content
stringlengths 1
15.9M
|
|---|
\section{Introduction}
\indent Heat conduction in low-dimensional systems has recently become the
subject of a large number of theoretical and experimental studies\cite{a1}. The theoretical interest in this field lies
in the rapid progress in probing and manipulating thermal properties
of nanoscale systems, which unveils the possibility of designing
thermal devices with optimized performance at the atomic scale.
As we all know, devices that control the transport of electrons, such as the electrical diode
and transistor, have been extensively studied and led to the
widespread applications in modern electronics. However, it
is far less studied for their thermal counterparts as to control
the transport of phonons (heat flux), possibly by reason that
phonons are more difficult to control than electrons. Recently, it has been revealed by theoretical studies in model
systems that, such as electrons and photons, phonons can also perform interesting function, which shed light on the
possible designs of thermal devices\cite{a2,a3,a4,a5,a6,a7,a8,a9,a10,a11}. The nonlinear systems with
structural asymmetry were predicted to exhibit thermal rectification\cite{a2,a3,a4,a5,a6,a7,a8,a9}, which has
triggered model designs of various types of thermal devices. Remarkably, a thermal
rectifier has been experimentally realized by using gradual
mass-loaded carbon and boron nitride nanotubes \cite{a9}.
The theoretical models of thermal transistors \cite{a6}, thermal logic gates \cite{a10}, and
thermal memory\cite{a11} are also proposed. Most of
these studies are relevant to heat conduction in the nonlinear
response regime, where the counterintuitive phenomenon of NDTR may
be observed and plays an important role in the operation of those
devices.
\indent NDTR refers to the phenomenon where the resulting heat flux
decreases as the applied temperature difference (or gradient)
increases. Usually, the studies on NDTR have been on the
models with structural inhomogeneity, such as the two-segment
Frenkel-Kontorova model \cite{a6,a12}, the weakly coupled
two-segment $\phi^{4}$ model \cite{a13}, and the anharmonic graded
mass model \cite{a5}. However, structural asymmetry is not a
necessary condition for NDTR and it can also occur in absolutely symmetric structures\cite{a14}.
Recently, Hu and coworkers \cite{a15} have found from molecular dynamics simulations that NDTR is possible in both asymmetric and symmetric GNRs. GNRs may be good candidate martials for designing thermal devices such as thermal transistors, thermal logic gates, and thermal memory. Therefore, it very necessary to find in which kind of GNRs NDTR can occur.
Recent works \cite{a16} have shown that dimension crossover can strongly affect heat transport in GNRs.
Therefore, it would be interesting to find dimension dependence of NDTR in GNRs. In this paper, we focus on finding how the dimension of GNRs affects the appearance of NDTR by using nonequilibrium molecular dynamics method.
\section {Model and methods}
\indent Many theoretical models have
been proposed and applied to explain and predict the thermal properties of graphene. The experiments and theories \cite{d1} show that the carrier density of non-doped graphene is relatively low, the phonon contribution overwhelms the electronic one by orders of magnitude and the electronic contribution to thermal conductivity (Wiedemann- Franz law) is negligible. The thermal conductivity of graphene is thus dominated by phonon transport, namely diffusive conduction at high temperature and ballistic conduction at sufficiently low temperature. Therefore, classical molecular dynamics is widely used in calculating the thermal conductivities of GNRs.
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\begin{center}\includegraphics[height=3cm]{fig1.eps}
\caption{(Color online) Schematic diagram of the armchair GNRs coupling two heat baths. The two ends along the length of GNRs are fixed and the other boundaries are free. $T_{L}=600K$ and $T_{R}$ is varied.}\label{1}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\indent In this paper, we study thermal transport of GNRs shown in Fig. 1 by using classical molecular dynamics. For a ribbon, its length $l$ is greater than its width
$w$, which in turn is larger than the effective thickness $h$ (i.e., $l>w >h$). In the simulations, we have used the Tersoff-Brenner potential \cite{b1} for carbon-carbon
interaction in the intra-plane. For multiple-layer GNRs, van der Waals interactions between the different layers are modeled by Lennard-Jones potential \cite{b2}.
\indent The Tersoff-Brenner potential between a pair of atoms can be written as
\begin{equation}\label{}
U_{ij}^{T}=f_{C}(r_{ij})[V_{R}(r_{ij})-b_{ij}V_{A}(r_{ij})],
\end{equation}
where $r_{ij}$ is the separation distance between two atoms $i$ and $j$. $V_{R}$ and $V_{A}$ are the repulsive and attractive Morse type potentials, respectively,
\begin{equation}\label{}
V_{R}(r_{ij})=A\exp(-\mu r_{ij}), V_{A}(r_{ij})=B\exp(-\lambda r_{ij}),
\end{equation}
and $f_{C}$ is a smooth cutoff function with parameters $R$ and $S$,
\begin{equation}\label{}
f_{C}(r_{ij})=\left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
1,&\hbox{as $r_{ij}<R$};\\
\frac{1}{2}+\frac{1}{2}\cos[\frac{\pi(r_{ij}-R)}{S-R}] ,&\hbox{as $R\leq r_{ij}\leq S$};\\
0 ,&\hbox{as $r_{ij}>S$},\\
\end{array}
\right.
\end{equation}
$b_{ij}$ implicitly contains multiple-body information and thus the whole potential function is actually a multiple-body potential. The parameters $A$, $B$, $\mu$, $\lambda$, $S$, $R$ and the detailed information of $b_{ij}$ are given in Brenner's reference \cite{b1}.
\indent The form of the Lennard-Jones potential is shown as follows
\begin{equation}\label{}
U_{ij}^{L}=-\frac{P}{r_{ij}^6}+\frac{Q}{r_{ij}^{12}},
\end{equation}
where $P$ and $Q$ are the attractive and repulsive constants, respectively. For graphene-graphene interaction\cite{b2}, $P=15.2$ $eV\times {\AA}^{6}$, $Q=24.1\times10^3$ $eV\times{\AA}^{12}$.
Therefore, the total potential between a pair of atoms is $U_{ij}=U^{T}_{ij}+U^{L}_{ij}$ and the force between two atoms can be found by taking the gradient of the
potential function with respect to their distance: $\vec{F}_{ij}=-\nabla U_{ij}$, where $\nabla$ is the gradient operator. Then, the net force on a particular
atom can be found by summing the forces due to all other atoms in the system,
\begin{equation}\label{}
\vec{F}_{i}=\sum_{j\neq i}\vec{F}_{ij}=-\sum_{j\neq i}\nabla U_{ij}.
\end{equation}
We place atoms at the two ends of GNRs in the thermostats with temperatures $T_{L}$ (left end) and $T_{R}$
(right end) shown in Fig. 1, respectively.
The equations of motion for the atoms in the Nose-Hoover thermostats\cite{b3,b4} are
\begin{equation}\label{}
\frac{d\vec{r}_i}{dt}=\frac{\vec{p}_i}{m}, \frac{d\vec{p}_{i}}{dt}=\vec{F}_{i}-\Gamma \vec{p}_{i}, \frac{d\Gamma}{dt}=\frac{1}{\tau^{2}}[\frac{T(t)}{T_{0}}-1],
\end{equation}
where the subscript $i$ runs over all atoms in the thermostat. $\vec{r}_{i}$ and $\vec{p}_{i}$ are the position vector and momentum of the $i$th atom, respectively. $\vec{F}_{i}$ is the force applied on the $i$th atom which can be obtained from Eq. (5). $\Gamma$ is the dynamics parameter of the thermostat and $\tau$ is the relaxation time. $T(t)$ is the instant temperature of the thermostat at time $t$, which can be defined as $T(t)=\frac{2}{3Nk_{B}}\sum_{i}\frac{\vec{p}_{i}\cdot\vec{p}_{i}}{2m}$. $T_{0}$($=T_{L}$ or $T_{R}$) is the set temperature of the thermostat. $N$ is the number of atoms in the thermostat, $k_{B}$ is the Boltzmann constant, and $m$ is the mass of the carbon atom. The atoms between the two thermostats are obeying the Newton's law motion,
\begin{equation}\label{}
\frac{d\vec{r}_j}{dt}=\frac{\vec{p}_j}{m}, \frac{d\vec{p}_{j}}{dt}=\vec{F}_{j},
\end{equation}
where $j$ runs over all the atoms between the two thermostats.
\indent The velocity Verlet method is employed to integrate the equations (1-7) of motion at the given initial positions and velocities of the all atoms.
The time step of $0.55fs$, and the simulation runs for $1\times 10^{8}$ time steps giving a total molecular dynamics time of $55ns$. The statistic average of interesting quantities start from half of the total time, i.e., $5\times 10^7$ time steps are used to relax the system to a stationary state. We set the relaxation time $\tau=1ps$. The distance between the neighbor layers is $0.335nm$ and the bond length of carbon-carbon is $1.48{\AA}$. In order to avoid the spurious global rotation of GNRs in the simulations, we use the fixed boundary conditions for the two ends along the length of GNRs.
\indent The heat bath acts on the atom with a force $-\Gamma \vec{p}_{i}$, thus the power of heat bath is $-\Gamma \vec{p}_{i}\cdot\vec{p}_{i}/m$, which can also be regarded as the heat flux coming out of the high temperature heat bath and injecting into the low temperature heat bath. The total heat flux (thermal current) from the heat bath to the system can be obtained \cite{b5} by
\begin{equation}\label{}
J=\sum_{i}[-\Gamma \vec{p}_{i}\cdot\vec{p}_{i}/m]=-3\Gamma Nk_{B}T(t),
\end{equation}
where $i$ runs over all the atoms in the thermostat.
\indent Because thermal transport strongly depends on the phonon density of states (PDOS) which is the number of vibrational states per unit frequency, it is necessary to study the full and transversal edge PDOS of the system to understand the appearance of NDTR. The Fourier transform of the autocorrelation function is the PDOS \cite{pdos}.
\begin{equation}\label{}
D(\omega)=\int_{0}^{\infty}dt\exp(2\pi\omega t)\Sigma_{j}\frac{\langle\vec{\nu}_{j}(t)\cdot\vec{\nu}_{j}(0)\rangle}{\langle\vec{\nu}_{j}(0)^{2}\rangle},
\end{equation}
where $\vec{\nu}_{j}$ represents the velocity vector of the $j$th atom, and the angle brackets denote an average over all atoms and all time windows. The transversal edge PDOS is obtained from Eq. (9) where $j$ runs over all the atoms at the transversal edge. Similarly, full PDOS is
calculated from Eq. (9) where $j$ runs all the atoms of the GNRs.
\section{Results and discussion}
\indent For the convenience of discussion on NDTR, thermal current can be written as $J\propto\kappa(\overline{T},\Delta T)\Delta T$, where $\kappa$ is the effective thermal conductivity which depends on $\overline{T}$ and $\Delta T$. $\Delta T =T_{L}-T_{R}$ is the temperature difference and $\overline{T}\equiv\frac{T_{L}+T_{R}}{2}=T_{L}-\frac{\Delta T}{2}$ is the average temperature. Obviously, NDTR may occur only when the effective thermal conductivity $\kappa(\overline{T},\Delta T)$ decreases remarkably as $\Delta T$ increases.
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\begin{center}\includegraphics[height=7cm]{fig2.eps}
\caption{(Color online) Thermal current $J$ as a function of the temperature difference $\Delta T$ for both armchair and zigzag GNRs. $w$ is $1.67nm$ for armchair GNRs and $1.63nm $ for zigzag GNRs. $l=5nm$, $T_{L}=600K$ and $T_{R}$ is varied. }\label{1}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
Figure 2 shows the heat transport in GNRs for both armchair and zigzag edges. When $\Delta T $ is not large, $J$ and $\Delta T$ are proportional to each other and the system is within the linear response regime. But for large values of $\Delta T$, the system enters the nonlinear response regime, where NDTR may occur. Since the results from zigzag GNRs are qualitatively similar to that from armchair GNRs, we mainly study dimension dependence of NDTR in armchair GNRs.
\indent Obviously, the phenomena of NDTR is not caused by the asymmetry, since GNRs is absolutely symmetric. The appearance of NDTR in GNRs can be explained by the transversal edge effects of GNRs\cite{b6}. From Eq. (9) we can obtain the transversal edge PDOS shown in Fig. 3. It is found that there are some strong low-frequency peaks which shows the existence of the edge-localized phonon modes.
The transversal edge of GNRs will reduce the effective thermal conductivity $\kappa$ owing to the appearance of the edge-localized phonon modes. The edge-localized phonons can interact with other low energy phonons and thus reduce the phonons' mean free paths, which reduces the effective thermal conductivity $\kappa$. When the average temperature increases (shown in Fig. 3), the heights of the low-frequency peaks decrease and the peaks become not significant gradually. In other words, the number of edge-localized phonon modes increases as the average temperature decreases. When the applied temperature difference $\Delta T$ increases from zero with $T_{L}=600K$, the average temperature $\overline{T}$ of the system decreases, the effect of the edge-localized phonon modes becomes more significant. At larger values of $\Delta T$ (i.e., lower values of the average temperature), the edge-localized phonon dominates the transport and the effective thermal conductivity $\kappa$ reduces remarkably, so NDTR appears.
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\begin{center}\includegraphics[height=7cm]{fig3.eps}
\caption{Transversal edge PDOS (arbitrary units) of single-layer armchair GNRs for different average temperature $\overline{T}$. $w=1.67$ and $l=5nm$. }\label{1}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\begin{center}\includegraphics[height=7cm]{fig4.eps}
\caption{Temperature profiles for different points $A$, $B$ and $C$ described in Fig. (2). $y/l$ is the relative position along the transport.}\label{1}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\indent In order to understand NDTR, we also study the temperature profiles for different points $A$, $B$ and $C$ described in Fig. 2.
The results are depicted in Fig. 4. As the applied temperature difference
$\Delta T$ increases, the system undergoes a transition from the linear
to the nonlinear response regime, with the latter being generally characterized by a nonuniform local temperature gradient.
For very large value of $\Delta T$ (e.g. point $C$), there is a big temperature jump (about $200K$) at the high temperature boundary which indicates that
the big thermal boundary resistance appears in heat transport (small thermal current). Therefore, NDTR will occur.
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\begin{center}\includegraphics[height=7cm]{fig5.eps}
\caption{(Color online) Thermal current $J$ as a function of the temperature difference $\Delta T$ for different widths $w$ of single-layer armchair GNRs. $w=0.38, 0.90, 1.67, 3.34, 5.25$, and $6.62nm$. $l=5nm$, $T_{L}=600K$ and $T_{R}$ is varied. }\label{1}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\indent Figure 5 shows the relation between thermal current $J$ and temperature difference $\Delta T$ for different widths of the single-layer GNRs. It is found that NDTR regime varies with the width $w$ of GNRs. When the width $w$ is very small, e.g., $w=0.38nm$, no NDTR can be observed. This can be understood as follows: GNRs with very small width reduces to one-dimensional atom chain\cite{b7} without on-site potentials, for example Fermi-Pasta-Ulam (FPU) chain, in this kind of chain, thermal current always increases with the applied temperature difference\cite{a14}. Therefore, NDTR can not occur for very narrow GNRs (one dimension). When the width $w$ increases, the system changes from one dimension to two dimensions, the onset of NDTR can be observed (e.g., $w=0.90, 1.67, 3.34nm$). However, NDTR will gradually disappear on further increasing the width $w$ (e.g., $w=5.25, 6.62nm$). On further increasing $w$, the number of the total phonon modes of GNRs increases, while the number of edge-localized phonon modes does not changes. Thus the effect of edge-localized phonon modes reduces gradually and NDTR disappears.
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\begin{center}\includegraphics[height=5cm]{fig6a.eps}
\includegraphics[height=5cm]{fig6b.eps}
\includegraphics[height=5cm]{fig6c.eps}
\includegraphics[height=5cm]{fig6d.eps}
\caption{(Color online) Full and transversal edge PDOS (arbitrary units) of single-layer armchair GNRs for different values of $w$ at $l=5nm$ and $\overline{T}=300K$. (a) $w=1.66nm$; (b) $w=3.34nm$; (c)$w=5.25nm$; (d)$w=6.62nm$.}\label{1}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\indent In order to verify the analysis for Fig. 5, we also studied the width $w$ dependence of both full and transversal edge PDOS in the single-layer GNRs shown in Fig. 6.
For the transversal edge PDOS, the strong low-frequency peaks dominate the PDOS distribution for all values of the width (see the red line in Fig. 6).
However, for full PDOS, the low-frequency peaks become gradually insignificant on increasing the width $w$. For small width (e. g. $w=1.67nm$ and $3.34nm$), the low-frequency peaks in full PDOS are very prominent, the edge-localized phonon modes dominates the transport, so the thermal current reduces remarkably and NDTR can occur. For large width (e. g. $w=5.25nm$ and $6.62nm$), the low-frequency peaks in full PDOS are not prominent, the effects of the edge-localized phonon modes reduce and NDTR disappears. Therefore, NDTR can not occur in very wide GNRs.
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\begin{center}\includegraphics[height=4.5cm]{fig7a.eps}
\includegraphics[height=4.5cm]{fig7b.eps}
\includegraphics[height=4.5cm]{fig7c.eps}
\includegraphics[height=4.5cm]{fig7d.eps}
\caption{(Color online) Thermal current $J$ as a function of temperature difference $\Delta T$ for different $M$ of armchair GNRs. (a)$M=1$; (b)$M=2$; (c)$M=4$; (d)$M=6$. $l=5nm$ and $w=1.67nm$. $T_{L}=600K$ and $T_{R}$ is varied.}\label{1}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
Figure 7 shows the layer dependence of NDTR for fixing $l=5nm$ and $w=1.67nm$. It is found that NDTR regime becomes smaller as the number $M$ of the layers increases, and NDTR completely disappears for large $M$, e.g., $M=4, 6$. This can be explained by the effect of the cross-plane coupling \cite{a16}. For multi-layer GNRs, the cross-plane coupling will play an important role. In the presence of cross-plane coupling, the phonons will scatter with the atoms at the interface between the layers and then the effective thermal conductivity will decrease. This scattering effect from the cross-plane coupling decreases with the average temperature.
When $\Delta T$ increases from zero for fixing $T_{L}=600K$, the average temperature $\overline{T}$ will decrease and the scattering effect from cross-plane coupling reduces, therefore, the effective thermal conductivity increases and NDTR disappears.
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\begin{center}\includegraphics[height=7cm]{fig8.eps}
\caption{(Color online) Thermal current $J$ as a function of the temperature difference $\Delta T$ for different lengths $l$ of single-layer armchair GNRs. $w=1.67$ and $M=1$. $T_{L}=600K$ and $T_{R}$ is varied. }\label{1}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\begin{center}\includegraphics[height=7cm]{fig9.eps}
\caption{Temperature profiles for different points $A$, $B$ described in Fig. (8). $y/l$ is the relative position along the transport.}\label{1}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\indent Finally, we study the length dependence of NDTR in single-layer armchair GNRs. From Fig. 8, we can find that the NDTR regime generally becomes smaller as the length increases. For example, NDTR almost disappears for $l=25nm$. We thus suggest that NDTR will eventually disappear if the length exceeds some critical value. Obviously, when the length increases so that the length is much larger than the width ($l\gg w$), GNRs becomes from two-dimensional system to one-dimensional system and GNRs reduces to one-dimensional atom chain without on-site potential, where no NDTR can be found \cite{a14}.
On the other hand, we can check the temperature profiles of the point $A$ and $B$ shown in Fig. 8. Though the shapes of the temperature profile for different length $l$ are similar (shown in Fig. 9), the temperature jump at high temperature boundary becomes small when the length $l$ increases. So the thermal boundary resistance becomes not significant for very long GNRs and no NDTR occur. Therefore, NDTR mainly occurs in small-size systems, which is in line with the current trend of device miniaturization in the technological world.
\section{Concluding remarks}
\indent In summary, we have investigated the thermal transport of GNRs in the nonlinear response regime from one dimension to three dimensions. When the width of the single-layer GNRs is very small, GNRs is a one-dimensional system, the onset of NDTR can not be observed. On increasing the width $w$, GNRs becomes to a two-dimensional system, NDTR appears. However, for large width $w$, NDTR disappears. When the number of the layers increases, GNRs becomes from two-dimensional system to three-dimensional system, NDTR regime becomes gradually smaller, and disappears for multiple layers (e.g., $M=4, 6$). In addition, on increasing the length $l$ so that $l\gg w$, GNRs becomes from two dimensions to one dimension, NDTR regime becomes smaller and eventually vanishes in the thermodynamic limit. The observation of NDTR in GNRs shows that NDTR can occur in a real system and GNRs may be good candidate materials for designing thermal devices. Our results will give an important guidance for designing the graphene thermal devices where NDTR plays an important role. In addition, the study can also facilitate the understanding the onset of NDTR in low dimensional systems.
This work was supported in part by the National Natural Science Foundation
of China (Grant Nos.11004082 and 11175067), the Natural
Science Foundation of Guangdong Province, China (Grant
Nos.10451063201005249 and S201101000332) and the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities,
JNU (Grant No. 21611437).
|
\section{Concluding Remarks}\label{Se:conclusion}
ROBMC is a new variant of Bounded Model Checking that has not been explored
before. Our experimental results indicate substantial speedups when
applying ROBMC for the automated placement of fences on programs with few
culprit pairs and a large number of innocent pairs. In particular, we
observe that the speedup obtained by using ROBMC increases when targeting a
weaker architecture. Thus, ROBMC adds a new direction in bounded model checking
which is worth exploring further.
\section{Introduction}\label{Se:intro}
Modern multicore CPUs implement optimizations such as \IT{store buffers} and
\IT{invalidate queues}. These features result in weaker memory consistency
guarantees than sequential consistency (SC)~\cite{lamportsc}. Though such
hardware optimizations offer better performance, the weaker consistency has
the drawback of intricate and subtle semantics, thus making it harder for
programmers to anticipate how their program might behave when run on such
architectures. For example, it is possible for a pair of statements to
appear to have executed out of the program order.
Consider the program given in \figref{tsoreorder}. Here, \TT{x} and \TT{y}
are shared variables whereas \TT{r1} and \TT{r2} are thread-local variables.
Statements $s_1$ and $s_3$ perform write operations. Owing to store
buffering, these writes may not be reflected immediately in the memory.
Next, both threads may proceed to perform the read operations $s_2$ and
$s_4$. Since the write operations might still not have hit the memory,
stale values for \TT{x} and \TT{y} may be read in \TT{r2} and \TT{r1},
respectively. This will cause the assertion to fail. Such behaviour is
possible with architectures that implement \IT{Total Store Order (TSO)},
which allows write-read reordering. Note that on a hypothetical
architecture that guarantees sequential consistency, this would never
happen. However, owing to store buffering, a global observer might witness
that the statements are executed in the order $(s_2,s_4,s_1,s_3)$, which
results in the assertion failure. We say that $\inroundb{s_1,s_2}$ and
$\inroundb{s_3,s_4}$ have been reordered.
\figref{psoreorder} shows how the assertion might fail on architectures that
implement \IT{Partial Store Order (PSO)}, which permits write-write and
write-read reordering. Using SC, one would expect to observe $\MT{r2==1}$
if $\MT{r1==1}$ has been observed. However, reordering of the write
operations $(s_1,s_2)$ leads to the assertion failure. Architectures such
as Alpha, POWER and SPARC RMO even allow read-write and read-read
reorderings, amongst other behaviours. Fortunately, all modern
architectures provide various kinds of \IT{memory barriers (fences)} to
prohibit unwanted weakening. Due to the intricate semantics of weak memory
models and fences, an automated approach to the placement of fences is
desirable.
In this paper, we make the following contributions:
\begin{itemize}
\item We introduce \IT{ReOrder Bounded Model Checking (ROBMC)}. In ROBMC,
the model checker is restricted to exploring only those behaviours of a
program that contain at most $k$ reorderings for a given bound $k$. The
reorder bound is a new parameter for bounding model checking that has not
been explored earlier.
\item We study how the performance of the analysis is affected as the bound
changes.
\item We implement two ROBMC-based algorithms. In addition, we implement
earlier approaches in the same framework to enable comparison with
ROBMC.
\end{itemize}
The rest of the paper is organized as follows. \sectref{overview} provides
an overview and a motivating example for ROBMC.
\sectrefs{preliminaries}{wmmrepair} provide preliminaries and describe
earlier approaches respectively. ROBMC is described in \sectref{reorder}.
Related research is discussed in \sectref{related}. Experimental results
are given in \sectref{results}. Finally, we make concluding remarks in
\sectref{conclusion}.
\section{Motivation and Overview} \label{Se:overview}
\begin{figure}[t]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{c@{\qquad}c@{\qquad}c}
\subcaptionbox{\label{Fi:tsoreorder}}[.28\linewidth]
{
\centering
\begin{scriptsize}
\begin{tabular}{ccc}
\multicolumn{3}{c}{$\MT{x=0,y=0;}$} \\
& & \\
\begin{minipage}{0.55in}
$s_1$ : \MT{x=1;} \\
$s_2$ : \MT{r1=y;} \\
\end{minipage} & \large{$\parallel$} &
\begin{minipage}{0.55in}
$s_3$ : \MT{y=1;} \\
$s_4$ : \MT{r2=x;} \\
\end{minipage} \\
& & \\
\multicolumn{3}{c}{\MT{assert(r1==1||r2==1);}}\\
\end{tabular}
\end{scriptsize}
}
&
\subcaptionbox{\label{Fi:psoreorder}}[.29\linewidth]
{
\centering
\begin{scriptsize}
\begin{tabular}{ccc}
\multicolumn{3}{c}{$\MT{x=0,y=0;}$} \\
& & \\
\begin{minipage}{0.5in}
$s_1$ : \MT{x=1;} \\
$s_2$ : \MT{y=1;} \\
\end{minipage} & \large{$\parallel$} &
\begin{minipage}{0.55in}
$s_3$ : \MT{r1=y;} \\
$s_4$ : \MT{r2=x;} \\
\end{minipage} \\
& & \\
\multicolumn{3}{c}{\MT{assert(r1!=1||r2==1);}}\\
\end{tabular}
\end{scriptsize}
}
&
\subcaptionbox{\label{Fi:innocent}}[.25\linewidth]
{
\begin{scriptsize}
\begin{tabular}{ccc}
\multicolumn{3}{c}{$\MT{x=0,y=0,w=0,z=0;}$} \\
& & \\
\begin{minipage}{0.55in}
\centering
$s_1$ : \MT{z=1;} \\
$s_2$ : \MT{p1=w;} \\
$s_3$ : \MT{x=1;} \\
$s_4$ : \MT{r1=y;} \\
\end{minipage} & \large{$\parallel$} &
\begin{minipage}{0.55in}
$s_5$ : \MT{w=1;} \\
$s_6$ : \MT{p2=z;} \\
$s_7$ : \MT{y=1;} \\
$s_8$ : \MT{r2=x;} \\
\end{minipage} \\
& & \\
\multicolumn{3}{c}{\MT{assert(r1==1||r2==1);}} \\
\multicolumn{3}{c}{ \MT{assert(p1+p2>=0);}}\\
\end{tabular}
\end{scriptsize}
}
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\caption{(\subref{Fi:tsoreorder}) Reordering in TSO. (\subref{Fi:psoreorder}) Reordering in PSO.
(\subref{Fi:innocent}) A program with \IT{innocent} and \IT{culprit} reorderings }
\end{figure}
There has been a substantial amount of previous research on automated fence
insertion~\cite{remmex-pso,memorax-tool,dfence,trencher,jadefmsd12,fender,cav2014}.
We distinguish approaches that aim to restore sequential consistency (SC)
and approaches that aim to ensure that a user-provided assertion holds.
Since every fence incurs a performance penalty, it is desirable to keep the
number of fences to a minimum. Therefore, a property-driven approach for
fence insertion can result in better performance. The downside of the
property-driven approach is that it requires an explicit specification.
Consider the example given in \figref{innocent}. Here, \TT{x,y,z,w} are
shared variables initialized to $0$. All other variables are thread-local.
A processor that implements total store ordering (TSO) permits a read of a
global variable to precede a write to a different global variable when there
are no dependencies between the two statements. Note that if $(s_3,s_4)$ or
$(s_7,s_8)$ is reordered, the assertion will be violated. We shall call
such pairs of statements \IT{culprit pairs}. By contrast, the pairs
$(s_1,s_2)$ and $(s_5,s_6)$ do not lead to an assertion violation
irrespective of the order in which their statements execute. We shall
call such pairs \IT{innocent pairs}. A tool that restores SC would insert
four fences, one for each pair mentioned earlier. However, only two fences
(between $s_3,s_4$ and $s_7,s_8$) are necessary to avoid the assertion
violation.
Some of the earlier property-driven techniques for fence
insertion~\cite{remmex-tso,memorax-tool} use the following approach.
Consider a counterexample to the assertion. Every counterexample to the
assertion must contain at least one culprit reordering. If we prevent all
culprit reorderings, the program will satisfy the property. This is done in
an iterative fashion. For all the counterexamples seen, a smallest set of
reorderings $S$ is selected such that $S$ has at least one reordering in
common with each of the counterexamples. Let us call such a set a
\IT{minimum-hitting-set} ($\mathit{MHS}$) over all the set of
counterexamples $C$ witnessed so far. All the weakenings in $\mathit{MHS}$
are excluded from the program. Even though $\mathit{MHS}$ may not cover all
the culprit reorderings initially, it will eventually consist of culprit
pairs only. Since one cannot distinguish the innocent pairs from the
culprit ones a priori, such an approach may get distracted by innocent
pairs, thus, taking too long to identify the culprit pairs.
To illustrate, let us revisit the example in \figref{innocent}. Let us name
the approach described above \textsc{Fi}\xspace (Fence Insertion). Let the first
counterexample path $\pi^1$ be $(s_2,s_1,s_6,s_5,s_4,s_7,s_8,s_3)$. The set
of reorderings is $\inparan{(s_1,s_2),(s_3,s_4),(s_5,s_6)}$. Method \textsc{Fi}\xspace may
choose to forbid the reordering of $\inparan{(s_1,s_2)}$, as it is one of
the choices for the $\mathit{MHS}$. Next, let
$\pi^2=(s_1,s_2,s_6,s_5,s_4,s_7,\allowbreak s_8,s_3)$. The set of
reorderings for this trace is $\inparan{(s_3,s_4),(s_5,s_6)}$. There are
multiple possible choices for $\mathit{MHS}$. For instance, \textsc{Fi}\xspace may choose to forbid
$\inparan{(s_5,s_6)}$. Let $\pi^3=(s_2,s_1,s_5,s_6,s_8,s_3,s_4,s_7)$. As
the set of reorderings is $\inparan{(s_1,s_2),(s_7,s_8)}$, one of the
choices for the $\mathit{MHS}$ is $\inparan{(s_1,s_2), (s_5,s_6)}$. Recall that
$(s_1,s_2)$ and $(s_5,s_6)$ are innocent pairs. On the other hand,
$(s_3,s_4)$ and $(s_7,s_8)$ are culprit pairs. \textsc{Fi}\xspace may continue with
$\pi^4=(s_1,s_2,s_5,s_6,s_4,s_7,s_8,s_3)$. The set of reorderings in
$\pi^4$ is $\inparan{(s_3,s_4)}$. An adversarial $\mathit{MHS}$ would be
$\inparan{(s_1,s_2),(s_3,s_4)}$. Let $\pi^5$ be
$(s_1,s_2,s_6,s_5,s_8,\allowbreak s_3,s_4,s_7)$. The reorderings
$\inparan{(s_5,s_6),(s_7,s_8)}$ will finally lead to the solution
$\inparan{(s_3,s_4),(s_7,s_8)}$. In the $6^{\mbox{\scriptsize th}}$
iteration \textsc{Fi}\xspace will find that the program is safe with a given $\mathit{MHS}$. For
brevity, we have not considered traces with reorderings $(s_1,s_4)$ and
$(s_5,s_8)$. In the worst case, considering these reorderings might lead to
even more traces.
As we can see, the presence of innocent pairs plays a major role in how fast
\textsc{Fi}\xspace will be able to find the culprit pairs. Consider a program with many
more innocent pairs. \textsc{Fi}\xspace will require increasingly more queries to the
underlying model checker as the number of innocent pairs increases.
To address the problem caused by innocent pairs, we propose \IT{Reorder
Bounded Model Checking} (ROBMC\xspace). In ROBMC\xspace, we restrict the model checker
to exploring only the behaviours of the program that have at most $k$
reorderings for a given reordering bound $k$. Let us revisit the example
given in \figref{innocent} to see how the bounded exploration affects the
performance. Assume that we start with the bound $k=1$. Since the
model checker is forced to find a counterexample with only one reordering,
there is no further scope for an innocent reordering to appear in the
counterexample path. Let the first trace found be
$\pi^1=(s_1,s_2,s_4,s_5,s_6,s_7,s_8,s_3)$. There is only one reordering
$\inparan{(s_3,s_4)}$ in this trace. The resulting $\mathit{MHS}$ will be
$\inparan{(s_3, s_4)}$. Let the second trace be
$\pi^2=(s_1,s_2,s_5,s_6,s_8,s_3,s_4,s_7)$. As the only reordering is
$\inparan{(s_7,s_8)}$, the $\mathit{MHS}$ over these two traces would be
$\inparan{(s_3,s_4)(s_7,s_8)}$. The next query would declare the program
safe. Now, even with a larger bound, no further counterexamples can be
produced. This example shows how a solution can be found much faster with
ROBMC\xspace compared to \textsc{Fi}\xspace. In the following sections, we describe our approach
more formally.
\section{Preliminaries} \label{Se:preliminaries}
Let $P$ be a concurrent program. A program execution is a sequence of
events. An event $e$ is a four-tuple
\[ e \equiv \tuple{\mathit{tid},\mathit{in},\mathit{var},\mathit{type}} \]
where $tid$ denotes the thread identifier associated with the event and $in$
denotes the instruction that triggered the event. Instructions are dynamic
instances of program statements. A program statement can give rise to
multiple instructions due to loops and procedure calls. $stmt : Instr
\rightarrow Stmt$ denotes a map from instructions to their corresponding
program statements. The program order between any two instructions $I_1$ and
$I_2$ is denoted as $I_1 \PO I_2$, which indicates that $I_1$ precedes $I_2$
in the program order. The component $var$ denotes the global/shared
variable that participated in the event $e$. The type of the event is
represented by $\mathit{type}$, which can either be $\mathit{read}$ or
$\mathit{write}$. Without loss of generality, we assume that $P$ only
accesses one global/shared variable per statement. Therefore, given a
statement $s \in Stmt$, we can uniquely identify the global variable
involved as well as the type of the event that $s$ gives rise to. Any
execution of program $P$ is a sequence of events $\pi = (e_1,\dots,e_n)$.
The $i^{\mbox{\scriptsize th}}$ event in the sequence $\pi$ is denoted by~$\pi(i)$.
\begin{mydefinition}\label{De:reorder}
A pair of statements $(s_1,s_2)$ of a program is said to be \EM{reordered}
in an execution $\pi$ if:
\begin{align*}
\exists _i \exists _j \left( \inroundb{e_i.tid=e_j.tid} \wedge \inroundb{\pi(i) =
e_i} \right.
\wedge \inroundb{\pi(j)=e_j} \\ \wedge \inroundb{j < i} \wedge
\inroundb{e_i.in=I_1 \wedge e_j.in=I_2} \\ \left. \wedge \inroundb{I_1 \PO I_2}
\wedge \inroundb{stmt(I_1)=s_1 \wedge stmt(I_2)= s_2} \right)
\end{align*}
\end{mydefinition}
According to \defref{reorder}, two statements are reordered if they give
rise to events that occurred out of program order.
\begin{mydefinition}
We write $RO_A(s_1,s_2)$ to denote that an architecture $A$ allows
the pair of statements $(s_1,s_2)$ to be reordered.
\end{mydefinition}
Different weak memory architectures permit particular reorderings of events.
\begin{itemize}
\item \BF{Total Store Order (TSO)}: TSO allows a read to be reordered before
a write if they access different global variables.
\begin{align*}
RO_{tso}(s_1,s_2) \equiv & \inroundb{s_1.var \neq s_2.var} \wedge \inroundb{s_1.type=write \wedge s_2.type=read}
\end{align*}
\item \BF{Partial Store Order (PSO)}: PSO allows a read or write to be reordered
before a write if they access different global variables.
\begin{align*}
RO_{pso}(s_1,s_2) \equiv & \inroundb{s_1.var \neq s_2.var} \wedge \inroundb{s_1.type=write}
\end{align*}
\end{itemize}
Partial-order based models for TSO, PSO, \IT{read memory order (RMO)} and
POWER are presented in detail in~\cite{jadefmsd12}.
\begin{mydefinition}
Let $C$ be a set consisting of non-empty sets $S_1,\dots,S_n$.
The set \MC{H} is called a \EM{hitting-set} (HS) of $C$ if:
\[ \forall_{S_i \in C} \MC{H} \cap S_i \neq \emptyset \]
\MC{H} is called a \EM{minimal-hitting-set} (mhs) if any proper subset of \MC{H}
is not a hitting-set. \MC{H} is a \EM{minimum-hitting-set} (MHS) of $C$ if $C$
does not have a smaller hitting-set. Note that a collection~$C$ may have
multiple minimum-hitting-sets.
\end{mydefinition}
\section{Related work} \label{Se:related}
There are two principal approaches for modelling weak memory semantics. One
approach is to use operational models that explicitly model the buffers and
queues to mimic the
hardware~\cite{remmex-pso,vechevpowmm,dfence,memorax-paper,DBLP:conf/esop/AlglaveKNT13,trencher,NETYS2015}.
The other approach is to axiomatize the observable behaviours using partial
orders~\cite{wmmcav13,jadefmsd12,wmmcpp}. Buffer-based modelling is closer
to the hardware implementation than the partial-order based approach.
However, the partial-order based approach provides an abstraction of the
underlying complexity of the hardware and has been proven
effective~\cite{wmmcav13}. Results on complexity and decidability for
various weak memory models such as TSO, PSO and RMO are given
in~\cite{sebastian-wmm}.
Due to the intricate and subtle semantics of weak memory consistency and the
fences offered by modern architectures, there have been numerous efforts
aimed at automating fence
insertion~\cite{memorax-tool,jadefmsd12,trencher,pensieve,fender,remmex-tso,remmex-pso,dfence,cav2014}.
These works can be divided into two categories. In one category, fences are
inserted in order to restore sequential
consistency~\cite{jadefmsd12,trencher,cav2014}. The primary advantage is
that no external specification is required. On the downside, the fences
inferred by these methods may be unnecessary.
The second category are methods that insert only those fences that are
required for a program to satisfy given
properties~\cite{remmex-tso,remmex-pso,memorax-tool,dfence,NETYS2015}.
These techniques usually require repetitive calls to a model checker or a
solver. \textsc{Dfence}\xspace is a dynamic analysis tool that falls into this category.
Our work differs from \textsc{Dfence}\xspace as ours is a fully static approach as compared
to the dynamic approach used by \textsc{Dfence}\xspace. A direct comparison with \textsc{Dfence}\xspace
cannot be made. However, we have implemented their approach in our framework
and we present an experimental comparison using our re-implementation.
\textsc{Memorax}\xspace~\cite{memorax-tool} and \textsc{Remmex}\xspace~\cite{remmex-tso,remmex-pso} also
fall into the category of property-driven tools.
\textsc{Memorax}\xspace~\cite{memorax-paper} computes all possible minimal-hitting-set
solutions. Though it computes the smallest possible solution, exhaustively
searching for all possible solutions can make such an approach slow.
Moreover, \textsc{Memorax}\xspace requires that the input program is written in \SC{rmm} |
a special purpose language. \algref{wmmprogrepair} captures what \textsc{Memorax}\xspace
would do if it has to find only one solution. \textsc{Remmex}\xspace also falls in the
category of property-driven tools and their approach is given as
\algref{wmmprogrepair}.
Bounded model checking has been used for the verification of concurrent
programs~\cite{wmmcav13,contextbmc}. In context-bounded model
checking~\cite{contextbmc, boolcontextbmc}, the number of interleavings in
counterexamples is bounded, but executions are explored without depth limit.
ROBMC is orthogonal to these ideas, as here the bound is on the number of
event reorderings.
\section{Reorder-bounded Exploration} \label{Se:reorder}
\algref{wmmprogrepair} can further be improved by avoiding innocent
reorderings so that culprit reorderings responsible for the violation
of the assertion are found faster.
As discussed in \sectref{overview}, \algref{wmmprogrepair} requires many
iterations to converge and terminate in the presence of innocent
reorderings. The reason is that the model checker may not return the
simplest possible counterexample that explains the assertion violation due
to reorderings. In order to address this problem, we need a model checker
$M'$ with an additional property as follows:
\begin{itemize}
\item $M'$ takes $P_{\phi}$ and $k$ as inputs. Here, $P_{\phi}$ is the program
along with the ordering constraint~$\phi$ and $k$ is a positive integer.
$M'$ produces a counterexample $\pi$ for $P_{\phi}$ such that $\pi$ has
at most $k$ reorderings. If it cannot find a counterexample with at most
$k$ reorderings, then it will declare $P_{\phi}$ safe.
\end{itemize}
With a model checker $M'$, we can employ \algref{brepair} to speed up the
discovery of the smallest set of culprit pairs of statements. The
steps that differ from \algref{wmmprogrepair} in \algref{brepair} are
highlighted. \algref{brepair} initializes the reordering bound $k$
\algline{algbrep:binit} to a given lower bound~$K_1$. The model checker $M'$
is now called with this bound to obtain a counterexample that has at most
$k$ reorderings \algline{algbrep:mcall}. When the counterexample cannot be
found, the bound~$k$ is increased according to some strategy denoted by
$\mathit{increaseStrategy}$ \algline{algbrep:increase}. Note that
collection~$C$ and the ordering constraint $\phi$ are preserved even when
$k$ is increased. Thus, when $k$ is increased from $k_1$ to $k_2$, the
search for culprit reorderings starts directly with the ordering
constraints that repair the program for up to $k_1$ reorderings. Only those
counterexamples that require more than $k_1$ and fewer than $k_2$
culprit reorderings will be reported. Let us assume that $P$ does not
have any counterexample with more than $k_{opt}$ reorderings. If $k_{opt}$
is much smaller than $k$, the performance of \algref{brepair} might suffer
due to interference from innocent reorderings. If the increase in $k$
is too small, the algorithm might have to go through many queries to reach
the given upper bound $K_2$. It can be beneficial to increase the bound $k$
by a larger amount after witnessing a few successive $\MI{SAFE}$ queries,
and by a smaller amount when a counterexample has been found recently.
\henabledfalse
\renewcommand{\algorithmicendwhile} {\ifhenabled \highlight{\algorithmicend\
\algorithmicwhile} \else \algorithmicend\ \algorithmicwhile \fi}
\renewcommand{\algorithmicwhile}{ \ifhenabled \highlight{\BF{while}} \else \BF{while} \fi }
\renewcommand{\algorithmicdo}{\ifhenabled \highlight{\BF{do}} \else \BF{do} \fi }
\begin{algorithm}[t]
\caption{\SC{ROBMC}}
\label{Alg:brepair}
\begin{scriptsize}
\begin{algorithmic}[1]
\STATE \BF{Input: } Program $P$, lower bound $K_1$ and an upper bound $K_2$
\STATE \BF{Output: } Set $S$ of pairs of statements that must not be reordered to avoid
assertion failure
\STATE $C:=\emptyset$
\STATE $S := \emptyset$
\STATE \highlight{$k := K_1$} \label{algbrep:binit}
\STATE $\phi := \mathit{true}$ \label{algbrep:constraint} \henabledtrue
\WHILE {\highlight{ $k\leq K_2$} }
\LOOP
\STATE \highlight{$\inangleb{\mathit{result},\pi}:=M'(P_\phi,k)$} \label{algbrep:mcall}
\IF {$\mathit{result}=\mathit{SAFE}$} \label{algbrep:safestart}
\STATE \BF{break}
\ENDIF \label{algbrep:safeend}
\STATE $\mathit{SP} := \mathit{GetReorderedPairs}(\pi)$ \label{algbrep:getpair}
\IF {$\mathit{SP} = \emptyset$} \label{algbrep:bcstart}
\PRINT \BF{Error:} Program cannot be repaired
\RETURN \BF{errorcode}
\ENDIF \label{algbrep:bcend}
\STATE $C := C \cup \inparan{SP}$
\STATE $S:=\mathit{MHS}(C)$ \label{algbrep:mhs}
\STATE $\phi := \displaystyle \bigwedge _{(s_1,s_2) \in S} s_1 \prec s_2$ \label{algbrep:enforce}
\ENDLOOP
\STATE \highlight{$k:=\mathit{increaseStrategy}(k)$} \label{algbrep:increase}
\ENDWHILE
\RETURN $S$
\end{algorithmic}
\end{scriptsize}
\end{algorithm}
\renewcommand{\algorithmicif}{\ifhenabled \highlight{\BF{if}} \else \BF{if} \fi }
\renewcommand{\algorithmicthen}{\ifhenabled \highlight{\BF{then}} \else \BF{then} \fi }
\renewcommand{\algorithmicendif} {\ifhenabled \highlight{\algorithmicend\
\algorithmicif} \else \algorithmicend\ \algorithmicif \fi}
\begin{algorithm}[t]
\caption{\SC{ROBMC-Et}}
\label{Alg:obrepair}
\begin{scriptsize}
\begin{algorithmic}[1]
\STATE \BF{Input: } Program $P$, lower bound $K_1$ and an upper bound $K_2$
\STATE \BF{Output: } Set $S$ of pairs of statements that must not be reordered to avoid
assertion failure
\STATE $C:=\emptyset$
\STATE $S := \emptyset$
\STATE $k := K_1$ \label{algobrep:binit}
\STATE $\phi := \mathit{true}$ \label{algobrep:constraint}
\STATE \highlight{$\mathit{terminate} := \mathit{false}$}
\WHILE { $k\leq K_2$ \AND \highlight{$\mathit{terminate}=\mathit{false}$}}
\LOOP
\STATE \highlight{$\inangleb{\mathit{result},\pi,\psi}:=M'(P_\phi,k)$} \label{algobrep:mcall}
\henabledfalse
\IF {$\mathit{result}=\mathit{SAFE}$} \label{algobrep:safestart} \henabledtrue
\IF{ \highlight{ \NOT $\mathit{safeDueToBound}(k,\psi)$} } \label{algobrep:etstart}
\STATE \highlight{$\mathit{terminate}:=\mathit{true}$} \label{algobrep:et}
\ENDIF \label{algobrep:etend}
\STATE \BF{break}
\ENDIF \label{algobrep:safeend}
\STATE $SP := \mathit{GetReorderedPairs}(\pi)$ \label{algobrep:getpair}
\IF {$SP = \emptyset$} \label{algobrep:bcstart}
\PRINT \BF{Error:} Program cannot be repaired
\RETURN \BF{errorcode}
\ENDIF \label{algobrep:bcend}
\STATE $C := C \cup \inparan{SP}$
\STATE $S:=\mathit{MHS}(C)$ \label{algobrep:mhs}
\STATE $\phi := \displaystyle \bigwedge _{(s_1,s_2) \in S} s_1 \prec s_2$ \label{algobrep:enforce}
\ENDLOOP
\STATE $k:=\mathit{increaseStrategy}(k)$ \label{algobrep:increase}
\ENDWHILE
\RETURN $S$
\end{algorithmic}
\end{scriptsize}
\end{algorithm}
\paragraph{\bf Building $M'$}
A model checker $M'$ that supports bounded exploration can be constructed
from $M$ as follows. For every pair $(s_1,s_2)$ that can potentially be
reordered, we introduce a new auxiliary Boolean variable $a_{12}$. Then, a
constraint $\neg a_{12} \leftrightarrow (s_1 \prec s_2)$ can be added. This
allows us to enforce the ordering constraint $s_1 \prec s_2$ by manipulating
values assigned to $a_{12}$. For a given bound $k$, we can enforce a
reorder-bounded exploration by adding a cardinality constraint
$\displaystyle \sum a_{ij} \leq k$. This constraint forces only up to $k$
auxiliary variables to be set to $\mathit{true}$, thus, allowing only up to
$k$ reorderings.
\paragraph{\bf Optimizing \algref{brepair}}
Even when the correct solution for the program is found, \algref{brepair}
has to reach the upper bound $K_2$ to terminate. This can cause many
further queries for which the model checker $M'$ is going to declare the
program $\MI{SAFE}$. To achieve soundness with \algref{brepair}, $K_2$
should be as high as the total number of all the pairs of statements that
can be potentially reordered. This leads to a very high value for $K_2$,
which may reduce the advantage that \algref{brepair} has over
\algref{wmmprogrepair}.
We can avoid these unnecessary queries if the model checker $M'$ produces a
proof whenever it declares the program $P_{\phi}$ as $\MI{SAFE}$. This
proof is analogous to an \IT{unsatisfiable core} produced by many SAT/SMT
solvers whenever the result of a query is \IT{unsat}.\footnote{SAT solvers
such as MiniSat~\cite{minisat} and Lingeling~\cite{lingeling} allow to query
whether a given assumption was part of the unsatisfiable
core~\cite{DBLP:journals/entcs/EenS03}.} With this additional feature of
$M'$, we can check whether the cardinality constraint $\sum a_{ij} \leq k$
was the reason for declaring the program $\MI{SAFE}$. If not, we know that
$P$ is safe under the ordering constraint~$\phi$ irrespective of the bound.
Therefore, \algref{brepair} can terminate early as shown in
\algref{obrepair}. The difference between \algref{brepair} and
\algref{obrepair} is highlighted in \algref{obrepair}. The model checker
$M'$ now returns $\psi$ as a proof when $P_{\phi}$ is safe
\algline{algobrep:mcall}. When $M'$ declares $P_\phi$ as safe,
\algref{obrepair} checks whether the bound $k$ is the reason that $P_\phi$
is declared safe \algline{algobrep:etstart}. If not, the termination flag
is set to $\MI{true}$ to trigger early termination \algline{algobrep:et}.
\paragraph{\bf Termination and soundness}
Let the program $P$ have counterexamples with up to $k_{opt}$ culprit
reorderings. If the value of the upper bound $K_2$ for \algref{brepair} and
\algref{obrepair} is smaller than $k_{opt}$, there might exist traces that
the algorithms fail to explore. For soundness, the value of $K_2$ should
thus be higher than $k_{opt}$. Since $k_{opt}$ is generally not known a
priori, a conservative value of $K_2$ should be equal to the total number of
pairs of statements for which reordering might happen ($RO_A(s_1,s_2)$ is
\MI{true}). Termination is guaranteed due to finiteness of the number of
pairs of statements and~$K_2$.
\section{Implementation and Experimental Results}\label{Se:results}
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\begin{tabular}{ccc}
\multicolumn{3}{c} {$\MT{[x_i=0;\,y_i=0;]}^{n} $} \\
\multicolumn{3}{c} {$ \MT{s1=0;\,s2=0;}$} \\
& & \\
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.25\textwidth}
\centering
$\insquareb{
\begin{array}{c}
\MT{x_i=1;} \\
\MT{s1\mbox{+=}y_i;} \\
\end{array}
} ^{n} $ \\
\end{minipage} & \large{$\displaystyle \parallel$} &
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.25\textwidth}
\centering
$ \insquareb{
\begin{array}{c}
\MT{y_i=1;} \\
\MT{s2\mbox{+=}x_i;} \\
\end{array}
} ^{n} $ \\
\end{minipage} \\
& & \\
\multicolumn{3}{c}{$\MT{assert(s1+s2>=0);}$} \\
\end{tabular}
\caption {A parameterized program.
Here, $[\texttt{st}]^n$ denotes that the statement \texttt{st} is repeated $n$ times.}
\label{Fi:paramsize}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[!tp]
\subcaptionbox{\# of instances solved\label{Fi:instances}}[.5\linewidth]
{
\begin{tikzpicture}[scale=.65]
\begin{axis} [ ymin=1, ymax=140, xmin=2, xmax=13, xlabel=$K_1$, ylabel=\# instances solved,
legend entries={\small{tso-te},tso-fi,tso-robmc,tso-robmc-et,pso-te,pso-fi,pso-robmc,pso-robmc-et},
legend style= { legend pos=south west, }
]
\addplot [dashed,domain=2:13] {18};
\addplot [dashdotted,domain=2:13] {83};
\addplot [dashed, mark=x] table {data/num-instances-tso-noet.dat};
\addplot [dashdotted,mark=+] table {data/num-instances-tso-et.dat};
\addplot [mark=triangle,domain=2:13] {4};
\addplot [mark=diamond,domain=2:13] {46};
\addplot [mark=oplus] table {data/num-instances-pso-noet.dat};
\addplot [mark=o] table {data/num-instances-pso-et.dat};
\end{axis}
\end{tikzpicture}
\subcaptionbox{\# of statement pairs \label{Fi:st-pairs}}[.5\linewidth]
{
\begin{tikzpicture}[scale=.65]
\begin{axis} [ xmin=2, xmax=40, xlabel=size parameter $n$, ylabel=\# of statement pairs,
legend entries={tso,pso},
legend style= { legend pos=south east, }
]
\addplot [dashed, mark=x] table {data/group-peterson-tso.dat};
\addplot [mark=triangle] table {data/group-peterson-pso.dat};
\end{axis}
\end{tikzpicture}
}
\subcaptionbox{\textsc{ROBMC-Et}\xspace (with $K_1=5$) v/s \textsc{Fi}\xspace \label{Fi:scatterk5}}[.5\linewidth]
{
\begin{tikzpicture}[scale=.65]
\begin{loglogaxis} [xmin=1,xmax=600, ymin=1, ymax=600, xlabel=fi,
ylabel=robmc-et,
]
\addplot [domain=1:600] {x};
\addplot [mark size=1.5,only marks] table
{data/scatter-k5-et.dat};
\end{loglogaxis}
\end{tikzpicture}
}
\subcaptionbox{peterson on TSO ($K_1=5$) \label{Fi:queries}}[.45\linewidth]
{
\begin{tikzpicture}[scale=.7]
\begin{semilogyaxis} [ xmin=2, xmax=40, xlabel=size parameter $n$, ylabel=\#queries,title=peterson-tso,
legend entries={te,fi,robmc,robmc-et},
legend style= { at={(.5,.9)},anchor=north},
]
\addplot [dashed, mark=x] table {data/query-peterson-tso-te.dat};
\addplot [mark=square] table {data/query-peterson-tso-nop.dat};
\addplot [mark=oplus] table {data/query-peterson-tso-noet-5.dat};
\addplot [mark=triangle] table {data/query-peterson-tso-et-5.dat};
\end{semilogyaxis}
\end{tikzpicture}
}
\subcaptionbox{peterson on TSO ($K_1=5$) \label{Fi:peterson-tso-k5}}[.5\linewidth]
{
\begin{tikzpicture}[scale=.7]
\begin{axis} [ ymin=0, ymax=600, xmin=2, xmax=40, xlabel=size parameter $n$, ylabel=time(sec),title=peterson-tso,
legend entries={te,fi,robmc,robmc-et},
legend style= { at={(.45,.95)},anchor=north }
]
\addplot [dashed, mark=x] table {data/peterson-tso-te.dat};
\addplot [mark=square] table {data/peterson-tso-nop.dat};
\addplot [mark=oplus] table {data/peterson-tso-noet-k5.dat};
\addplot [mark=triangle] table {data/peterson-tso-et-k5.dat};
\end{axis}
\end{tikzpicture}
}
\subcaptionbox{peterson on PSO ($K_1=5$)\label{Fi:peterson-pso-k5}}[.5\linewidth]
{
\begin{tikzpicture}[scale=.7]
\begin{axis} [ ymin=0, ymax=600, xmin=2, xmax=40, xlabel=size parameter $n$, ylabel=time(sec), title=peterson-pso,
legend entries={te,fi,robmc,robmc-et},
legend style= { at={(.45,.95)},anchor=north }
]
\addplot [dashed, mark=x] table {data/peterson-pso-te.dat};
\addplot [mark=square] table {data/peterson-pso-nop.dat};
\addplot [mark=oplus] table {data/peterson-pso-noet-k5.dat};
\addplot [mark=triangle] table {data/peterson-pso-et-k5.dat};
\end{axis}
\end{tikzpicture}
}
\phantomcaption
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\ContinuedFloat
\subcaptionbox{dijkstra on TSO ($K_1=5$) \label{Fi:dijkstra-tso-k5}}[.5\linewidth]
{
\begin{tikzpicture}[scale=.7]
\begin{axis} [ ymin=0, ymax=600, xmin=2, xmax=40, xlabel=size parameter $n$, ylabel=time(sec),title=dijkstra-tso,
legend entries={te,fi,robmc,robmc-et},
legend style= { at={(.35,.95)},anchor=north }
]
\addplot [dashed, mark=x] table {data/dijkstra-tso-te.dat};
\addplot [mark=square] table {data/dijkstra-tso-nop.dat};
\addplot [mark=oplus] table {data/dijkstra-tso-noet-k5.dat};
\addplot [mark=triangle] table {data/dijkstra-tso-et-k5.dat};
\end{axis}
\end{tikzpicture}
}
\subcaptionbox{dijkstra on PSO ($K_1=5$)\label{Fi:dijkstra-pso-k5}}[.5\linewidth]
{
\begin{tikzpicture}[scale=.7]
\begin{axis} [ ymin=0, ymax=600, xmin=2, xmax=40, xlabel=size parameter $n$, ylabel=time(sec), title=dijkstra-pso,
legend entries={te,fi,robmc,robmc-et},
legend style= { at={(.35,.95)},anchor=north }
]
\addplot [dashed, mark=x] table {data/dijkstra-pso-te.dat};
\addplot [mark=square] table {data/dijkstra-pso-nop.dat};
\addplot [mark=oplus] table {data/dijkstra-pso-noet-k5.dat};
\addplot [mark=triangle] table {data/dijkstra-pso-et-k5.dat};
\end{axis}
\end{tikzpicture}
}
\subcaptionbox{dijkstra on TSO ($K_1=10$) \label{Fi:dijkstra-tso-k10}}[.5\linewidth]
{
\begin{tikzpicture}[scale=.7]
\begin{axis} [ ymin=0, ymax=600, xmin=2, xmax=40, xlabel=size parameter $n$, ylabel=time(sec),title=dijkstra-tso,
legend entries={te,fi,robmc,robmc-et},
legend style= { at={(.35,.95)},anchor=north }
]
\addplot [dashed, mark=x] table {data/dijkstra-tso-te.dat};
\addplot [mark=square] table {data/dijkstra-tso-nop.dat};
\addplot [mark=oplus] table {data/dijkstra-tso-noet-k10.dat};
\addplot [mark=triangle] table {data/dijkstra-tso-et-k10.dat};
\end{axis}
\end{tikzpicture}
}
\subcaptionbox{dijkstra on PSO ($K_1=10$)\label{Fi:dijkstra-pso-k10}}[.5\linewidth]
{
\begin{tikzpicture}[scale=.7]
\begin{axis} [ ymin=0, ymax=600, xmin=2, xmax=40, xlabel=size parameter $n$, ylabel=time(sec), title=dijkstra-pso,
legend entries={te,fi,robmc,robmc-et},
legend style= { at={(.35,.95)},anchor=north }
]
\addplot [dashed, mark=x] table {data/dijkstra-pso-te.dat};
\addplot [mark=square] table {data/dijkstra-pso-nop.dat};
\addplot [mark=oplus] table {data/dijkstra-pso-noet-k10.dat};
\addplot [mark=triangle] table {data/dijkstra-pso-et-k10.dat};
\end{axis}
\end{tikzpicture}
}
\subcaptionbox{ChaseLev on TSO ($K_1=5$) \label{Fi:chaselev-tso-k5}}[.5\linewidth]
{
\begin{tikzpicture}[scale=.7]
\begin{axis} [ ymin=0, ymax=600, xmin=2, xmax=40, xlabel=size parameter $n$, ylabel=time(sec),title=chaselev-tso,
legend entries={te,fi,robmc,robmc-et},
legend style= { at={(.30,.95)},anchor=north }
]
\addplot [dashed, mark=x] table {data/chaselev-tso-te.dat};
\addplot [mark=square] table {data/chaselev-tso-nop.dat};
\addplot [mark=oplus] table {data/chaselev-tso-noet-k5.dat};
\addplot [mark=triangle] table {data/chaselev-tso-et-k5.dat};
\end{axis}
\end{tikzpicture}
}
\subcaptionbox{ChaseLev on PSO ($K_1=5$)\label{Fi:chaselev-pso-k5}}[.5\linewidth]
{
\begin{tikzpicture}[scale=.7]
\begin{axis} [ ymin=0, ymax=600, xmin=2, xmax=40, xlabel=size parameter $n$, ylabel=time(sec), title=chaselev-pso,
legend entries={te,fi,robmc,robmc-et},
legend style= { at={(.30,.95)},anchor=north }
]
\addplot [dashed, mark=x] table {data/chaselev-pso-te.dat};
\addplot [mark=square] table {data/chaselev-pso-nop.dat};
\addplot [mark=oplus] table {data/chaselev-pso-noet-k5.dat};
\addplot [mark=triangle] table {data/chaselev-pso-et-k5.dat};
\end{axis}
\end{tikzpicture}
}
\caption{For all experiments : Timeout=$600$ seconds, $K_2$=all pairs of statement (for soundness) }
\label{Fi:stats}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Experimental Setup}
To enable comparison between the different approaches, we implemented all
four algorithms in the same code base, using \textsc{Cbmc}\xspace~\cite{wmmcav13} as the
model checker. \textsc{Cbmc}\xspace explores loops until a given bound. Our
implementation and the benchmarks used are available online at
\url{http://www.cprover.org/glue} for independent verification of our
results. The tool takes a C program as an input and assertions in the
program as the specification.
\algref{te} closely approximates the approach used in \textsc{Dfence}\xspace~\cite{dfence}.
\algref{wmmprogrepair} resembles the approach used in
\textsc{Remmex}\xspace~\cite{remmex-tso,remmex-pso} and a variant of
\textsc{Memorax}\xspace~\cite{memorax-paper,memorax-tool}. We used \textsc{Minisat 2.2.0}\xspace~\cite{minisat}
as the SAT solver in \textsc{Cbmc}\xspace. For all four algorithms incremental SAT solving
is used. The cardinality constraints used in \algref{brepair} and
\algref{obrepair} are encoded incrementally~\cite{cp14}. Thus, the program
is encoded only once while the ordering constraints are changed in every
iteration using the assumption interface of the solver. The experiments
were performed on a machine with 8-core Intel Xeon processors and 48\,GB
RAM.
The $\mathit{increaseStrategy}(k)$ used for algorithms \algref{brepair} and
\algref{obrepair} doubles the bound $k$.
\subsection{Benchmarks}
Mutual exclusion algorithms such as {\em dekker}, {\em
peterson}~\cite{peterson-mutex}, {\em lamport}~\cite{lamport-mutex}, {\em
dijkstra}~\cite{lamport-mutex} and {\em szymanski}~\cite{szymanski-mutex} as
well as {\em ChaseLev}~\cite{chaselev} and {\em Cilk}~\cite{cilk} work
stealing queues were used as benchmarks. All benchmarks have been
implemented in C using the \TT{pthread} library. For mutual exclusion
benchmarks, a shared counter was added and incremented in the critical
section. An assertion was added to check that none of the increments are
lost. In addition, all the benchmarks were augmented with a parametric code
fragment shown in \figref{paramsize}, which increases the number of innocent
pairs as $n$ is increased. The parameter~$n$ was increased from $2$ to $40$
with an increment of $2$. Thus, each benchmark has $20$ parametric
instances, which makes the total number of problem instances for one memory
model $140$.
\subsection{Results}
We ran our experiments for the TSO and PSO memory models for all the
instances with the timeout of $600$ seconds. From now on, we will refer to
\algref{te} as \textsc{Te}\xspace, \algref{wmmprogrepair} as \textsc{Fi}\xspace, \algref{brepair} as
ROBMC\xspace and \algref{obrepair} as \textsc{ROBMC-Et}\xspace. In our experiments we found that
all algorithms produce the smallest set of fence placement for every problem
instance. Thus, we will focus our discussion on the relative performance of
these approaches.
\figref{instances} shows the effect of changing the value of the parameter
$K_1$ in ROBMC\xspace and \textsc{ROBMC-Et}\xspace. Remember that the bound is increased
gradually from $K_1$ to $K_2$. Here, $K_2$ is always set to the total
number of statement pairs in the program to guarantee soundness. \textsc{Te}\xspace and
\textsc{Fi}\xspace do not have a parameter~$K_1$, and thus, their corresponding plots are
flat. \figref{instances} shows that ROBMC\xspace and \textsc{ROBMC-Et}\xspace solve far more
instances than \textsc{Te}\xspace and \textsc{Fi}\xspace. The gap is even wider for the PSO memory model,
which allows more reordering, and thus the number of innocent pairs are
significantly higher compared to TSO on the same program. As expected,
\textsc{ROBMC-Et}\xspace performs better, due to the early termination optimization. The
value of $K_1$ barely affects the number of solved instances. The moderate
downward trend for the plots as $K_1$ increases suggests that as $K_1$
increases, ROBMC\xspace tends to behave more and more like \textsc{Fi}\xspace.
\figref{st-pairs} shows the increase in the total number of statement pairs
that can potentially be reordered as the parameter $n$ (\figref{paramsize})
increases for the Peterson algorithm. As expected, the number of pairs
grows quadratically in $n$. For PSO, the increase is steeper, as PSO allows
more reordering than TSO. This explains the better performance of the
ROBMC\xspace approaches on PSO.
The log-scale scatter plot in \figref{scatterk5} compares the run-time of
\textsc{ROBMC-Et}\xspace with $K_1=5$ with \textsc{Fi}\xspace over all 280 problem instances.
\textsc{Fi}\xspace times out significantly more often (data points where both time out are
omitted). Even on the instances solved by both the approaches, \textsc{ROBMC-Et}\xspace
clearly outperforms \textsc{Fi}\xspace on all but a few instances. Those instances where
\textsc{Fi}\xspace performs better typically have very few innocent pairs. Note that the
queries generated by \textsc{ROBMC-Et}\xspace are more expensive, as our current
implementation uses cardinality constraints to enforce boundedness. Thus,
it is possible for \textsc{Fi}\xspace to sometimes perform better even though it generates
a larger number of queries to the underlying model checker.
The semi-log-scale plot in \figref{queries} gives the number of queries to
the model checker required by the approaches for the peterson algorithm on
TSO. \textsc{Te}\xspace and \textsc{Fi}\xspace generate exponentially many queries to the model checker
as $n$ increases. By contrast, the number of queries generated by ROBMC\xspace
and \textsc{ROBMC-Et}\xspace virtually remains unaffected by~$n$. This is expected as the
search is narrow and focussed owing to the bound $k$.
\figref{peterson-tso-k5} and \figref{peterson-pso-k5} give the relative
performance of all the algorithms when the size and number of innocent pairs
increases with the parameter $n$. All plots show an exponential trajectory,
indicating that ROBMC\xspace does not fundamentally reduce the complexity of the
underlying problem. Even though the number of queries required remains
constant (\figref{queries}), each such query becomes more expensive because
of the cardinality constraints.
However, the growth rate for ROBMC\xspace and \textsc{ROBMC-Et}\xspace is much slower compared to
\textsc{Te}\xspace and \textsc{Fi}\xspace. \figref{peterson-tso-k5} and \figref{peterson-pso-k5}
corroborate the claim that ROBMC\xspace-based approaches perform much better when
there are a significant number of innocent pairs. For PSO, the performance
gained by using ROBMC\xspace is even higher, as PSO allows more reordering.
Similar trends are observed for dijkstra algorithm in
\figrefs{dijkstra-tso-k5}{dijkstra-pso-k5}. Plots in
\figrefs{dijkstra-tso-k5}{dijkstra-tso-k10} as well as
\figrefs{dijkstra-pso-k5}{dijkstra-pso-k10} show that the performance of
ROBMC\xspace-based approaches is not highly sensitive to the value of $K_1$ as it
changes from $5$ to $10$. This is consistent with the observation made from
\figref{instances}.
The performance comparision for the ChaseLev work stealing queue is given in
\figrefs{chaselev-tso-k5}{chaselev-pso-k5}. Here it can be seen that the
threshold (in terms of innocent pairs) needed for ROBMC\xspace to surpass other
approaches is higher. Even for such a case, ROBMC\xspace still provides
competitive performance when the number of innocent pairs are low. ROBMC\xspace
regains its superiority towards the end as the number of innocent pairs
increases. Thus, even when every individual query is more expensive (due to
the current implementation that uses cardinality constraints to enforce the
bound), ROBMC\xspace always provides almost equal or better performance for all
the benchmarks.
\section{Property-driven Fence Insertion}\label{Se:wmmrepair}
\subsection{Overview}
In this section we will discuss two approaches that were used
earlier for property-driven fence insertion. We will present our
improvements in the next section.
For a program $P$ of size $\vbars{P}$, the total number of pairs of
statements is $\vbars{P}^2$. Since the goal is to find a subset of these
pairs, the search space is $2^{\vbars{P}^2}$. Thus, the search space grows
\EM{exponentially} as the size of the program is increased.
An automated method for fence insertion typically includes two components:
(1)~a model checker $M$ and (2)~a search technique that uses $M$ iteratively
in order to find a solution. We assume that the model checker $M$ has the
following properties:
\begin{itemize}
\item $M$ should be able to find counterexamples to assertions
in programs given a memory model.
\item $M$ should return the counterexample $\pi$ in form of a sequence of
events as described in \sectref{preliminaries}.
\item For a pair of statements $(s_1,s_2)$ for which $RO_A(s_1,s_2)$ holds,
$M$ should be able to enforce an ordering constraint $s_1 \prec s_2$ that
forbids the exploration of any execution where $(s_1,s_2)$ is reordered.
\end{itemize}
\subsection{Fence Insertion using Trace Enumeration}
\algref{te} is a very simple approach to placing fences in the program with
the help of such a model checker. The algorithm is representative of the
technique that is used in \textsc{Dfence}\xspace~\cite{dfence}. \algref{te} iteratively
submits queries to $M$ for a counterexample \algline{algte:mcall}. All the
pairs of statements that have been reordered in $\pi$ are collected in $SP$
\algline{algte:getpair}. To avoid the same trace in future iterations,
reordering of at least one of these pairs must be disallowed. The choice of
which reorderings must be banned is left open. This process is repeated
until no further error traces are found. Finally,
$\mathit{computeMinimalSolution}(\phi)$ computes a minimal set of pairs of
statements such that imposing ordering constraints on them satisfies~$\phi$.
\paragraph{\bf Termination and soundness}
Even though the program may have unbounded loops and thus potentially
contains an unbounded number of counterexamples, \algref{te} terminates.
The reason is that an ordering constraint $s_1 \prec s_2$ disallows
reordering of all events that are generated by $(s_1,s_2)$. The number of
iterations is bounded above by $2^{\vbars{P}^2}$, which is the size of the
search space. Soundness is a consequence of the fact that the algorithm
terminates only when no counterexamples are found. A minimal-hitting-set
(mhs) is computed over all these counterexamples to compute the culprit
pairs that must not be reordered. Since every trace must go through one of
these pairs, it cannot manifest when the reordering of these pairs is
banned. The number of pairs computed is minimal, thus, \algref{te} does not
guarantee the least number of fences. One can replace the
minimal-hitting-set (mhs) with a minimum-hitting-set (MHS) in order to
obtain such a guarantee.
\begin{algorithm}[pt]
\caption{Trace Enumerating Fence Insertion (\textsc{Te}\xspace)}
\label{Alg:te}
\begin{scriptsize}
\begin{algorithmic}[1]
\STATE \BF{Input: } Program $P$
\STATE \BF{Output: } Set $S$ of pairs of statements that must not be reordered to avoid
assertion failure
\STATE $C:=\emptyset$
\STATE $S:= \emptyset$
\STATE $\phi:= \mathit{true}$ \label{algte:constraint}
\LOOP
\STATE $\inangleb{\mathit{result},\pi}:=M(P_\phi)$ \label{algte:mcall}
\IF {$\mathit{result}=\mathit{SAFE}$} \label{algte:safestart}
\STATE \BF{break}
\ENDIF \label{algte:safeend}
\STATE $\mathit{SP}:= \mathit{GetReorderedPairs}(\pi)$ \label{algte:getpair}
\IF {$\mathit{SP} = \emptyset$} \label{algte:bcstart}
\PRINT \BF{Error:} Program cannot be repaired
\RETURN \BF{errorcode}
\ENDIF \label{algte:bcend}
\STATE $\phi := \displaystyle \phi \wedge \inroundb{\bigvee _{(s_1,s_2) \in SP} s_1 \prec s_2}$ \label{algte:enforce}
\ENDLOOP
\STATE $S := \mathit{computeMinimalSolution}(\phi)$
\RETURN $S$
\end{algorithmic}
\end{scriptsize}
\end{algorithm}
\begin{algorithm}[pt]
\caption{Accelerated Fence Insertion (\textsc{Fi}\xspace)}
\label{Alg:wmmprogrepair}
\begin{scriptsize}
\begin{algorithmic}[1]
\STATE \BF{Input: } Program $P$
\STATE \BF{Output: } Set $S$ of pairs of statements that must not be reordered to avoid
assertion failure
\STATE $C:=\emptyset$
\STATE $S:= \emptyset$
\STATE $\phi:= \mathit{true}$ \label{algrep:constraint}
\LOOP
\STATE $\inangleb{\mathit{result},\pi}:=M(P_\phi)$ \label{algrep:mcall}
\IF {$\mathit{result}=\mathit{SAFE}$} \label{algrep:safestart}
\STATE \BF{break}
\ENDIF \label{algrep:safeend}
\STATE $\mathit{SP} := \mathit{GetReorderedPairs}(\pi)$ \label{algrep:getpair}
\IF {$\mathit{SP} = \emptyset$} \label{algrep:bcstart}
\PRINT \BF{Error:} Program cannot be repaired
\RETURN \BF{errorcode}
\ENDIF \label{algrep:bcend}
\STATE \highlight{$C := C \cup \inparan{\mathit{SP}}$}
\STATE \highlight{$S:=\mathit{MHS}(C)$ \label{algrep:mhs}}
\STATE \highlight{$\phi := \displaystyle \bigwedge _{(s_1,s_2) \in S} s_1 \prec s_2$} \label{algrep:enforce}
\ENDLOOP
\RETURN $S$
\end{algorithmic}
\end{scriptsize}
\end{algorithm}
\subsection{Accelerated Fence Insertion}
\algref{wmmprogrepair} is an alternative approach to fence insertion. The
differences between \algref{te} and \algref{wmmprogrepair} are highlighted.
\algref{wmmprogrepair} has been used in~\cite{remmex-tso,remmex-pso} and is
a variant of the approach used in~\cite{memorax-tool}.
\algref{wmmprogrepair} starts with an ordering constraint $\phi$
\algline{algrep:constraint}, which is initially unrestricted. A call to the
model checker $M$ is made \algline{algrep:mcall} to check whether the
program $P$ under the constraint $\phi$ has a counterexample. From a
counterexample~$\pi$, we collect the set of pairs of statements $SP$ that
have been reordered in $\pi$ \algline{algrep:getpair}. This set is put into
a collection~$C$.
Next, we compute a minimum-hitting-set over~$C$. This gives us one of the
smallest sets of pairs of statements that can avoid all the counterexamples
seen so far. The original approach in~\cite{remmex-tso} uses a
minimal-hitting-set (mhs). The ordering constraint~$\phi$ is updated using
the minimum-hitting-set \alglines{algrep:mhs}{algrep:enforce}.
\algref{wmmprogrepair} tells the model checker which reorderings from each
counterexample are to be banned at every iteration, which is in contrast to
\algref{te}. \algref{wmmprogrepair} assumes that an assertion violation in
$P$ is due to a reordering. If a counterexample is found without any
reordering, the algorithm exits with an
error~\alglines{algrep:bcstart}{algrep:bcend}. Finally, the algorithm
terminates when no more counterexamples can be found
\alglines{algrep:safestart}{algrep:safeend}.
\paragraph{\bf Termination and soundness}
The argument that applies to \algref{te} can also be used to prove
termination and soundness of \algref{wmmprogrepair}. In addition, the
constraint $\phi$ generated is generally stronger
(i.e.~$\phi_\textrm{\algref{wmmprogrepair}} \rightarrow \phi_\textrm{\algref{te}}$) than the
constraint generated by \algref{te}. Thus, for the same sequence of traces,
\algref{wmmprogrepair} typically converges to a solution faster than
\algref{te}.
\input{reorder}
|
\section{Introduction and main results}\label{csw-sec1}
Let $\mathbb{R}^{n}
$ denote the usual real vector space of dimension $n$, where
$n\geq2$ is a positive integer. Sometimes it is convenient to
identify each point $x=(x_{1},\ldots,x_{n})\in\mathbb{R}^{n}$ with
an $n\times 1$ column matrix so that
$$x=\left(\begin{array}{cccc}
x_{1} \\
\vdots \\
x_{n}
\end{array}\right).
$$
For $a=(a_{1},\ldots,a_{n})$ and $x\in\mathbb{R}^{n}$, we define the Euclidean inner product
$\langle \cdot ,\cdot \rangle$ by
$$\langle x,a\rangle=x_{1}a_{1}+\cdots+x_{n}a_{n}
$$
so that the Euclidean length of $x$ is defined by
$$|x|=\langle x,x\rangle^{1/2}=(|x_{1}|^{2}+\cdots+|x_{n}|^{2})^{1/2}.
$$
Denote a ball in $\mathbb{R}^{n}$
with center $x'$ and radius $r$ by
$$\mathbb{B}^{n}(x',r)=\{x\in\mathbb{R}^{n}:\, |x-x'|<r\}.
$$
In particular, $\mathbb{B}^{n}$ denotes the unit ball
$\mathbb{B}^{n}(0,1)$. Set $\mathbb{D}=\mathbb{B}^2$, the open unit
disk in the complex plane $\mathbb{C}$.
A function $f$ of an open subset $\Omega\subset\mathbb{R}^{n}$ into
$\mathbb{R}$ is called a {\it harmonic function} if $\Delta f=0$,
where $\Delta$ represents the $n$-dimensional Laplacian operator
$$\Delta=\sum_{k=1}^{n}\frac{\partial^{2}}{\partial x_{k}^{2}}.
$$
In this paper, we use $C$ to denote the various positive constants,
whose value may change from one occurrence to the next.
A continuous increasing function $\omega:\, [0,\infty)\rightarrow
[0,\infty)$ with $\omega(0)=0$ is called a {\it majorant} if
$\omega(t)/t$ is non-increasing for $t>0$. Given a subset $\Omega$
of $\mathbb{R}^{n}$, a function $f:\, \Omega\rightarrow
\mathbb{R}^{m}~(m\geq1)$ is said to belong to the {\it Lipschitz
space $\Lambda_{\omega}(\Omega)$} if there is a positive constant
$C$ such that \begin{equation}\label{eq1x} |f(x)-f(y)|\leq C\omega(|x-y|) ~\mbox{
for all $x,\ y\in\Omega.$} \end{equation} For $\delta_{0}>0$, let
\begin{equation}\label{eq2x} \int_{0}^{\delta}\frac{\omega(t)}{t}\,dt\leq
C\cdot\omega(\delta),\ 0<\delta<\delta_{0} \end{equation} and \begin{equation}\label{eq3x}
\delta\int_{\delta}^{\infty}\frac{\omega(t)}{t^{2}}\,dt\leq
C\cdot\omega(\delta),\ 0<\delta<\delta_{0}, \end{equation} where $\omega$ is a
majorant. A majorant $\omega$ is said to be {\it regular} if it
satisfies the conditions (\ref{eq2x}) and (\ref{eq3x}) (see
\cite{CRW,D,D1,P,Pav1,Pav2}).
Let $\Omega$ be a domain in $\mathbb{R}^{n}$ with non-empty
boundary. We use $d_{\Omega}(x)$ to denote the Euclidean distance
from $x$ to the boundary $\partial \Omega$ of $\Omega$. In
particular, we always use $d(x)$ to denote the Euclidean distance
from $x$ to the boundary of $\mathbb{B}^{n}.$
A proper subdomain $G$ of $\mathbb{R}^{n}$ is said to be {\it
$\Lambda_{\omega}$-extension} if
$\Lambda_{\omega}(G)=\mbox{loc}\Lambda_{\omega}(G)$, where
$\mbox{loc}\Lambda_{\omega}(G)$ denotes the set of all functions
$f:\, G\rightarrow \mathbb{R}^{m}$ satisfying (\ref{eq1x}) with a
fixed positive constant $C$, whenever $x\in G$ and $y\in G$ such
that $|x-y|<\frac{1}{2}d_{G}(x)$. Obviously, $\mathbb{B}^{n}$ is a
$\Lambda_{\omega}$-extension domain.
In \cite{L}, the author proved that $G$ is a
$\Lambda_{\omega}$-extension domain if and only if each pair of
points $x,y\in G$ can be joined by a rectifiable curve
$\gamma\subset G$ satisfying \begin{equation}\label{eq1.0}
\int_{\gamma}\frac{\omega(d_{G}(\zeta))}{d_{G}(\zeta)}\,ds(\zeta)
\leq C\omega(|x-y|) \end{equation} with some fixed positive constant
$C=C(G,\omega)$, where $ds$ stands for the arc length measure on
$\gamma$. Furthermore, Lappalainen \cite[Theorem 4.12]{L} proved
that $\Lambda_{\omega}$-extension domains exist only for majorants
$\omega$ satisfying (\ref{eq2x}). See \cite{D1,GM,KW,L} for more
details on $\Lambda_{\omega}$-extension domains.
Krantz \cite{Kr} proved a Hardy-Littlewood type theorem for harmonic
functions in the unit ball with respect to the majorant
$\omega(t)=\omega_{\alpha}(t)=t^{\alpha}~(0<\alpha\leq1)$ as
follows.
\begin{Thm}{\rm (\cite[Theorem 15.8]{Kr})}\label{ThmA}
Let $f$ be a harmonic function from $\mathbb{B}^{n}$ into
$\mathbb{R}$ and $0<\alpha\leq1$. Then $f$ satisfies $$|\nabla
f(x)|\leq C\frac{\omega_{\alpha}\big(d(x)\big)}{d(x)}~\mbox{for
any}~x\in\mathbb{B}^{n}$$ if and only if
$$|f(x)-f(y)|\leq C\omega_{\alpha}(|x-y|)~\mbox{for
any}~x,y\in\mathbb{B}^{n},$$ where $\nabla f$ denotes the gradient
of $f$.
\end{Thm}
For the extensive discussions on this topic, see
\cite{Ai,ABM,MVM,ABN,CPW5}. We generalize Theorem \Ref{ThmA} to the
following form.
\begin{thm}\label{thm-1}
Let $\omega$ be a majorant satisfying {\rm (\ref{eq2x})}, $\Omega$
be a $\Lambda_{\omega}$-extension domain in $\mathbb{R}^{n}$ and $f$
be a harmonic function from $\Omega$ into $\mathbb{R}$. Then $f\in
\Lambda_{\omega}(\Omega)$ if and only if
$$|\nabla f(x)|\leq
C\frac{\omega\big(d_{\Omega}(x)\big)}{d_{\Omega}(x)}~\mbox{for
any}~x\in\Omega.$$
\end{thm}
In \cite{Ho}, Holland-Walsh obtained the following result. For the
extensive studies on this topic, see \cite{CPW2,Pav,Re}.
\begin{Thm}{\rm (\cite[Theorem 3]{Ho})}\label{ThmA2}
Let $\mathcal{B}$ denote all analytic functions in $\mathbb{D}$
which form a complex Banach space with the norm
$$\|f\|_{\mathcal{B}}=|f(0)|+\sup_{z\in\mathbb{D}}\{(1-|z|^{2})|f'(z)|\}<\infty.
$$
Then $f\in\mathcal{B}$ if and only if
$$\sup_{z,w\in\mathbb{D},z\neq w}\left\{
\frac{\sqrt{(1-|z|^{2})(1-|w|^{2})}|f(z)-f(w)|}{|z-w|}\right\}<\infty.
$$
\end{Thm}
In \cite{Pav}, Pavlovi\'c generalized Theorem \Ref{ThmA2} into the
following form.
\begin{Thm}{\rm (\cite[Theorem 2]{Pav})}\label{ThmA3}
Let $ \mathcal{C}^{1}(\mathbb{B}^{n})$ be the class of all one order
continuous differentiable functions from $\mathbb{B}^{n}$ into
$\mathbb{R}.$ Let $\mathcal{B}_{\mathcal{C}^{1}}$ denote all
$f\in \mathcal{C}^{1}(\mathbb{B}^{n})$ which form a
Banach space with the norm
$$\|f\|_{\mathcal{B}_{\mathcal{C}^{1}}}=|f(0)|+\sup_{z\in\mathbb{D}}\{(1-|x|^{2})|\nabla
f(x)|\}<\infty.
$$
Then $f\in\mathcal{B}_{\mathcal{C}^{1}}$ if and only if
$$\sup_{x,y\in\mathbb{B}^{n},x\neq y}\left\{
\frac{\sqrt{(1-|x|^{2})(1-|y|^{2})}|f(x)-f(y)|}{|x-y|}\right\}<\infty.
$$
\end{Thm}
By using a different proof methods,
we will prove a more general result as follows which is
a generalization of Theorems \Ref{ThmA2} and \Ref{ThmA3}.
\begin{thm}\label{thm-CPW1}
Let $f\in\mathcal{C}^{1}(\mathbb{B}^{n})$ and $\omega$ be a
majorant. Then for any $x\in\mathbb{B}^{n}$,
$$|\nabla f(x)|\leq C\omega\left(\frac{1}{d(x)}\right)
$$ if and only if
for any $x, y\in\mathbb{R}^{n}$ with $x\neq y$,
$$\frac{|f(x)-f(y)|}{|x-y|}\leq
C\omega\left(\frac{1}{\sqrt{d(x)d(y)}}\right).
$$
\end{thm}
Dyakonov \cite{D} discussed the relationship between the Lipschitz
space and the bounded mean oscillation on holomorphic functions in
$\mathbb{D}$, and obtained the following result.
\begin{Thm}{\rm (\cite[Theorem 1]{D})}\label{ThmDy}
Suppose that $f$ is a holomorphic function in $\mathbb{D}$ which is
continuous up to the boundary of $\mathbb{D}$. If $\omega$ and
$\omega^{2}$ are regular majorants, then
$$f\in \Lambda_{\omega}(\mathbb{D})\Longleftrightarrow \mbox{{\rm P}}_{|f|^{2}}(z)-|f(z)|^{2}\leq M\omega^{2}(d(z)),
$$
where
$$\mbox{{\rm P}}_{|f|^{2}}(z)=\frac{1}{2\pi}\int_{0}^{2\pi}\frac{1-|z|^{2}}{|z-e^{i\theta}|^{2}}|f(e^{i\theta})|^{2}\,d\theta.
$$
\end{Thm}
In particular, for harmonic functions, we get the following result
which is analogous to Theorems \Ref{ThmA2} and \Ref{ThmDy}. For
some related topics on complex-valued functions, we refer to
\cite{CPVW,CRW}.
\begin{thm}\label{thm-CPW}
Let $f\in\mathcal{C}^{1}(\mathbb{B}^{n})$ be a harmonic and
$\omega$ be a majorant. Then the following are equivalent:
\item{{{\rm(a)}}}~for any $x\in\mathbb{B}^{n}$, $$|\nabla f(x)|\leq C\omega\left(\frac{1}{d(x)}\right);
$$
\item{{{\rm(b)}}}~ for any $x, y\in\mathbb{R}^{n}$ with $x\neq y$,
$$\frac{|f(x)-f(y)|}{|x-y|}\leq
C\omega\left(\frac{1}{\sqrt{d(x)d(y)}}\right);
$$
\item{{{\rm(c)}}}~for any $r\in(0,d(x)]$,
$$\frac{1}{|\mathbb{B}^{n}(x,r)|}\int_{\mathbb{B}^{n}(x,r)}|f(\zeta)-f(x)|dV(\zeta)\leq Cr\omega\Big(\frac{1}{r}\Big),$$
where $dV$ denotes the Lebesgue volume measure in $\mathbb{B}^{n}$.
\end{thm}
For a {\it vector-valued and real harmonic
function} $f=(f_{1},\ldots,f_{n})$ from $\mathbb{B}^{n}$ into $\mathbb{R}^n$ (i.e. for
each $i\in\{1,2,\ldots,n\}$, $f_{i}:\,\, \mathbb{B}^{n}\rightarrow \mathbb{R}$ is harmonic),
we denote the Jacobian of $f$ by $J_{f}$, i.e.,
$$J_{f}=\det \left ( \frac{\partial f_i}{\partial x_{j}}\right )_{n\times n},
$$
where $j\in\{1,2,\ldots,n\}.$ Let $\mathcal{H}(\mathbb{B}^{n}, \mathbb{R}^{n})$ be the set of all
real harmonic functions $f$ from $\mathbb{B}^{n}$ into
$\mathbb{R}^{n}$. Also, for $p\in(0,\infty)$, let
$\mathcal{H}^{p}(\mathbb{B}^{n}, \mathbb{R}^{n})$ denote the
harmonic Hardy class consisting of all functions
$f\in\mathcal{H}(\mathbb{B}^{n}, \mathbb{R}^{n})$ such that
$$\|f\|_{p}=\sup_{0<r<1}M_{p}(f,r) <\infty, \quad
M_{p}^{p}(f,r):=\int_{\partial\mathbb{B}^{n}}|f(r\zeta)|^{p}\, d\sigma(\zeta),
$$
where $d\sigma$ is the normalized surface measure on
$\partial\mathbb{B}^{n}$ (see \cite{ABR}).
One of the long standing open problems in geometric function theory
is to determine the precise value of the univalent Landau-Bloch
constant for analytic functions of ${\mathbb D}$. It has attracted much
attention, see \cite{LM, Mi1,Mi2,M-89} and references therein. For
general holomorphic mappings of more than one complex variable, no
univalent Landau-Bloch constant exists (cf. \cite{ W}). In order to
obtain some analogous results of univalent Landau-Bloch constant for
functions with several complex variables, it is necessary to
restrict the class of mappings considered, see
\cite{CPW3,CPW,FG,LX,M3,T,W}.
In \cite{HG1}, the authors discussed the Schwarz-Pick Lemma and the
Landau-Bloch type theorems for bounded pluriharmonic mappings. It is known that pluriharmonic
mappings are special vector-valued harmonic
functions.
By using a different approach, as our last aim, we will
establish the Schwarz-Pick Lemma and obtain a univalent Landau-Bloch constant for vector-valued harmonic
functions in the Hardy spaces. Since all bounded vector-valued
harmonic functions belong to the harmonic Hardy classes, we see
that our result (Theorem \ref{thm1}) is a generalization of
\cite[Theorem 5]{HG1}.
\begin{thm}\label{thm1}
Suppose that $f\in\mathcal{H}^{p}(\mathbb{B}^{n},\mathbb{R}^{n})$
satisfies $J_{f} (0)-1=|f(0)|=0,$ where $p\geq1$ and $n\geq3$. Then
$f(\mathbb{B}^{n})$ contains a univalent ball $\mathbb{B}^{n}(0,R)$,
where
$$R\geq\max_{0<r<1}\varphi(r),
$$
where
$$\varphi(r)=\frac{1}{2[nK(r)]^{2n-2}M(r)[(1+\sqrt{2})^{n-1}+\sqrt{2}-1]},
$$
$$K(r) = 2^{1/p}\|f\|_{p}/[r(1-r)^{(n-1)/p}]~\mbox{and}~M(r)=K(r)[(3+\sqrt{3})n+2\sqrt{2}].
$$
\end{thm}
We remark that, as $\lim_{r\rightarrow0+}\varphi(r)=\lim_{r\rightarrow1-}\varphi(r)=0,
$
the maximum of $\varphi(r)$ in Theorem \ref{thm1} does exist.
The following result easily follows from Theorem \ref{thm1}.
\begin{thm}\label{thm5-x}
Let $f\in\mathcal{H}(\mathbb{B}^{n}, \mathbb{R}^{n})$ with $J_{f}
(0)-1=|f(0)|=0$ and $|f(x)|<M$ for $x\in\mathbb{B}^{n}$. Then $f$ is
univalent in $\mathbb{B}^{n}(0,\rho_{0})$ and
$f(\mathbb{B}^{n}(0,\rho_{0}))$ contains a univalent ball
$\mathbb{B}^{n}(0,R_{0})$, where
$$\rho_{0}=\frac{1}{n^{n-1}M^{n}[(3+\sqrt{2})n+2\sqrt{2}][(1+\sqrt{2})^{n-1}+\sqrt{2}-1]}
~\mbox{ and }~R_{0}=\frac{\rho_{0}}{2(nM)^{n-1}}.
$$
\end{thm}
We will extend Theorem \ref{thm5-x} to a general case. Let us give
some preparations before we present our next result.
Let $f:~\overline{\Omega}\to \mathbb{R}^n$ be a differentiable
mapping and $p$ be a regular value of $f$, where $p\notin
f(\partial\Omega)$ and $\Omega\subset \mathbb{R}^n$ is a bounded
domain. Then the degree $\deg(f,\Omega,p)$ is defined by the formula
$$\deg(f,\Omega,p):=\sum_{y\in f^{-1}(p)}\mbox{ sign} \big(\det J_{f} (y)\big).
$$
The $\deg(f,\Omega,p)$ satisfies the following properties (cf. \cite{RR,V}):\\
\begin{enumerate}
\item[(I)] If $\deg(f,\overline{\Omega},p)\neq 0$, then there
exists an $x\in\Omega$ such that $f(x)=p$.
\item[(II)]\label{(II)} If $D$ is a domain with $\overline{D}\subset\Omega$ and $p\in
\mathbb{R}^ n \backslash f(\partial D)$, then the degree
$\deg(f,D,p)$ is a constant.
\end{enumerate}
Let $D\subset\mathbb{R}^{n}$ be a domain and $f$ be a real function
from $D$ into $\mathbb{R}^{n}$. If the H\"{o}lder coefficient
$$\|f\|_{\alpha,D}= \sup_{x,y\in D, x\neq y} \frac{|f(x)- f(y)|}{|x-y|^\alpha}
$$
is finite, then the function $f$ is said to be (uniformly)
H\"{o}lder continuous with exponent $\alpha$ in $D$, where $0<
\alpha\leq 1.$ In this case, the H\"{o}lder coefficient serves as a
seminorm. If the H\"older coefficient is merely bounded on compact
subsets of $D$, then the function $f$ is said to be locally H\"older
continuous with exponent $\alpha$ in $D$. We denote by
$C^\alpha(D,\mathbb{R}^{n})$ the space consist of all locally
H\"{o}lder continuous functions $f$ from $D$ into $\mathbb{R}^{n}$
with exponent $\alpha$ (cf. \cite{gt,Kr}).
Let $\mathcal{PE}_{f}$ denote the class of functions $u$ satisfying
the Poisson equation $\Delta u=f $ with $J_{u} (0)-1=|u(0)|=0$,
where $u\in C^2(\mathbb{B}^{n})$, i.e., twice continuously
differentiable function in $\mathbb{B}^{n}$, and $f\in
C^\alpha(\mathbb{B}^{n}, \mathbb{R}^{n})$ with the constants
$\alpha\in(0,1)$ and $\|f\|_{\alpha,\mathbb{B}^{n}}<\infty$. We use
$\mathcal{PE}_{f}^M$ to denote the family of all functions $u$
satisfying $u \in \mathcal{PE}_{f}$ with $|u(x)|\leq M$ for
$x\in\mathbb{B}^{n}$, where $M$ is a positive constant. Obviously,
all bounded harmonic functions belong to $\mathcal{PE}_{f}^M$.
\begin{thm}\label{thm6-x}
Let $u\in\mathcal{PE}_{f}^M$. Then there is a positive constant
$c_0$ depending only on $M$, $\|f\|_{\alpha,\mathbb{B}^{n}}$ and $n$
such that $\mathbb{B}^{n}(0,c_0)\subset u(\mathbb{B}^{n})$.
\end{thm}
In fact, the bounded condition in Theorem \ref{thm6-x} is necessary.
The following example shows that there is no Landau-Bloch Theorem
for functions $u\in\mathcal{PE}_{f}$ without the bounded condition.
\begin{example}
For $k\in\{1,2,\ldots\}$ and $x\in\mathbb{B}^{n}$, let $u_k(x)=
(kx_1, x_2/k,x_3,\ldots,x_n)$. Then $u_k$ are harmonic and $J_{u_k}
(0)-1=|u_k (0)|=0$.
This example tells us that if $u: \mathbb{B}^{n}\rightarrow \mathbb{R}^{n}$
is a harmonic function on the unit ball with $J_{u}
(0)-1=|u(0)|=0$, then there is no an absolute constant $s>0$ such
that $\mathbb{B}^{n}(0,s) $ belongs to $u(\mathbb{B}^{n})$. Thus
the Theorem \ref{thm6-x} does not hold for $u\in\mathcal{PE}_{f}$.
\end{example}
The proofs of Theorems \ref{thm-1}, \ref{thm-CPW1} and \ref{thm-CPW}
will be given in Section \ref{csw-sec2}. We will show Theorems
\ref{thm1} and \ref{thm6-x}
in the last part of this paper.
\section{Lipschitz type spaces on harmonic functions}\label{csw-sec2}
\subsection*{Proof of Theorem \ref{thm-1}}
We first prove the sufficiency. Since $\Omega$ is a
$\Lambda_{\omega}$-extension domain in $\mathbb{R}^{n}$, we see that
for any $x,y\in\Omega$, by using (\ref{eq1.0}), there is a
rectifiable curve $\gamma\subset\Omega$ joining $x$ to $y$ such that
\begin{eqnarray*}
|f(x)-f(y)|&\leq&\int_{\gamma}|\nabla f(\zeta)|ds(\zeta)\\
&\leq&C\int_{\gamma}\frac{\omega\big(d_{\Omega}(\zeta)\big)}{d_{\Omega}(\zeta)}ds(\zeta)\\
&\leq&C\omega(|x-y|).
\end{eqnarray*}
Now we come to prove the necessity. Let
$x=(x_{1},\ldots,x_{n})\in\Omega$ and $r=d_{\Omega}(x)/2$.
For all $y\in\mathbb{B}^{n}(x,r)$, using Poisson formula, we get
$$f(y)=\int_{\partial\mathbb{B}^{n}}\mbox{P}(y,\zeta)f(r\zeta+x)d\sigma(\zeta),
$$
where $\zeta=(\zeta_{1},\ldots,\zeta_{n})\in\partial\mathbb{B}^{n}$ and
$$\mbox{P}(y,\zeta)=\frac{r^{2}-|y-x|^{2}}{|y-x-r\zeta|^{2}}
.$$
By elementary calculations, for each $k\in\{1,2,\ldots,n\}$, we have
$$\frac{\partial \mbox{P}(y,\zeta)}{\partial
y_{k}}=-2
\frac{\big[(y_{k}-x_{k})|y-x-r\zeta|^{2}+(r^{2}-|y-x|^{2})(y_{k}-r\zeta_{k}-x_{k})\big]}{|y-x-r\zeta|^{4}}.$$
Then for all $y\in\mathbb{B}^{n}(x,r/2)$,
\begin{eqnarray*}
\left|\frac{\partial \mbox{P}(y,\zeta)}{\partial y_{k}}\right|
&\leq&2\frac{\big[|y_{k}-x_{k}||y-x-r\zeta|^{2}+(r^{2}-|y-x|^{2})|y_{k}-r\zeta_{k}-x_{k}|\big]}{|y-x-r\zeta|^{4}}\\
&\leq&2\frac{\left[\frac{r}{2}\Big(\frac{3r}{2}\Big)^{2}+r^{2}\Big(\frac{3r}{2}\Big)\right]}{\Big(r-\frac{r}{2}\Big)^{4}}
= \frac{84}{r},
\end{eqnarray*}
\noindent which implies that
\begin{eqnarray*}
|\nabla
f(y)|&=&\left[\sum_{k=1}^{n}f^{2}_{y_{k}}(y)\right]^{\frac{1}{2}}\\
&=&\Big\{\sum_{k=1}^{n}\Big(\Big|\int_{\partial\mathbb{B}^{n}}\frac{\partial
\mbox{P}(y,\zeta)}{\partial
y_{k}}(f(r\zeta+x)-f(x))d\sigma(\zeta)\Big|^{2}\Big\}^{\frac{1}{2}}\\
&\leq&\sum_{k=1}^{n}\Big|\int_{\partial\mathbb{B}^{n}}\frac{\partial\mbox{P}(y,\zeta)}{\partial
y_{k}}(f(r\zeta+x)-f(x))d\sigma(\zeta)\Big|\\
&\leq&\sum_{k=1}^{n}\int_{\partial\mathbb{B}^{n}}\left|\frac{\partial\mbox{P}(y,\zeta)}{\partial
y_{k}}\right|\big|f(r\zeta+x)-f(x)\big|d\sigma(\zeta)\\
&\leq&\sqrt{n}\int_{\partial\mathbb{B}^{n}}\left|\nabla
\mbox{P}(y,\zeta)\right|\big|f(r\zeta+x)-f(x)\big|d\sigma(\zeta)\\
&\leq&\frac{84n}{r}\int_{\partial\mathbb{B}^{n}}\big|f(r\zeta+x)-f(x)\big|d\sigma(\zeta)\\
&\leq&\frac{84nC\omega(r)}{r}\\
&\leq&168nC\frac{\omega\big(d_{\Omega}(x)\big)}{d_{\Omega}(x)}.
\end{eqnarray*}
If we take $y=x$, then we get the desired result. The proof of this
theorem is complete. \qed
\subsection*{Proof of Theorem \ref{thm-CPW1}}
We first prove the necessity. For any $x, y\in\mathbb{B}^{n}$ with
$x\neq y$, let $\varphi(t)=xt+(1-t)y$, where $t\in[0,1]$. Since
$|\varphi(t)|\leq t|x|+(1-t)|y|$, we see that
\begin{equation}\label{eq-y1}1-|\varphi(t)|\geq1-t|x|-|y|+t|y| \geq1-t+|y|(t-1)
=(1-t)d(y)
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}\label{eq-y2}1-|\varphi(t)|\geq1-t|x|-|y|+t|y|
=1-t|x|-|y|(1-t)\geq1-t|x|-(1-t)=td(x).
\end{equation}
By (\ref{eq-y1}) and (\ref{eq-y2}), we get
$$\left(1-|\varphi(t)|\right)^{2}\geq (1-t)t d(x)d(y),
$$
which implies
\begin{equation}\label{eq-t20}
\frac{1}{1-|\varphi(t)|}\leq\frac{1}{\sqrt{(1-t)t d(x)d(y)}}.
\end{equation}
For $t>0,$ by the monotonicity of $\omega(t)/t$, we know that
\begin{equation}\label{eq-p1}\omega(\lambda t)\leq\lambda\omega(t),\end{equation} where
$\lambda\geq1$.
By (\ref{eq-t20}) and (\ref{eq-p1}), for any $x, y\in\mathbb{B}^{n}$
with $x\neq y$, we have
\begin{eqnarray*}
|f(x)-f(y)|&=&\left|\int_{0}^{1}\frac{df}{dt}(\varphi(t))dt\right|\\
&\leq&\sqrt{n}|x-y|\int_{0}^{1}|\nabla f(\varphi(t))|dt\\
&\leq&\sqrt{n}|x-y|\int_{0}^{1}\frac{|\nabla
f(\varphi(t))|}{\omega\left(\frac{1}{1-|\varphi(t)|}\right)}
\omega\left(\frac{1}{1-|\varphi(t)|}\right)dt\\
&\leq&C\sqrt{n}|x-y|\int_{0}^{1}\omega\left(\frac{1}{1-|\varphi(t)|}\right)dt\\
&\leq&C\sqrt{n}|x-y|\int_{0}^{1}\omega\left(\frac{1}{\sqrt{(1-t)t
d(x)d(y)}}\right)dt\\
&\leq&C\sqrt{n}|x-y|\omega\left(\frac{1}{\sqrt{d(x)d(y)}}\right)\int_{0}^{1}\frac{1}{\sqrt{(1-t)t}}dt\\
&=&C\sqrt{n}|x-y|\omega\left(\frac{1}{\sqrt{d(x)d(y)}}\right)\int_{0}^{\frac{\pi}{2}}\frac{2\sin\theta\cos\theta}
{\sqrt{\sin^{2}\theta\cos^{2}\theta}}d\theta\\
&=&C\pi\sqrt{n}|x-y|\omega\left(\frac{1}{\sqrt{d(x)d(y)}}\right),
\end{eqnarray*}
which gives
$$\frac{|f(x)-f(y)|}{|x-y|}\leq \pi
C\sqrt{n}\omega\left(\frac{1}{\sqrt{d(x)d(y)}}\right).
$$
Now we prove the sufficiency part. For any $x,
y\in\mathbb{B}^{n}$ with $x\neq y$, since
$$|\nabla f(x)|=\lim\sup_{y\rightarrow
x}\frac{|f(y)-f(x)|}{|y-x|},$$ we see that $$\lim\sup_{y\rightarrow
x}\frac{|f(y)-f(x)|}{|y-x|}=|\nabla f(x)|\leq
C\lim\sup_{y\rightarrow
x}\omega\left(\frac{1}{\sqrt{d(x)d(y)}}\right)=C\omega\left(\frac{1}{d(x)}\right).$$
The proof of this theorem is complete. \qed
\vspace{6pt}
Using arguments similar to those in the proof of \cite[Lemma
2.5]{MV}, we have the following lemma and so, we omit its proof.
\begin{lem}\label{lem-g1}
Suppose that $f:\
\overline{\mathbb{B}}^{n}(a,r)\rightarrow\mathbb{R}$ is a continuous
function in $\overline{\mathbb{B}}^{n}(a,r)$ and harmonic in
$\mathbb{B}^{n}(a,r)$. Then
$$|\nabla f(a)|\leq
\frac{n\sqrt{n}}{r}\int_{\partial\mathbb{B}^{n}}|f(a+r\zeta)-f(a)|d\sigma(\zeta).$$
\end{lem}
\subsection*{Proof of Theorem \ref{thm-CPW}}
(a)$\Longleftrightarrow$(b) easily follows from Theorem
\ref{thm-CPW1}. We only need to prove (a)$\Longleftrightarrow$(c).
We first prove (a)$\Longrightarrow$(c). For any
$x=(x_{1},\ldots,x_{n}),\ y=(y_{1},\ldots,y_{n})\in\mathbb{B}^{n}$
and $t\in[0,1]$, we have
$$d\big(x+t(y-x)\big)\geq d(x)-t|y-x|.$$ Suppose that
$d(x)-t|y-x|>0$. Then
\begin{eqnarray*}
|f(y)-f(x)|&=&\Big|\int_{0}^{1}\frac{df}{dt}(\varsigma)dt\Big|\\
&=&\left|\sum_{k=1}^{n}(y_{k}-x_{k})\int_{0}^{1}\frac{df}{d\varsigma_{k}}(\varsigma)dt\right|\\
&\leq&\Big(\sum_{k=1}^{n}|y_{k}-x_{k}|^{2}\Big)^{\frac{1}{2}}\Big[\sum_{k=1}^{n}\Big(\int_{0}^{1}\Big|\frac{\partial
f}{\partial \varsigma_{k}}(\varsigma)\Big|dt\Big)^{2}\Big]^{\frac{1}{2}}\\
&\leq& \sqrt{n}|y-x|\int_{0}^{1}|\nabla f(\varsigma)|dt\\
&\leq&C\sqrt{n}|y-x|\int_{0}^{1}\omega\left(\frac{1}{d(x)-t|y-x|}\right)dt\\
&=&C\sqrt{n}\int_{0}^{|y-x|}\omega\left(\frac{1}{d(x)-t}\right)dt,
\end{eqnarray*}
which implies
\vspace{6pt}
$\displaystyle \frac{1}{|\mathbb{B}^{n}(x,r)|}\int_{\mathbb{B}^{n}(x,r)}|f(\zeta)-f(x)|dV(\zeta)$
\begin{eqnarray*}
&\leq&\frac{C\sqrt{n}}{|\mathbb{B}^{n}(0,r)|}\int_{\mathbb{B}^{n}(0,r)}\left\{\int_{0}^{|\xi|}
\omega\left(\frac{1}{d(x)-t}\right)dt\right\}dV(\xi)\\
&=&\frac{Cn\sqrt{n}}{r^{n}}\int_{0}^{r}\rho^{n-1}\left\{\int_{0}^{\rho}\omega\Big(\frac{1}{d(x)-t}\Big)dt\right\}d\rho\\
&\leq&\frac{Cn\sqrt{n}}{r^{n}}\int_{0}^{r}\left\{\int_{t}^{r}\rho^{n-1}
d\rho\right\}\omega\left(\frac{1}{r-t}\right)dt\\
&\leq&\frac{C\sqrt{n}}{r^{n}}\int_{0}^{r}(r-t)\left(r^{n-1}+r^{n-2}t+\cdots+t^{n-1}\right)\omega\left(\frac{1}{r-t}\right)dt\\
&\leq&\frac{C\sqrt{n}}{r^{n}}r\omega\Big(\frac{1}{r}\Big)\int_{0}^{r}\left(r^{n-1}+r^{n-2}t+\cdots+t^{n-1}\right)dt\\
&=&C\sqrt{n}\left(\sum_{j=1}^{n}\frac{1}{j}\right)r\omega\Big(\frac{1}{r}\Big),
\end{eqnarray*}
where $\varsigma=(\varsigma_{1},\ldots,\varsigma_{n})=yt+(1-t)x$.
Now we prove that (c)$\Longrightarrow$(a). By Lemma
\ref{lem-g1}, we have
$$|\nabla f(x)|\leq
\frac{n\sqrt{n}}{\rho}\int_{\partial\mathbb{B}^{n}}|f(x+\rho\zeta)-f(x)|d\sigma(\zeta),$$
where $\rho\in(0,d(x)]$. Let $r=d(x)$. Then we have
$$\int_{0}^{r}|\nabla f(x)|\rho^{n} d\rho\leq\sqrt{n}\int_{0}^{r}\Big(n\rho^{n-1}\int_{\partial\mathbb{B}^{n}}|f(x)-f(x+\rho
\zeta)|d\sigma(\zeta)\Big)d\rho,$$ which implies
\begin{eqnarray*}
|\nabla
f(x)|&\leq&\frac{(n+1)\sqrt{n}}{2r^{n+1}}\int_{0}^{r}\Big(n\rho^{n-1}\int_{\partial\mathbb{B}^{n}}|f(x)-f(x+\rho
\zeta)|d\sigma(\zeta)\Big)d\rho\\
&=&\frac{(n+1)\sqrt{n}}{2r|\mathbb{B}^{n}(x,r)|}\int_{\mathbb{B}^{n}(x,r)}|f(\xi)-f(x)|dV(\xi)\\
&\leq&\frac{(n+1)\sqrt{n}C}{2}\omega\Big(\frac{1}{r}\Big)\\
&=&\frac{(n+1)\sqrt{n}C}{2}\omega\left(\frac{1}{d(x)}\right).
\end{eqnarray*}
Therefore, (a)$\Longleftrightarrow$(c). Since
(a)$\Longleftrightarrow$(b) and (a)$\Longleftrightarrow$(c), we
conclude that $$\mbox{(a)}\Longleftrightarrow
\mbox{(b)}\Longleftrightarrow\mbox{(c)}.$$
The
proof of the theorem is complete. \qed
\section{Landau-Bloch theorem for functions in $\mathcal{H}^{p}(\mathbb{B}^{n}, \mathbb{R}^{n})$ and $\mathcal{PE}_{f}^M$}\label{csw-sec3}
The following lemmas are crucial for the proof of Theorem
\ref{thm1}.
The following result is a Schwarz-Pick type lemma for harmonic
functions in $\mathcal{H}(\mathbb{B}^{n}, \mathbb{R}^{n})$.
\begin{lem}\label{thm7}
Let $f\in\mathcal{H}(\mathbb{B}^{n},
\mathbb{R}^{n})$ with $|f(x)|\leq M$ in $\mathbb{B}^{n}$, where $M$
is a positive constant. Then
\begin{equation}\label{eqb3}
\left|f(x)-\frac{1-|x|}{(1+|x|)^{n-1}}f(0)\right|\leq
M\left[1-\frac{1-|x|}{(1+|x|)^{n-1}}\right].
\end{equation}
\end{lem}
\begin{pf} Without loss of generality, we assume that $f$ is also harmonic
on $\partial\mathbb{B}^{n}.$ We first prove the inequality (\ref{eqb3}). By the
Poisson integral formula, we have
\begin{equation}\label{xx-1}
f(x)=\int_{\partial\mathbb{B}^{n}}\frac{1-|x|^{2}}{|x-\zeta|^{n}}f(\zeta)\,d\sigma(\zeta),
\end{equation}
where $d\sigma$ denotes the normalized surface measure on $\partial\mathbb{B}^{n}$. By calculations, we have
\begin{eqnarray*}
\left|f(x)-\frac{1-|x|}{(1+|x|)^{n-1}}f(0)\right|&=&\left|\int_{\partial\mathbb{B}^{n}}
\left [\frac{1-|x|^{2}}{|x-\zeta|^{n}}-\frac{1-|x|}{(1+|x|)^{n-1}}\right ]f(\zeta)\,d\sigma(\zeta)\right|\\
&\leq&\int_{\partial\mathbb{B}^{n}}
\left[\frac{1-|x|^{2}}{|x-\zeta|^{n}}-\frac{1-|x|}{(1+|x|)^{n-1}}\right]|f(\zeta)|\,d\sigma(\zeta)\\
&\leq&M\int_{\partial\mathbb{B}^{n}}
\left[\frac{1-|x|^{2}}{|x-\zeta|^{n}}-\frac{1-|x|}{(1+|x|)^{n-1}}\right]\,d\sigma(\zeta)\\
&\leq&M\left[1-\frac{1-|x|}{(1+|x|)^{n-1}}\right]
\end{eqnarray*}
and the proof is complete. \end{pf}
A matrix-valued function $A(x)=\big(a_{i,j}(x)\big)_{n\times n}$is
called {\it matrix-valued and real harmonic function} if each of its
entries $a_{i,j}(x)$ is a real harmonic function from an open subset
$\Omega\subset\mathbb{R}^{n}$ into $\mathbb{R}$.
\begin{lem}\label{lem3.1}
Let $A(x)=\big(a_{i,j}(x)\big)_{n\times n}$ be a matrix-valued
harmonic mapping defined on the ball $\mathbb{B}^{n}(0,r)$. If
$A(0)=0$ and $|A(x)|\leq M$ in $\mathbb{B}^{n}(0,r),$ then
$$|A(x)|\leq M\left[1-\frac{r^{2n-2}(r-|x|)}{(r+|x|)^{2n-1}}\right].
$$
\end{lem}\begin{pf}
For an arbitrary
$\theta=(\theta_1,\ldots,\theta_n)^{T}\in\partial\mathbb{B}^{n}$, we
let
$$ P_{\theta}(x)=A(x)\theta=(p_{1}(x),\ldots,p_{n}(x)).
$$
For every $\zeta\in\mathbb{B}^{n}$, let
$F_{\theta}(\zeta)=P_{\theta}(r\zeta).$ By Lemma \ref{thm7}, we see
that for all $\zeta\in\mathbb{B}^{n}$,
$$\left|F_{\theta}(\zeta)-\frac{1-|\zeta|}{(1+|\zeta|)^{n-1}}F_{\theta}(0)\right|\leq
M\left[1-\frac{1-|\zeta|}{(1+|\zeta|)^{n-1}}\right],
$$
which gives
$$|P_{\theta}(x)|\leq M\left[1-\frac{r^{n-2}(r-|x|)}{(r+|x|)^{n-1}}\right], ~\mbox{ $|x|<r$}.
$$
The arbitrariness of $\theta$ yields the desired inequality. \end{pf}
\begin{lem}\label{lem3.2}
Let $f\in\mathcal{H}(\mathbb{B}^{n}, \mathbb{R}^{n})$ with $|f(x)|\leq M$ for $x\in\mathbb{B}^{n}$, where
$M$ is a positive constant. Then
$$|f'(x)|\leq M\frac{2|x|+n(1+|x|)}{1-|x|^{2}}.
$$
\end{lem}
\begin{pf} Let $f=(f_{1},\ldots,f_{n})$ and
$\theta=(\theta_{1},\ldots,\theta_{n}) \in\partial\mathbb{B}^{n}$.
Without loss of generality, we assume that $f$ is also harmonic on
$\partial\mathbb{B}^{n}.$ By the Poisson integral formula, we find that
$$f(x)=\int_{\partial\mathbb{B}^{n}}\frac{1-|x|^{2}}{|x-\zeta|^{n}}f(\zeta)\,d\sigma(\zeta),
$$
where $d\sigma$ denotes the normalized surface measure on $\partial\mathbb{B}^{n}$. Clearly,
\begin{equation}\label{eq-1}
\int_{\partial\mathbb{B}^{n}}\frac{d\sigma(\zeta)}{|x-\zeta|^{n}} =\frac{1}{1-|x|^{2}}.
\end{equation}
For each$j,k\in\{1,\ldots,n\}$, we have
$$(f_{j}(x))_{x_{k}}=\int_{\partial\mathbb{B}^{n}}
\frac{-2x_{k}|x-\zeta|^{2}-n(1-|x|^{2})(x_{k}-\zeta_{k})}{|x-\zeta|^{n+2}}f_{j}(\zeta)
\, d\sigma(\zeta),
$$
which gives
\begin{eqnarray*}
\left |\sum_{k=1}^{n}(f_{j}(x))_{x_{k}}\cdot\theta_{k}\right |^{2}&=&
\left |\sum_{k=1}^{n}\int_{\partial\mathbb{B}^{n}}
\frac{[2x_{k}|x-\zeta|^{2}+n(1-|x|^{2})(x_{k}-\zeta_{k})]\theta_{k}}
{|x-\zeta|^{n+2}}f_{j}(\zeta)\, d\sigma(\zeta)\right |^{2}\\
&=&\left |\int_{\partial\mathbb{B}^{n}}
\frac{\sum_{k=1}^{n}[2x_{k}|x-\zeta|^{2}+n(1-|x|^{2})(x_{k}-\zeta_{k})]\theta_{k}}
{|x-\zeta|^{n+2}}f_{j}(\zeta)\, d\sigma(\zeta)\right |^{2}\\
&\leq&\left [\int_{\partial\mathbb{B}^{n}}\frac{[2|x|\,|x-\zeta|^{2}+n(1-|x|^{2})|x-\zeta|]|f_{j}(\zeta)|}
{|x-\zeta|^{n+2}}\,d\sigma(\zeta)\right ]^{2}\\
&\leq&\left [\int_{\partial\mathbb{B}^{n}}\frac{[2|x|\,|x-\zeta|+n(1-|x|^{2})]^{2}}
{|x-\zeta|^{n+2}}\,d\sigma(\zeta)\right ]\\
&&\times \left [\int_{\partial\mathbb{B}^{n}}\frac{|f_{j}(\zeta)|^{2}}{|x-\zeta|^{n}}\,d\sigma(\zeta)\right ]
\end{eqnarray*}
Then the relation \eqref{eq-1} shows
\begin{align*}
\sum_{j=1}^{n}\left |\sum_{k=1}^{n}(f_{j}(x))_{x_{k}}\cdot\theta_{k}\right |^{2}&\leq
\left [\int_{\partial\mathbb{B}^{n}}\frac{[2|x|\,|x-\zeta|+n(1-|x|^{2})]^{2}}
{|x-\zeta|^{n+2}}\,d\sigma(\zeta)\right ]\\
~~~~~~~~~~&\times \left [\int_{\partial\mathbb{B}^{n}}\frac{\sum_{j=1}^{n}|f_{j}(\zeta)|^{2}}
{|x-\zeta|^{n}}\,d\sigma(\zeta)\right ]\\
&\leq\frac{M^{2}}{1-|x|^{2}}\left [\int_{\partial\mathbb{B}^{n}}\frac{[2|x|\,|x-\zeta|+n(1-|x|^{2})]^{2}}
{|x-\zeta|^{n+2}}\,d\sigma(\zeta)\right]\\
&\leq\frac{M^{2}}{1-|x|^{2}}\left [\int_{\partial\mathbb{B}^{n}}
\frac{[2|x|+n(1+|x|)]^{2}}{|x-\zeta|^{n}}\,d\sigma(\zeta)\right]\\
&\leq\frac{M^{2}[2|x|+n(1+|x|)]^{2}}{(1-|x|^{2})^{2}}
\end{align*}
whence
$$|f'(x)|\leq M\frac{2|x|+n(1+|x|)}{1-|x|^{2}}.
$$
The proof of this lemma is complete. \end{pf}
\begin{Lem}{\rm (\cite[Lemma 4]{LX})}\label{LemA}
Let $A$ be an $n \times n$ real $($or complex$)$ matrix with $|A|\neq0$. Then for any unit
vector $\theta\in\partial \mathbb{B}^{n}$, the inequality
$$|A\theta|\geq\frac{|\det A|}{|A|^{n-1}}
$$
holds.
\end{Lem}
\subsection*{Proof of Theorem \ref{thm1}} Without loss of generality, we assume that $f$ is also harmonic on
$\partial\mathbb{B}^{n}$, where $n\geq3$. By the Poisson integral
representation, we have
$$f(x)=\int_{\partial\mathbb{B}^{n}}\frac{1-|x|^{2}}{|x-\zeta|^{n}}f(\zeta)\,d\sigma(\zeta)
$$
in $\mathbb{B}^{n}$. By Jensen's inequalities, we obtain
$$|f(x)|^{p}\leq\int_{\partial\mathbb{B}^{n}}\frac{1-|x|^{2}}{|x-\zeta|^{n}}
|f(\zeta)|^{p}\,d\sigma(\zeta)\leq\frac{2\|f\|_{p}^{p}}{(1-|x|)^{n-1}}
$$
which gives
$$|f(x)|\leq\frac{2^{1/p}K_{0}}{(1-|x|)^{(n-1)/p}},
$$
where $K_{0}=\|f\|_{p}$. For $\zeta\in\mathbb{B}^{n}$ and for a fixed $r\in(0,1)$, let
$F(\zeta)=f(r\zeta)/r.$ Then
$$|F(\zeta)|\leq\frac{2^{1/p}K_{0}}{r(1-r)^{(n-1)/p}}=K(r).
$$
For each $\zeta\in\mathbb{B}^{n}(0,\sqrt{2}/2)$, using Lemma
\ref{lem3.2}, we have
\begin{eqnarray*}
|F'(\zeta)-F'(0)|
&\leq&|F'(0)|+|F'(\zeta)|\\
&\leq&nK(r)+\frac{K(r)[n+(n+2)|\zeta|]}{1-|\zeta|^{2}}\\
&\leq&K(r)[(3+\sqrt{2})n+2\sqrt{2}],
\end{eqnarray*} which implies $F'(\zeta)-F'(0)$ is a bounded matrix-valued and real harmonic
function in $\mathbb{B}^{n}(0,\sqrt{2}/2).$ By Lemma \ref{lem3.1},
for each $\zeta\in\mathbb{B}^{n}(0,\sqrt{2}/2)$, we have
\begin{eqnarray*}
|F'(\zeta)-F'(0)|&\leq&
M(r)\left[1-\frac{\left(\frac{\sqrt{2}}{2}\right)^{n-2}(\frac{\sqrt{2}}{2}-|\zeta|)}{(\frac{\sqrt{2}}{2}+|\zeta|)^{n-1}}\right]\\
&\leq&M(r)\cdot\frac{C_{n-1}^{1}\left(\frac{\sqrt{2}}{2}\right)^{n-2}|\zeta|+\cdots+C_{n-1}^{n-1}|\zeta|^{n-1}+
\left(\frac{\sqrt{2}}{2}\right)^{n-2}|\zeta|}{(\frac{\sqrt{2}}{2}+|\zeta|)^{n-1}}\\
&\leq&M(r)|\zeta|\frac{\left[(1+\frac{\sqrt{2}}{2})^{n-1}+\Big(\frac{\sqrt{2}}{2}\Big)^{n-2}-\Big(\frac{\sqrt{2}}{2}\Big)^{n-1}\right]}
{(\frac{\sqrt{2}}{2}+|\zeta|)^{n-1}}\\
&\leq&M(r)\left[(1+\sqrt{2})^{n-1}+\sqrt{2}-1\right]|\zeta|,
\end{eqnarray*}
where $M(r)=K(r)[(3+\sqrt{2})n+2\sqrt{2}]$ and $C_{n}^{k}={n\choose
k}$ ($k=1,2, \ldots, n$) denote the binomial coefficients.
Since for each $\theta\in\partial\mathbb{B}^{n}$,
Lemmas \ref{lem3.2} and \Ref{LemA} imply
$$|F'(0)\theta|\geq\frac{J_{F}(0)}{|F'(0)|^{n-1}}\geq \frac{1}{\big [nK(r)\big ]^{n-1}}.
$$
Let $\zeta'$ and $\zeta''$ be two distinct points in
$\mathbb{B}^{n}(0,\rho(r))$ with
$$\rho(r)=\frac{1}{[nK(r)]^{n-1}M(r)[(1+\sqrt{2})^{n-1}+\sqrt{2}-1]},
$$
and let $[\zeta',\zeta'']$ denote the segment connecting $\zeta'$ and $\zeta''$. Set
$$ d\zeta=\left(\begin{array}{cccc}
d\zeta_{1} \\
\vdots \\
d\zeta_{n}
\end{array}\right).
$$
Then we have
\begin{eqnarray*}
|F(\zeta')-F(\zeta'')|&\geq&
\left|\int_{[\zeta',\zeta'']}F'(0)d\zeta\right|
-\left|\int_{[\zeta',\zeta'']}(F'(\zeta)-F'(0))\,d\zeta\right|\\
&>&|\zeta'-\zeta''|\left\{\frac{1}{[nK(r)]^{n-1}}-M(r)\left[(1+\sqrt{2})^{n-1}+\sqrt{2}-1\right]\rho(r)\right\}\\
&=&0.
\end{eqnarray*}
This observation shows that $F$ is univalent in $\mathbb{B}^{n}(0,\rho(r))$. Furthermore, for any
$\zeta_{0}$ with $|\zeta_{0}|=\rho(r)$, we have
\begin{eqnarray*}
|F(\zeta_{0})-F(0)|&\geq&
\left|\int_{[0,\zeta_{0}]}F'(0)d\zeta\right|
-\left|\int_{[0,\zeta_{0}]}(F'(\zeta)-F'(0))\, d\zeta\right|\\
&\geq&\rho(r)\left\{\frac{1}{[nK(r)]^{n-1}}-M(r)\left[(1+\sqrt{2})^{n-1}+\sqrt{2}-1\right]\rho(r)/2\right\}\\
&=&\frac{\rho(r)}{2[nK(r)]^{n-1}}\\
&>&0.
\end{eqnarray*}
Therefore, $f(\mathbb{B}^{n})$ contains a univalent ball
$\mathbb{B}^{n}(0,R)$, where
\begin{eqnarray*}
R&\geq&\max_{0<r<1}\left\{\frac{\rho(r)}{2[nK(r)]^{n-1}}\right\}\\
&=&\max_{0<r<1}\left\{\frac{1}{2[nK(r)]^{2n-2}M(r)[(1+\sqrt{2})^{n-1}+\sqrt{2}-1]}\right\}.
\end{eqnarray*}
The
theorem is proved. \qed
\subsection*{Proof of Theorem \ref{thm6-x}} If we suppose that this result is not true, then
there is a sequence $\{a_k\}$ and a sequence of functions
$\{u_k\}$ with $u_{k}\in\mathcal{PE}_{f}^{M}$, such that $\{a_k\}$
tends to $0$ and $a_k \notin u_k(\mathbb{B}^{n})$, where $a_k>0$ for
$k\in\{1,2,\ldots\}$. By \cite[Theorem 4.6 and Corollary 4.7]{gt},
we know that there is a subsequence $\{g_{k}\}$ of $\{u_{k}\}$ which
converges uniformly on compact subsets of $\mathbb{B}^{n}$ to a
function $g $. Note that for each $k$, the function $h_k=g_{k}-g_1$ is harmonic.
Hence the sequence $\{h_k\}$ converges uniformly on compact subsets of
$\mathbb{B}^{n}$ to $ g-g_1$ and therefore, the partial derivatives
of $g_k$ converge uniformly on compact subsets of $\mathbb{B}^{n}$ to
the partial derivatives of $ g$. In particular, ${g_k} (0)
\rightarrow g(0)$ and $J_{g_k} (0) \rightarrow J_{g} (0)$, and
therefore, $g \in \mathcal{PE}_{f}^M$. Since $J_{g} (0)-1=|g(0)|=0,$
there are $0 < r_0 <1$ and $c_1
> 0$ such that $J_{g} >0$ on $
\overline{\mathbb{B}^{n}(0,r_{0})}$, $g(\mathbb{B}^{n}(0,r_{0}))
\supset \overline{\mathbb{B}^{n}(0,c_1)}$ and $|g(x)| \geq c_1$ for
$x \in
\partial\mathbb{B}^{n}(0,r_{0})$.
Set $c_2=c_1/2$, $B_{r_{0}}=\mathbb{B}^{n}(0,r_{0})$ and $B_{c_{2}}=
\mathbb{B}^{n}(0,c_2) $. Then there is a $k_0$ such that $|g_{k}(x)|
\geq c_2$ for $k \geq k_0$ and $J_{g_k} >0$ on
$\overline{B_{r_{0}}}$. Since $\deg(g_k,B_{r_{0}},0)\geq 1$, by the
degree property (II) in page \pageref{(II)}, we see that
$\deg(g_k,B_{r_{0}},y)\geq 1$ for $y \in B_{c_{2}}$ and $k \geq
k_0$. Hence $g_k(B_{r_{0}})\supset B_{c_{2}}$ for $k \geq k_0$ and
this leads a contradiction. The proof of the theorem is complete.
\qed
|
\section{INTRODUCTION}
\subsection{Motivation and results}
Cubic fourfolds have been studied in the context of associated holomorphic symplectic manifolds, relations to K3 surfaces and rationality problems and so on. For example, Beauville and Donagi \cite{BD} proved that the Fano variety $F(X)$ of lines on $X$ is a holomorphic symplectic fourfold deformation equivalent to the Hilbert scheme of two points on a K3 surface. Recently, Lehn et al \cite{LLSS} proved that if $X$ is a cubic fourfold \it{not}\rm{} containing a plane, then $X$ can be embedded into a holomorphic symplectic eightfold $Z$ as a Lagrangian submanifold. The above $Z$ is constructed by the moduli space of generalized twisted cubics on $X$ \cite{JS}, and if $X$ is Pfaffian, then Addington and Lehn \cite{AL} proved that $Z$ is deformation equivalent to the Hilbert scheme of four points on a K3 surface. However, if $X$ contains a plane, the argument of Lehn et al is not applied.
In this paper, we proved the following theorem.
\begin{thm}
Let $X$ be a very general cubic fourfold containing a plane. Then $X$ can be embedded into a holomorohic symplectic eightfold $M$ as a Lagrangian submanifold. Moreover, $M$ is deformation equivalent to the Hilbert scheme of four points on a K3 surface.
\end{thm}
Although Lehn et al used the moduli space of twisted cubics, we use notions of derived categories and Bridgeland stability conditions in our construction of $M$. More presicely, the holomorphic symplectic eightfold $M$ is constructed as a moduli space of Bridgeland stable objects in the derived category of the twisted K3 surface $(S,\alpha)$, which corresponds to $X$. The twisted K3 surface $(S,\alpha)$ is constructed by Kuznetsov (\cite{Kuz10}, Section 4) in the context of his conjecture about K3 surfaces and rationality of cubic fourfolds.
\subsection{Background}
We recall Kuznetsov's conjecture. The rationality problem of cubic fourfolds is related to K3 surfaces conjectually. The derived category $D^b(X)$ of coherent sheaves on $X$ has the following semiorthogonal decomposition:
\begin{equation}\label{sod}
D^b(X)= \langle \mathcal{A}_X, \mathcal{O}_X, \mathcal{O}_X(1), \mathcal{O}_X(2) \rangle.
\end{equation}
The full triangulated subcategory $\mathcal{A}_X$ is a Calabi-Yau $2$ category i.e. the Serre functor of $\mathcal{A}_X$ is isomorphic to the shift functor $[2]$. Kuznetsov proposed the following conjecture.
\begin{conj}[\cite{Kuz10}]\label{Kuzconj}
A cubic fourfold $X$ is rational if and only if there is a K3 surface $S$ such that $\mathcal{A}_X \simeq D^b(S)$.
\end{conj}
Hassett \cite{Has00} introduced the notion of special cubic fourfolds. Cubic fourfolds containing a plane are examples of special cubic fourfolds. Special cubic fourfolds often have associated K3 surfaces Hodge theoretically \cite{Has00}. Addington and Thomas \cite{AT} proved that Kuznetsov's and Hassett's relations between cubic fourfolds and K3 surfaces coincide generically. The known examples of rational cubic fourfolds are Pfaffian cubic fourfolds \cite{Tr84}, \cite{Tr93} and some rational cubic fourfolds containing a plane, which are constructed in \cite{Has99}. Conjectually, very general cubic fourfolds are irrational. However, there are no known examples of irrational cubic fourfolds so far. Kuznetsov constructed the equivalences between $\mathcal{A}_X$ and the derived categories of coherent sheaves on K3 surfaces for these rational cubic fourfolds. For a general cubic fourfold $X$ containing a plane, Kuznetsov proved the following theorem more generally.
\begin{thm}[\cite{Kuz10}, Theorem 4.3]
Let $X$ be a general cubic fourfold containing a plane. Then there is a twisted K3 surface $(S,\alpha)$ such that $\mathcal{A}_X \simeq D^b(S,\alpha)$. Moreover, the Brauer class $\alpha \in \mathrm{Br}(S)$ is trivial i.e. the twisted K3 surface $(S,\alpha)$ is the usual K3 surface $S$ if and only if $X$ is Hassett's rational cubic fourfold containing a plane.
\end{thm}
We say that a general cubic fourfold $X$ containing a plane is very general when the Picard number of $S$ is equal to one. If a cubic fourfold $X$ containing a plane is very general, then $\mathcal{A}_X$ is not equivalent to derived categories of coherent sheaves on K3 surfaces (\cite{Kuz10} Proposition 4.8). So very general cubic fourfolds containing a plane are irrational conjectually.
We recall previous works on holomorphic symplectic manifolds associated to cubic fourfolds and derived categories. Using the mutation functors associated to the semiorthogonal decomposition (\ref{sod}), we can define a projection functor $\mathrm{pr} \colon D^b(X) \to \mathcal{A}_X$. The Fano variety $F(X)$ of lines on $X$ and the holomorphic sympletic eightfold $Z$ in \cite{LLSS} are related to the projection functor $\mathrm{pr} \colon D^b(X) \to \mathcal{A}_X$. In \cite{KM}, the Fano variety $F(X)$ of lines on $X$ is regarded as a moduli space of objects in $\mathcal{A}_X$ of the form $\mathrm{pr}(\mathcal{O}_{\mathrm{line}}(1))$. For a general cubic fourfold $X$ containing a plane, Macri and Stellari \cite{MS} constructed Bridgeland stability conditions on $\mathcal{A}_X \simeq D^b(S,\alpha)$ such that all objects of the form $\mathrm{pr}(\mathcal{O}_{\mathrm{line}}(1))$ are stable. So the Fano variety $F(X)$ of lines on a general cubic fourfold $X$ containing a plane is isomorphic to a moduli space of Bridgeland stable objects in $\mathcal{A}_X \simeq D^b(S,\alpha)$. For a general Pfaffian cubic fourfold $X$ not containing a plane, Lehn and Addington \cite{AL} proved that the holmorphic symplectic eightfold $Z$ is birational to the Hilbert scheme of four points on the K3 surface considering the projections of ideal sheaves of (generalized) twisted cubics on $X$ and the equivalence between $\mathcal{A}_X$ and the derived category of coherent sheaves on the K3 surface. In particular, the holomorphic symplectic eightfold $Z$ is deformation equivalent to the Hilbert scheme of four points for a general Paffian cubic fourfold not containing a plane.
\subsection{Strategy for Theorem 1.1}
To construct Lagrangian embeddingsof cubic fourfolds, we consider the projections of skyscraper sheaves of points on $X$.
First, we illustrate the relation between the projection functor $\mathrm{pr} \colon D^b(X) \to \mathcal{A}_X$ and Lagrangian embeddings of cubic fourfolds. We prove the following proposition in Section 4.
\begin{prop}\label{Lagproj}
Let $X$ be a cubic fourfold. Take a point $x \in X$. Then the followings hold.
\begin{itemize}
\item For $x \neq y \in X$, $\mathrm{pr}(\mathcal{O}_x)$ is not isomorphic to $\mathrm{pr}(\mathcal{O}_y)$.
\item We have $\mathrm{Ext}^1(\mathcal{O}_x, \mathcal{O}_x)=\mathbb{C}^4$, $\mathrm{Ext}^1(\mathrm{pr}(\mathcal{O}_x), \mathrm{pr}(\mathcal{O}_x))=\mathbb{C}^8$ and
$\mathrm{Ext}^2(\mathrm{pr}(\mathcal{O}_x),\mathrm{pr}(\mathcal{O}_x)) \simeq \mathrm{Hom}(\mathrm{pr}(\mathcal{O}_x),\mathrm{pr}(\mathcal{O}_x))=\mathbb{C}$.
\item The linear map $\mathrm{pr} \colon \mathrm{Ext}^1(\mathcal{O}_x, \mathcal{O}_x) \to \mathrm{Ext}^1(\mathrm{pr}(\mathcal{O}_x),\mathrm{pr}(\mathcal{O}_x))$ is injective.
\item Let
\[ \omega_x \colon \mathrm{Ext}^1(\mathrm{pr}(\mathcal{O}_x),\mathrm{pr}(\mathcal{O}_x)) \times \mathrm{Ext}^1(\mathrm{pr}(\mathcal{O}_x),\mathrm{pr}(\mathcal{O}_x)) \to \mathrm{Ext}^2(\mathrm{pr}(\mathcal{O}_x),\mathrm{pr}(\mathcal{O}_x))\]
be the bilinear form induced by the composition of morphisms in the derived category. Then the bilinear form $\omega_x$ vanishes on $\mathrm{Ext}^1(\mathcal{O}_x, \mathcal{O}_x)$.
\end{itemize}
\end{prop}
Next, we construct a Lagrangian embedding of a very general cubic fourfold containing a plane using Bridgeland stability conditions $\sigma$ on the Calabi-Yau $2$ category $\mathcal{A}_X$ such that the objects $\mathrm{pr}(\mathcal{O}_x)$ are $\sigma$-stable for all $x \in X$. We prove the following proposition.
\begin{prop}[Proposition \ref{main}]\label{mainthm}
Let $X$ be a very general cubic fourfold containing a plane and $\Phi \colon \mathcal{A}_X \stackrel{\sim}{\to} D^b(S,\alpha)$ be the equivalence as in Corollary 2.14. Let $v$ be the Mukai vector of $\Phi(\mathrm{pr}(\mathcal{O}_x))$. Then there is a stability condition $\sigma \in \mathrm{Stab}(D^b(S,\alpha))$ generic with respect to $v$ such that $\mathrm{pr}(\mathcal{O}_x)$ is $\sigma$-stable for all $x \in X$. In particular, the morphism
\[ X \to M, x \mapsto \Phi(\mathrm{pr}(\mathcal{O}_x)) \] is the Lagrangian embedding. Here M is the moduli space of $\sigma$-stable objects with Mukai vector $v$. So $M$ is deformation equivalent to the Hilbert scheme of four points on a K3 surface.
\end{prop}
In Proposition 1.4, we don't assume that a cubic fourfold $X$ doesn't contain a plane. However, we assume that $X$ is a very general cubic fourfold containing a plane in Proposition \ref{mainthm}. Since we don't know how to construct stability conditions on $\mathcal{A}_X$ for a general cubic fourfold $X$ so far, we need to use some geometric discription of $\mathcal{A}_X$ in order to construct Bridgeland stability conditions on $\mathcal{A}_X$. In fact, it is difficult to construct the heart $\mathcal{C}$ of a bounded t-structure on $\mathcal{A}_X$ and a central charge $Z \colon K(\mathcal{A}_X) \to \mathbb{C}$ such that $Z(\mathcal{C} \setminus \{0\})$ is contained in the semiclosed upper-half plane. Moreover, we don't have well-established moduli theory for Bridgeland stable objects in $\mathcal{A}_X$. So we need some (twisted) K3 surfaces to use moduli theory for Bridgeland stable objects as in \cite{BM12}, \cite{BM13}. However, if $X$ is a very general cubic fourfold containing a plane, we can construct desired Bridgeland stability conditions on $\mathcal{A}_X$ using the twisted K3 surface $(S,\alpha)$. Thus, using the moduli theory \cite{BM12}, \cite{BM13} of Bridgeland stable objects on derived categories of twisted K3 surfaces, we have the Lagrangian embedding $X \to M$ in Proposition 1.5. So we obtain Theorem 1.1.
Finally we coments on two recent works on cubic fourfolds. One is the work on Bridgeland stability conditions on $\mathcal{A}_X$ by Toda \cite{Tod13}. By the Orlov's theorem \cite{Orl09}, the triangulated category $\mathcal{A}_X$ is equivalent to the triangulated category $\mathrm{HMF}^{gr}(W)$ of graded matrix factorizations of the defining polynomial $W$ of $X$. To investigate Bridgeland stability conditions on $\mathcal{A}_X$ is related to the existence problem of Gepner type stability condition on $\mathrm{HMF}^{gr}(W)$, which is treated in \cite{Tod13}. However, it is also difficult to construct the heart of a bounded t-structure on $\mathrm{HMF}^{gr}(W)$ so far. Other one is the work on rationality problem of cubic fourfolds and Fano variety of lines by Galkin and Shinder \cite{GS}. Galkin and Shinder \cite{GS} proved that rationality of cubic fourfolds is related to birationality of Fano varieties of lines and Hilbert schemes of two points on K3 surfaces if Cancellation conjecture on the Grothendieck ring of varieties holds. Addington \cite{Ad} compared results in \cite{GS} with Conjecture \ref{Kuzconj}. It may be interesting to study relationship between Lagrangian embeddings of cubic fourfolds and rationality of cubic fourfolds.
\subsection*{Construction of this paper}
In Section 2, we recall the notion of Bridgeland stability conditions on derived categories of twisted K3 surfaces (\cite{Bri07},\cite{Bri08},\cite{HMS}), properties of moduli spaces of Bridgeland stable objects in derived categories of twisted K3 surfaces (\cite{BM12},\cite{BM13}), and the construction of Kuznetsov equivalence (\cite{Kuz10}).
In Section 3, we define the projection functor $\mathrm{pr} \colon D^b(X) \to \mathcal{A}_X$ and explain Proposition \ref{mainthm} more precisely. In Section 4, we see properties of the projection functor and prove Proposition \ref{Lagproj}. In Section 5, we calculate the images of objects in $\mathcal{A}_X$ via Kuznetsov equivalence and compute their Mukai vectors.
In Section 6, we construct Bridgeland stability conditions on derived category of the twisted K3 surface such that projections of structure sheaves of points in $X$ are stable. In this section, we complete the proof of Proposition \ref{mainthm}
\subsection*{Notation}
We work over the complex number field $\mathbb{C}$. Cubic fourfolds and K3 surfaces are always smooth and projective. A triangulated category means a $\mathbb{C}$-linear triangulated category. For a smooth projetive variety $X$, we denote by $D^b(X)$ the bounded derived category of coherent sheaves on $X$. We write its Grothendieck group as $K(X):=K(D^b(X))$. For an object $E \in \mathcal{D}$ in a Calabi-Yau 2 category $\mathcal{D}$, we say that $E$ is spherical if $\mathbf{R}\mathrm{Hom}(E,E)=\mathbb{C} \oplus \mathbb{C}[-2]$.
Let $\mathcal{D}$ be a triangulated category. For an exceptional object $E \in \mathcal{D}$, we define the right mutation functor $\mathbf{R}_E \colon \mathcal{D} \to \mathcal{D}$ and the left mutation functor $\mathbf{L}_E \colon \mathcal{D} \to \mathcal{D}$ as follows
\begin{align*}
\mathbf{R}_E(-)&:=\mathrm{Cone}(- \to \mathbf{R}\mathrm{Hom}(-,E)^{\vee} \otimes E)[-1]\\
\mathbf{L}_E(-)&:=\mathrm{Cone}(\mathbf{R}\mathrm{Hom}(E,-) \otimes E \to -).
\end{align*}
\subsection*{Acknowledgements}
I would like to express my sincere gratitude to my advisor Professor Yukinobu Toda for his valuable comments and warmful encouragement. I would like to thank Professor Hokuto Uehara, Professor Shinnosuke Okawa and Professor Daisuke Matsushita. They gave me the chances to talk about my result in this paper at DMM seminar at Kavli IPMU, the workshop at Osaka University and the workshop at RIMS in Kyoto respectively. This work was supported by the program for Leading Graduate Schools, MEXT, Japan.
\section{PRELIMINARY}
In this section, we recall the notions of twisted K3 surfaces and Bridgeland stability conditions, and the relation between cubic fourfolds containing a plane and twisted K3 surfaces.
\subsection{Twisted K3 surfaces}
We review the definitions of twisted K3 surfaces, twisted sheaves and the twisted Mukai lattices.
\begin{dfn}[\cite{C}]
A twisted K3 surface is a pair $(S,\alpha)$ of a K3 surface $S$ and an element $\alpha$ of the Brauer group $\mathrm{Br}(S):=H^2(S,\mathcal{O}_{S}^*)_{\mathrm{tor}}$ of $S$.
\end{dfn}
\begin{dfn}[\cite{C}]
Let $(S,\alpha)$ be a twisted K3 surface. Taking an analytic open cover $\{U_i\}_{i \in I}$ of $S$, the Brauer class $\alpha$ can be represented by $\check{C}ech$ cocycle $\{\alpha_{ijk}\}$. An $\alpha$-twisted coherent sheaf $F$ on $S$ is a collection $(\{F_i\}_{i \in I},\{\phi_{ij}\}_{i,j \in I})$, where $F_i$ is a coherent sheaf on $U_i$ and $\phi_{ij}|_{U_i \cap U_j }\colon F_{i}|_{U_i \cap U_j} \to F_{j}|_{U_i \cap U_j} $ is an isomorphism satisfying the following conditions:
\[\phi_{ii}=\mathrm{id}, \ \phi_{ij}=\phi_{ji}^{-1}, \ \phi_{ij}\circ\phi_{jk}\circ\phi_{ki}=\alpha_{ijk}\cdot\mathrm{id}.\]
We denote by $\mathrm{Coh}(S,\alpha)$ and set $D^b(S,\alpha):=D^b(\mathrm{Coh}(S,\alpha))$ the category of $\alpha$-twisted coherent sheaves on $S$.
\end{dfn}
Let $(S,\alpha)$ be a twisted K3 surface. For simplicity, we will say $E \in \mathrm{Coh}(S,\alpha)$ a sheaf instead of an $\alpha$-twisted sheaf.
Take $B \in H^2(S,\mathbb{Q})$ with $\exp{(B^{0,2})}=\alpha$. Then $B$ is called a $B$-field of $\alpha$.
Here $B^{0,2}$ is the $(0,2)$-part of $B$ in $H^2(S,\mathbb{C})$. We define the twisted Mukai lattice $\widetilde{H}^{1,1}(S,B,\mathbb{Z})$ as follow:
\[ \widetilde{H}^{1,1}(S,B,\mathbb{Z}):=e^B\biggl(\bigoplus_{i=0}^2 H^{i,i}(S,\mathbb{Q})\biggr) \cap H^{*}(S,\mathbb{Z}).\]
The lattice structure is given by the Mukai pairing $\langle-,-\rangle$:
\[ \langle (r,c,d),(r^{\prime},c^{\prime},d^{\prime}) \rangle :=cc^{\prime}-rd^{\prime}-dr^{\prime}.\]
There is the twisted Chern character \cite{HS}
\[ \mathrm{ch}^{B}:K(S,\alpha) \twoheadrightarrow \widetilde{H}^{1,1}(S,B,\mathbb{Z}).\]
The twisted Chern character $\mathrm{ch}^B$ satisfies the Riemann-Roch formula:
\begin{equation}\label{RR}
\chi(E,F)=-\langle v^B(E),v^B(F) \rangle.
\end{equation}
Here $v^B(E):=\mathrm{ch}^{B}(E) \cdot \sqrt{\mathrm{td_{S}}} \in \widetilde{H}^{1,1}(S,B,\mathbb{Z})$ is the (twisted) Mukai vector of $E \in K(S,\alpha)$. We denote by $c_{1}^B(-)$ the degree 2 part of $v^B(-)$.
\begin{rem}
Let $N(S,\alpha)$ be the numerical Grothendieck group of $D^b(S,\alpha)$. The twisted Chern character induces the isomorphism
\[ \mathrm{ch}^B \colon N(S,\alpha) \to \widetilde{H}^{1,1}(S,B,\mathbb{Z}).\]
\end{rem}
\begin{lem}[\cite{MS}, Lemma 3.1]\label{gene}
Let $d$ be the order of $\alpha$. Then the twisted Mukai lattice $\widetilde{H}^{1,1}(S,B,\mathbb{Z})$ is generated by $(d,dB,0), \mathrm{Pic}(S)$ and $(0,0,1)$ in $H^{*}(S,\mathbb{Z})$.
In particular, the rank of $E$ is divisible by $d$ for all $E \in D^b(S,\alpha)$.
\end{lem}
\subsection{Bridgeland stability conditions}
Let $\mathcal{D}$ be a triangulated category and $N(\mathcal{D})$ be the numerical Grothendieck group of $\mathcal{D}$. Assume that $N(\mathcal{D})$ is finitely generated. If $\mathcal{D}$ is the derived category of a twisted K3 surface, this assumption is satisfied.
\begin{dfn}[\cite{Bri07}]
A stability condition on $\mathcal{D}$ is a pair $\sigma = (Z,\mathcal{C})$ of a group homomorphism (called central charge) $Z:N(\mathcal{D}) \to \mathbb{C}$ and the heart of a bounded t-structure $\mathcal{C \subset \mathcal{D}}$ on $\mathcal{D}$, which satisfy the following conditions:
\begin{itemize}
\item For any $0 \neq E \in \mathcal{C}$, we have $Z(E) \in \{re^{i\pi \phi} \in \mathbb{C} \mid r>0,0<\phi \le 1\}.$
\item For any $0 \neq E \in \mathcal{C}$, there is a filtration (called Harder-Narasimhan filtration) in $\mathcal{C}$
\[0=E_0 \subset E_1 \subset \cdot \cdot \cdot \subset E_N =E\]
such that $F_i := E_i/E_{i-1}$ is $\sigma$-semistable and $\phi(F_i)>\phi(F_{i+1})$ for all $1\le i \le N-1$.
\item Fix a norm $||-||$ on $N(\mathcal{D})_{\mathbb{R}}$. Then there is a constant $C$ such that $||E|| \le C \cdot |Z(E)|$ for any non-zero $\sigma$-semistable object $E \in \mathcal{C}$. This property is called the support property.
\end{itemize}
Here we put $\phi(E):=\mathrm{arg}(Z(E))/\pi \in (0,1]$ for $0 \neq E \in \mathcal{C}$ and $E \in \mathcal{C}$ is $\sigma$-(semi)stable if the inequality $\phi(F)<(\le)\phi(E)$ holds for any $0 \neq F \subset E$.
\end{dfn}
\begin{rem}[\cite{Bri07}]
We denote by $\mathrm{Stab}(\mathcal{D})$ the set of all stability conditions on $\mathcal{D}$. Then $\mathrm{Stab}(\mathcal{D})$ has a natural topology such that the map
\[\mathrm{Stab} (\mathcal{D}) \to \mathrm{Hom}_{\mathbb{Z}}(N(\mathcal{D}) ,\mathbb{C}), (Z,\mathcal{C}) \mapsto Z \]
is a local homeomorphism. In particular, $\mathrm{Stab}(\mathcal{D})$ has a structure of a complex manifold.
\end{rem}
From now on, we focus on stability conditions on derived categories of twisted K3 surfaces. Let $(S,\alpha)$ be a twisted K3 surface and fix a $B$-field $B \in H^2(S,\mathbb{Q})$ of the Brauer class $\alpha$.
We set $\mathrm{Stab}(S,\alpha):=\mathrm{Stab}(D^b(S,\alpha))$.
\begin{dfn}
Fix an ample divisor $\omega \in \mathrm{NS}(S)$ on $S$. Let $E \in \mathrm{Coh}(S,\alpha)$ be a sheaf. We define the slope $\mu^B(E)$ of $E$ as follow:
\[ \mu^B(E):=\frac{c_1^B(E) \cdot \omega}{\mathrm{rk}E}. \]
If $\mathrm{rk}E=0$, then we regard $\mu^B(E)=\infty$.
We say that $E$ is $\mu^B$-(semi)stable if and only if $\mu^B(F)(\le)<\mu^B(E/F)$ holds for all nonzero subsheaves $F \subset E$.
\end{dfn}
Note that the $\mu^B$-satability admits the Harder-Narasimhan filtrations and Jordan-H\"{o}lder filtrations.
\begin{ex}[\cite{Bri08}, \cite{HS}]\label{stab}
Take $B^{\prime} \in \mathrm{NS}(S)_{\mathbb{R}}$ and a real ample class $\omega \in \mathrm{NS}(S)_{\mathbb{R}}$ with $\omega^2>2$. Let $\tilde{B}:=B^{\prime}+B \in H^2(S,\mathbb{R})$. We define a group homomorphism $Z:=Z_{\tilde{B},\omega} \colon N(S,\alpha) \to \mathbb{C}$ as follow:
\[Z_{\tilde{B},\omega}(E):=\langle v^B(E),e^{\tilde{B}+i\omega} \rangle. \]
We can define a torsion pair $(\mathcal{T},{F})$ on $\mathrm{Coh}(S,\alpha)$ as follows:
\begin{itemize}
\item $\mathcal{T}:= \langle E \in \mathrm{Coh}(S,\alpha) \mid$ $E$ is $\mu^B$-semistable with $\mu^B(E)>\tilde{B}\omega \rangle_{\mathrm{ex}}$
\item $\mathcal{F}:= \langle E \in \mathrm{Coh}(S,\alpha) \mid E$ is $\mu^B$-semistable with $\mu(E) \le \tilde{B}\omega \rangle_{\mathrm{ex}}$.
\end{itemize}
Then $\mathcal{C}:=\langle \mathcal{F}[1],\mathcal{T} \rangle_{\mathrm{ex}} \subset D^b(S,\alpha)$ is the heart of a bounded t-structure on $D^b(S,\alpha)$ induced by the torsion pair $(\mathcal{T},\mathcal{F})$. Here we denote the extension closure by $\langle - \rangle_{\mathrm{ex}}$. The pair $(Z,\mathcal{C})$ is a stability condition on $D^b(S,\alpha)$.
\end{ex}
Let $\mathrm{Stab}^{\dagger}(S,\alpha)$ be the conected component of the space of stability conditions $\mathrm{Stab}(S,\alpha)$, which contains the stability conditions of the form $(Z_{\tilde{B},\omega},\mathcal{C})$.
\begin{rem}[\cite{Bri08}, \cite{Tod08}, \cite{BM13}]
Fix a Mukai vector $v \in \widetilde{H}^{1,1}(S,B,\mathbb{Z})$. Then $\mathrm{Stab}^{\dagger}(S,\alpha)$ has a wall and chamber structure which depends only on a choice of $v$. Variying $\sigma \in \mathrm{Stab}^{\dagger}(S,\alpha)$ within a chamber, the set of $\sigma$-(semi)stable objects with Mukai vector $v$ does not change. If $\sigma \in \mathrm{Stab}^{\dagger}(S,\alpha)$ is in a chamber, we say $\sigma$ is generic with respect to $v$ . If $v$ is primitive, then $\sigma \in \mathrm{Stab}^{\dagger}(S,\alpha)$ is generic with respect to $v$ if and only if all $\sigma$-semistable objects with Mukai vector $v$ are $\sigma$-stable.
\end{rem}
\subsection{Moduli spaces of Bridgeland stable complexes on twisted K3 surfaces}
We recall the facts on moduli spaces of Bridgeland stable objects on twisted K3 surfaces.
\begin{dfn}
A holomorphic symplectic variety is a simply connected smooth projective variety $M$ with a non-degenerate holomorphic 2-form $\omega$ (called symplectic form) such that $H^0(M,\Omega_{M}^2)=\mathbb{C}\cdot \omega$.
\end{dfn}
Examples of holomorphic symplectic varieties which will be appeared later are moduli spaces of Bridgeland stable objects in derived categories of twisted K3 surfaces.
\begin{thm}[\cite{BM13}]\label{moduli}
Let $(S,\alpha)$ be a twisted K3 surface and $v \in \widetilde{H}^{1,1}(S,B,\mathbb{Z})$ be a primitive Mukai vector with $\langle v,v \rangle \ge -2$. Let $\sigma \in \mathrm{Stab}^{\dagger}(S,\alpha)$ be a stability condition generic with respect to $v$.
Then the coarse moduli space $M_{\sigma}(v)$ of $\sigma$-stable objects with Mukai vector $v$ is a holomorphic symplectic variety deformation equivalent to the Hilbert scheme of points of a K3 surface and $\dim{M_{\sigma}(v)}=2+\langle v,v \rangle$.
\end{thm}
\subsection{Relation between cubic fourfolds and twisted K3 surfaces}
Let $X$ be a cubic fourfold and $H$ be a hyperplane section of $X$.
Consider the semiorthogonal decomposition:
\[ D^b(X)=\langle \mathcal{A}_X ,\mathcal{O}_X ,\mathcal{O}_X(H),\mathcal{O}_X(2H) \rangle.\]
The full triangulated subcategory
\[ \mathcal{A}_X=\{E \in D^b(X) \mid \mathbf{R}\mathrm{Hom}(\mathcal{O}_X(iH),E)=0 ,i=0,1,2 \} \subset D^b(X) \]
is a Calabi-Yau 2 category(\cite{Kuz03}, Corollary 4.3).
We recall geometric properties of cubic fourfolds containing a plane \cite{Has99}, \cite{Kuz10}. Suppose that $X$ contains a plane $P=\mathbb{P}^2$ in $\mathbb{P}^5$.
Let $\sigma\colon \tilde{X} \to X$ be the blowing up of $X$ at the plane P and $p\colon \widetilde{\mathbb{P}^5} \to \mathbb{P}^5$ be the blowing up of $\mathbb{P}^5$ at the plane $P$. The linear projection from $P$ gives the morphism $q\colon \widetilde{\mathbb{P}^5} \to \mathbb{P}^2$. This is a projectivization of the rank 4 vector bundle $\mathcal{O}_{\mathbb{P}^2}^{\oplus 3} \oplus \mathcal{O}_{\mathbb{P}^2}(-h)$ on $\mathbb{P}^2$. Here $h$ is a line in $\mathbb{P}^2$. Let $D$ be the exceptional divisor of $\sigma$. Then $D$ is linearly equivalent to $H-h$ on $\tilde{X}$. Set $\pi:=q\circ j\colon \tilde{X} \to \mathbb{P}^2$, where $j\colon \tilde{X} \hookrightarrow \widetilde{\mathbb{P}^5}$ is the natural inclusion. Then $\pi \colon \tilde{X} \to \mathbb{P}^2$ is a quadric fibration with degenerate fibres along a plane curve $C$ of degree $6$. We assume that fibres of $\pi$ don't degenerate into union of two planes.
Then $C$ is a smooth curve. Let $f\colon S \to \mathbb{P}^2$ be the double cover ramified along $C$.
Since $C$ is smooth, the surface $S$ is a K3 surface.
\[ \xymatrix{D \ar@{^{(}-{>}} [r] \ar[d] &\tilde{X} \ar@{^{(}-{>}} [r]^j \ar[d]_\sigma& \widetilde{\mathbb{P}^5} \ar[d]_p \ar[rd]_q && \\ P \ar@{^{(}-{>}} [r] & X \ar@{^{(}-{>}} [r] & \mathbb{P}^5 \ar@{.{>}} [r]& \mathbb{P}^2 & \ar[l]_f S} \]
We recall Kuznetsov's construction \cite{Kuz10} of the twisted K3 surface $(S,\alpha)$ and equivalence between $\mathcal{A}_X$ and $D^b(S,\alpha)$.
The quadric fibration $\pi$ defines the sheaf of Clifford algebras $\mathcal{B}$ on $\mathbb{P}^2$. It has the even part $\mathcal{B}_{0}$ and the odd part $\mathcal{B}_{1}$, which are described as
\[ \mathcal{B}_{0}=\mathcal{O}_{\mathbb{P}^2}\oplus\mathcal{O}_{\mathbb{P}^2}(-h)^{\oplus3}\oplus\mathcal{O}_{\mathbb{P}^2}(-2h)^{\oplus3}\oplus\mathcal{O}_{\mathbb{P}^2}(-3h) \]
\[ \mathcal{B}_{1}=\mathcal{O}_{\mathbb{P}^2}^{\oplus3}\oplus\mathcal{O}_{\mathbb{P}^2}(-h)^{\oplus2}\oplus\mathcal{O}_{\mathbb{P}^2}(-2h)^{\oplus3}. \]
Let $\mathrm{Coh}(\mathbb{P}^2,\mathcal{B}_0)$ be the category of coherent right $\mathcal{B}_0$-modules on $\mathbb{P}^2$.
Note that $\mathcal{B}_0$ is a spherical object in $D^b(\mathbb{P}^2,\mathcal{B}_0)$. Set $D^b(\mathbb{P}^2, \mathcal{B}_0) := D^b(\mathrm{Coh}(\mathbb{P}^2, \mathcal{B}_0))$.
\begin{lem}[\cite{Kuz08}, \cite{Kuz10}]
There exists a fully faithful functor
\[ \Phi\colon D^b(\mathbb{P}^2,\mathcal{B}_0) \hookrightarrow D^b(\tilde{X}) \]
with the semiorthgonal decomposition
\[ D^b(\tilde{X})=\langle \Phi(D^b(\mathbb{P}^2,\mathcal{B}_0)),\pi^*D^b(\mathbb{P}^2),\pi^*D^b(\mathbb{P}^2)(H) \rangle. \]
The left adjoint functor $\Psi\colon D^b(\tilde{X}) \to D^b(\mathbb{P}^2,\mathcal{B}_0)$ of $\Phi$ is described as
\[ \Psi(-)=\mathbf{R}\pi_*((-)\otimes\mathcal{O}_{\tilde{X}}(h)\otimes\mathcal{E})[2]. \]
Here $\mathcal{E}$ is the rank 4 vector bundle on $\tilde{X}$ with a structure of a flat right $\pi^*\mathcal{B}_0$-module and the exact sequence
\begin{equation}\label{surj}
0 \to q^*\mathcal{B}_1(-h-2H) \to q^*\mathcal{B}_0(-H) \to j_*\mathcal{E} \to 0 .
\end{equation}
\end{lem}
\begin{lem}[\cite{Kuz10}]
The followings hold.
\itemize
\item The functor
\[ \Phi_{\mathbb{P}^2}:=\mathbf{R}\sigma_*\mathbf{L}_{\mathcal{O}_{\tilde{X}}(h-H)}\mathbf{R}_{\mathcal{O}_{\tilde{X}}(-h)}\Phi\colon D^b(\mathbb{P}^2,\mathcal{B}_0) \to \mathcal{A}_X \]
gives an equivalence.
\item There is a sheaf $\mathcal{B}$ of Azumaya algebras on $S$ such that $f_*\mathcal{B}=\mathcal{B}_0$ and $f_*\colon \mathrm{Coh}(S,\mathcal{B}) \to \mathrm{Coh}(\mathbb{P}^2,\mathcal{B}_0)$ gives an equivalence.
\item There are a Brauer class $\alpha$ of order $2$ and a rank $2$ vector bundle $\mathcal{U}_0 \in \mathrm{Coh}(S,\alpha)$ such that $\otimes\mathcal{U}_0^{\vee}\colon \mathrm{Coh}(S,\alpha) \to \mathrm{Coh}(S,\mathcal{B})$ gives an equivalence.
\end{lem}
\begin{cor}\label{Kuzeq}
The functor $\Phi_{S}:=\Phi_{\mathbb{P}^2} \circ f_* \circ \otimes\mathcal{U}_0^{\vee}\colon D^b(S,\alpha) \to \mathcal{A}_X$ is an equivalence.
\end{cor}
\begin{rem}
The following holds.
\[ \Phi_{\mathbb{P}^2}^{-1}=\Psi\mathbf{L}_{\mathcal{O}_{\tilde{X}}(-h)}\mathbf{R}_{\mathcal{O}_{\tilde{X}}(h-H)}\mathbf{L}\sigma^*\colon\mathcal{A}_X \to D^b(\mathbb{P}^2,\mathcal{B}_0) \]
\end{rem}
If $X$ is very general i.e. $\mathrm{Pic}S=\mathbb{Z}$, then $\alpha$ is non-trivial.
\begin{prop}[\cite{Kuz10}, Proposition 4.8]
If $X$ is very general, $\mathcal{A}_X$ is not equivalent to $D^b(S^{\prime})$ for any K3 surface $S^{\prime}$. In particular, $\alpha \neq 1$.
\end{prop}
Due to Lemma \ref{gene}, the condition $\alpha \neq 1$ is strong constraint. In fact, if $\alpha \neq 1$, then there are no rank one sheaves on $(S,\alpha)$.
The following lemma will be needed later.
\begin{lem}[\cite{MS}, Lemma 2.4]\label{reducelem}
The followings hold.
\begin{itemize}
\item For any $m \in \mathbb{Z}$, $\Psi(\mathcal{O}_{\tilde{X}}(mh))=\Psi(\mathcal{O}_{\tilde{X}}(mh-H))=0$.
\item $\Psi(\mathcal{O}_{\tilde{X}}(-h+H))=\mathcal{B}_0[2]$, $\Psi(\mathcal{O}_{\tilde{X}}(h-2H))=\mathcal{B}_1$.
\end{itemize}
\end{lem}
In the next section, we see the construction of the Lagrangian embeddings.
\section{FORMULATION OF THE MAIN PROPOSITION}
In this section, we define the projection functor and formulate Proposition \ref{mainthm}.
\begin{dfn}
Let $X$ be a cubic fourfold and $H$ be a hyperplane section of $X$.
We define the projection functor as follow.
\begin{equation}
\mathrm{pr}:=\mathbf{R}_{\mathcal{O}_{X}(-H)}\mathbf{L}_{\mathcal{O}_X}\mathbf{L}_{\mathcal{O}_{X}(H)}[1]\colon D^b(X) \to \mathcal{A}_X
\end{equation}
\end{dfn}
From now on, we use the same notation as in Section 2.4.
\begin{dfn}
For a point $x\in X$, let $P_x:=\Phi_{S}^{-1}(\mathrm{pr}(\mathcal{O}_x))[-4]\in D^b(S,\alpha)$.
\end{dfn}
The following proposition is the more precise version of Proposition \ref{mainthm}.
\begin{prop}[Proposition \ref{mainthm}]\label{main}
Assume that $X$ is a very general cubic fourfold containing a plane $P$. Fix a $B$-field $B \in H^2(S,\mathbb{Q})$ of the Brauer class $\alpha$ and let $v:=v^B(P_x) \in \widetilde{H}^{1,1}(S,B,\mathbb{Z})$ for $x \in X$. Then the follwings hold.
\begin{itemize}
\item[\rm{(a)}] There is a stability condition $\sigma \in \mathrm{Stab}^{\dagger}(S,\alpha)$ generic with respect $v$ such that $P_x$ is $\sigma$-stable for each $x \in X$.
\item[\rm{(b)}] $M_{\sigma}(v)$ is a holomorphic symplectic eightfold.
\item[\rm{(c)}] $X \to M_{\sigma}(v) , x \mapsto P_x$ is a closed immersion.
\item[\rm{(d)}] $X$ is a Lagrangian submanifold of $M_{\sigma}(v)$.
\end{itemize}
\end{prop}
In the rest of the paper, we will give a proof of Proposition \ref{main}. In the proof of (a), we will construct a family $\{\sigma_{\lambda}\}$ of stability conditions generic with respect to $v$ such that $P_x$ is $\sigma_{\lambda}$-stable for each $x\in X$. The construction of stability conditions will be in Section 6. The statement (b) will be deduced by Theorem \ref{moduli} and $\mathbf{R}\mathrm{Hom}(\mathrm{pr}(\mathcal{O}_x), \mathrm{pr}(\mathcal{O}_x))=\mathbb{C}\oplus\mathbb{C}^8[-1]\oplus\mathbb{C}[-2]$ or $\langle v,v \rangle=6$. The Mukai vector $v$ will be calculated in Section 5. In the proof of (c) and (d), we identfy tangent spaces $\mathrm{T}_xX$ and $\mathrm{T}_xM_{\sigma}(v)$ with $\mathrm{Ext}^1(\mathcal{O}_x,\mathcal{O}_x)$ and $\mathrm{Ext}^1(P_x,P_x)$ respectively. The statements (c), (d) is deduced from Proposition \ref{Lagproj}. This will be in Section 4. Note that we will not use K3 surfaces and the plane $P$ in a cubic fourfold $X$ in the proof of Proposition \ref{Lagproj}.
\section{THE PROJECTION FUNCTOR AND LAGRANGIAN EMBEDDINGS}
In this section, we prove Proposition \ref{Lagproj}. Let $X$ be a cubic fourfold and $H$ be a hyperplane section of $X$. Take a point $x \in X$. Let $I_x \subset \mathcal{O}_X$ be the ideal sheaf of $x \in X$. First, we calculate the image $\mathrm{pr}(\mathcal{O}_x)$ of the skyscraper sheaf $\mathcal{O}_x$.
\begin{lem}\label{sky}
Let $L \in \mathrm{Pic}X$ be a line bundle on $X$. The followings hold.
\begin{itemize}
\item $\mathbf{R}\mathcal{H}om(\mathcal{O}_x,L)=\mathcal{O}_x[-4].$
\item $\mathbf{R}\mathrm{Hom}(\mathcal{O}_x,L)=\mathbb{C}[-4].$
\end{itemize}
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
The second claim is deduced by the first claim. So we prove the first claim. Let $i_x \colon x \hookrightarrow X$ be the natural inclusion. Using the Grothendieck-Verdier duality, we have the isomorphisms
\begin{align*}
\mathbf{R}\mathcal{H}om(\mathcal{O}_x,L)&=\mathbf{R}\mathcal{H}om(i_{x*}\mathcal{O}_x,L)\\
&\simeq i_{x*}\mathbf{R}\mathcal{H}om_x(\mathcal{O}_x,i_x^{!}L) \\
&\simeq i_{x*}\mathbf{R}\mathcal{H}om_x(\mathcal{O}_x,\mathcal{O}_x[-4])\\
&\simeq \mathcal{O}_x[-4].
\end{align*}
\end{proof}
Consider the exact sequence
\begin{equation}\label{ideal}
0 \to I_x(H) \to \mathcal{O}_X(H) \to \mathcal{O}_x \to 0.
\end{equation}
Let $e_1 \colon \mathcal{O}_x \to I_x(H)[1]$ be the extension morphism of (\ref{ideal}).
Since $\mathbf{R}\mathrm{Hom}(\mathcal{O}_X(H),I_x(H))=\mathbf{R}\Gamma(X,I_x)=0$, we have $I_x(H) \in \langle \mathcal{O}_X(H) \rangle^{\bot}$. This implies
\[ \mathbf{L}_{\mathcal{O}_X(H)}(\mathcal{O}_x)[-1]=I_x(H). \]
Since $I_x(H) \subset \mathcal{O}_X(H)$ is genarated by five linear functions on $X$, we have the surjection
\[ \mathcal{O}_X^{\oplus5} \twoheadrightarrow I_x(H). \]
Let $F_x:=\mathrm{Ker}(\mathcal{O}_X^{\oplus5} \twoheadrightarrow I_x(H))$.
Consider the exact seqence
\begin{equation}\label{mid}
0 \to F_x \to \mathcal{O}_X^{\oplus5} \to I_x(H) \to 0.
\end{equation}
Let $e_2 \colon I_x(H) \to F_x[1]$ be the extension morphism of (\ref{mid}).
If $F_x \in \langle \mathcal{O}_X \rangle^{\bot}$, we can get
\[ \mathbf{L}_{\mathcal{O}_X}(I_x(H))[-1]=F_x. \]
In fact, the following holds.
\begin{lem}
We have $\mathbf{R}\mathrm{Hom}(\mathcal{O}_X,F_x)=0.$
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
Applying $\mathbf{R}\Gamma(X,-)$ to the exact sequence (\ref{ideal}), we have the exact triangle
\[ \mathbf{R}\Gamma(X,I_x(H)) \to \mathbf{R}\Gamma(X,\mathcal{O}_X(H)) \twoheadrightarrow \mathbf{R}\Gamma(X,\mathcal{O}_x). \]
Since $\mathbf{R}\Gamma(X,\mathcal{O}_X(H))=\mathbb{C}^6$ and $\mathbf{R}\Gamma(X,\mathcal{O}_x)=\mathbb{C}$, we have $\mathbf{R}\Gamma(X,I_x(H))=\mathbb{C}^5$.
Applying $\mathbf{R}\Gamma(X,-)$ to the exact sequence (\ref{mid}),
we have an exact triangle\[ \mathbf{R}\Gamma(X,F_x) \to \mathbf{R}\Gamma(X,\mathcal{O}_X^{\oplus5}) \twoheadrightarrow \mathbf{R}\Gamma(X,I_x(H)). \]
Since $\mathbf{R}\Gamma(X,\mathcal{O}_X^{\oplus5})=\mathbf{R}\Gamma(X,I_x(H))=\mathbb{C}^5$, we have
\[\mathbf{R}\mathrm{Hom}(\mathcal{O}_X,F_x)=\mathbf{R}\Gamma(X,F_x)=0.\]
\end{proof}
By the definition of the right mutation functor $\mathbf{R}_{\mathcal{O}_X(-H)} \colon D^b(X) \to D^b(X)$, there is the exact triangle
\[ F_x \to \mathbf{R}\mathrm{Hom}(F_x,\mathcal{O}_X(-H))^{\vee} \otimes \mathcal{O}_X(-H) \to \mathrm{pr}(\mathcal{O}_x). \]
We calculate $\mathbf{R}\mathrm{Hom}(F_x,\mathcal{O}_X(-H))$ in the next lemma.
\begin{lem}\label{thrd}
We have $\mathbf{R}\mathrm{Hom}(F_x,\mathcal{O}_X(-H))=\mathbb{C}[-2]$.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
Applying $\mathbf{R}\mathrm{Hom}(-,\mathcal{O}_X(-H))$ to the exact sequences (\ref{ideal}) and (\ref{mid}), we have the exact triangles
\[ \mathbf{R}\mathrm{Hom}(\mathcal{O}_x,\mathcal{O}_X(-H)) \to \mathbf{R}\mathrm{Hom}(\mathcal{O}_X(H),\mathcal{O}_X(-H)) \to \mathbf{R}\mathrm{Hom}(I_x(H),\mathcal{O}_X(-H)),\]
\[ \mathbf{R}\mathrm{Hom}(I_x(H),\mathcal{O}_X(-H)) \to \mathbf{R}\mathrm{Hom}(\mathcal{O}_X^{\oplus5},\mathcal{O}_X(-H)) \to \mathbf{R}\mathrm{Hom}(F_x,\mathcal{O}_X(-H)). \]
By Lemma \ref{sky} and $\mathbf{R}\mathrm{Hom}(\mathcal{O}_X(H),\mathcal{O}_X(-H))=0$,
the first exact triangle is nothing but
\[ \mathbb{C}[-4] \to 0 \to \mathbf{R}\mathrm{Hom}(I_x(H),\mathcal{O}_X(-H)).\]
So we obtain $\mathbf{R}\mathrm{Hom}(I_x(H),\mathcal{O}_X(-H))=\mathbb{C}[-3]$.
Since $\mathbf{R}\mathrm{Hom}(\mathcal{O}_X^{\oplus5},\mathcal{O}_X(-H))=0$, the second exact triangle is nothing but
\[ \mathbf{R}\mathrm{Hom}(I_x(H),\mathcal{O}_X(-H)) \to 0 \to \mathbf{R}\mathrm{Hom}(F_x,\mathcal{O}_X(-H)). \]
This implies
\begin{align*}
\mathbf{R}\mathrm{Hom}(F_x,\mathcal{O}_X(-H)) &= \mathbf{R}\mathrm{Hom}(I_x(H),\mathcal{O}_X(-H))[1] \\
&= \mathbb{C}[-2].
\end{align*}
\end{proof}
By Lemma \ref{thrd}, we have the following exact triangle
\begin{equation}\label{proj}
F_x \to \mathcal{O}_X(-H)[2] \to \mathrm{pr}(\mathcal{O}_x).
\end{equation}
Collecting exact triangles (\ref{ideal}), (\ref{mid}) and (\ref{proj}), we have the following proposition.
\begin{lem}\label{res}
There are the following exact triangles on $X$:
\begin{equation}\label{fir}
I_x(H) \hookrightarrow \mathcal{O}_X(H) \twoheadrightarrow \mathcal{O}_x \stackrel{e_1}{\to} I_x(H)[1]
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}\label{sec}
F_x \hookrightarrow \mathcal{O}_X^{\oplus5} \twoheadrightarrow I_x(H) \stackrel{e_2}{\to} F_x[1]
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}\label{three}
F_x \stackrel{c}{\to} \mathcal{O}_X(-H)[2] \to \mathrm{pr}(\mathcal{O}_x) \stackrel{e_3}{\to} F_x.
\end{equation}
Here $c$ is the morphism in \rm{(\ref{proj})}.
\end{lem}
Taking the long exact sequence of the exact triangle (\ref{three}), we obtain the following remark.
\begin{rem}\label{cohproj}
The following holds.
\begin{itemize}
\item $\mathcal{H}^0(\mathrm{pr}(\mathcal{O}_x))=F_x.$
\item $\mathcal{H}^{-1}(\mathrm{pr}(\mathcal{O}_x))=\mathcal{O}_X(-H).$
\item $\mathcal{H}^k(\mathrm{pr}(\mathcal{O}_x))=0$ for any $k \neq -1,0$.
\end{itemize}
\end{rem}
The following proposition is the first statement in Proposition \ref{Lagproj}.
\begin{prop}
Let $x\neq y \in X$ be distinct points in $X$. Then $\mathrm{pr}(\mathcal{O}_x)$ is not isomorphic to $\mathrm{pr}(\mathcal{O}_y)$.
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
By Remark \ref{cohproj}, it is sufficient to prove that $F_x$ is not isomorphic to $F_y$.
So we prove that $\mathcal{E}xt^2(F_x,\mathcal{O}_X) \simeq \mathcal{O}_x$.
Applying $\mathbf{R}\mathcal{H}om(-,\mathcal{O}_X)$ to the exact triangles (\ref{fir}) and (\ref{sec}), we can obtain the isomorphisms
\begin{align*}
\mathcal{E}xt^2(F_x,\mathcal{O}_X) &\simeq \mathcal{E}xt^3(I_x(H),\mathcal{O}_X)\\
&\simeq \mathcal{E}xt^4(\mathcal{O}_x,\mathcal{O}_X)\\
&\simeq \mathcal{O}_x.
\end{align*}
\end{proof}
Thus we have calculated the image $\mathrm{pr}(\mathcal{O}_x)$ of the skyscraper sheaf $\mathcal{O}_x$.
Second, we calculate $\mathrm{Ext}$-groups and prove the remaining statements in Proposition \ref{Lagproj}.
\begin{lem}\label{FIcoh}
The following holds.
\begin{itemize}
\item $\mathbf{R}\Gamma(X,F_x(H))=\mathbb{C}^{10}$.
\item $\mathbf{R}\mathrm{Hom}(I_x(H),\mathcal{O}_X)=\mathbb{C}[-3]$.
\end{itemize}
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
Consider the exact sequence
\[ 0 \to I_x(2H) \to \mathcal{O}_X(2H) \to \mathcal{O}_x \to 0 .\]
Taking $\mathbf{R}\Gamma(X,-)$, we have the exact triangle
\[ \mathbf{R}\Gamma(X,I_x(2H)) \to \mathbf{R}\Gamma(X,\mathcal{O}_X(2H)) \twoheadrightarrow \mathbf{R}\Gamma(X,\mathcal{O}_x). \]
Since $\mathbf{R}\Gamma(X, \mathcal{O}_X(2H))=\mathbb{C}^{21}$ and $\mathbf{R}\Gamma(X, \mathcal{O}_x)=\mathbb{C}$, we obtain \[\mathbf{R}\Gamma(X,I_x(2H))=\mathbb{C}^{20}.\]
Applying $\otimes \mathcal{O}_X(H)$ to the exact sequence (\ref{sec}), we have
\[ 0 \to F_x(H) \to \mathcal{O}_X(H)^{\oplus5} \to I_x(2H) \to 0. \]
Taking $\mathbf{R}\Gamma(X,-)$, we have the exact triangle
\[ \mathbf{R}\Gamma(X,F_x(H)) \to \mathbf{R}\Gamma(X,\mathcal{O}_X(H)^{\oplus5}) \twoheadrightarrow \mathbf{R}\Gamma(X,I_x(2H)). \]
Since $\mathbf{R}\Gamma(X,\mathcal{O}_X(H)^{\oplus5})=\mathbb{C}^{30}$ and $\mathbf{R}\Gamma(X,I_x(2H))=\mathbb{C}^{20}$, we obtain
\[\mathbf{R}\Gamma(X,F_x(H))=\mathbb{C}^{10}.\]
We prove the second claim. Applying $\mathbf{R}\mathrm{Hom}(-,\mathcal{O}_X)$ to the exact sequence (\ref{fir}), we have the exact triangle
\[ \mathbf{R}\mathrm{Hom}(\mathcal{O}_x,\mathcal{O}_X) \to \mathbf{R}\mathrm{Hom}(\mathcal{O}_X(H),\mathcal{O}_X) \to \mathbf{R}\mathrm{Hom}(I_x(H),\mathcal{O}_X). \]
By Lemma \ref{sky} and $\mathbf{R}\mathrm{Hom}(\mathcal{O}_X(H),\mathcal{O}_X)=0$, we obtain
\[\mathbf{R}\mathrm{Hom}(I_x(H),\mathcal{O}_X)=\mathbb{C}[-3].\]
\end{proof}
\begin{lem}\label{iso}
There are the following isomorphisms.
\begin{equation}\label{u}
\circ e_1 \colon \mathbf{R}\mathrm{Hom}(I_x(H),I_x(H)) \stackrel{\sim}{\to} \mathbf{R}\mathrm{Hom}(\mathcal{O}_x,I_x(H))[1]
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}\label{i}
\circ e_2 \colon \mathbf{R}\mathrm{Hom}(F_x,F_x) \stackrel{\sim}{\to} \mathbf{R}\mathrm{Hom}(I_x(H),F_x)[1]
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}\label{a}
e_3 \circ \colon \mathbf{R}\mathrm{Hom}(\mathrm{pr}(\mathcal{O}_x),\mathrm{pr}(\mathcal{O}_x)) \stackrel{\sim}{\to} \mathbf{R}\mathrm{Hom}(\mathrm{pr}(\mathcal{O}_x),F_x)[1]
\end{equation}
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
Applying $\mathbf{R}\mathrm{Hom}(-,I_x(H))$ to the exact sequence (\ref{fir}), we have the exact triangle
\[ \mathbf{R}\mathrm{Hom}(\mathcal{O}_x,I_x(H)) \to \mathbf{R}\mathrm{Hom}(\mathcal{O}_X(H),I_x(H)) \to \mathbf{R}\mathrm{Hom}(I_x(H),I_x(H)).\]
Since $I_x(H) \in \langle \mathcal{O}_X(H) \rangle^{\bot}$, we have $\mathbf{R}\mathrm{Hom}(\mathcal{O}_X(H),I_x(H))=0$.
So we obtain the isomorphism
\[ \circ e_1 \colon \mathbf{R}\mathrm{Hom}(I_x(H),I_x(H)) \stackrel{\sim}{\to} \mathbf{R}\mathrm{Hom}(\mathcal{O}_x,I_x(H))[1].\]
Using $F_x \in \langle \mathcal{O}_X \rangle^{\bot}$ and $\mathrm{pr}(\mathcal{O}_x) \in \mathcal{A}_X$ similarly, we can obtain
\[\circ e_2 \colon \mathbf{R}\mathrm{Hom}(F_x,F_x) \stackrel{\sim}{\to} \mathbf{R}\mathrm{Hom}(I_x(H),F_x)[1]\]
\[e_3 \circ \colon \mathbf{R}\mathrm{Hom}(\mathrm{pr}(\mathcal{O}_x),\mathrm{pr}(\mathcal{O}_x)) \stackrel{\sim}{\to} \mathbf{R}\mathrm{Hom}(\mathrm{pr}(\mathcal{O}_x),F_x)[1].\]
\end{proof}
Applying $\mathbf{R}\mathrm{Hom}(\mathcal{O}_x,-)$ to the exact triangle (\ref{fir}), we have the exact triangle
\begin{equation}\label{ka}
\mathbf{R}\mathrm{Hom}(\mathcal{O}_x,I_x(H)) \to \mathbf{R}\mathrm{Hom}(\mathcal{O}_x,\mathcal{O}_X(H)) \to \mathbf{R}\mathrm{Hom}(\mathcal{O}_x,\mathcal{O}_x)
\end{equation}
By Lemma \ref{sky}, the exact triangle (\ref{ka}) is nothing but
\begin{equation}\label{kaa}
\mathbf{R}\mathrm{Hom}(\mathcal{O}_x,I_x(H)) \to \mathbb{C}[-4] \to \mathbf{R}\mathrm{Hom}(\mathcal{O}_x,\mathcal{O}_x).
\end{equation}
Taking the long exact sequence of the exact triangle (\ref{kaa}), we have the folloing isomorphisms.
\begin{lem}\label{e1}
There are the following isomorphisms.
\[e_1 \circ \colon \mathrm{Hom}(\mathcal{O}_x,\mathcal{O}_x) \stackrel{\sim}{\to} \mathrm{Ext}^1(\mathcal{O}_x,I_x(H))\]
\[e_1 \circ \colon \mathrm{Ext}^1(\mathcal{O}_x,\mathcal{O}_x) \stackrel{\sim}{\to} \mathrm{Ext}^2(\mathcal{O}_x,I_x(H))\]
\[e_1 \circ \colon \mathrm{Ext}^2(\mathcal{O}_x,\mathcal{O}_x) \stackrel{\sim}{\to} \mathrm{Ext}^3(\mathcal{O}_x,I_x(H))\]
\end{lem}
Applying $\mathbf{R}\mathrm{Hom}(I_x(H),-)$ to the exact triangle (\ref{sec}), we have the exact triangle
\begin{equation}\label{o}
\mathbf{R}\mathrm{Hom}(I_x(H),F_x) \to \mathbf{R}\mathrm{Hom}(I_x(H),\mathcal{O}_X^{\oplus5}) \to \mathbf{R}\mathrm{Hom}(I_x(H),I_x(H))
\end{equation}
By Lemma \ref{FIcoh}, the exact triangle (\ref{o}) is nothing but
\begin{equation}\label{oa}
\mathbf{R}\mathrm{Hom}(I_x(H),F_x) \to \mathbb{C}^5[-3] \to \mathbf{R}\mathrm{Hom}(I_x(H),I_x(H)).
\end{equation}
Taking the long exact sequence of the exact triangle (\ref{oa}), we have the following isomorphisms.
\begin{lem}\label{e2}
There are the following isomorphisms.
\[e_2 \circ \colon \mathrm{Hom}(I_x(H),I_x(H)) \stackrel{\sim}{\to} \mathrm{Ext}^1(I_x(H), F_x)\]
\[e_2 \circ \colon \mathrm{Ext}^1(I_x(H),I_x(H)) \stackrel{\sim}{\to} \mathrm{Ext}^2(I_x(H), F_x)\]
\end{lem}
Applying $\mathbf{R}\mathrm{Hom}(-,F_x)$ to the exact triangle (\ref{three}), we have the exact triangle
\begin{equation}\label{e}
\mathbf{R}\mathrm{Hom}(\mathrm{pr}(\mathcal{O}_x),F_x) \to \mathbf{R}\mathrm{Hom}(\mathcal{O}_X(-H)[-2],F_x) \to \mathbf{R}\mathrm{Hom}(F_x,F_x).
\end{equation}
By Lemma \ref{FIcoh}, the exact triangle (\ref{e}) is nothing but
\begin{equation}\label{ea}
\mathbf{R}\mathrm{Hom}(\mathrm{pr}(\mathcal{O}_x),F_x) \to \mathbb{C}^{10}[-2] \to \mathbf{R}\mathrm{Hom}(F_x,F_x).
\end{equation}
Taking the lomg exact sequence of the exact triangle (\ref{ea}), we have the following isomorphism.
\begin{lem}\label{e3}
There is the isomorphism
\[\circ e_3 \colon \mathrm{Hom}(F_x,F_x) \stackrel{\sim}{\to} \mathrm{Ext}^1(\mathrm{pr}(\mathcal{O}_x),F_x).\]
\end{lem}
We can prove that the object $\mathrm{pr}(\mathcal{O}_x)$ is simple.
\begin{cor}\label{simple}
We have $\mathrm{Hom}(\mathrm{pr}(\mathcal{O}_x),\mathrm{pr}(\mathcal{O}_x))=\mathbb{C}$.
\end{cor}
\begin{proof}
By Lemma \ref{iso}, Lemma \ref{e1}, Lemma \ref{e2} and Lemma \ref{e3}, we have the isomorphisms
\begin{align*}
\mathrm{Hom}(\mathrm{pr}(\mathcal{O}_x),\mathrm{pr}(\mathcal{O}_x)) &\stackrel{e_3 \circ}{\simeq} \mathrm{Ext}^1(\mathrm{pr}(\mathcal{O}_x),F_x) \\
&\stackrel{\circ e_3}{\simeq} \mathrm{Hom}(F_x,F_x)\\
&\stackrel{\circ e_2}{\simeq} \mathrm{Ext}^1(I_x(H),F_x)\\
& \stackrel{e_2 \circ}{\simeq} \mathrm{Hom}(I_x(H),I_x(H))\\
&\stackrel{\circ e_1}{\simeq} \mathrm{Ext}^1(\mathcal{O}_x,I_x(H))\\
&\stackrel{e_1 \circ}{\simeq} \mathrm{Hom}(\mathcal{O}_x,\mathcal{O}_x)=\mathbb{C}.
\end{align*}
\end{proof}
\begin{lem}
We have $\mathrm{Ext}^2(F_x,F_x)=\mathbb{C}^7$.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
By the exact triangle (\ref{oa}), we have the exact sequence
\begin{align*}
0 \to \mathrm{Ext}^2(I_x(H),I_x(H)) &\to \mathrm{Ext}^3(I_x(H),F_x) \to \mathbb{C}^5\\ \to \mathrm{Ext}^3(I_x(H),I_x(H)) &\to \mathrm{Ext}^4(I_x(H),F_x) \to 0.
\end{align*}
By Lemma \ref{iso} and the isomorphism (\ref{a}), we have
\begin{align*}
\mathrm{Ext}^4(I_x(H),F_x) &\simeq \mathrm{Ext}^3(F_x,F_x)\\
&\simeq \mathrm{Ext}^4(\mathrm{pr}(\mathcal{O}_x),F_x)\\
&\simeq \mathrm{Ext}^3(\mathrm{pr}(\mathcal{O}_x),\mathrm{pr}(\mathcal{O}_x))=0.
\end{align*}
By Lemma \ref{iso} and Lemma \ref{e1}, we have
\[\mathrm{Ext}^2(I_x(H),I_x(H))=\mathbb{C}^6\]
\[\mathrm{Ext}^3(I_x(H),I_x(H))=\mathbb{C}^4\]
\[\mathrm{Ext}^2(F_x,F_x) \simeq \mathrm{Ext}^3(I_x(H),F_x).\]
So the above long exact sequence can be described as
\[ 0 \to \mathbb{C}^6 \to \mathrm{Ext}^2(F_x,F_x) \to \mathbb{C}^5\\ \to \mathbb{C}^4 \to 0. \]
Hence, we have $\mathrm{Ext}^2(F_x,F_x)=\mathbb{C}^7$.
\end{proof}
We can calculate the dimension of $\mathrm{Ext}^1(\mathrm{pr}(\mathcal{O}_x),\mathrm{pr}(\mathcal{O}_x))$.
\begin{cor}\label{tangent}
We have $\mathrm{Ext}^1(\mathrm{pr}(\mathcal{O}_x),\mathrm{pr}(\mathcal{O}_x))=\mathbb{C}^8$.
\end{cor}
\begin{proof}
By Lemma \ref{iso} and Lemma \ref{e2}, we have
\begin{equation}\label{1FF}
\mathrm{Ext}^1(F_x,F_x)=\mathbb{C}^4
\end{equation}
\[\mathrm{Ext}^1(\mathrm{pr}(\mathcal{O}_x), \mathrm{pr}(\mathcal{O}_x)) \simeq \mathrm{Ext}^2(\mathrm{pr}(\mathcal{O}_x),F_x).\]
Moreover, using Lemma \ref{iso} and Corollary \ref{simple}, we have
\[\mathrm{Ext}^3(\mathrm{pr}(\mathcal{O}_x),F_x) \simeq \mathrm{Ext}^2(\mathrm{pr}(\mathcal{O}_x), \mathrm{pr}(\mathcal{O}_x))=\mathbb{C}.\]
Here the last equality is deduced from the Serre duality for $\mathcal{A}_X$.
By the exact triangle (\ref{ea}), we obtain the long exact sequence
\[0 \to \mathbb{C}^4 \to \mathrm{Ext}^1(\mathrm{pr}(\mathcal{O}_x), \mathrm{pr}(\mathcal{O}_x)) \to \mathbb{C}^{10} \to \mathbb{C}^7 \to \mathbb{C} \to 0.\]
So we obtain $\mathrm{Ext}^1(\mathrm{pr}(\mathcal{O}_x), \mathrm{pr}(\mathcal{O}_x))=\mathbb{C}^8$.
\end{proof}
We will complete the proof of the third statement in Proposition \ref{Lagproj}.
\begin{prop}\label{closedimm}
The linear map
\[ \mathrm{pr} \colon \mathrm{Ext}^1(\mathcal{O}_x,\mathcal{O}_x) \to \mathrm{Ext}^1(\mathrm{pr}(\mathcal{O}_x),\mathrm{pr}(\mathcal{O}_x))\]
is injective.
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
By Lemma \ref{iso}, Lemma \ref{e1}, Lemma \ref{e2} and Lemma \ref{e3}, the linear map
\[ \mathrm{pr} \colon \mathrm{Ext}^1(\mathcal{O}_x,\mathcal{O}_x) \to \mathrm{Ext}^1(\mathrm{pr}(\mathcal{O}_x),\mathrm{pr}(\mathcal{O}_x))\]
can be factorized as follows:
\begin{align*}
\mathrm{pr} \colon \mathrm{Ext}^1(\mathcal{O}_x,\mathcal{O}_x) &\stackrel{e_1 \circ}{\simeq} \mathrm{Ext}^2(\mathcal{O}_x,I_x(H))\\ &\stackrel{\circ e_1}{\simeq} \mathrm{Ext}^1(I_x(H),I_x(H))\\
&\stackrel{e_2 \circ}{\simeq} \mathrm{Ext}^2(I_x(H),F_x)\\
&\stackrel{\circ e_2}{\simeq} \mathrm{Ext}^1(F_x,F_x)\\
&\stackrel{\circ e_3}{\hookrightarrow} \mathrm{Ext}^2(\mathrm{pr}(\mathcal{O}_x),F_x)\\
&\stackrel{e_3 \circ}{\simeq} \mathrm{Ext}^1(\mathrm{pr}(\mathcal{O}_x),\mathrm{pr}(\mathcal{O}_x)).
\end{align*}
\end{proof}
Finaly, we will prove the last statement in Proposition \ref{Lagproj}.
Before giving a proof, we recall the definition of the bilinear form on $\mathrm{Ext}^1(\mathrm{pr}(\mathcal{O}_x),\mathrm{pr}(\mathcal{O}_x))$, which is corresponding to the symplectic forms on moduli spaces of Bridgeland stable complexes on twisted K3 surfaces.
\begin{dfn}
We define a bilinear form
\[\omega_x \colon \mathrm{Ext}^1(\mathrm{pr}(\mathcal{O}_x),\mathrm{pr}(\mathcal{O}_x)) \times \mathrm{Ext}^1(\mathrm{pr}(\mathcal{O}_x),\mathrm{pr}(\mathcal{O}_x)) \to \mathbb{C}\] by the composition of morphisms in the derived category.
\end{dfn}
The following proposition implies Proposition \ref{main}(d).
\begin{prop}
The bilinear form $\omega_x$ vanishes on $\mathrm{Ext}^1(\mathcal{O}_x,\mathcal{O}_x) \times \mathrm{Ext}^1(\mathcal{O}_x,\mathcal{O}_x)$.
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
Consider the following commutative diagram:
\begin{xy}
\xymatrix{\mathrm{Ext}^1(\mathcal{O}_x,\mathcal{O}_x) \times \mathrm{Ext}^1(\mathcal{O}_x,\mathcal{O}_x) \ar[r]^-{\mathrm{composition}} \ar[d]_{\mathrm{pr}} & \mathrm{Ext}^2(\mathcal{O}_x,\mathcal{O}_x) \ar[d]_{\mathrm{pr}}\\
\mathrm{Ext}^1(\mathrm{pr}(\mathcal{O}_x),\mathrm{pr}(\mathcal{O}_x)) \times \mathrm{Ext}^1(\mathrm{pr}(\mathcal{O}_x),\mathrm{pr}(\mathcal{O}_x)) \ar[r]_-{\omega_x} &\mathrm{Ext}^2(\mathrm{pr}(\mathcal{O}_x),\mathrm{pr}(\mathcal{O}_x)).}
\end{xy}
It is sufficient to prove that
\begin{equation}\label{ext2}
\mathrm{pr} \colon \mathrm{Ext}^2(\mathcal{O}_x,\mathcal{O}_x) \to \mathrm{Ext}^2(\mathrm{pr}(\mathcal{O}_x),\mathrm{pr}(\mathcal{O}_x))
\end{equation}
is zero.
The linear map (\ref{ext2}) can be factorized as follows:
\begin{align*}
\mathrm{pr} \colon \mathrm{Ext}^2(\mathcal{O}_x,\mathcal{O}_x) &\stackrel{e_1 \circ}{\simeq} \mathrm{Ext}^3(\mathcal{O}_x,I_x(H))\\
&\stackrel{\circ e_1}{\simeq} \mathrm{Ext}^2(I_x(H),I_x(H))\\
&\stackrel{e_2 \circ}{\hookrightarrow} \mathrm{Ext}^3(I_x(H),F_x)\\
&\stackrel{\circ e_2}{\simeq} \mathrm{Ext}^2(F_x,F_x)\\
&\stackrel{\circ e_3}{\twoheadrightarrow} \mathrm{Ext}^3(\mathrm{pr}(\mathcal{O}_x),F_x)\\
&\stackrel{e_3 \circ}{\simeq} \mathrm{Ext}^2(\mathrm{pr}(\mathcal{O}_x),\mathrm{pr}(\mathcal{O}_x)).
\end{align*}
Applying $\mathbf{R}\mathrm{Hom}(-,\mathcal{O}_X)$ to the exact triangle (\ref{sec}), we have the exact triangle
\[ \mathbf{R}\mathrm{Hom}(I_x(H),\mathcal{O}_X) \to \mathbf{R}\mathrm{Hom}(\mathcal{O}_X^{\oplus5},\mathcal{O}_X) \to \mathbf{R}\mathrm{Hom(F_x,\mathcal{O}_X)}. \]
Since $\mathbf{R}\mathrm{Hom}(\mathcal{O}_X^{\oplus5},\mathcal{O}_X)=\mathbb{C}^5$, we have
\begin{equation}\label{FIext}
\mathrm{Ext}^2(F_x, \mathcal{O}_X^{\oplus5}) \stackrel{\circ e_2}{\simeq} \mathrm{Ext}^3(I_x(H),\mathcal{O}_X^{\oplus5}).
\end{equation}
By the isomorphism (\ref{FIext}) and the exact triangle (\ref{o}), we have
\begin{align*}
&\mathrm{Im}(\mathrm{Ext}^2(I_x(H),I_x(H)) \hookrightarrow \mathrm{Ext}^2(F_xF_x))\\
=&\mathrm{Ker}(\mathrm{Ext}^2(F_x,F_x) \to \mathrm{Ext}^2(F_x,\mathcal{O}_X^{\oplus5})).
\end{align*}
Note that this vector space is $6$-dimensional.
Recall that $c \colon F_x \to \mathcal{O}_X(-H)[2]$ is the morphism in the exact triangle (\ref{three}). Taking the long exact seqence of the exact triangle (\ref{e}), we have the following exact sequence
\begin{align*}
0 &\to \mathrm{Ext}^1(F_x,F_x) \stackrel{\circ e_3}{\to} \mathrm{Ext}^2(\mathrm{pr}(\mathcal{O}_x),F_x) \to \mathrm{Ext}^2(\mathcal{O}_X(-H)[2],F_x) \\
&\stackrel{\circ c}{\to} \mathrm{Ext}^2(F_x,F_x) \stackrel{\circ e_3}{\twoheadrightarrow} \mathrm{Ext}^3(\mathrm{pr}(\mathcal{O}_x),F_x) \to 0.
\end{align*}
Hence, we have
\begin{align*}
&\mathrm{Ker}(\mathrm{Ext}^2(F_x,F_x)\stackrel{\circ e_3}{\twoheadrightarrow} \mathrm{Ext}^3(F_x,\mathrm{pr}(\mathcal{O}_x)))\\=&\mathrm{Im}(\mathrm{Ext}^2(\mathcal{O}_X(-H)[2],F_x) \stackrel{\circ c}{\to} \mathrm{Ext}^2(F_x,F_x)) .
\end{align*}
By (\ref{1FF}), Lemma \ref{FIcoh}, Lemma \ref{iso} and Corollary \ref{tangent}, this vector space is $6$-dimensional.
So it is enough to prove that
\[ \mathrm{Im}(\mathrm{Ext}^2(\mathcal{O}_X(-H)[2],F_x) \stackrel{\circ c}{\to} \mathrm{Ext}^2(F_x,F_x)) \subset \mathrm{Ker}(\mathrm{Ext}^2(F_x,F_x) \to \mathrm{Ext}^2(F_x,\mathcal{O}_X^{\oplus5})). \]
Take $\psi \in \mathrm{Im}(\mathrm{Ext}^2(\mathcal{O}_X(-H)[2],F_x) \stackrel{\circ c}{\to} \mathrm{Ext}^2(F_x,F_x))$.
Then there is a morphism $\eta \in \mathrm{Ext}^2(\mathcal{O}_X(-H)[2], F_x)$ satisfying a following commutative diagram:
\[ \xymatrix{{F_x} \ar[d]^{\psi} \ar[r]^{c} & \mathcal{O}_X(-H)[2] \ar[ld]^{\eta} \\ F_x[2] \ar[r] & \mathcal{O}_X^{\oplus5}[2] .} \]
Take a hyperplane section $H$ of $X$ such that $x \notin H$. Let $i \colon \mathcal{O}_X(-H) \to \mathcal{O}_X$ be the morphism defining $H$.
We prove that $i[2] \circ c \neq 0$. Assume that $i[2] \circ c=0$. Then there is a morphism between exact triangles:
\[ \xymatrix{F_x \ar[r]^c \ar[d] & \mathcal{O}_X(-H) \ar[r] \ar[d]^{\mathrm{id}} &
\mathrm{pr}(\mathcal{O}_x) \ar[d] \\
\mathcal{O}_H(1)[1] \ar[r] & \mathcal{O}_X(-H)[2] \ar[r]^{i[2]} & \mathcal{O}_X[2] . }\]
Since $x \notin H$, we have
\[ 0 \to F_x|_H \to \mathcal{O}_H^{\oplus5} \to \mathcal{O}_H(1) \to 0,\]
which is the restriction of the exact sequence (\ref{fir}).
Applying $\mathbf{R}\mathrm{Hom}(-,\mathcal{O}_H)$ to this exact seqence, we have
\[ \mathbf{R}\mathrm{Hom}(F_x,\mathcal{O}_H)=\mathbf{R}\mathrm{Hom}(F_x|H,\mathcal{O}_H)=\mathbb{C}^5. \]
This implies $\mathrm{Ext}^1(F_x,\mathcal{O}_H)=0$. Since $c \neq 0$, this is contradiction.
Note that the vector space $\mathrm{Ker}(\mathrm{Ext}^2(\mathcal{O}_X(-H)[2],\mathcal{O}_X) \stackrel{\circ c}{\twoheadrightarrow} \mathrm{Ext}^2(F_x,\mathcal{O}_X))$ is generated by morphisms $\mathcal{O}_X(-H) \to \mathcal{O}_X$ induced by hyperplane sections of $X$, which is through the point $x$. By the definition of $F_x$, the composition $\mathcal{O}_X(-H) \stackrel{\eta}{\to}F_x \to \mathcal{O}_X^{\oplus5}$ are induced by hyperplane sections of $X$, which is through $x \in X$. So the composition $F_x \stackrel{\psi}{\to} F_x[2] \to \mathcal{O}_X^{\oplus5}$ is zero.
Hence, we have
\[\psi \in \mathrm{Ker}(\mathrm{Ext}^2(F_x,F_x) \to \mathrm{Ext}^2(F_x,\mathcal{O}_X^{\oplus5})). \]
\end{proof}
Thus we have proved Proposition \ref{Lagproj}.
In the next section, we will see properties of the object $P_x$ on the twisted K3 surface, which is corresponding to the point $x \in X$.
\section{DESCRIPTION OF COMPLEXES ON TWISTED K3 SURFACES}
Let $X$ be a cubic fourfold containing a plane $P$ as in Section 2.4 and $(S,\alpha)$ be the correspoding twisted K3 surface. We use the same notation as Section 2.4.
\begin{dfn}
For a point $x \in X$, we define the object $R_x \in D^b(S,\alpha)$ as follow:
\[ R_x:=\Phi_{\mathbb{P}^2}^{-1}(\mathrm{pr}(\mathcal{O}_x))[-4] \in D^b(\mathbb{P}^2,\mathcal{B}_0). \]
\end{dfn}
\begin{lem}
Let $x \in X$ be a point. Then the followings hold.
\begin{itemize}
\item[\rm(a)]$R_x \simeq \Psi(\mathbf{L}\sigma^{*}(I_x(H))[-2]$.
\item[\rm(b)] There is the exact triangle:
\begin{equation}\label{sankaku}
R_x \to \mathcal{B}_0(h) \to \Psi(\mathbf{L}\sigma^{*}\mathcal{O}_x)[-2].
\end{equation}
\end{itemize}
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
\begin{itemize}
\item[(a)] Since $\mathbf{L}\sigma^{*} \colon D^b(\tilde{X}) \to D^b(X)$ is fully faithful, we have
\begin{align*}
R_x&=\Phi_{\mathbb{P}^2}^{-1}(\mathrm{pr}(\mathcal{O}_x))[-4]\\
&=\Psi\mathbf{L}_{\mathcal{O}_{\tilde{X}}(-h)}\mathbf{R}_{\mathcal{O}_{\tilde{X}}(h-H)}\mathbf{L}\sigma^{*}\mathbf{R}_{\mathcal{O}_X(-H)}\mathbf{L}_{\mathcal{O}_X}\mathbf{L}_{\mathcal{O}_X(H)}(\mathcal{O}_x)[-3]\\
&\simeq \Psi\mathbf{L}_{\mathcal{O}_{\tilde{X}}(-h)}\mathbf{R}_{\mathcal{O}_{\tilde{X}}(h-H)}\mathbf{R}_{\mathcal{O}_{\tilde{X}}(-H)}\mathbf{L}_{\mathcal{O}_{\tilde{X}}}\mathbf{L}\sigma^{*}(I_x(H))[-2].
\end{align*}
First, we prove that $\Psi\mathbf{L}_{\mathcal{O}_{\tilde{X}}(-h)}(E) \simeq \Psi(E)$ for any $E \in D^b(\tilde{X})$. By the definition of mutation functors, there is the exact triangle:
\[ \mathbf{R}\mathrm{Hom}(\mathcal{O}_{\tilde{X}}(-h),E)\otimes\mathcal{O}_{\tilde{X}}(-h) \to E \to \mathbf{L}_{\mathcal{O}_{\tilde{X}}(-h)}(E). \]
Applying the functor $\Psi$, we have the exact triangle
\[ \Psi(\mathbf{R}\mathrm{Hom}(\mathcal{O}_{\tilde{X}}(-h),E)\otimes\mathcal{O}_{\tilde{X}}(-h)) \to \Psi(E) \to \Psi(\mathbf{L}_{\mathcal{O}_{\tilde{X}}(-h)}(E)). \]
By Lemma \ref{reducelem}, we have
\[\Psi(\mathbf{R}\mathrm{Hom}(\mathcal{O}_{\tilde{X}}(-h),E)\otimes\mathcal{O}_{\tilde{X}}(-h))= \mathbf{R}\mathrm{Hom}(\mathcal{O}_{\tilde{X}}(-h),E)\otimes\Psi(\mathcal{O}_{\tilde{X}}(-h))=0.\]
So we have $\Psi\mathbf{L}_{\mathcal{O}_{\tilde{X}}(-h)}(E) \simeq \Psi(E)$.
Imitating these arguments, we have the isomorphism $R_x \simeq \Psi(\mathbf{L}\sigma^{*}(I_x(H))[-2]$.
\item[(b)] Applying $\Psi(\mathbf{L}\sigma^{*}(-))[-2]$ to the exact triangle (\ref{fir}),
we have the exact triangle:
\[R_x \to \Psi(\mathbf{L}\sigma\mathcal{O}_X(H))[-2] \to \Psi(\mathbf{L}\sigma^{*}\mathcal{O}_x)[-2]. \]
By Lemma \ref{reducelem}, we have the isomorphisms
\begin{align*}
\Psi(\mathbf{L}\sigma\mathcal{O}_X(H))[-2] &\simeq \Psi(\mathcal{O}_{\tilde{X}}(H))[-2]\\
&\simeq \Psi(\mathcal{O}_{\tilde{X}}(-h+H))(h)[-2]\\
&\simeq \mathcal{B}_0(h).
\end{align*}
Hence, we have obtained the desired exact triangle.
\end{itemize}
\end{proof}
If $x \in P$, then we have $\mathcal{H}^{-1}(\mathbf{L}\sigma^*\mathcal{O}_x)=\mathcal{O}_{\sigma^{-1}(x)}(D)$, $\mathcal{H}^0(\mathbf{L}\sigma^{*}\mathcal{O}_x)=\mathcal{O}_{\sigma^{-1}(x)}$ and the others are zero. Since $D=H-h$, we obtain the following lemma.
\begin{lem}\label{coh}
The followings hold.
\begin{itemize}
\item If $x \in X \setminus P$, then $\Psi(\mathbf{L}\sigma^{*}\mathcal{O}_x)[-2]= \pi_*(\mathcal{E}(h))|_{\pi(\sigma^{-1}(x))}$.
\item If $x \in P$, then we have
\[\mathcal{H}^0(\Psi(\mathbf{L}\sigma^{*}\mathcal{O}_x)[-2])=\pi_*(\mathcal{E}(h))|_{\pi(\sigma^{-1}(x))}\]
\[ \mathcal{H}^{-1}(\Psi(\mathbf{L}\sigma^{*}\mathcal{O}_x)[-2])=\pi_*(\mathcal{E})|_{\pi(\sigma^{-1}(x))}\]
and others are zero.
\end{itemize}
\end{lem}
\begin{lem}
Let $x \in X$ be a point. Then followings hold.
\begin{itemize}
\item[\rm{(a)}]The object $R_x$ is a sheaf.
\item[\rm{(b)}]Assume that $x \in X \setminus P$. Taking the long exact sequence of the exact triangle $(\mathrm{\ref{sankaku}})$, we have the exact sequence
\[ 0 \to R_x \to \mathcal{B}_0(h) \to \pi_*(\mathcal{E}(h))|_{\pi(\sigma^{-1}(x))} \to 0 .\]
Here $\pi(\sigma^{-1}(x))$ is a point in $\mathbb{P}^2$.
\item[\rm{(c)}]Assume that $x \in P$. Taking the long exact sequence of the exaxt triangle $(\mathrm{\ref{sankaku}})$, we have the exact sequence
\[ 0 \to (R_x)_{\mathrm{tor}} \to R_x \to \mathcal{B}_0(h) \to \pi_{*}(\mathcal{E}(h))|_{\pi(\sigma^{-1}(x))} \to 0. \]
Here $\pi(\sigma^{-1}(x))$ is a line in $\mathbb{P}^2$ and $R_x$ is an 1-dimensional pure torsion sheaf.
\end{itemize}
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
Take a point $x \in X$.
By Lemma \ref{coh}, it is sufficient to prove that the morphism $\mathcal{B}_0(h) \to \pi_*(\mathcal{E}(h))|_{\pi(\sigma^{-1}(x))}$ is surjective.
Restricting the exact sequence (\ref{surj}) to $\tilde{X}$, we have the surjection $\pi^{*}\mathcal{B}_0(-H) \twoheadrightarrow \mathcal{E}$. So we can obtain the surjective morphism $\pi^{*}\mathcal{B}_0(h-H) \twoheadrightarrow \mathcal{E}(h)$.
Note that $\pi|_{\sigma^{-1}(x)} \colon \sigma^{-1}(x) \to \mathbb{P}^2$ is a closed immersion. Restricting the morphism $\pi^{*}\mathcal{B}_0(h-H) \twoheadrightarrow \mathcal{E}(h)$ to $\sigma^{-1}(x)$ and the taking direct images of $\pi$, we have the surjective morphism $\mathcal{B}_0(h-H)|_{\pi(\sigma^{-1}(x))} \twoheadrightarrow \mathcal{E}(h)|_{\pi(\sigma^{-1}(x))}$. Now we can ignore $\otimes \mathcal{O}_X(-H)$.
So there is the following commutative diagram.
\[\xymatrix{{\mathcal{B}_0(h)} \ar@{->>}[d]^{\rm{restriction}} \ar[rd] & \\ {\mathcal{B}_0(h)|_{\pi(\sigma^{-1}(x))}} \ar@{->>}[r] & {\pi_{*}(\mathcal{E}(h))|_{\pi(\sigma^{-1}(x))}}} \]
So the morphism $\mathcal{B}_0(h) \to \pi_*(\mathcal{E}(h))|_{\pi(\sigma^{-1}(x))}$ is surjective.
\end{proof}
Considering these exact sequences on the twisted K3 surface $(S,\alpha)$, we have the following proposition.
\begin{prop}
Let $x \in X$ be a point. Then there is the exact triangle:
\begin{equation}\label{basictri}
P_x \to \mathcal{U}_0 \to Q_x.
\end{equation}
Here $Q_x:=(f_*(- \otimes \mathcal{U}_0^{\vee}))^{-1}(\Psi(\mathbf{L}\sigma^{*}\mathcal{O}_x)[-2]) \in D^b(S,\alpha)$.
If $x \in X \setminus P$, then $Q_x$ is a zero dimensional torsion sheaf of length 2 and the exact triangle {\rm{(\ref{basictri})}} induces a following exact sequence in $\mathrm{Coh}(S,\alpha)$
\begin{equation}\label{Mukai}
0 \to P_x \to \mathcal{U}_0 \to Q_x \to 0.
\end{equation}
If $x \in P$, then the exact triangle {\rm{(\ref{basictri})}} induces the following exact sequence in $\mathrm{Coh}(S,\alpha)$
\begin{equation}
0 \to (P_x)_{\mathrm{tor}} \to P_x \to \mathcal{U}_0 \to \mathcal{H}^0(Q_x) \to 0.
\end{equation}
Here $(P_x)_{\mathrm{tor}}=\mathcal{H}^0(Q_x)(-h)$ is an 1-dimensional pure torsion sheaf.
\end{prop}
Next, we calculate Mukai vectors.
Fix a $B$-field $B \in \mathrm{H}^2(S,\frac{1}{2}\mathbb{Z})$ of the Brauer class $\alpha$.
\begin{lem}[\cite{Tod13}, Lemma 4.6]
We can describe $v^B(\mathcal{U}_0)=(2,s,t)$ such that $s^2-4t=-2$ and $s-2B \in \mathrm{Pic}S$.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
Recall that $\mathcal{U}_0$ is the $\alpha$-twisted vector bundle of rank $2$. So we can write $v^B(\mathcal{U}_0)=(2,s,t) \in \tilde{\mathrm{H}}^{1,1}(S,B,\mathbb{Z})$. Since $\mathcal{U}_0$ is spherical, we have
$\chi(\mathcal{U}_0,\mathcal{U}_0)=-2$. By the Riemann-Roch formula (\ref{RR}), we have $s^2-4t=-2.$
By Lemma \ref{gene}, we have $s-2B \in \mathrm{Pic}S$.
\end{proof}
Toda \cite{Tod13}(Corollary 4.4) proved that
\[[\mathcal{B}_1]=\frac{3}{8}[\mathcal{B}_0]+\frac{3}{4}[\mathcal{B}_0(h)]-\frac{1}{8}[\mathcal{B}_0(2h)]\]
in $N(D^b(\mathbb{P}^2,\mathcal{B}_0))$.
Let $\mathcal{U}_1 \in \mathrm{Coh}(S,\alpha)$ be the $\alpha$-twisted vector bundle corresponding to $\mathcal{B}_1$.
Using this relation, we can calculate the Mukai vector of $\mathcal{U}_1$ as follow.
\begin{lem}[\cite{Tod13}, Lemma 4.6]
We have
\[v^B(\mathcal{U}_1)=e^{h/2}v^B(\mathcal{U}_0)=\left(s,s+h,t+\frac{1}{2}sh+\frac{1}{2}\right).\]
\end{lem}
We calculate the mukai vector of $P_x$.
\begin{prop}
Let $x \in X$ be a point. Then
\begin{equation}\label{mukai}
v^B(P_x)=(2,s+2h,t+sh).
\end{equation}
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
By Lemma \ref{res}, the numerical classes of $P_x$ and $P_y$ are same for any points $x,y \in X$. So we can assume that $x \in X \setminus P$. Since $Q_x$ is a zero dimensional torsion sheaf of length 2, we have $v^B(Q_x)=(0,0,2)$.
Using the exact sequence (\ref{Mukai}), we have
\begin{align*}
v^B(P_x)&=v^B(\mathcal{U}_0(h))-v^B(Q_x)\\
&=e^h(2,s,t)-(0,0,2)\\
&=(2,s+2h,t+sh).
\end{align*}
\end{proof}
In the next lemma, we calculate the Mukai vector of $(P_x)_{\mathrm{tor}}$.
\begin{lem}
Let $x \in P$ be a point. Then we have
\begin{equation}\label{mukaitor}
v^B((P_x)_{\mathrm{tor}})=\left(0,h,\frac{1}{2}sh-\frac{1}{2}\right).
\end{equation}
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
Take a line $C_x \subset X$, which is through a point $x$.
Let $C_x^{\prime}:=\sigma^{-1}(C_x)$ and $l_x:=\sigma^{-1}(x)$.
Then there are isomorphisms
\[ \mathcal{O}_D(-C_x^{\prime}) \simeq \mathcal{O}_D(-H)\]
\[ \mathcal{O}_{C_x^{\prime}}(-l_x) \simeq \mathcal{O}_{C_x^{\prime}}(-H).\]
Consider the following exact sequences:
\begin{equation}\label{koko1}
0 \to \mathcal{O}_{\tilde{X}}(-D)(=\mathcal{O}_{\tilde{X}}(h-H)) \to \mathcal{O}_{\tilde{X}} \to \mathcal{O}_D \to 0
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}\label{koko2}
0 \to \mathcal{O}_D(-C_x^{\prime})(=\mathcal{O}_D(-H)) \to \mathcal{O}_D \to \mathcal{O}_{C_x^{\prime}} \to 0
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}\label{koko}
0 \to \mathcal{O}_{C_x^{\prime}} \to \mathcal{O}_{C_x^{\prime}}(H) \to \mathcal{O}_{l_x} \to 0.
\end{equation}
Here the exact sequence (\ref{koko}) is induced by the exact sequence
\[ 0 \to \mathcal{O}_{C_x^{\prime}}(-l_x)(=\mathcal{O}_{C_x^{\prime}}(-H)) \to \mathcal{O}_{C_x^{\prime}} \to \mathcal{O}_{l_x} \to 0.\]
(Note that $\mathcal{O}_{l_x}(H) \simeq \mathcal{O}_{l_x}$.)
Applying the functor $\Psi(-)[-2]$ to (\ref{koko}), we have the exact triangle:
\[ \Psi(\mathcal{O}_{C_x^{\prime}})[-2] \to \Psi(\mathcal{O}_{C_x^{\prime}}(H))[-2] \to \Psi(\mathcal{O}_{l_x})[-2].\]
If $\Psi(\mathcal{O}_{C_x^{\prime}})[-2] \simeq \mathcal{B}_1$ and $\Psi(\mathcal{O}_{C_x^{\prime}}(H))[-2] \simeq \mathcal{B}_0(h)$, there is an exact triangle
\begin{equation}\label{idea}
\mathcal{U}_1 \to \mathcal{U}_0(h) \to \mathcal{H}^0(Q_x).
\end{equation}
By the exact triangle (\ref{idea}), we can obtain
\begin{align*}
v^B(\mathcal{H}^0(Q_x))&=v^B(\mathcal{U}_0(h))-v^B(\mathcal{U}_1)\\
&=\left(0,h,\frac{1}{2}sh+\frac{3}{2}\right),
\end{align*}
\begin{align*}
v^B((P_x)_{\mathrm{tor}})&=v^B(\mathcal{H}^{-1}(Q_x))\\
&=v^B(\mathcal{H}^0(Q_x))-(0,0,2)\\
&=\left(0,h,\frac{1}{2}sh-\frac{1}{2}\right).
\end{align*}
So we prove that $\Psi(\mathcal{O}_{C_x^{\prime}})[-2] \simeq \mathcal{B}_1$ and $\Psi(\mathcal{O}_{C_x^{\prime}}(H))[-2] \simeq \mathcal{B}_0(h)$.
First, we prove that $\Psi(\mathcal{O}_{C_x^{\prime}})[-2] \simeq \mathcal{B}_1$.
By Lemma \ref{reducelem} and the exact triangle (\ref{koko1}), we have $\Psi(\mathcal{O}_D)=0$.
Applying the functor $\Psi$ to the sequence (\ref{koko2}), we have the exact triangle:
\[ \Psi(\mathcal{O}_D(-H)) \to \Psi(\mathcal{O}_D) \to \Psi(\mathcal{O}_{C_x^{\prime}}) \]
Since $\Psi(\mathcal{O}_D)=0$, we have $\Psi(\mathcal{O}_{C_x^{\prime}}) \simeq \Psi(\mathcal{O}_D(-H))[1]$.
Applying $\Psi(- \otimes \mathcal{O}_{\tilde{X}}(-H))$ to the sequence (\ref{koko1}), we have
\[ \Psi(\mathcal{O}_{\tilde{X}}(h-2H)) \to \Psi(\mathcal{O}_{\tilde{X}}(-H)) \to \Psi(\mathcal{O}_D(-H)). \]
By Lemma \ref{reducelem}, we can get isomorphisms
\begin{align*}
\Psi(\mathcal{O}_{C_x^{\prime}}) &\simeq \Psi(\mathcal{O}_D(-H))[1]\\
&\simeq \Psi(\mathcal{O}_{\tilde{X}}(h-2H))[2]\\
&\simeq \mathcal{B}_1[2].
\end{align*}
Next, we prove that $\Psi(\mathcal{O}_{C_x^{\prime}}(H))[-2] \simeq \mathcal{B}_0(h)$.
Applying $\Psi(- \otimes \mathcal{O}_{\tilde{X}}(H))$ to the seqence (\ref{koko2}), we have
\[ \Psi(\mathcal{O}_D) \to \Psi(\mathcal{O}_D(H)) \to \Psi(\mathcal{O}_{C_x^{\prime}} (H)). \]
Since $\Psi(\mathcal{O}_D)=0$, we have $ \Psi(\mathcal{O}_{C_x^{\prime}} (H)) \simeq \Psi(\mathcal{O}_D(H))$.
Applying $\Psi(- \otimes \mathcal{O}_{\tilde{X}}(H))$ to the sequence (\ref{koko1}), we have
\[ \Psi(\mathcal{O}_{\tilde{X}}) \to \Psi(\mathcal{O}_{\tilde{X}}(H)) \to \Psi(\mathcal{O}_D(H)). \]
By Lemma \ref{reducelem}, we can get isomorphisms
\begin{align*}
\Psi(\mathcal{O}_{C_x^{\prime}} (H)) &\simeq \Psi(\mathcal{O}_D(H))\\
&\simeq \Psi(\mathcal{O}_{\tilde{X}}(H)\\
&\simeq \mathcal{B}_0(h)[2].
\end{align*}
\end{proof}
Since Mukai vectors are integral, we obtain the following remark.
\begin{rem}\label{int}
We have
\[\frac{1}{2}sh-\frac{1}{2} \in \mathbb{Z}.\]
\end{rem}
\begin{prop}
Let $x \in P$ be a point. Then we have $P_x/(P_x)_{\mathrm{tor}} \simeq \mathcal{U}_1$.
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
Note that $P_x/(P_x)_{\mathrm{tor}}$ and $\mathcal{U}_1$ are $\mu^B$-stable rank 2 torsion free sheaves.
We can calculate the Mukai vector of $P_x/(P_x)_{\mathrm{tor}}$ as follows:
\begin{align*}
v^B(P_x/(P_x)_{\mathrm{tor}})&=v^B(P_x)-v^B((P_x)_{\mathrm{tor}})\\
&=\left(2,s+h,t+\frac{1}{2}sh+\frac{1}{2}\right)\\
&=v^B(\mathcal{U}_1).
\end{align*}
So $P_x/(P_x)_{\mathrm{tor}}$ and $\mathcal{U}_1$ are spherical. Hence, we have $P_x/(P_x)_{\mathrm{tor}} \simeq \mathcal{U}_1$.
\end{proof}
In the next section, we construct stability conditions such that $P_x$ is stable for any points $x \in X$.
\section{CONSTRUCTION OF STABILITY CONDITIONS}
We use the same notation as in the previous section. In this section, we prove Proposition \ref{main} (a).
\begin{dfn}\label{defB}
Let
\[ \tilde{B}:=\frac{1}{2}l+\frac{1}{4}h+B=\frac{1}{2}s+\frac{1}{4}h \in H^2(S,\mathbb{Q}).\]
Here $l:=s-2B \in \mathrm{Pic}S$.
For $\lambda>1/2$, we can define the stability condition $\sigma_{\lambda}=(Z_{\lambda},\mathcal{C}):=(Z_{\tilde{B},\lambda h},\mathcal{C})$ on $D^b(S,\alpha)$\rm{(Example \ref{stab}}).
\end{dfn}
For simplicity, we denote the central charge $Z_{\lambda}$ by $Z$. To prove Proposition \ref{main} (a), it is sufficient to prove the following proposition.
\begin{prop}\label{main6}
Assume that $X$ is very generic. If $\sqrt{\frac{3}{8}}<\lambda<\frac{3}{4}$, then $\sigma_{\lambda}$ is generic with respect to $v$ and $P_x$ is $\sigma_{\lambda}$-stable for all $x \in X$.
\end{prop}
Before giving the proof, we need some calculations.
\begin{lem}\label{central}
For a point $x \in X$, we have
\[ Z(P_x)=2\lambda^2+\frac{3}{8}+3\lambda i. \]
For a point $x \in P$, we have
\[ Z((P_x)_{\mathrm{tor}})=1+2\lambda i . \]
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
Note that $\mathrm{Re}(e^{\tilde{B}+\lambda ih})=(1,\tilde{B},\tilde{B}^2/2-\lambda^2)$ and $\mathrm{Im}(e^{\tilde{B}+\lambda ih})=(0,\lambda h,\lambda\tilde{B}h)$.
By (\ref{mukai}) and (\ref{mukaitor}), we can calculate values of the central charge $Z$ directly.
\end{proof}
\begin{rem}\label{phase}
Let $x \in P$ be a point. Then $\phi((P_x)_{\mathrm{tor}})<\phi(P_x)$ if and only if $\lambda<3/4$.
\end{rem}
\begin{proof}
By Lemma \ref{central}, the inequality
$\phi((P_x)_{\mathrm{tor}})<\phi(P_x)$ is equivalent to
\[\mathrm{Re}Z((P_x)_{\mathrm{tor}})>\frac{2}{3}\mathrm{Re}Z(P_x).\]
Solving this inequality, we have $\lambda <3/4$.
\end{proof}
\begin{lem}
We have $\mathrm{Im}Z(E) \in \lambda \mathbb{Z} \subset \mathbb{R}$ for all $E \in K(S,\alpha)$.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
Let $E \in K(S,\alpha)$ and $v^B(E)=(r,c,d)$.
By Definition \ref{defB} and Remark \ref{int}, we can calculate as follows:
\begin{align*}
\mathrm{Im}Z(E)&=\langle (r,c,d),(0,\lambda h,\lambda \tilde{B}h)\rangle\\
&=\lambda\Bigl\{ch-\left(\frac{1}{2}sh+\frac{1}{2}\right)\Bigr\} \in \lambda\mathbb{Z} \subset \mathbb{R}.
\end{align*}
\end{proof}
\begin{lem}\label{1/4}
Assume taht $\alpha \neq 1$. Then the following holds for all $E \in K(S,\alpha)$.
\[ \mathrm{Re}Z(E) \in \dfrac{1}{4}\mathbb{Z}+\dfrac{\mathrm{rk}E}{2}\left(2\lambda^2+\dfrac{3}{8}\right)\ \subset \mathbb{R}. \]
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
Let $E \in K(S,\alpha)$ and $v^B(E)=(r,c,d)$. Since $\alpha \neq 1$, the integer $r$ is even.
Note that
\[ c\tilde{B}=\dfrac{1}{2}cs+\dfrac{1}{4}ch \in \dfrac{1}{4}\mathbb{Z} \] and
\[ \tilde{B}^2=\dfrac{1}{4}s^2+\dfrac{1}{4}sh+\dfrac{1}{8} \in \dfrac{1}{4}\mathbb{Z}+\dfrac{1}{8} \subset \mathbb{R}. \]
So we have
\begin{align*}
\mathrm{Re}Z(E)&=\langle (r,c,d),(1,\tilde{B},(\tilde{B}^2-2\lambda^2)/2) \rangle\\
&= c \tilde{B}-\frac{r}{2}(\tilde{B}^2-2\lambda^2)-d\\
&=c\tilde{B}-\frac{r}{2}\left(\tilde{B}^2-\frac{1}{2}+\frac{1}{2}-2\lambda^2\right)-d\\
&=c\tilde{B}-\frac{r}{2}\left(\tilde{B}^2-\frac{1}{8}\right)-\frac{r}{2}\cdot\frac{1}{2}-d+\frac{r}{2}\left(2\lambda^2+\frac{3}{8}\right) \in \frac{1}{4}\mathbb{Z}+\frac{r}{2}\left(2\lambda^2+\frac{3}{8}\right).
\end{align*}
\end{proof}
\begin{lem}
Assume that $\alpha \neq 1$.
Then we have $P_x \in \mathcal{C}$ for all $x \in X$.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
Take $x \in X \setminus P$.
Since $\alpha \neq 1$ and $P_x$ is rank 2 torsion free, $P_x$ is $\mu^B$-stable.
Due to $\mathrm{Im}Z(P_x)=3\lambda >0$, we have $\mu^B(P_x) > \tilde{B}h$. Hence, we obtain $P_x \in \mathcal{T}$.
Take $x \in P$. Since $\alpha \neq 1$, $P_x/(P_x)_{\mathrm{tor}}$ is $\mu^B$-stable.
Since $\mathrm{Im}Z(P_x/(P_x)_{\mathrm{tor}})=\lambda >0$, we have $\mu^B(P_x/(P_x)_{\mathrm{tor}})>\tilde{B}h$.
Hence, we obtain $P_x \in \mathcal{T}.$
\end{proof}
\begin{lem}
Assume that $\alpha \neq 1$. Let $x \in X$ be a point and $0 \neq F \subset P_x$ be a subobject in $\mathcal{C}$. Then $F \in \mathcal{T}$ and $\mathrm{Im}Z(F)>0$.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
Since $P_x \in \mathcal{T}$, we have $\mathcal{H}^{-1}(F)=0$. So we obtain $F \in \mathcal{T}$.
We prove that $\mathrm{Im}Z(F)>0$. If $F$ is not torsion, $\mathrm{Im}Z(F)>0$ holds. So we assume that $F$ is torsion.
Consider the exact sequence
\[ 0 \to F \to P_x \to \mathrm{Coker}(F \to P_x) \to 0 \]
in $\mathcal{C}$.
Taking the long exact sequence, we have the exact sequence
\[ 0 \to \mathcal{H}^{-1}(\mathrm{Coker}(F \to P_x)) \to F \to P_x \to \mathcal{H}^0(\mathrm{Coker}(F \to P_x)) \to 0\]
in $\mathrm{Coh}(S,\alpha)$.
Since $\mathcal{H}^{-1}(\mathrm{Coker}(F \to P_x)) \in \mathcal{F}$ and $F$ is torsion, we have
\[ \mathcal{H}^{-1}(\mathrm{Coker}(F \to P_x))=0. \]
So $F \subset (P_x)_{\mathrm{tor}}$ in $\mathrm{Coh}(S,\alpha)$.
If $x \in X \setminus P$, we have $(P_x)_{\mathrm{tor}}=0$ and $F \neq 0$. This is contradiction. So we can assume that $x \in P$.
Since $(P_x)_{\mathrm{tor}}$ is an 1-dimensional pure torsion sheaf, $F$ is an 1-dimensional torsion sheaf. Hence, $\mathrm{Im}Z(F)>0$ holds.
\end{proof}
\begin{lem}[\cite{Tod13}, Lemma 3.7]\label{toda}
Let $I_P \subset \mathcal{O}_X$ be the ideal sheaf of the plane $P$ in $X$. Then we have
\[ \mathbf{R}\sigma_{*}\Phi(\mathcal{B}_1) \simeq I_P \oplus \mathcal{O}_X(-H)^{\oplus3}.\]
\end{lem}
\begin{lem}\label{vanish}
We have $\mathrm{Hom}(\mathcal{U}_1,P_x)=0$ for all $x \in X$.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
There are following isomorphisms and an inclusion:
\begin{align*}
\mathrm{Hom}(\mathcal{U}_1,P_x) &\simeq \mathrm{Hom}(P_x,\mathcal{U}_1[2])\\
&\simeq \mathrm{Hom}_{\mathcal{B}_0}(\Psi(\mathbf{L}\sigma^*I_x(H))[-2],\mathcal{B}_1[2]) \\
&\simeq \mathrm{Hom}_X(I_x(H)[-2],\mathbf{R}\sigma_*\Phi(\mathcal{B}_1)[2]) \\
&\simeq \mathrm{Hom}_X(I_x(H)[-2], I_P \oplus \mathcal{O}_X(-H)^{\oplus3}[2])\\
&\simeq \mathrm{Hom}_X(I_x(H)[-4], I_P \oplus \mathcal{O}_X(-H)^{\oplus3}) \\
&\simeq \mathrm{Hom}_X(I_P \oplus \mathcal{O}_X(-H)^{\oplus3},I_x(-2H)) \\
&\simeq \mathrm{Hom}_X(I_P \oplus \mathcal{O}_X(-H)^{\oplus3},I_x(-2H)) \\
&\simeq \mathrm{Hom}_X(I_P,I_x(-2H)) \oplus \mathrm{Hom}_X(\mathcal{O}_X(-H),I_x(-2H))^{\oplus3} \\
&\subset \mathrm{Hom}_X(I_P^{\vee \vee},I_x(-2H)^{\vee \vee}) \oplus \mathrm{Hom}(\mathcal{O}_X(-H)^{\vee \vee},I_x(-2H)^{\vee \vee})^{\oplus3} \\
&\simeq \mathrm{Hom}_X(\mathcal{O}_X,\mathcal{O}_X(-2H)) \oplus \mathrm{Hom}_X(\mathcal{O}_X(-H),\mathcal{O}_X(-2H))^{\oplus3}\\
&=0
\end{align*}
The first isomorphism is given by the Serre duality for $\mathcal{A}_X$. The third isomorphism is deduced from the adjoint property. The fourth isomorphism is given by Lemma \ref{toda}. The sixth isomorphism is given by the Serre duality for $D^b(X)$.
So we have $\mathrm{Hom}(\mathcal{U}_1,P_x)=0$.
\end{proof}
\begin{lem}\label{ineq}
Let $F \in D^b(S,\alpha)$ be an object which satisfies $\mathrm{Hom}(F,F)=\mathbb{C}$.
\begin{itemize}
\item
Assume that $\mathrm{Im}Z(F)=\lambda$. If $\mathrm{rk}F>0$, then we have the inequality
\[ \mathrm{Re}Z(F) \ge 2 \lambda^2 - \frac{5}{8}. \]
The equality holds if and only if the Mukai vector of $F$ is
\[ v^B(F)=\left(2,s+h,\frac{1}{2}sh+\frac{1}{2}\right) \]
If $\mathrm{rk}F \ge 4$, then we have the inequality:
\[ \mathrm{Re}Z(F) \ge 4 \lambda^2 - \frac{5}{16}. \]
\item
Assume that $\mathrm{Im}Z(F)=2\lambda$. If $\mathrm{rk}F>0$, then we have the inequality
\[ \mathrm{Re}Z(F) > 2\lambda^2-1 .\]
If $\mathrm{rk}F \ge 4$, then we have the inequality
\[ \mathrm{Re}Z(F) \ge 4\lambda^2 - \frac{1}{2}. \]
\end{itemize}
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
Let $v^B(F)=(r,c,d)$, $r>0$ and $L:=c-r\tilde{B} \in \mathrm{NS}(S)_{\mathbb{Q}}$.
Since $r>0$, the following holds:
\[ \mathrm{Re}Z(F)=\frac{1}{2r}(-\chi(F,F)+2r^2\lambda^2- L^2).\]
Since $\mathrm{Hom}(F,F)=\mathbb{C}$, we have $\chi(F,F)\le2$.
Note that $\mathrm{Im}Z(F)=\lambda Lh$.
Assume that $\mathrm{Im}Z(F)=\lambda$. Due to Hodge index theorem, we have the inequality
\[L^2 \le \frac{1}{2}. \]
So we have
\begin{align*}
\mathrm{Re}Z(F)&=\frac{1}{2r}(-\chi(F,F)+2r^2\lambda^2- L^2)\\
&\ge \frac{1}{2 \cdot 2}\left(-2+2 \cdot2^2 \lambda^2-\frac{1}{2}\right)\\
&=2\lambda^2-\frac{5}{8}.
\end{align*}
By the equality condition of Hodge index theorem, the equality holds when $r=2$, $\chi(F,F)=2$ and $L=h/2$, this is,
\[ v^B(F)=\left(2,s+h,t+\frac{1}{2}sh+\frac{1}{2}\right). \]
If $\mathrm{rk}F \ge 4$, then we have
\begin{align*}
\mathrm{Re}Z(F)&=\frac{1}{2r}(-\chi(F,F)+2r^2 \lambda^2- L^2)\\
&\ge \frac{1}{2 \cdot 4}\left(-2+2 \cdot 4^2 \lambda^2 - \frac{1}{2}\right)\\
&=4 \lambda^2-\frac{5}{16}.
\end{align*}
Assume that $\mathrm{Im}Z(F)=2\lambda$. Due to Hodge index theorem, we have the inequality
\[L^2 \le 2. \]
So we have
\begin{align*}
\mathrm{Re}Z(F)&=\frac{1}{2r}(-\chi(F,F)+2r^2 \lambda^2- L^2)\\
&\ge\frac{1}{2 \cdot 2}(-2 + 2 \cdot 2^2\lambda^2- 2)\\
&=2\lambda^2-1.
\end{align*}
Note that the equality holds when $r=2$, $\chi(F,F)=2$ and $L=h$.
If the equality holds, then we have $c=s+\frac{3}{2}h \notin H^2(S,\mathbb{Z})$. This is contradiction. So The equality does not hold.
If $\mathrm{rk}F \ge 4$, then we have
\begin{align*}
\mathrm{Re}Z(F)&=\frac{1}{2r}(-\chi(F,F)+2r^2 \lambda^2- L^2)\\
&\ge\frac{1}{2 \cdot 4}(-2+2 \cdot 4^2\lambda^2 -2)\\
&=4\lambda^2 -\frac{1}{2}.
\end{align*}
\end{proof}
\begin{prop}
Assume that $\sqrt{\frac{3}{8}}<\lambda$ and $X$ is very general. Let $E \in \mathcal{C}$ be a $\sigma_\lambda$-semistable object with Mukai vector $v$. Then we have $E \in \mathcal{T}$.
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
Consider the natural exact sequence
\[ 0 \to \mathcal{H}^{-1}(E)[1] \to E \to \mathcal{H}^0(E) \to 0\]
in $\mathcal{C}$.
Suppose that $\mathcal{H}^{-1}(E) \neq 0$. Then $\mathrm{rk}\mathcal{H}^0(E)>0$ holds. Taking Harder-Narasimhan filtration and Jordan-H\"{o}lder filtration with respect to $\mu^B$-stability, we obtain a $\mu^B$-stable subsheaf $F \subset \mathcal{H}^{-1}(E)$.
So we obtain an exact sequence
\[0 \to F[1] \to E \to G \to 0\]
in $\mathcal{C}$.
Taking the long exact sequence, we have the exact sequence
\begin{align*}
0 &\to F \to \mathcal{H}^{-1}(E) \to \mathcal{H}^{-1}(G)\\
&\to 0 \to \mathcal{H}^0(E) \to \mathcal{H}^0(G) \to 0.
\end{align*}
Since $E$ is $\sigma_\lambda$-semistable, we have $\mathrm{Im}Z(F[1])>0$. So we obtain $\mathrm{Im}Z(F[1])=\lambda$ or $2\lambda$ or $3\lambda$.
Since $\mathcal{H}^{-1}(E)$ is torsion free, we have $\mathrm{rk}\mathcal{H}^0(E)>0$.
Suppose that $\mathrm{Im}Z(F[1])=3\lambda$. Then we have
\[\mathrm{Im}Z(\mathcal{H}^0(G))+\mathrm{Im}Z(\mathcal{H}^{-1}(G)[1])=\mathrm{Im}Z(G)=0.\]
So we can deduce $\mathrm{Im}Z(\mathcal{H}^0(E))=\mathrm{Im}Z(\mathcal{H}^0(G))=0$. Since $\mathrm{rk}\mathcal{H}^0(E)>0$, $\mathrm{Im}Z(\mathcal{H}^0(E))$ must be positive. This is contradiction.
Therefore, $\mathrm{Im}Z(F[1])=\lambda$ or $2\lambda$.
Assume that $\mathrm{Im}Z(F[1])=\lambda$. By Lemma \ref{ineq}, we have
\[ \mathrm{Re}Z(F) \ge 2\lambda^2-\frac{5}{8}.\]
This implies
\begin{equation}\label{huto1}
\mathrm{Re}Z(F[1]) \le -2\lambda^2+\frac{5}{8}.
\end{equation}
Since $E$ is $\sigma_\lambda$-semistable, we have $\phi(F[1]) \le \phi(E)$. So we obtain
\begin{equation}\label{huto2}
\mathrm{Re}Z(F[1]) \ge \frac{1}{3}\mathrm{Re}Z(E)=\frac{2}{3}\lambda^2+\frac{1}{8}.
\end{equation}
By the inequalities (\ref{huto1}) and (\ref{huto2}), we can obtain the inequality
\begin{equation}\label{huto3}
-\lambda^2+\frac{5}{8} \ge \frac{2}{3}\lambda^2+\frac{1}{8}.
\end{equation}
Solving the inequality (\ref{huto3}), we have $\sqrt{3}/{4} \ge \lambda$. This is contradiction.
Assume that $\mathrm{Im}Z(F[1])=2\lambda$. By Lemma \ref{ineq}, we have
\[ \mathrm{Re}Z(F) \ge 2\lambda^2 -1. \]
This implies
\begin{equation}\label{huto4}
\mathrm{Re}Z(F[1]) \le -2\lambda^2+1.
\end{equation}
Since $E$ is $\sigma_\lambda$-semistable, we have $\phi(F[1]) \le \phi(E)$.
So we obtain
\begin{equation}\label{huto5}
\mathrm{Re}(F[1]) \ge \frac{2}{3}\mathrm{Re}Z(E)=\frac{4}{3}\lambda^2+\frac{1}{4}.
\end{equation}
By the inequalities (\ref{huto4}) and (\ref{huto5}), we can obtain the inequality
\begin{equation}\label{huto6}
-2\lambda^2+1 \ge \frac{4}{3}\lambda^2+\frac{1}{4}.
\end{equation}
Solving the inequality (\ref{huto6}), we have ${3}\sqrt{10}/{20} \ge \lambda$. This is contradiction.
\end{proof}
From now on, we prove Proposition \ref{main6}.
First, we prove the generality of the stability conditions.
\begin{lem}\label{generic}
Assume that $\sqrt{\frac{3}{8}}<\lambda<\frac{3}{4}$ and $X$ is very general. Then $\sigma_\lambda$ is generic with respect to the Mukai vector $v$.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
It is sufficient to prove that $\sigma_\lambda$-semistable objects with Mukai vector $v$ are $\sigma_\lambda$-stable.
Let $E \in \mathcal{C}$ be a $\sigma_\lambda$-semistable object with Mukai vector $v$. Suppose that $E$ is not $\sigma_\lambda$-stable. Then there is a exact sequence
\[ 0 \to F \to E \to G \to 0\]
in $\mathcal{C}$ such that $\phi(E)=\phi(F)$.
Now $F$ is also $\sigma_\lambda$-semistable. Taking Jordan-H\"{o}lder filtration of $F$, we can assume that $F$ is $\sigma_\lambda$-stable. Since $\mathrm{Im}Z(E)=3\lambda$ and $\phi(F)=\phi(E)$, we have $\mathrm{Im}Z(F)=\lambda$ or $2\lambda$.
Suppose that $\mathrm{Im}Z(F)=\lambda$. Since $\phi(E)=\phi(F)$, we have
\[ \mathrm{Re}Z(F)=\dfrac{1}{3}\left(2\lambda^2+\dfrac{3}{8}\right). \]
Assume that $\mathrm{rk}F=0$. Due to Lemma \ref{1/4}, we have
\[\mathrm{Re}Z(F) \in \frac{1}{4}\mathbb{Z}.\]
By $1/2<\lambda<3/4$, we have
\[\dfrac{1}{4}<\mathrm{Re}Z(F)=\dfrac{1}{3}\left(2\lambda^2+\dfrac{3}{8}\right)<\dfrac{1}{2}.\]
This is contradiction. Assume that $\mathrm{rk}F=2$. Due to Lemma \ref{1/4}, we have
\[\mathrm{Re}Z(F)-\left(2\lambda^2+\dfrac{3}{8}\right)=-\dfrac{2}{3}\left(2\lambda^2+\dfrac{3}{8}\right) \in \dfrac{1}{4}\mathbb{Z}.\]
Since $\sqrt{\frac{3}{8}}<\lambda<\frac{3}{4}$, we have the inequarity
\[ -\frac{3}{4}<-\frac{2}{3}\left(2\lambda^2+\dfrac{3}{8}\right)<-\frac{7}{12}. \]
This is contradiction. Hence, we have $\mathrm{rk}F \ge 4$. By Lemma \ref{ineq}, we obtain the inequality
\begin{equation}\label{hutoa}
\frac{1}{3}\left(2\lambda^2+\dfrac{3}{8}\right)=\mathrm{Re}Z(F) \ge 4\lambda^2-\frac{5}{16}.
\end{equation}
Solving the inequality (\ref{hutoa}), we have the inequality
\[ \lambda^2 \le \frac{21}{160}. \]
By the assumption $\lambda^2 > 3/8$, this is contradiction.
Suppose that $\mathrm{Im}Z(F)=2\lambda$. Since $\phi(E)=\phi(F)$, we have
\[ \mathrm{Re}Z(F)=\dfrac{2}{3}\left(2\lambda^2+\dfrac{3}{8}\right).\]
Assume that $\mathrm{rk}F=0$. Due to Lemma \ref{1/4}, we have
\[\mathrm{Re}Z(F) \in \dfrac{1}{4}\mathbb{Z}.\]
By $\sqrt{\frac{3}{8}} < \lambda <\frac{3}{4}$, we have the inequality
\[\frac{3}{4} <\mathrm{Re}(F)=\frac{2}{3}\left(2\lambda^2+\frac{3}{8}\right) <1. \]
This is contradiction. Assume that $\mathrm{rk}F=2$. Due to Lemma \ref{1/4}, we have
\[\mathrm{Re}Z(F)-\left(2\lambda^2+\dfrac{3}{8}\right)=-\dfrac{1}{3}\left(2\lambda^2+\dfrac{3}{8}\right) \in \dfrac{1}{4}\mathbb{Z}.\]
By $\sqrt{\frac{3}{8}}<\lambda<\frac{3}{4}$, we have the inequality
\[ -\frac{1}{2} <-\frac{1}{3}\left(2\lambda^2+\frac{3}{8}\right) <-\frac{3}{8}. \]
This is contradiction. Hence, we have $\mathrm{rk}F \ge 4$. By Lemma \ref{ineq}, we obtain the inequality
\begin{equation}\label{hutob}
\frac{2}{3}\left(2 \lambda^2+\frac{3}{8}\right)=\mathrm{Re}Z(F) \ge 4\lambda^2-\frac{1}{2}.
\end{equation}
Solving the inequality (\ref{hutob}), we have the inequality
\[ \frac{9}{32} \ge \lambda^2. \]
By the assumption $3/8 < \lambda^2$, this is contradiction.
\end{proof}
Finaly, we prove the stability of $P_x$ for all $x \in X$.
\begin{proof}[Proof of Proposition \ref{main6}]
Take $x \in X$. By Lemma \ref{generic}, it is suffiient to prove that $P_x$ is $\sigma_\lambda$-semistable.
Suppose that $P_x$ is not $\sigma_\lambda$-semistable. Then there is an exact sequence
\[ 0 \to F \to P_x \to G \to 0. \]
in $\mathcal{C}$ such that $ \phi(F)>\phi(P_x)$. Taking Harder-Narasimhan filtration and Jordan-H\"{o}lder filtration of $F$, we can assume that $F$ is $\sigma_\lambda$-stable. Since $P_x \in \mathcal{T}$, the object $F$ is also contained in $\mathcal{T}$.
First, we prove that $\mathrm{rk}F>0$. Assume that $\mathrm{rk}F=0$. Since $\mathcal{H}^{-1}(G) \in \mathcal{F}$, we have $\mathcal{H}^{-1}(G)=0$. So $F$ is a subsheaf of $P_x$. Since $P_x$ is torsion free for $x \in X \setminus P$, it is sufficient to consider the case of $x \in P$. Now $F \subset (P_x)_{\mathrm{tor}}$ and $(P_x)_{\mathrm{tor}}$ is an 1 -dimensional pure torsion sheaf. So we can write $v^B(F)=(0,h,k)$ for some $ k \in \mathbb{Z}$. Since $(P_x)_{\mathrm{tor}}/F$ is a zero dimensional torsion sheaf, we have $\phi((P_x)_{\mathrm{tor}}) \ge \phi(F)$.
By Remark \ref{phase}, we obtain the inequality
\[ \phi((P_x)_{\mathrm{tor}}) > \phi(F) > \phi((P_x)_{\mathrm{tor}}). \]
This is contradiction. Therefore, we have $\mathrm{rk}F > 0$. Hence, we have $\mathrm{Im}Z(F)=\lambda$ or $2\lambda$. Assume that $\mathrm{Im}Z(F)=\lambda$.
By $\phi(F) > \phi(P_x)$, we have the inequality
\[ \mathrm{Re}Z(F) < \frac{1}{3}\mathrm{Re}Z(P_x)=\frac{1}{3}\left(2\lambda^2+\frac{3}{8}\right). \]
We will prove that $\mathrm{rk}F=2$. So we assume that $\mathrm{rk}F \ge 4$. By Lemma \ref{ineq}, we have the inequality
\[ \frac{1}{3}\left(2\lambda^2+\frac{3}{8}\right)>\mathrm{Re}Z(F) \ge 4\lambda^2-\frac{5}{16}. \]
Solving the inequality
\[\frac{1}{3}\left(2\lambda^2+\frac{3}{8}\right)>4\lambda^2-\frac{5}{16},\]
we have
\[ \frac{21}{160} \ge \lambda^2. \]
This is contradiction. Hence, $\mathrm{rk}F=2$. Due to Lemma \ref{1/4}, we have
\[\mathrm{Re}Z(F)-\left(2\lambda^2+\dfrac{3}{8}\right) \in \dfrac{1}{4}\mathbb{Z}.\]
By Lemma \ref{ineq}, we have the inequality
\[ \frac{1}{3}\left(2\lambda^2+\frac{3}{8}\right)>\mathrm{Re}Z(F) \ge \lambda^2 -\frac{5}{8}. \]
This implies
\[-\frac{2}{3}\left(2\lambda^2+\frac{3}{8}\right)>\mathrm{Re}Z(F)-\left(2\lambda^2+\dfrac{3}{8}\right) \ge -1. \]
By the assumption $\sqrt{\frac{3}{8}}<\lambda$, we have the inequality
\[-\frac{3}{4}>\mathrm{Re}Z(F)-\left(2\lambda^2+\dfrac{3}{8}\right) \ge -1. \]
So we obtain $\mathrm{Re}Z(F)=2\lambda^2-5/8$. By Lemma \ref{ineq}, we have
\begin{align*}
v^B(F)&=(2,s+h,t+\dfrac{1}{2}sh+\dfrac{1}{2})\\
&=v^B(\mathcal{U}_1).
\end{align*}
Since $\mathrm{Pic}S=\mathbb{Z}h$, the sperical sheaf $F$ is torsion free. So we have $F \simeq \mathcal{U}_1$. By Lemma \ref{vanish}, the morphism $F \hookrightarrow P_x$ is zero. Hence, we have $\mathcal{U}_1=0$. This is contradiction.
Assume that $\mathrm{Im}Z(F)=2\lambda$. If $\mathrm{rk}F=2$, then $\mathrm{rk}G=0$. Since $\mathrm{Pic}S=\mathbb{Z}h$, we have $\mathrm{Im}Z(G) \in 2\mathbb{Z} \lambda \subset \mathbb{R}$. However, $\mathrm{Im}Z(G)=\lambda$ holds. This is contradiction. So we prove that $\mathrm{rk}F=2$.
Assume that $\mathrm{rk}F \ge 4$. Since $\phi(F)<\phi(P_x)$, we have the inequality
\[ \mathrm{Re}Z(F) <\frac{2}{3}\left(2 \lambda^2+\frac{3}{8}\right). \]
By Lemma \ref{ineq}, we have the inequality
\[ \mathrm{Re}Z(F) \ge 4\lambda^2-\frac{1}{2}. \]
So we obtain
\begin{equation}\label{ht}
\frac{2}{3}(2\lambda^2+\frac{3}{8}) > 4\lambda^2-\frac{1}{2}.
\end{equation}
Solving the inequality (\ref{ht}), we have the inequality:
\[ \frac{9}{32} >\lambda^2. \]
This gives contradiction. So $P_x$ is $\sigma_{\lambda}$-stable.
\end{proof}
|
\section{Introduction}
The dynamics of bipolar jets observed near astrophysical black holes and active galactic nuclei in particular, remains a mystery. There have been several jet launching and collimation mechanisms proposed, which involve magnetic fields as an essential ingredient. Nowadays, the problem is most commonly approached via the advanced computer simulations of the gravitohydromagnetics of plasma accreting into rotating black holes. (See, e.g., Ref.~\cite{RoVi} and the references therein.) It is unknown whether the jets are powered by the accretion disk or the rotational energy of the black hole. Recent observations concluded that the power of the jets is proportional to the black hole's spin, in agreement with the mechanism proposed by Blandford and Znajek \cite{Nar0,Nar}. This conclusion is congruent with that of computer simulations of the gravitohydromagnetics (see, e.g., Refs.~\cite{KSKM,SDP,TMN}). It should be noted, however, that a pervious observation found no evidence for black hole rotation powering the jets in x-ray binaries \cite{Fend}.
Magnetic fields can be present in the vicinity of a black hole, mainly due to the accreting plasma around it as discussed in Refs. \cite{RoVi,Pun}. Moreover, astrophysical black holes are speculated to be rapidly rotating. Even slowly rotating black holes can be spun up by matter accretion \cite{Bar,LB}. The spin angular momentum of a black hole of mass $M$ is thought to be limited by $J=0.998M^2$ due to the counteracting torque resulting from the absorption of the radiation from the accretion disk \cite{Th}. Recent observations found that astrophysical black holes are indeed rapidly rotating~\cite{Bren,McC0,Rey,McC}
In this paper we consider a simplified and yet interesting model that can shed light on the high energy emissions associated with astrophysical black holes. The system we study consists of a charged particle in a circular orbit around a rotating black hole immersed in a uniform weak axisymmetric magnetic field. The field is weak in the sense that its back-reaction on the spacetime is negligible. The field is either aligned or oppositely aligned with the black hole's spin.
We then give the particle a kick off the orbit and observe how its dynamics evolves and whether it escapes or ends up captured by the black hole. In real situations the kick could be given for example by another particle or photon. The problem in the background of a Schwarzschild black hole was studied in Ref.~\cite{Z2}.
The inclusion of the magnetic field breaks down the constant of motion associated with the Kerr spacetime's hidden symmetry; the Carter constant. Consequently, the equations of motion are rendered non-integrable in general. They remain integrable in the equatorial submanifold, however. The main effect of the magnetic field on the charged particles' circular orbits is bringing their ISCOs closer to the black hole. Additionally, negatively 'superbound' stable circular orbits can exist if the magnetic force is large enough (see below).
Numerical integration is required for studying the dynamics outside the equatorial submanifold. Depending on the initial conditions and the parameters of the system, the motion can be chaotic. The chaotic motion of charged particles near a Kerr black hole immersed in a weak magnetic field was studied in Refs.~\cite{kkss,kkss2} for a uniform axisymmetric field and in Refs.~\cite{ni,tk} for a dipole field. Similar studies in the background of a Schwarzschild black hole were conducted. In fact, there are several cases in general relativity where chaotic particle dynamics was encountered even in the absence of magnetic fields. (See the references in Ref.~\cite{Z2})
In this paper we study charged particles escape from a weakly magnetized rotating black hole. The simpler case of neutral particles is tackled first. The effect of the black hole's rotation on charged particles escape and chaoticness in their dynamics is investigated as well. The paper is organised as follows: In Sec.~\ref{s2} we analyse the case of neutral particles. We review particle dynamics and circular orbits in Kerr geometry and then give the escape conditions analytically. In Sec.~\ref{s3} we treat the charged particles case. We introduce the magnetization of rotating black holes, describe circular orbits and ISCOs, and then analyse charge particles dynamics and give the conditions for their escape. The relationship between chaoticness and rotation is investigated afterward. We give general discussion and conclusion in Sec.~\ref{sum}. We use the sign conventions
adopted in Ref.~\cite{MTW} and geometrical units where $c=G=1$.
\section{Escape Velocity of a Neutral Particle} \label{s2}
\subsection{Circular Orbits}
The spacetime geometry around a rotating black hole is described by the Kerr metric. For a black hole of mass $M$ and spin angular momentum $J=aM$ the Kerr metric in Boyer-Linquist coordinates reads~\cite{Zee}
\begin{eqnarray}
ds^2=&-&\Sigma\frac{\Delta}{A}dt^2+\frac{\Sigma}{\Delta}dr^2+\Sigma d\theta^2\nonumber \\
&+&\frac{A}{\Sigma}\left(d\phi-\frac{2aMr}{A}dt\right)^2\sin^2\theta,
\end{eqnarray}
where
\begin{eqnarray}
\Sigma &=&r^2+a^2\cos^2\theta, \:\:\: \Delta=r^2+a^2-2Mr, \non \\
&&\:\:\:A=(r^2+a^2)^2-a^2\Delta \sin^2\theta,
\end{eqnarray}
\nin and $a$, with $-M\leq a\leq M$, is the rotation parameter.
The Kerr spacetime admits two commuting Killing vectors
\begin{equation}
\xi^{\mu}_{(t)}=\delta^{\mu}_t, \:\:\: \xi^{\mu}_{(\phi)}=\delta^{\mu}_{\phi},
\end{equation}
\noindent and a Killing tensor
\begin{equation}
K^{\mu\nu}=\Delta k^{(\mu}l^{\nu)}+r^2g^{\mu\nu},
\end{equation}
\noindent where
\begin{eqnarray}
l^{\mu}&=&\frac{1}{\Delta}\left[(r^2+a^2)\delta_t^{\mu}+\Delta \delta_r^{\mu}+a \delta_{\phi}^{\mu}\right], \\
k^{\mu}&=&\frac{1}{\Delta}\left[(r^2+a^2)\delta_t^{\mu}-\Delta \delta_r^{\mu}+a \delta_{\phi}^{\mu}\right].
\end{eqnarray}
\noindent Consider a particle in the Kerr spacetime moving with four-velocity $u^{\mu}$. The three Killing symmetries are associated with three constants of the particle's motion
\begin{eqnarray}
-\ce &=& p_{\mu}\xi^{\mu}_{(t)}/m,\\
\cl &=& p_{\mu}\xi^{\mu}_{(\phi)}/m,\\
\ck &=& u_{\mu}u_{\nu}K^{\mu\nu}-(\cl-a\ce)^2\label{car},
\end{eqnarray}
\noindent where $p^{\mu}=mu^{\mu}$ is the particle's four-momentum. $\ce$ and $\cl$ are the specific energy and azimuthal angular momentum, respectively, and $\ck$ is the Carter constant\footnote{The second term on the right hand side of Eq.~(\ref{car}) does not appear in the standard definition of the Carter constant. We chose our definition for convenience.}. Using these three constants of motion along with the normalization $u_{\mu}u^{\mu}=-1$ we reduce the equations of motion to quadratures:
\begin{eqnarray}
&&\dot{t}=\ce+\frac{2Mr[(r^2+a^2)\ce-a\cl]}{\Delta\Sigma},\\
&&\dot{\phi}=\frac{\cl}{\Sigma\sin^2\theta}+\frac{a(2Mr\ce-a\cl)}{\Delta\Sigma},\\
&&\Sigma^2\dot{r}^2=[(r^2+a^2)\ce-a\cl]^2 \nonumber\\
&&\hspace{1.2cm}-\Delta[r^2+\ck+(\cl-a\ce)^2],\label{rdot}\\
&&\Sigma^2\dot{\theta}^2=\ck+(\cl-a\ce)^2-a^2\cos^2{\theta} \nonumber\\
&&\hspace{1.2cm}-\left(a\ce\sin{\theta}-\frac{\cl}{\sin{\theta}}\right)^2\label{thethadot},
\end{eqnarray}
\noindent where the overdot denotes the derivative with respect to the proper time. The dynamics is invariant under reflection with respect to the equatorial plane
\begin{equation}\label{sym1}
\theta\rightarrow\pi-\theta, \hspace{1cm} \dot{\theta}\rightarrow-\dot{\theta}.
\end{equation}
It is also invariant under the transformations
\begin{equation}\label{sym2}
\phi\rightarrow-\phi, \hspace{3mm} \dot{\phi}\rightarrow-\dot{\phi}, \hspace{3mm} \cl\rightarrow-\cl, \hspace{3mm} a\rightarrow -a.
\end{equation}
There are two dynamically distinct modes of motion, depending on whether the black hole's spin and particle's azimuthal angular momentum are aligned ($a\cl>0$) or oppositely aligned ($a\cl<0$). Without loss of generality, $\cl$ will be kept positive while $a$ can take both signs. We refer to orbits with $a>0$ as {\it prograde} and orbits with $a<0$ as {\it retrograde}.
Let us define $R(r)$ to be the right hand side of Eq.~(\ref{rdot}):
\begin{eqnarray}
R(r):=&[(&r^2+a^2)\ce-a\cl]^2 \nonumber\\
&-&\Delta[r^2+\ck+(\cl-a\ce)^2].\label{rpot}
\end{eqnarray}
$R(r)$ is positive semidefinite; it vanishes at the radial turning points only. Equatorial circular orbits exist where $R(r)$ and its first derivative $R'(r)$ vanish when $\theta=\frac{\pi}{2}, \ck=0$. We used the notation $(\:\:\:)'=\partial_r(\:\:\:)$. These two conditions yield
\begin{eqnarray}
&&[(r^2+a^2)\ce-a\cl]^2-\Delta[r^2+(\cl-a\ce)^2]=0,\:\:\:\:\:\:\: \\
&&2r\ce[(r^2+a^2)\ce-a\cl]-2r\Delta \nonumber\\
&&\hspace{18mm}-2(r-M)[r^2+(\cl-a\ce)^2]=0.\:\:
\end{eqnarray}
\nin We will use $r_o$, $\ce_o$ and $\cl_o$ to denote quantities corresponding to circular orbits from here on. Solving these equations for $\ce_o$ and $\cl_o$ one obtains
\begin{eqnarray}
\ce_o=\frac{aM^{1/2}+r_o^{1/2}(r_o-2M)}{\sqrt{2aM^{1/2}r_o^{3/2}+r_o^2(r_o-3M)}},\label{ec}\\
\cl_o=\frac{M^{1/2}(a^2+r_o^2)-2aMr_o^{1/2}}{\sqrt{2aM^{1/2}r_o^{3/2}+r_o^2(r_o-3M)}}.\label{lc}
\end{eqnarray}
\nin The radius of the last circular orbit $r_{lc}$, is given by
\begin{equation}
r_{lc}=\frac{[M+M^{1/3}(\sqrt{a^2-M^2}-a)^{2/3}]^2}{M^{1/3}(\sqrt{a^2-M^2}-a)^{2/3}}.
\end{equation}
\nin Equation~(\ref{ec}) reveals that $\ce_o$ is positive for all circular orbits. A circular orbit is the ISCO when $R''(r_o)$ vanishes, or
\begin{eqnarray}
(6r_o^2+a^2)(\ce_o^2-1)+6Mr_o-\cl_o^2=0.
\end{eqnarray}
\nin Plugging the $\ce_o$ and $\cl_o$ expressions above in this condition yields
\begin{equation}
r_{ms}(r_{ms}-6M)+8a\sqrt{Mr_{ms}}-3a^2=0.
\end{equation}
\nin We used $r_{ms}$ (for {\it marginally stable}) to denote the ISCO's radius. The $\ce_o$ and $\cl_o$ expressions reduce for the ISCO to
\begin{eqnarray}
\cl_{ms}^2=\frac{2}{3}\frac{M}{r_{ms}}(3r_{ms}^2-a^2),\:\:\: \ce_{ms}^2=1-\frac{2}{3}\frac{M}{r_{ms}}.\:\:\:\:\:\:\:\:
\end{eqnarray}
\nin Figure~\ref{fig:arms} shows how $r_{ms}$ changes with $a$. The ISCO radius lies in the interval $[M,9M]$.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{arms2c.eps}
\caption{The dependence of the radius of the last stable circular orbit $r_{ms}$ on the black hole's rotation parameter $a$.}
\label{fig:arms}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Conditions for escape from a circular orbit}
\subsubsection{Three-Dimensional Motion}
A particle at a stable circular orbit of radius $r_o$ has the four-velocity
\begin{equation}
\tilde{u}_{\mu}=(-\ce_o,0,0,\cl_o).
\end{equation}
To reduce the complexity of the problem we will consider a kick that gives the particle polar velocity $v_k=-r_o\dot{\theta}_k$ without changing $\cl_o$. The kick therefore changes the particle's four-velocity to
\begin{equation}
u_{\mu}=(-\ce,0,r_o^3\dot{\theta}_k,\cl_o).
\end{equation}
The space of initial conditions of the problem is therefore two-dimensional: $\{r_o,\dot{\theta}_k\}$. The symmetry transformations~(\ref{sym1}) make it enough to take $v_k$ to be positive or negative without loss of generality. We can express the dependence of $\ce$ and $\ck$ on $\dot{\theta}_k$ using Eqs.~(\ref{rdot}) and~(\ref{thethadot}). The expressions are
{\small
\begin{eqnarray}
&{\cal E}&=\frac{1}{r_o^3+a^2(r_o+2M)}\Big[2a\cl_o M+\Delta_o^{1/2} \nonumber\\
& &\sqrt{a^2(r+2M)(r_o^3\dot{\theta}_k^2+r_o)+r_o^2(r^4_o\dot{\theta}_k^2+r^2_o+\cl_o^2)}\Big],\:\:\:\:\:\:\:\:\:\label{ene0}\\
&{\cal K}&=r_o^4\dot{\theta}_k^2, \label{cc}
\end{eqnarray}}where $\Delta_o=\Delta|_{r=r_o}$. The root for $\ce$ corresponding to future-directed four-velocity was selected.
To study the particle's behavior after the kick, it is more appropriate to recast Eq.~(\ref{rdot}) as
\begin{equation}\label{epe}
\Sigma^2\dot{r}^2=r[r^3+a^2(r+2M)](\ce-V_+)(\ce-V_-),
\end{equation}
\noindent where
\begin{eqnarray}
\small &V&_{\pm}(r)=\frac{1}{r^3+a^2(r+2M)}\Big[2a\cl M\pm\Delta^{1/2} \nonumber\\
& &\sqrt{a^2(r+2M)(\ck/r+r)+r^2(\ck+r^2+\cl^2)}\Big].\:\:\:\:\:\:\:\:\label{ene}
\end{eqnarray}
Again $V_+(r)$ will be considered for future-directed four-velocity vector. In order to determine the escape conditions we need to inspect $V_+(r)$ to figure out how the particle moves after getting kicked.
\subsubsection{Escape Conditions}
Far away from the black hole, $V_+(r)$ becomes unity. Trivially, the particle must be energetically unbound (${\cal E}\geq 1$) to be able to escape. The value of $\dot{\theta}_k$ at which the particle becomes energetically unbound is designated as $\dot{\theta}_{\ce=1}$. We use Eqs.~(\ref{ene0}) and~(\ref{cc}) to express it as
\begin{equation}
|\dot{\theta}_{\ce=1}|=\left[\frac{2M[(\cl_o-a)^2+r_o^2]-\cl_o^2r_o}{\Delta r_o^3}\right]^{1/2}.
\end{equation}
We will assume that the trivial condition $|\dot{\theta}_k|\ge |\dot{\theta}_{\ce=1}|$ is always satisfied. When $|\dot{\theta}_k|\ll|\dot{\theta}_{\ce=1}|$, the particle oscillates slightly around the initial orbit.
The energetic freedom is not sufficient for the particle to escape when $a>0$, in general. Depending on the black hole's parameters and particle's initial conditions, the particle may accelerate both away or toward the black hole. $V_+(r)$ has only one maximum. The particle will therefore experience only one radial turning point. Hence, {\it the sign of the radial acceleration just after the kick $\ddot{r}(r_o)$ determines whether the particle escapes or gets captured}. Using Eq.~(\ref{epe}) we write an expression for $\ddot{r}(r)$ as
\begin{equation}
\ddot{r}(r)=-\frac{r^3+a^2(r+2M)}{2r^3}[\ce-V_-(r)] V'_+(r).
\end{equation}
Therefore, $\ddot{r}(r_o)\propto-V'_+(r_o)$ since $\ce>V_-(r_o)$. Figure~\ref{fig:epk} shows an example of capture and another of escape.
\begin{figure*}[ht]
\begin{center}
\ba
&&\hspace{0cm}\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{pot_r1-2c.eps}
\hspace{.2cm}\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{pot_l1-2c.eps}\non\\
&&\hspace{4.8cm}({\bf a})\hspace{7.8cm}({\bf b})\non
\ea
\caption{$V_+(r)$ for a particle before (dashed line) and after (solid line) getting kicked with $\dot{\theta}_k=\dot{\theta}_{\ce=1}$. (a) The particle kicked from the circular orbit at $r_o=3M$ accelerates away. (b) The particle kicked from the circular orbit at $r_o=3/2M$ accelerates toward the black hole. In both cases $a=M$.}\label{fig:epk}
\end{center}
\end{figure*}
Careful analysis of $V'_+(r_o)$ reveals that there are {\it three} distinct regions in which the kicked particle accelerates in a specific way. The three regions are as follows:
\begin{itemize}
\item {\bf Escape region}: For any $\dot{\theta}_k$ value $\ddot{r}(r_o)>0$ in this region. The acceleration is proportional to $|\dot{\theta}_k|$. The escape region is given by $r>r_{esc}$, where $r_{esc}$ is given by the equation
\begin{equation}
\hspace{12mm}(r_{esc}-3M)r_{esc}^2+a^2(r_{esc}+M)=0.
\end{equation}
The ISCO is located in this region when $a\lesssim0.853M$.
\item {\bf Capture region}: In this region $\ddot{r}(r_o)<0$ for any $\dot{\theta}_k$. The stronger the kick, the faster the capture is. This region lies between $r_{cap}$ and the black hole's event horizon, where $r_{cap}$ is given by the equation
\begin{eqnarray}
&&\:\:M^{1/2}(ar_{cap}^2+a^3)+(r_{cap}-3M)r_{cap}^{5/2} \nonumber \\
&&\hspace{2.6cm}+a^2(r_{cap}-M)r_{cap}^{1/2}=0.
\end{eqnarray}
The orbit at $r_o=M$ (when $a=M$), where Eq.~(\ref{ene0}) reduces to $\ce=1/\sqrt{3}$ for any $\dot{\theta}_k$, is an exception. The ISCO is located in the capture region for $M\geq a\gtrsim0.952M$.
\item {\bf The critical escape region}: The particle acceleration is more involved in this region because its direction depends on $|\dot{\theta}_k|$ value. In particular, $\ddot{r}(r_o)>0$ if $|\dot{\theta}_k|$ is below some critical value $|\dot{\theta}_c|$. When $|\dot{\theta}_k|>|\dot{\theta}_c|$, the acceleration becomes inwards. For orbits with $|\dot{\theta}_{\ce=1}|>|\dot{\theta}_c|$, the particle can never escape. The critical escape region lies between the escape and capture regions. The critical kick angular velocity $\dot{\theta}_c$ is determined by
\begin{equation}
V'_+(r_o,\dot{\theta}_c)=0 ;\centering \hspace{5mm} r_{cap}<r_o<r_{esc}.
\end{equation}
In Fig.~\ref{fig:vc} we plot $|\dot{\theta}_c|$ and $|\dot{\theta}_{\ce=1}|$ vs. $r_o$ for $a=0.95M$. We see that $|\dot{\theta}_c|$ vanishes at $r_{cap}\approx1.92M$ and approaches infinity as $r_o$ approaches $r_{esc}\approx2.49M$. Figure~\ref{fig:rcvc} shows how the initial orbit radius $r_o$ at which $|\dot{\theta}_c|=|\dot{\theta}_{\ce=1}|$ changes with $a$. It is always greater than $r_{cap}$.
\begin{figure}[!htb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=.48\textwidth]{vth95-4c.eps}
\caption{$|\dot{\theta}_c|$ (solid) and $|\dot{\theta}_{\ce=1}|$ (dashed) vs. $r_o$ for $a=0.95M$. $|\dot{\theta}_c|$ vanishes at $r_{cap}$ and approaches infinity as $r_o$ approaches $r_{esc}$.}
\label{fig:vc}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{rcvc1-2c.eps}
\caption{The radius of the initial orbit $r_o$ at which $|\dot{\theta}_c|=|\dot{\theta}_{\ce=1}|$ (solid) as a function of $a$. The dashed curve is $r_{cap}$.}
\label{fig:rcvc}
\end{figure}
\end{itemize}
\noindent Figure \ref{fig:reg} shows the three regions along with the ISCO and how they change with $a$. Incorporating all of the restrictions above, a particle in a circular orbit around a Kerr black hole kicked in the direction normal to the orbit can escape in the following two cases:
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{reg1-2c.eps}
\caption{The dependence of $r_{esc}$, $r_{cap}$ and $r_{ms}$ (dashed) on $a$. The escape region is to the right of $r_{esc}$, the capture region is to the left of $r_{cap}$, while the critical escape region is the one in between. The dotted line is $r_{lc}$}
\label{fig:reg}
\end{figure}
\begin{enumerate}
\item Its initial orbit is in the escape region, $r_o\geq r_{esc}$.
\item Its initial orbit is in the critical escape region, $r_{cap}<r_o<r_{esc}$, where it is possible to have $|\dot{\theta}_{\ce=1}|\leq |\dot{\theta}_k|<|\dot{\theta}_c|$.
\end{enumerate}
\section{Escape velocity of a Charged Particle} \label{s3}
\subsection{Weakly Magnetized Kerr Black Holes}
We follow the magnetization procedure introduced by Wald \cite{Wald}. In a Ricci flat spacetime a Killing vector $\xi^{\mu}$ obeys the equation
\begin{equation}
\xi^{\mu\:\:\:\: ;\nu}_{\:\:\;;\nu}=0.
\end{equation}
\noindent This is identical to the source-free Maxwell equations for a four-potential $A^{\mu}$ in the Lorentz gauge ($A^{\mu}_{\:\:\:;\mu}=0$),
\begin{equation}
A^{\mu\:\:\:\: ;\nu}_{\:\:\;;\nu}=0.
\end{equation}
Therefore, any linear combination of the Killing vectors the spacetime admits will serve as a solution to the Maxwell equations.
For the Kerr metric the choice
\begin{equation}\label{empot}
A^{\mu}=\frac{B}{2}\xi^{\mu}_{(\phi)}
\end{equation}
\noindent corresponds to an axisymmetric magnetic field that has strength $B$ asymptotically \cite{Wald,AG,AO}. It is this potential that will be used in this work.
The dynamics of a charged particle of mass $m$ and charge $q$ in an electromagnetic field in curved spacetime is governed by the equation
\begin{equation}\label{de}
m{u}^{\nu}\nabla_{\nu}u^{\mu}=qF^{\mu}_{\;\;\rho}u^{\rho},
\end{equation}
\noindent where $F_{\;\;\nu}^{\mu}$ is the electromagnetic field tensor given by
\begin{equation}
F_{\mu\nu}=A_{\nu,\mu}-A_{\mu,\nu}.
\end{equation}
\nin In the frame of an observer with four-velocity $u^\mu$, the electric and magnetic fields are, respectively
\begin{eqnarray}
E^{\mu}&=&F^{\mu\nu}u_{\nu}, \\
B^{\mu}&=&-\frac{1}{2}\frac{\varepsilon^{\mu\nu\lambda\sigma}}{\sqrt{-g}}F_{\lambda\sigma}u_{\nu},
\end{eqnarray}
where $g=\mbox{det}(g_{\mu\nu})$ and $\varepsilon_{0123}=+1$.
\nin The generalized four-momentum of the particle is
\begin{equation}
P^{\mu}=mu^{\mu}+qA^{\mu}.
\end{equation}
The weak field approximation breaks down when the magnetic field creates curvature comparable to that made by the black hole's mass, or
\begin{equation}
B^2\sim M^{-2}.
\end{equation}
\nin In conventional units, the Wald approximation fails when
\begin{equation}
B\sim \frac{k^{1/2}c^3}{G^{3/2}M},
\end{equation}
\nin where $k$ is the Coulomb constant. For a solar mass black hole one gets $B\sim10^{19}$Gauss. The typical magnetic field strength near a black hole's horizon has been estimated to be $\sim10^8$G ($10^{-15} \:\text{meter}^{-1}$) for stellar mass black holes and $\sim10^4$G ($10^{-19} \:\text{meter}^{-1}$) for supermassive black holes \cite{SGBPN,PSGN}. These estimates validate ignoring corrections to the metric due to the presence of the magnetic field. Despite that $B$ is "tiny" its effect on the dynamics is significant since $q/m=2.04\times 10^{21} (1.11\times 10^{18})$ for electrons (protons). For electrons (protons) near a typical stellar mass black hole ${qB}/{m}\sim10^7\:(10^3) \:\text{meter}^{-1}$ and near a typical supermassive black hole $qB/m\sim10^3\:(10^{-1}) \:\text{meter}^{-1}$.
\subsection{Circular Orbits}
The introduction of the magnetic field breaks down the Carter constant. It can be easily checked that
\begin{equation}
\dot{\cal K}\neq 0.
\end{equation}
The particle's energy and azimuthal angular momentum are constants of motion since the Lie derivatives of the electromagnetic potential~(\ref{empot}) with respect to the Killing vectors vanish
\begin{equation}
{\cal L}_{\xi^{\nu}_{(t)}}A^{\mu}={\cal L}_{\xi^{\nu}_{(\phi)}}A^{\mu}=0.
\end{equation}
The specific energy $\cal E$ and azimuthal angular momentum $\cal L$ are
\begin{eqnarray}
-{\cal E}&=&P_{\mu}\xi^{\mu}_{(t)}/m \non \\
&=&\left(\frac{2Mr}{\Sigma}-1\right)\dot{t}-\frac{2aMr}{\Sigma}(b+\dot{\phi})\sin^2{\theta}, \label{mage}\:\:\:\:\:\:\\
{\cal L}&=&P_{\mu}\xi^{\mu}_{(\phi)}/m \non \\
&=&\left[-\frac{2aMr}{\Sigma}\dot{t}+\frac{A}{\Sigma}(b+\dot{\phi})\right]\sin^2{\theta}, \label{magl}
\end{eqnarray}
\noindent where $b={qB}/{2m}$. Using these constants of motion and the normalization condition $u^{\mu}u_{\mu}=-1$ we write
\begin{eqnarray}
&&\dot{t}=\ce+\frac{2Mr[(r^2+a^2)\ce-a\cl]}{\Delta\Sigma},\label{tdeq}\\
&&\dot{\phi}=\frac{\cl}{\Sigma\sin^2\theta}+\frac{a(2Mr\ce-a\cl)}{\Delta\Sigma}-b\label{phideq}\\
&&\Sigma^2\left(\dot{r}^2+\Delta\dot{\theta}^2\right)=A\ce^2-4aM\ce\cl r-\Delta\Sigma(1-2b\cl) \nonumber\\
&&\hspace{2.4cm}+\frac{\cl^2(2Mr-\Sigma)}{\sin^2\theta}-b^2A\Delta\sin^2\theta.\label{ethd} \:\:\:\:\:\:\:\:
\end{eqnarray}
The $r$ and $\theta$ components of the dynamical equation (\ref{de}) are written in the appendix below.
Equations (\ref{tdeq})--(\ref{ethd}), (\ref{req}) and~(\ref{teq}) are invariant under reflection with respect to the equatorial plane~(\ref{sym1}). They are also invariant under the symmetry transformations
\begin{eqnarray}\label{sym2}
&&\phi\rightarrow-\phi, \hspace{3mm} \dot{\phi}\rightarrow-\dot{\phi}, \hspace{3mm} \cl\rightarrow-\cl, \non\\
&&\hspace{10mm} a\rightarrow -a , \hspace{3mm} b\rightarrow -b.
\end{eqnarray}
\nin There are {\it four} dynamically distinct modes of motion. They are determined by the four combinations of the signs of $b\cl$ and $a\cl$. As before we fix $\cl$ to be positive. We just alter the signs of $a$ and $b$ to consider the four cases. We refer to the $b>0$ motion as anti-Larmor and to the $b<0$ motion as Larmor. For circular orbits, the radial acceleration of the particle $f^1=\frac{q}{m}(F^1_{\;\;0}\dot{t}+F^1_{\;\;3}\dot{\phi})$ is positive for the anti-Larmor motion and negative for Larmor motion.
Equation (\ref{ethd}) simplifies in the equatorial plane to
\begin{eqnarray}\label{rpm}
r^3\dot{r}^2&=&(\ce^2-b^2\Delta)[r(r^2+a^2)+2Ma^2]- \nonumber\\
&&4aM\ce\cl-r\Delta(1-2b\cl)-\cl^2(r-2M).\:\:\:\:\:\:\:\:
\end{eqnarray}
\nin Let us define the positive semi-definite function ${\cal R}(r)$ to be the right hand side of Eq.~(\ref{rpm}):
\begin{eqnarray}
&&{\cal R}(r):=(\ce^2-b^2\Delta)[r(r^2+a^2)+2Ma^2]- \nonumber\\
&&\hspace{10mm}4aM\ce\cl-r\Delta(1-2b\cl)-\cl^2(r-2M). \:\:\:\:\:\:\:\:
\end{eqnarray}
\nin Then using the circular orbit conditions ${\cal R}(r)=0$ and ${\cal R}'(r)=0$ one obtains, respectively,
\begin{eqnarray}
&&(\ce^2-b^2\Delta)[r(r^2+a^2)+2Ma^2]-4aM\ce\cl \non\\
&&\hspace{12mm}-r\Delta(1-2b\cl)-\cl^2(r-2M)=0,\:\:\:\label{co1}
\end{eqnarray}
and
\begin{eqnarray}
&&2b^2(r-M)[r(r^2+a^2)+2Ma^2]+ \non \\
&&(1-2b\cl)[2r(r-M)+\Delta]+\cl^2- \non \\
&&\hspace{15.5mm}(\ce^2-b^2\Delta)(3r^2+a^2)=0.\label{co2}
\end{eqnarray}
\nin The extra condition for ISCOs ${\cal R}''(r)=0$ gives
\begin{eqnarray}
&&(2b\cl-1)(3r-2M)+3\ce^2r\non \\
&&\hspace{10mm}-2b^2r[r(5r-6M)+3a^2]=0.
\end{eqnarray}
\nin It is very difficult to solve Eqs.~(\ref{co1}) and~(\ref{co2}) to obtain analytic expressions for $\ce_o$ and $\cl_o$. Instead, we solve these equations numerically. We also require that $\dot{t}>0$ to exclude past-directed solutions.
It is interesting to see how the ISCO radius depends on $a$ for selected values of the magnetic parameter $b$. Knowing the dependence of the ISCO radius on $a$ is essential for measuring the spin of astrophysical black holes \cite{Bren}. The $a$--$r_{ms}$ curves for selected $b$ values are shown in Fig.~\ref{rmsb}. When $b=0$ Fig.~\ref{fig:arms} is reproduced. In both Larmor and anti-Larmor motions $r_{ms}$ gets closer to the black hole as $|b|$ increases. It converges to an asymptotic value as $|b|$ becomes large. The shift in $r_{ms}$ is more evident in the anti-Larmor motion. The value of $r_{ms}$ is different from the asymptotic values by less than $0.1\%$ when $5.8\times10^3M^{-1}<b<-0.82 M^{-1}$. For retrograde motion $r_{ms}$ is always outside the static limit. Figures~\ref{Lmsb} and~\ref{Emsb} show $\cl_{ms}$ and $\ce_{ms}$ corresponding to the ISCOs shown in Fig.~\ref{rmsb}. It is interesting that negative energy stable circular orbits can exist in the retrograde anti-Larmor motion. The possibility for the existence of negative energy states due to magnetic fields was pointed out in Ref.~\cite{PrDa} and further explored in Ref.~\cite{DhDa1}. The related energy-emission processes were discussed in Refs.~\cite{DhDa2,PWHD}. At $a=-M$, $\ce_{ms}$ becomes zero when $b=b_c$, where $Mb_c$ is the positive real root of
\begin{eqnarray}
&&45056x^{12}-52224x^{10}+3072x^8\non\\
&-&3776x^6+4656x^4-1320x^2=25.
\end{eqnarray}
Numerically, $x\approx 1.0534$. As $b$ increases further $\ce_{ms}$ becomes negative for a larger interval of $a>-M$. Asymptotically, $\ce_{ms}$ becomes negative for all retrograde anti-Larmor orbits and approaches a minimum of $2(1-\sqrt{2})Mb$ at $a=-M$ where $r_{ms}=(1+\sqrt{2})M$. This immense binding energy is intriguing. A charged particle of mass $m_q$ and $b\gg M^{-1}$ ending up in this 'superbound' state can give off energy
\begin{equation}
E=m_q\ce_{ms}=(\sqrt{2}-1)qBM.
\end{equation}
For typical stellar mass and supermassive black holes of masses $M_{St}$ and $M_{Su}$, respectively, this amounts to
\begin{eqnarray}
E=1.832\times10^6 (\frac{M_{St}}{M_{\odot}})\: \mbox{GeV}, \\
E=1.832\times10^2 (\frac{M_{Su}}{M_{\odot}})\: \mbox{GeV},\label{smbhe}
\end{eqnarray}
where $M_{\odot}$ is the solar mass. For a supermassive black hole of mass $M=10^{9.5}M_{\odot}$, Eq.~(\ref{smbhe}) gives $E\sim100$ Joules.
It should be noted that the correspondence between $r_{ms}$ and $a$ is {\it one-to-one} in all cases, after past-directed orbits are excluded. The equation for $r_{ms}$ given in Ref.~\cite{AO} yields future-directed solutions only when $b<b_c$.
\begin{figure*}[ht]
\begin{center}
\ba
&&\hspace{0cm}\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{rmsa-Larc.eps}
\hspace{.2cm}\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{rmsLarc.eps}\non\\
&&\hspace{4.8cm}({\bf a})\hspace{7.8cm}({\bf b})\non
\ea
\caption{The ISCO's radius $r_{ms}$ dependence on $a$ for different values of the magnetic parameter $b$ for (a) anti-Larmor motion and (b) Larmor motion.}\label{rmsb}
\end{center}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure*}[ht]
\begin{center}
\ba
&&\hspace{0cm}\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{Lmsa-Larc.eps}
\hspace{.2cm}\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{LmsLarc.eps}\non\\
&&\hspace{4.8cm}({\bf a})\hspace{7.8cm}({\bf b})\non
\ea
\caption{The ISCO's azimuthal angular momentum $\cl_{ms}$ dependence on $a$ for different values of the magnetic parameter $b$ for (a) anti-Larmor motion and (b) Larmor motion.}\label{Lmsb}
\end{center}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure*}[ht]
\begin{center}
\ba
&&\hspace{0cm}\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{Emsa-Larc.eps}
\hspace{.2cm}\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{EmsLarc.eps}\non\\
&&\hspace{4.8cm}({\bf a})\hspace{7.8cm}({\bf b})\non
\ea
\caption{The ISCO's energy $\ce_{ms}$ dependence on $a$ for different values of the magnetic parameter $b$ for (a) anti-Larmor motion and (b) Larmor motion.}\label{Emsb}
\end{center}
\end{figure*}
\subsection{Three-Dimensional motion and conditions for escape from a circular orbit}
\noindent It does not seem possible to determine the escape conditions analytically since the equations of motion are non-integrable in general. Equations~(\ref{req}) and~(\ref{teq}) were solved numerically using the built-in {\it MATHEMATICA} 7.0 function NDSOLVE. We used the constant of motion $\ce$ as a gauge of error in the numerical solver. The deviation in $\ce$ is $\sim10^{-6}$ or less. Sometimes the error grows to $\sim10^{-3}$ when the integration time is very long. We can increase the accuracy of the solver to achieve much better accuracy. This is not a problem when few trajectories are plotted, but it is very time-consuming when the basins of attraction are generated (see below). That is because in generating them the equations of motions are integrated $\sim10^6$ times and we are concerned about the final state of the particle which is practically not modified by increasing the accuracy.
The numerical integration reveals that the escape and capture regions are more involved than those in the neutral particle case. In Fig.~\ref{fig:tra} the trajectories of a charged particle kicked up to three different energies $\ce=1.0890$, $\ce=1.0893$ and $\ce=1.0900$ are shown. In this section we use $\ce$ to quantify the kick instead of $\dot{\theta}_k$, for convenience. The two are related by Eq.~(\ref{ethd}). The particle in each case ends up following a completely different trajectory despite the tiny difference between the energies. This extreme sensitivity to initial conditions is a characteristic of non-integrable and chaotic systems. To obtain a comprehensive view of the problem we need to identify which initial conditions lead to escape and which lead to capture.
\begin{figure*}[ht]
\begin{center}
\ba
&&\hspace{1cm}\includegraphics[width=0.25\textwidth]{trac.eps
\hspace{1cm}\includegraphics[width=0.25\textwidth]{traup.eps
\hspace{1cm}\includegraphics[width=0.25\textwidth]{tradn.eps}\non\\%\label{fig:edown}
&&\hspace{3.cm}({\bf a})\hspace{4.4cm}({\bf b})\hspace{4.4cm} ({\bf c})\non
\ea
\caption{The trajectories of a charged particle initially at $r_o=4M$ kicked to three different energies (a): $\ce=1.0890$ (b): $\ce=1.0893$ (c): $\ce=1.0900$. In all cases $a=0.5M$ and $b=0.1 M^{-1}$. The particle is scattered to a different final state in every case.}\label{fig:tra}
\end{center}
\end{figure*}
In general the particle is fated to be captured by the black hole, escape it up (down) and approach $z=\infty$ ($z=-\infty$) asymptotically, or end up in an orbit 'meta-staple' within the computation time. Keeping the possible meta-stable orbits aside, the system therefore has three {\it attractors}. We need to use a method well-suited for analysing non-compact chaotic scattering systems.
An attractor of a dynamical system is a subset of the set of all possible states of the system which an orbit with certain initial conditions approaches asymptotically. The set of initial conditions which leads to an attractor is its {\it basin of attraction}.
The boundary between different basins of attraction in the space of initial conditions is a simple smooth curve (surface) in case of regular systems. In chaotic systems the basin-boundary is a {\it fractal} boundary. A fractal is a geometrical object that has fractal dimension $D_f$ larger than its topological dimension. A characteristic of fractals is the appearance of self-similar patterns persistent at any magnification.
Let us see how the basin of attraction plot looks like for a neutral particle first. We use the following color notation for all basins of attraction in this paper: (1) Green for escape to $z\rightarrow +\infty$ (2) Yellow for escape to $z\rightarrow -\infty$, (3) Red for capture and (4) Blue for meta-stable orbits.
Figure~\ref{fig:nb} shows the basin of attraction plot for a neutral particle generated numerically with initial values of $r_o\in[r_{lc},r_{lc}+6M]$ plotted horizontally and initial values of $\ce\in[1.0,2.0]$ plotted vertically. The resolution of the plot is 600$\times$600. We tackled the $a=0.999M$ case, where $r_{lc}=1.052M$, because the structure of the basin of attraction plot in this case is the richest. The basin boundaries are regular lines as they should be for a regular system. The structure of the escape and capture attractors is in accord with that described analytically in Sec.~\ref{s2}. The red color approaches $r_{esc}$ as $\ce$ becomes very large. The particle is backscattered near $r_{esc}$ and at low energies, where it barely makes it to escape.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{neutralc2.eps}
\caption{The basin of attraction plot for a neutral particle when $a=0.999M$. $r_{esc}$ and $r_{cap}$ are shown as well.}
\label{fig:nb}
\end{figure}
Now we return to charged particles. Figure.~\ref{fig:anti-lar} shows the basin of attraction plots for anti-Larmor motion ($b=0.1 M^{-1}$) with initial values of $r_o\in[r_{ms},r_{ms}+6M]$ plotted horizontally and initial values of $\ce\in[1.0,2.0]$ plotted vertically. Figure~\ref{fig:lar} shows the Larmor motion ($b=-0.1 M^{-1}$) basin of attraction plots but with initial values of $\ce\in[1.0,3.0]$ since $\ce_o$ is usually considerably larger than 1. The white regions in the figures represent the energetically forbidden orbits. The value of $|b|$ considered here may be small compared to typical astrophysical values. Nonetheless, we find it appropriate to demonstrate the various aspects of the problem. The spin parameter $a$ was taken at selected values between $-1$ and $1$.
The state of the particle is considered an escape if it reaches $z=200M$. At this distance the gravitational potential can be well approximated by the Newtonian value of $-M/r\approx -M/z$. In cases for which $\dot{z}^2<2M/z$ the particle will return back and all three outcome are possible. This is the case with about $1\%$ of escape cases, especially when $\ce$ is just above $1$. The maximum integration time was $10^5M$ for the anti-Larmor case and $2\times 10^4M$ for the Larmor case. We chose the latter due to the existence of meta-stable orbits. The resolution of the plots in these figures is $800\times800$.
The similarity between Fig.~\ref{fig:nb} and Fig.~\ref{fig:anti-lar} (f) is striking. The main effect of the magnetic field is to distort the basin boundaries from regular lines to fractals.
\begin{figure*}[ht]
\begin{center}
\ba
&&\hspace{0.2cm}\includegraphics[width=0.3\textwidth]{anti-Lar-1c.eps}
\hspace{.2cm}\includegraphics[width=0.3\textwidth]{anti-Lar-.6c.eps}
\hspace{.2cm}\includegraphics[width=0.3\textwidth]{anti-Lar0c.eps}\non\\
&&\hspace{1.5cm}({\bf a}):\: a=-0.999M. \hspace{2.3cm}({\bf b}):\: a=-0.6M.\hspace{2.5cm} ({\bf c}):\: a=0.\non\\
&&\hspace{.2cm}\includegraphics[width=0.3\textwidth]{anti-Lar.6c.eps}
\hspace{.2cm}\includegraphics[width=0.3\textwidth]{anti-Lar.8c.eps}
\hspace{.2cm}\includegraphics[width=0.3\textwidth]{anti-Lar1c.eps}\non\\
&&\hspace{1.5cm}({\bf d}):\: a=0.6M. \hspace{2.9cm}({\bf e}):\: a=0.8M.\hspace{2.7cm} ({\bf f}):\: a=0.999M.\non
\ea
\caption{The basin of attraction plots for a charged particle with $b=0.1 M^{-1}$.}\label{fig:anti-lar}
\end{center}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure*}[ht]
\begin{center}
\ba
&&\hspace{0.2cm}\includegraphics[width=0.3\textwidth]{Lar-1c.eps}
\hspace{.2cm}\includegraphics[width=0.3\textwidth]{Lar-.6c.eps}
\hspace{.2cm}\includegraphics[width=0.3\textwidth]{Lar0c.eps}\non\\
&&\hspace{1.5cm}({\bf a}):\: a=-0.999M. \hspace{2.3cm}({\bf b}):\: a=-0.6M.\hspace{2.5cm} ({\bf c}):\: a=0.\non\\
&&\hspace{.2cm}\includegraphics[width=0.3\textwidth]{Lar.6c.eps}
\hspace{.2cm}\includegraphics[width=0.3\textwidth]{Lar.8c.eps}
\hspace{.2cm}\includegraphics[width=0.3\textwidth]{Lar1c.eps}\non\\
&&\hspace{1.5cm}({\bf d}):\: a=0.6M. \hspace{2.9cm}({\bf e}):\: a=0.8M.\hspace{2.7cm} ({\bf f}):\: a=0.999M.\non
\ea
\caption{The basin of attraction plots for a charged particle with $b=-0.1 M^{-1}$.}\label{fig:lar}
\end{center}
\end{figure*}
Let us discuss the general structure of the basin of attraction plots and formulate the escape condition for charged particles. The main parts in the basin of attraction plots can be identified as follows:
\begin{itemize}
\item{\bf Escape region}: The particle here escapes directly in the direction of the kick. This region is the upper right large green area in the figures. It gets reduced from left as $a$ increases. We use the boundary of this region to define an {\it effective escape energy} $\ce_{esc}$. The effective escape energy curve can be fitted with a tiny relative error to a function of the form
\begin{equation}
\ce_{esc}=1+\frac{a+b r_o+c r_o^2}{d+e r_o+f r_o^2}.
\end{equation}
where $a, b, ...\:\mbox{and}\: f$ are fitting parameters.
\item{\bf Capture region}: This is the red nearly rectangular area in the left side of the plots when $a=0.999M$. The particle is always captured in this region for any energy. It is the proximity of $r_o$ from the horizon that makes the particle always accelerate inwardly no matter how energetic the kick is. Therefore this region shows up only when $a$ is close to $M$. Increasing $b$ for anti-Larmor motion would also lead to the emergence of this region because $r_{ms}$ would become closer to the horizon [see Fig.~\ref{rmsb} (a)].
\item{\bf Fractal region}: The escape region is bounded by a diffuse region of fine threads that demonstrate a repetitive pattern of red, green and yellow colors. These threads get finer as they get closer to the escape region. We refer to this region as the fractal region. The particle's trajectory in it can cross the equatorial plane several times. The fractal structure is persistent at any magnification level. This fact confirms that the system is chaotic. The vertical branch of the fractal becomes smaller as $a$ decreases. The red color ceases to exist near the end of the horizontal tail of the fractal. This effect becomes more noticeable as $a$ increases until the red color completely disappears from the lower half of the fractal structure when $a=0.999M$.
\item{\bf Meta-Stability region}: It is represented by the blue strip in the Larmor motion plots. We expect that the left boundary of this region becomes smooth if the numerical integrator is run for longer time. However, increasing the integration time will increase the computation time immensely without modifying significantly the quantity we want to measure, namely $D_f$. (See below.)
\item{\bf Backscattering region}: It is the yellow isle located between the capture region and the upper branch of the fractal region. In the back\-scattering region the particle escapes in the direction opposite to the kick. Like the capture region, the backscattering region appears when $r_o$ is close to the horizon.
\end{itemize}
\subsection{Rotation and Chaoticness}
\nin It is interesting to see how the black hole's spin $a$ affects the chaoticness in the dynamics. We will use the fractal dimension $D_f$ of the basin boundary as a measure of chaoticness. The fractal dimension $D_f$ can be measured using the box-counting dimension $D_b$ which is given in a two-dimensional space of initial conditions by
\begin{equation}
D_b=\lim_{\epsilon\to 0}\left(\frac{\ln N(\epsilon)}{\ln 1/\epsilon}\right), \hspace{1cm} 1\leq D_b <2,
\end{equation}
where $N(\epsilon)$ is the number of squares of side length $\epsilon$ that are needed to cover the basin boundary~\cite{Ott}.
The box-counting dimension is related to the uncertainty exponent $\alpha\equiv 2-D_b$, which gives the probability $\rho$ that a measurement of uncertainty $\epsilon$ will fail to determine the final state of an orbit \cite{Ott}
\begin{equation}
\rho(\epsilon)\sim \epsilon^{\alpha}.
\end{equation}
It should be mentioned that $D_f$ cannot be used to make a general conclusion for the whole system since basin of attraction plots are produced for specific sets of initial conditions. Moreover, $r_{ms}$ and, to a lesser extent $\ce_o$, depend on $a$. This makes choosing consistent sets of initial conditions for different values of $a$ tricky. We preferred to take the sets of initial conditions identical to those of the basin of attraction plots in Figs.~\ref{fig:anti-lar} and~\ref{fig:lar}, in which the dependence of $r_{ms}$ on $a$ is taken into account. We kept the sets of $\ce$ unchanged for simplicity. The dependence of $D_b$ on $a$ is shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:Df vs. a} for (a) anti-Larmor motion and (b) Larmor motion.
\begin{figure*}[ht]
\begin{center}
\ba
&&\hspace{0cm}\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{Dfvsal.eps}
\hspace{.2cm}\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{Dfvsaal.eps}\non\\
&&\hspace{4.cm}({\bf a})\hspace{7.2cm}({\bf b})\non
\ea
\caption{The box-counting dimension $D_b$ of the basin of attraction plots of (a) Fig.~\ref{fig:anti-lar} and (b) Fig.~\ref{fig:lar} vs. $a$.}\label{fig:Df vs. a}
\end{center}
\end{figure*}
\nin For Larmor retrograde motion $D_b$ is nearly constant while it is linearly increasing, within error, for the remaining cases. It is not surprising that $D_b$ increases with $a$ since the 'gravitational field' gets more intense as $r_{ms}$ gets closer to the horizon. As mentioned above, the $D_b$--$a$ relation depends on the set of initial conditions chosen. For example, $D_b$ becomes inversely proportional to $a$ if $r_o\in[4M,10M]$ is chosen instead.
\section{Summary}\label{sum}
We have studied the escape of neutral and charged particles kicked from circular orbits around a weakly magnetized rotating black hole. It was found that the escape of a neutral particle depends mainly on the proximity of its initial orbit to the black hole. If the particle's orbit is very close to the horizon it always gets captured. If the orbit is far enough from the horizon then it always escapes if it is made energetically free. When the orbit lies between these escape and capture regions, the particle can escape if it can be made energetically free and outwardly accelerating.
The problem is more involved for charged particles. The dynamics becomes chaotic. The final fate of a charged particle was also found to depend mainly on the initial orbit's radius. The escape and capture regions are not as lucid as in the case of a neutral particle, however. The chaoticness in the dynamics manifests itself in the boundaries between different regions of capture and escape in the space of initial conditions.
There does not seem to be an explicit general relationship between the black hole's rotation and the chaoticness in the dynamics. Instead, a restricted relationship can be given for specific sets of initial conditions. Nonetheless, the dynamics appears to be more chaotic near the black hole's horizon where the gravitational field is stronger.
It would be interesting to see how the problem develops when further sophistications are involved. Namely, when more realistic magnetic fields, more general initial orbits and more general kicks with physical kicking mechanisms are used. While these modifications may enrich the problem, we expect its main features to be sustained.
|
\section{Introduction}
$\mathcal{N}=(2,2)$ superconformal field theories play an important role as
world-sheet descriptions of superstrings. There are various
constructions and approaches known: the geometric construction as
non-linear sigma model, rational coset constructions (Kazama-Suzuki
models), and the realisation as infrared fixed-point of a
supersymmetric Landau-Ginzburg model (see e.g.\ \cite{Greene:1996cy}
for a review). Each approach has
advantages and disadvantages, in the sense that there are certain
quantities that are easy to compute, and others that are
difficult. For example, in the rational construction one has good
control over the correlation functions, and many quantities can be
determined exactly, but on the other hand, it is hard to compute
deformations of the theory, because the large rational symmetry is
then broken. In contrast to that, in Landau-Ginzburg models
deformations of the superpotential are easily described, but only few quantities
can be computed exactly, namely those that are protected when one
follows the renormalisation group flow to the infrared. It is
therefore desirable to make contact between the different approaches
to combine the advantages and to learn more about the different
descriptions. The connection between the geometric and the
Landau-Ginzburg description is achieved via gauged linear sigma
models~\cite{Witten:1993yc}, and in this way one has obtained a good understanding of the
moduli space of such theories.
We are interested here in the connection between rational theories and
their Landau-Ginzburg realisation. It is known that there is a large
class of supersymmetric coset models that have a Landau-Ginzburg
description, a subclass of the Kazama-Suzuki models~\cite{Kazama:1989qp,Kazama:1988uz}. Within this class
there are the Grassmannian Kazama-Suzuki models that have a
description as cosets $SU(n+1)_{k}/U(n)$. The superpotentials of the
corresponding Landau-Ginzburg theories have been identified
in~\cite{Lerche:1989uy,Gepner:1991gr}, relying on the
identification of the chiral ring of bulk fields.
In rational theories, one also has a distinguished family of rational
boundary conditions and defects, and it is therefore natural to study
those and to look for their counterparts on the Landau-Ginzburg
side. This has been studied for (products of) minimal models and
orbifolds thereof
in~\cite{Brunner:2003dc,Kapustin:2003rc,Brunner:2005pq,Brunner:2005fv,Enger:2005jk,Keller:2006tf}. In
these models the rational algebras are (products of) super-Virasoro
algebras, so that the algebraic structures are rather simple. A
non-minimal situation has been explored in~\cite{Behr:2010ug}, where
we identified matrix factorisations for some rational boundary
conditions in the $SU(3)/U(2)$ Kazama-Suzuki model. The strategy there
was to identify first some elementary factorisations, and then build
others with the help of the cone construction as tachyon condensates
of elementary ones. This approach, however, cannot be driven very far,
because the cones in question quickly become very complicated.
\smallskip
In this work we want to continue to study the $SU(3)/U(2)$ model, but
following a different approach. The idea is to generate new boundary
conditions by fusing defects onto known boundary conditions. If we
have identified the appropriate defects as matrix factorisations, we
can use them to generate new matrix factorisations for boundary
conditions from known ones by taking tensor products of matrix factorisations.
To identify matrix factorisations for defects, we make use of an
interface between the $SU(3)/U(2)$ Kazama-Suzuki model and the product of two minimal
models that we introduced in~\cite{Behr:2012xg}. The fusion of this variable
transformation interface to a matrix factorisation has a simple
operator-like description: it can be implemented by a simple operation
acting individually on each entry of the matrix factorisation.
Fusing this interface to a matrix factorisation in the minimal
models results in a matrix factorisation for the Kazama-Suzuki
model. This interface then allows us to identify a matrix
factorisation for a particular rational topological defect in the
Kazama-Suzuki model. Fusing this defect to the matrix factorisations
identified in~\cite{Behr:2010ug}, we generate matrix factorisations
for all rational boundary conditions.
\smallskip
The plan of the paper is as follows. In section~\ref{sec:MFs} we
review matrix factorisations for B-type boundary conditions in
Landau-Ginzburg models and the variable transformation interface
between the Kazama-Suzuki model and products of minimal
models. Section~\ref{sec:CFT} gives an introduction to the conformal
field theory description of Kazama-Suzuki models. We discuss rational boundary
conditions and renormalisation group flows between them. Defects and
their fusion to boundary conditions are briefly reviewed. After these
preparations we discuss in section~\ref{sec:rationalfactorisations}
the construction of matrix factorisations for rational boundary
conditions. We show how the factorisations of~\cite{Behr:2010ug} can
be obtained from permutation factorisations in the product of two
minimal models with the help of the variable transformation
interface. We also discuss how the interface relates the computation of RR-charges in
Kazama-Suzuki models to computations in minimal models. Finally the
interface is used to construct a certain topological defect in the
Landau-Ginzburg description that then allows us to algorithmically determine matrix
factorisations for all rational boundary conditions. We compute a
large class of them explicitly, and formulate a concrete proposal for
all such factorisations. We have collected
some of the more technical steps in the appendix.
\section{Matrix factorisations and variable transformation
interfaces}\label{sec:MFs}
In this section we introduce the description of B-type boundary
conditions in Landau-Ginzburg models as matrix factorisations. We then
review the construction of variable transformation interfaces, and
discuss in detail the interface between the $SU(3)/U(2)$ Kazama-Suzuki
model and the product of two minimal models.
\subsection{Matrix factorisations in Landau-Ginzburg models}
B-type boundary conditions in $\mathcal{N}=(2,2)$ supersymmetric
Landau Ginzburg models can be described by matrix factorisations $Q$
of the superpotential $W$
(see~\cite{Kontsevich:unpublished,Kapustin:2002bi,Orlov:2003yp,Brunner:2003dc,Kapustin:2003ga}). We
want to consider a polynomial superpotential $W(x_{1},\dotsc ,x_{n})$,
and the factorisation $Q$ is then a polynomial square matrix of the form
\begin{equation}
Q=\begin{pmatrix}
0 & Q^{(1)}\\
Q^{(0)} & 0
\end{pmatrix}
\end{equation}
such that
\begin{equation}
Q^{2} = W \cdot \ensuremath{\mathbf{1}} \ .
\end{equation}
The spectrum of chiral primary boundary fields is encoded in terms of
morphisms between matrix factorisations. Let $Q_{1}$ and $Q_{2}$ be
two matrix factorisations of size $2q_{1}$ and $2q_{2}$,
respectively. $Q_{i}$ implements an endomorphism on $R^{2q_{i}}$, where
$R=\mathbb{C}[x_{1},\dotsc ,x_{n}]$ is the polynomial ring in the
variables $x_{1},\dotsc ,x_{n}$. There is a natural $\mathbb{Z}_{2}$
grading on these free modules, $R^{2q_{i}}=R^{q_{i}}\oplus R^{q_{i}}$,
such that $Q_{i}$ defines an odd map. Also morphisms $\phi_{n}$
between $Q_{1}$ and $Q_{2}$ come with a $\mathbb{Z}_{2}$ degree
$n$. They are given by even ($n=0$) or odd ($n=1$) homomorphisms from $R^{2q_{1}}$ to $R^{2q_{2}}$
that satisfy the closure condition
\begin{equation}
Q_{2}\,\phi_{n} - (-1)^{n} \phi_{n}\, Q_{1} = 0 \ .
\end{equation}
In addition, two morphisms that differ by an exact morphism of the form
\begin{equation}\label{exact}
\tilde{\phi}_{n} = Q_{2}\,\psi + (-1)^{n}\psi \, Q_{1}
\end{equation}
are identified.
If for two matrix factorisations $Q_{1}$, $Q_{2}$ there is a homomorphism
$\phi_{0}$ between $Q_{1}$ and $Q_{2}$, and a homomorphism
$\psi_{0}$ between $Q_{2}$ and $Q_{1}$, such that
$\phi_{0}\circ \psi_{0}$ and $\psi_{0}\circ \phi_{0}$
coincide with the identity up to exact terms~\eqref{exact}, then we
say that these two matrix factorisations are equivalent.
In particular if the factorisations $Q_{1}$ and $Q_{2}$ are of the same size and are related by
a similarity transformation $\mathcal{U}$,
\begin{equation}
Q_{2} = \mathcal{U} \cdot Q_{1} \cdot \mathcal{U}^{-1} \ ,
\end{equation}
then $Q_{1}$ and $Q_{2}$ are equivalent with $\phi_{0}=\mathcal{U}$ and $\psi_{0}=\mathcal{U}^{-1}$.
Given two factorisations $Q_{1}$ and $Q_{2}$ and an odd morphism
$\phi_{1}$ from $Q_{1}$ to $Q_{2}$, one can build a new factorisation
$C (Q_{1},Q_{2};\phi_{1})$ by the so-called cone construction that is
related to the process of tachyon condensation (see e.g.\
\cite{Herbst:2004zm,govindarajan:2005im}),
\begin{equation}
C (Q_{1},Q_{2};\phi_{1}) = \begin{pmatrix}
Q_{1} & 0\\
\phi_{1} & Q_{2}
\end{pmatrix} \ .
\end{equation}
\subsection{Variable transformation interfaces}
We can describe B-type interfaces between Landau-Ginzburg models with
superpotentials $W^{x}(x_{1},\dotsc ,x_{m})$ and $W^{y} (y_{1},\dotsc
,y_{n})$ by matrix factorisations of the difference $W^{x}-W^{y}$ of
the superpotentials~\cite{Brunner:2007qu} (see
also~\cite{Kapustin:2004df,Khovanov:2004}). They can be fused to other
matrix factorisations by means of the tensor product of matrix
factorisations~\cite{Yoshino:1998,Khovanov:2004}.
If the two superpotentials are related to each other by a variable transformation,
\begin{equation}\label{vartrans}
y_{j} \mapsto Y_{j} (x_{1},\dotsc ,x_{m}) \ ,
\end{equation}
that expresses the $y_{j}$ as polynomials in the variables $x_{i}$, such that
\begin{equation}
W^{x} (x_{1},\dotsc ,x_{m}) = W^{y}(Y_{1} (x_{1},\dotsc
,x_{m}),\dotsc ,Y_{n} (x_{1},\dotsc ,x_{m})) \ ,
\end{equation}
there is a particular \emph{variable transformation interface}
$_{y}I_{x}$ that we introduced in~\cite{Behr:2012xg}. The fusion of
this interface to other matrix factorisations can be described in a
simple way as we will review in the following.
If we denote the polynomial rings in $x_{i}$ and $y_{i}$ variables by
$S$ and $R$, respectively, the variable
transformation~\eqref{vartrans} defines a ring homomorphism $Y$,
\begin{equation}
Y : R \to S \quad ,\quad Y : p (y_{1},\dotsc ,y_{n}) \mapsto p
(Y_{1} (x_{1},\dotsc ,x_{m}),\dotsc ,Y_{n} (x_{1},\dotsc ,x_{m})) \ .
\end{equation}
Using this homomorphism we can view $S$ as an $(S,R)$-bimodule
$_{S}S_{R}$ or as an $(R,S)$-bimodule $_{R}S_{S}$. This defines two
functors, the \emph{extension of scalars} $Y^{*}$ maps $R$-modules to
$S$-modules by tensoring with $_{S}S_{R}$, and the \emph{restriction of
scalars} $Y_{*}$ maps $S$- to $R$-modules by tensoring with
$_{R}S_{S}$.
Let us discuss the first one, $Y^{*}$, more explicitly. First we
observe that this functor maps finite rank free $R$-modules to
finite rank free $S$-modules of the same rank,
\begin{equation}
_{S}S_{R} \otimes_{R} \big({}_{R}R\oplus \dotsb \oplus {}_{R}R \big) \cong
{}_{S}S \oplus \dotsb \oplus {}_{S}S \ .
\end{equation}
A homomorphism between finite rank free $R$-modules, which can be viewed as a
matrix with polynomial entries in the variables $y_{i}$, is mapped to
the homomorphism between $S$-modules that is obtained by replacing all
variables $y_{i}$ by the polynomials $Y_{i} (x_{1},\dotsc ,x_{m})$. So
it acts by replacement of variables: it takes polynomial matrices in variables $y_{j}$ and
maps them to polynomial matrices in variables $x_{i}$.
The second one, $Y_{*}$, maps an $S$-module to an $R$-module by
tensoring it with $_{R}S_{S}$,
\begin{equation}
_{S}M \mapsto {}_{R}S_{S}\otimes_{S}{}_{S}M \ .
\end{equation}
This is in general not a finite rank free $R$-module, even if
$_{S}M$ was a finite rank free $S$-module. If on the other hand
$_{R}S$ as an $R$-module is free and of finite rank,
\begin{equation}
\rho : {}_{R}R^{\oplus r} \xrightarrow{\sim} {}_{R}S \ ,
\end{equation}
with $\rho$ an $R$-module isomorphism, then a free $S$-module $_{S}M$
of rank $d$ is mapped to a free $R$-module of rank $r\cdot d$. In this
case, its action on homomorphisms can also be described very
concretely: given any homomorphism $\phi$ of free $S$-modules of
finite rank, we can represent it by a matrix whose entries $\phi_{ij}$
are polynomials in $S$. The homomorphism between the images of the
modules under $Y_{*}$ is then described by the matrix that is
obtained by replacing each entry $\phi_{ij}$ by a $r\times r$-block
that describes the map $\rho^{-1}\circ \phi_{ij}\circ \rho$. Therefore
the functor $Y_{*}$ maps matrices in the variables $x_{i}$ to (in
general larger) matrices in the variables $y_{j}$.
To summarise, we have introduced two functors that on polynomial entries act as
\begin{align}
Y^{*} (p (y_{1},\dotsc ,y_{n})) &= p \big(Y_{1} (x_{1},\dotsc
,x_{m}),\dotsc ,Y_{n} (x_{1},\dotsc ,x_{m}) \big)\\
Y_{*} ( p (x_{1},\dotsc ,x_{m})) & = \rho^{-1}\circ p\circ \rho \
.
\label{actionofyUx}
\end{align}
These two functors describe the fusion of the variable transformation
interface $_{y}I_{x}$: fusing it to the left, it acts by replacement
of variables (i.e.\ via $Y^{*}$), fusing it to the right it acts by $Y_{*}$.
\smallskip
The simplest example of a variable transformation interface is
obtained if the rings are the same, $S=R$, and the map $Y=\sigma$ is an
automorphism of $R$. In this case, $Y^{*}$ acts by replacing variables
according to $Y$, whereas the action of $Y_{*}$ is given by the
inverse $Y^{-1}$. In case the two superpotentials are the same, and
$\sigma$ is a symmetry of $W$, these interfaces are also known as
group-like defects or symmetry defects~\cite{Frohlich:2006ch,Brunner:2007qu,Carqueville:2009ev}.
\subsection{Kazama-Suzuki models}\label{sec:ks-minmod-functor}
We now come to our key example, which will be important for the rest
of this paper. These are the \emph{Grassmannian Kazama-Suzuki models}
$SU(n+1)/U(n)$, where we will be interested in particular in the case
$n=2$.
\noindent For general $n\geq 1$, we consider the superpotential
\begin{equation}
W^{x}_{n;k} (x_{1},\dotsc ,x_{n}) = x_{1}^{k+n+1}+\dotsb +x_{n}^{k+n+1}\ ,
\end{equation}
where $n,k\geq 1$ are integers. As $W^{x}$ is completely symmetric in
$x_{1},\dotsc,x_{n}$, we can express it in terms of the elementary
symmetric polynomials
\begin{equation}
Y_{j} (x_{1},\dotsc ,x_{n}) = \sum_{1\leq i_{1}<\dotsb <i_{j}\leq n} x_{i_{1}}\cdot \dotsb
\cdot x_{i_{j}} \quad ,\ j=1,\dotsc ,n \ ,
\end{equation}
to obtain a superpotential $W^{y}$ in variables $y_{1},\dotsc ,y_{n}$ such that
\begin{equation}
W^{y}_{n;k} (Y_{1} (x_{1},\dotsc ,x_{n}),\dotsc ,Y_{n} (x_{1},\dotsc
,x_{n})) = W^{x}_{n;k} (x_{1},\dotsc ,x_{n}) \ .
\end{equation}
The superpotential $W^{x}$ describes the tensor product of $n$ minimal
models, whereas $W^{y}$ describes the $SU(n+1)/U(n)$ Kazama-Suzuki
model (see~\cite{Gepner:1988wi,Lerche:1989uy}). We are now
precisely in the setup of the previous subsection, and we can define a
variable transformation interface $_{x}I_{y}$ between these models. It
acts on the right just by replacing the variables $y_{j}$ by
$Y_{j}(x_{1},\dotsc ,x_{n})$. To understand its behaviour on the left,
i.e.\ its action on the $x$-variables, we have to understand the
structure of $S=\mathbb{C}[x_{1},\dotsc,x_{n}]$ as a module over
$R=\mathbb{C}[y_{1},\dotsc ,y_{n}]$. In the following we want to
restrict to the case $n=2$. We choose the explicit
$R$-module isomorphism $\rho$ between $R\oplus R$ and $_{R}S$ as
\begin{equation}
\rho : \big(p_{1} (y_{1},y_{2}),p_{2} (y_{1},y_{2}) \big) \mapsto
p_{1} (x_{1}+x_{2},x_{1}x_{2}) + (x_{1}-x_{2})
p_{2} (x_{1}+x_{2},x_{1}x_{2}) \ .
\end{equation}
The inverse is then given by
\begin{equation}
\rho^{-1}: p (x_{1},x_{2}) \mapsto \bigg(p_{S}
(x_{1},x_{2})\Big|_{y},\frac{1}{x_{1}-x_{2}}p_{A}
(x_{1},x_{2})\Big|_{y}\bigg)\ ,
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
p_{S/A} (x_{1},x_{2}) =\frac{1}{2}\big(p(x_{1},x_{2})\pm
p(x_{2},x_{1})\big)\ ,
\end{equation}
and for a symmetric polynomial $q(x_{1},x_{2})$
we denote by $q(x_{1},x_{2})|_{y}$ the polynomial in $y$-variables
from which one obtains $q(x_{1},x_{2})$ when one replaces $y_{i}$ by
$Y_{i}(x_{1},x_{2})$.
The functor $Y_{*}$ sends an $S$-module of rank $r$ to
an $R$-module of rank $2r$. On homomorphisms it acts by replacing each
polynomial entry by a $2\times 2$ matrix. With the explicit
isomorphism $\rho$ given above, the action of $Y_{*}$ on a
polynomial $p(x_{1},x_{2})$ can be determined
from~\eqref{actionofyUx}, and it is given by
\begin{equation}\label{ksexample-actionofyUx}
Y_{*}:p \mapsto \begin{pmatrix}
p_{S}\big|_y & (x_{1}-x_{2})p_{A} \big|_{y}\\
\frac{p_{A}}{x_{1}-x_{2}}\big|_{y} & p_{S}\big|_{y}
\end{pmatrix} \ .
\end{equation}
This variable transformation interface can then be used to relate
defects and boundary conditions in Kazama-Suzuki models to those in
minimal models. It lies at the heart of the constructions in this paper.
\section{Boundaries and Defects in Kazama-Suzuki models}\label{sec:CFT}
In this section we review the construction of rational boundary conditions
in Grassmannian Kazama-Suzuki model with emphasis on the
model based on the coset $SU(3)/U(2)$. We also discuss
renormalisation group flows of boundary conditions, and topological
defects and their fusion to boundaries.
\subsection{Bulk theory}
Kazama-Suzuki models~\cite{Kazama:1989qp,Kazama:1988uz} are rational
$\mathcal{N}=(2,2)$ superconformal field theories that are constructed as cosets
\begin{equation}
\frac{G_{k}\times SO (d)_{1}}{H}\ ,
\end{equation}
where $d$ is the difference between the dimension of the simple Lie
group $G$ and the dimension of its regularly embedded subgroup
$H$. The integer $k$ is the level, and for $\mathcal{N}=(2,2)$
supersymmetry, the geometric space $G/H$ has to be K{\"a}hler.
A particularly interesting class of such models are the Grassmannian
models based on $G=SU(n+1)$ and $H=U(n)$, and in this work we specify
the model further by considering the case $n=2$.
In the following we briefly review the spectrum of the $SU(3)/U(2)$
model. More details can be found e.g.\ in~\cite{Behr:2010ug}.
The primary fields (w.r.t.\ the bosonic subalgebra of the chiral
symmetry algebra) are labelled by tuples $(\Lambda ,\Sigma;\lambda ,\mu)$ where
\begin{itemize}
\item $\Lambda=(\Lambda_{1},\Lambda_{2})$ is an $su(3)$ highest weight
($\Lambda_{1},\Lambda_{2}$ being the non-negative integer Dynkin
labels) satisfying $\Lambda_{1}+\Lambda_{2}\leq k$, and it labels a (unitary irreducible)
representation of the affine Lie algebra $su(3)_{k}$,
\item $\Sigma\in\{0,v,s,c\}$ labels representations of $so(4)_{1}$
(with the corresponding representations being the trivial
representation, vector, spinor and conjugate spinor),
\item $\lambda$ is a highest weight of $su(2)$, with $0\leq \lambda\leq k+1$
labelling a representation of the affine $su(2)_{k+1}$,
\item $\mu$ is an integer modulo $6(k+3)$ labelling
representations of $u(1)_{6(k+3)}$.
\end{itemize}
There is a selection rule on the allowed labels that reads
\begin{equation}
\frac{\Lambda_{1}+2\Lambda_{2}}{3} + \frac{|\Sigma |}{2}
-\frac{\lambda}{2}+\frac{\mu}{6} \in \mathbb{Z} \ ,
\end{equation}
where $|\Sigma|=0$ for $\Sigma =0,v$ and $|\Sigma|=1$ for
$\Sigma=s,c$. Finally, tuples are identified according to
\begin{equation}
((\Lambda_{1},\Lambda_{2}),\Sigma;\lambda,\mu) \sim
((k-\Lambda_{1}-\Lambda_{2},\Lambda_{1}),v\times
\Sigma;k+1-\lambda,\mu+ (k+3))\ ,
\end{equation}
where $v\times \cdot$ denotes the fusion with the vector
representation, which exchanges on the one hand $0$ and $v$, and on
the other hand $s$ and $c$.
In the spectrum there are chiral primary fields corresponding to the tuples
\begin{equation}\label{chiralprimary}
((\Lambda_{1},\Lambda_{2}),0;\Lambda_{1},\Lambda_{1}+2\Lambda_{2}) \ ,
\end{equation}
and they can be labelled by representations
$(\Lambda_{1},\Lambda_{2})$ of $su(3)$.
\subsection{Boundary conditions}
According to how the supercurrents are glued at the boundary of the
world-sheet we distinguish between A-type and B-type gluing
conditions~\cite{Ooguri:1996ck}. Here we are only interested in B-type
gluing conditions. Rational boundary conditions can be constructed
following the Cardy construction~\cite{Cardy:1989ir}. In the diagonal
$SU(3)/U(2)$ coset model, maximally symmetric B-type boundary states
$|L,S;\ell \rangle$ are labelled by two integers $L,\ell$ with $0\leq
L\leq \lfloor \frac{k}{2}\rfloor$, $0\leq \ell\leq k+1$, and an
$so(4)_{1}$ representation $S$ (see e.g.\ \cite{Behr:2010ug}, and
also~\cite{Ishikawa:2003kk} for a general discussion of twisted
boundary states in Kazam-Suzuki models). Here, $\lfloor x\rfloor$
denotes the greatest integer smaller or equal $x$. Choosing a
particular sign in the gluing condition for the supercurrents, we can
restrict to $S=0,v$. We introduce the notation
\begin{equation}
|L,\ell \rangle := |L,0;\ell\rangle \quad \text{and}\quad
\overline{|L,\ell \rangle} := |L,v;\ell \rangle \ .
\end{equation}
Because of field identifications and selection rules, we have to identify
\begin{equation}\label{bsidentification}
|L,\ell\rangle \equiv \overline{|L,k+1-\ell\rangle} \ .
\end{equation}
The boundary spectrum is given by ($q=e^{2\pi i\tau}$,
$\tilde{q}=e^{-2\pi i/\tau}$)
\begin{multline}
\langle L,\ell|q^{\frac{1}{2} (L_{0}+\bar{L}_{0})-\frac{c}{24}}|L',\ell'\rangle\\
= \sum_{[\Lambda,\Sigma;\lambda,\mu]} n_{\Lambda L}{}^{L'} \big(
N^{(k+1)}_{\lambda\ell}{}^{\ell'}\delta_{\Sigma,0}
+ N^{(k+1)}_{\lambda(k+1-\ell)}{}^{\ell'}\delta_{\Sigma,v}\big)\chi_{(\Lambda,\Sigma;\lambda,\mu)} (\tilde{q}) \big)\ .
\end{multline}
Here, the sum only goes over equivalence classes
of bulk labels, and $N^{(k+1)}$ denotes the fusion rules of
$su(2)_{k+1}$, $N^{\text{so}}$ the fusion rules of $so(4)_{1}$, and
\begin{equation}\label{twistedfusionrules}
n_{\Lambda L}{}^{L'} = \sum_{\lambda} b^{\Lambda}_{\lambda}
\left(N^{(k+1)}_{\lambda L}{}^{L'} - N^{(k+1)}_{(k+1-\lambda)L}{}^{L'} \right)
\end{equation}
are twisted fusion rules of $su(3)_{k}$ (see e.g.\ \cite{Gaberdiel:2002qa}). In the last expression the
branching rules $b^{\Lambda}_{\lambda}$ of the decomposition of $su(3)$ representations
$\Lambda =(\Lambda_{1},\Lambda_{2})$ into
representations $\lambda$ of its regularly embedded subalgebra $su(2)$ appear.
We will later need the branching rules that describe how an $su(3)$
representation $(\Lambda_{1},\Lambda_{2})$ decomposes into
representations $(\lambda;\mu)$ of $su(2)\oplus u(1)$,
\begin{equation}\label{branching}
(\Lambda_{1},\Lambda_{2}) \to \sum_{\lambda,\mu}
b^{\Lambda}_{(\lambda;\mu)} (\lambda;\mu) =
\sum_{\gamma_{1}=0}^{\Lambda_{1}}\sum_{\gamma_{2}=0}^{\Lambda_{2}}
\big(\gamma_{1}+\gamma_{2}; 3(\gamma_{1}-\gamma_{2})
+ 2(\Lambda_{2}-\Lambda_{1})\big) \ .
\end{equation}
From this we directly read off the branching needed
in~\eqref{twistedfusionrules} by ignoring the $u(1)$ label $\mu$.
\subsection{Boundary renormalisation group flows}
When relevant boundary fields are present, one can study the boundary
renormalisation group flows induced by those fields. Such boundary
flows have been studied in general cosets in the limit of large
levels~\cite{Fredenhagen:2001nc,Fredenhagen:2001kw,Fredenhagen:thesis}. There
is one class of flows that is conjectured to be present at all
levels~\cite{Fredenhagen:2002qn,Fredenhagen:2003xf,Bachas:2009mc}, which we will
briefly describe here.
Applied to the $SU(3)/U(2)$ Kazama-Suzuki models, the rule
of~\cite{Fredenhagen:2002qn,Fredenhagen:2003xf} predicts the following
renormalisation group flows:
\begin{equation}
\sum_{\lambda,\ell'} b^{\Lambda^{+}}_{\lambda}\,
N^{(k+1)}_{\lambda\ell}{}^{\ell'}\,|L,\ell'\rangle
\longrightarrow \sum_{L'} n_{\Lambda L}{}^{L'}\, |L',\ell \rangle \ ,
\end{equation}
where $\Lambda=(\Lambda_{1},\Lambda_{2})$ is an arbitrary highest
weight with $\Lambda_{1}+\Lambda_{2}\leq k$ labelling a representation
of $su(3)_{k}$, and $\Lambda^{+}=(\Lambda_{2},\Lambda_{1})$ is the
conjugate representation. $b^{\Lambda}_{\lambda}$ denotes the
branching of the $su(3)$ representation $\Lambda$ into $su(2)$
representations $\lambda$ (see~\eqref{branching}). The field that
induces this flow is a linear combination of fields labelled by
$((0,0),0;1,\pm 3)$.
A simple example of such a flow is given by $\Lambda = (1,0)$, and it reads
\begin{multline}\label{simplestflow}
|L,\ell -1\rangle + |L,\ell\rangle + |L,\ell +1\rangle \\
\longrightarrow \left\{\begin{array}{ll}
|L-1,\ell \rangle + |L,\ell\rangle + |L+1,\ell\rangle &
\text{for}\
L\not= \frac{k}{2}\\
|L-1,\ell\rangle & \text{for}\ L=\frac{k}{2} \ .
\end{array} \right.
\end{multline}
If a label happens to lie outside the allowed range, the corresponding
boundary state has to be omitted (e.g.\ for $\ell=0$ the first state
on the left hand side can be left out).
A nice outcome of this flow rule is that one can obtain all boundary
states from a subset of states by perturbing suitable superpositions
of boundary states. Successively using the flow~\eqref{simplestflow}
one can e.g.\ start from the states $|0,\ell\rangle$ and obtain all others.
\subsection{Defects and fusion}\label{sec:RCFTdefects}
We can also study topological defects in these models, and here we
will focus on defects with B-type gluing conditions for the
supercurrents. The rational defects carry the same labels as the bulk fields,
$D_{[\Lambda,\Sigma ;\lambda,\mu]}$ \cite{Petkova:2000ip}. By fixing the sign in the gluing
condition for the supercurrents we can restrict the set of defects to
those with $\Sigma =0,v$.
Topological defects can be fused to
boundaries~\cite{Petkova:2000ip,Graham:2003nc}. Using a B-type defect,
a B-type boundary condition is transformed into a superposition of
B-type boundary conditions,
\begin{equation}\label{eq:FSdefBrane}
D_{[\Lambda ,0;\lambda ,\mu]} |L,\ell\rangle =
\sum n_{\Lambda L}{}^{L'}\, N^{(k+1)}_{\lambda \ell}{}^{\ell'} \,
|L',\ell'\rangle \ .
\end{equation}
Defects that only differ in the label $\mu$ have an identical effect
on B-type boundary conditions.
As an example consider the defect $D_{[(0,0),0;1,3]}$. Fusing this
defect to boundary conditions is described by
\begin{equation}\label{examplefusion}
D_{[(0,0),0;1,3]} |L,\ell \rangle = |L,\ell +1\rangle +
|L,\ell -1\rangle \ ,
\end{equation}
where the last boundary condition is omitted if $\ell =0$. Therefore,
starting from $|L,0\rangle$ one can generate all other boundary
conditions by fusing $D_{[(0,0),0;1,3]}$.
\section{Matrix factorisations for rational boundary
conditions}\label{sec:rationalfactorisations}
In this section we want to discuss matrix factorisations of the
Landau-Ginzburg superpotential $W^{y}_{2;k}$ that leads to the
$SU(3)/U(2)$ Kazama-Suzuki model. In particular we want to identify
those factorisations that correspond to rational boundary conditions in
the conformal field theory.
We first review the identification of some of the rational boundary
conditions as polynomial factorisations (i.e. where the matrix
factorisations $Q$ are $2\times 2$-matrices) \cite{Behr:2010ug}, and how one can
obtain some higher factorisations via the cone construction. Then we will discuss
how one can employ defects for a systematic construction of all matrix
factorisations corresponding to rational boundary conditions.
\subsection{Polynomial factorisations}\label{sec:polynomialMF}
The superpotential of the $SU(3)/U(2)$ Kazama-Suzuki model is given by
\begin{align}
W^{y}_{2;k} (y_{1},y_{2}) &= \big(
x_1^{k+3}+x_2^{k+3}\big)\Big\vert_{\begin{array}{rcl}
= \prod_{j=0}^{k+2}\big(x_{1} - \eta^{2j+1}x_{2} \big)\Big\vert_{\begin{array}{rcl}\nonumber\\
&= \prod_{j=0}^{\lfloor\frac{k+1}{2} \rfloor} (y_{1}^{2}-\delta
_{j}y_{2}) \cdot \left\{\begin{array}{ll}
y_{1} & \text{for}\ k\ \text{even}\\
1 & \text{for}\ k\ \text{odd} \ ,
\end{array} \right.\label{eq:WKSdef}
\end{align}
where
\begin{equation}
\eta = e^{i\pi /(k+3)} \quad ,\quad
\delta_{j} = \frac{\big(1+\eta^{2j+1}\big)^{2}}{\eta^{2j+1}} \ .
\end{equation}
The product form of the superpotential allows us to easily write down
factorisations $Q^{(1)}\cdot Q^{(0)}=W^{y}_{2;k}$ with polynomials
$Q^{(1)}$ and $Q^{(0)}$. Among those polynomial factorisations we
could identify in~\cite{Behr:2010ug} those that correspond to rational boundary
conditions. One class that can be identified in this way consists of
the boundary conditions $|L,0\rangle$, and the associated
factorisations are
\begin{equation}\label{eq:QLzeroMFs}
Q_{|L,0\rangle} = \begin{pmatrix}
0 & \mathcal{J}_{|L,0\rangle}\\
\mathcal{J}_{\overline{|L,0\rangle}} & 0
\end{pmatrix}\ ,
\end{equation}
with
\begin{equation}\label{cJs}
\mathcal{J}_{|L,0\rangle}= \prod_{j=0}^{L} \mathcal{J}_{j} \quad ,\quad \mathcal{J}_{j} =
y_{1}^{2}-\delta_{j}y_{2} \quad ,\quad \mathcal{J}_{\overline{|L,0\rangle}}=
\frac{W^{y}_{2;k}}{\mathcal{J}_{|L,0\rangle}} \ .
\end{equation}
The identification in~\cite{Behr:2010ug} is based on the comparison of the
spectra of chiral primary fields, and of the RR-charges.
For even $k$ there is another class of rational boundary conditions
that have a description in terms of polynomial factorisations. These
are the boundary conditions $|\frac{k}{2},\ell \rangle$ -- details can
be found in~\cite{Behr:2010ug}.
\smallskip
In section~\ref{sec:ks-minmod-functor} we introduced the variable
transformation interface~$_{y}I_{x}$ between the $SU(3)/U(2)$
Kazama-Suzuki model and two copies of minimal models at level
$k+1$. Let us briefly discuss how one can obtain the factorisations
$Q_{|L,0\rangle}$ in the Kazama-Suzuki model from factorisations in
the product of minimal models by interface fusion. The simplest
factorisations in the product of two minimal models are the polynomial
factorisations, which are called permutation
factorisations~\cite{Brunner:2005fv} (see
also~\cite{Ashok:2004zb,Ashok:2004xq}). A subset of those corresponds
to rational boundary states, namely the permutation boundary
states~$|L,M\rangle_{\text{perm}}$, which are labelled by two numbers,
$L=0,\dotsb,k+1 $ and $M$ being an integer identified modulo $2k+6$,
such that $L+M$ is even. In~\cite{Brunner:2005fv} these have been
identified with the factorisations
\begin{align}
Q_{|L,M\rangle_{\text{perm}}}&=\begin{pmatrix}
0& Q^{(1)}_{|L,M\rangle_{\text{perm}}}\\
Q^{(0)}_{|L,M\rangle_{\text{perm}}} & 0
\end{pmatrix}\nonumber\\
&=\begin{pmatrix}
0 & {\displaystyle\prod_{j=-\frac{M+L}{2}-1}^{-\frac{M-L}{2}-1}} \big(x_{1}-\eta^{2j+1}x_{2}\big)\\
{\displaystyle\prod_{-\frac{M-L}{2}}^{k+1-\frac{M+L}{2}}} \big(x_{1}-\eta^{2j+1}x_{2}\big) & 0
\end{pmatrix}\ .
\label{permutationMF}
\end{align}
Let us now fuse the interface $_{y}I_{x}$ onto the factorisation
$Q_{|2L,0\rangle_{\text{perm}}}$. We first note that we can rewrite the
product that appears in $Q^{(1)}_{|2L,0\rangle_{\text{perm}}}$ as
\begin{equation}
Q^{(1)}_{|2L,0\rangle_{\text{perm}}} =
\big(x_{1}-\eta^{-2L-1}x_{2}\big)\prod_{j=0}^{L-1} \mathcal{J}_{j}
(y_{1},y_{2})\Big|_{\begin{array}{rcl} \ .
\end{equation}
The effect of fusing $_{y}I_{x}$ is given by the functor $Y_{*}$ defined
in~\eqref{ksexample-actionofyUx}. When we apply it to
$Q^{(1)}_{|2L,0\rangle_{\text{perm}}}$, we obtain
\begin{align}
Y_{*} \big(Q^{(1)}_{|2L,0\rangle_{\text{perm}}}\big) &=
\prod_{j=0}^{L-1}\mathcal{J}_{j} (y_{1},y_{2})\cdot \begin{pmatrix}
\frac{1}{2} \big(1-\eta^{-L-1}\big) y_{1} &
\frac{1}{2} \big(1+\eta^{-L-1}\big) \big(y_{1}^{2}-4y_{2}\big)\\
\frac{1}{2} \big(1+\eta^{-L-1}\big) & \frac{1}{2} \big(1-\eta^{-L-1}\big) y_{1}
\end{pmatrix} \nonumber\\
&\to \begin{pmatrix}
\prod_{j=0}^{L}\mathcal{J}_{j} (y_{1},y_{2}) & 0 \\
0 & \prod_{j=0}^{L-1}\mathcal{J}_{j} (y_{1},y_{2})
\end{pmatrix} \ ,
\end{align}
where we performed a similarity transformation in the second step. We thus see that
\begin{equation}\label{KS-bc-from-minmod}
_{y}I_{x}\otimes Q_{|2L,0\rangle_{\text{perm}}} \cong
Y_{*} (Q_{|2L,0\rangle_{\text{perm}}}) \cong
Q_{|L,0\rangle}\oplus Q_{|L-1,0\rangle} \ ,
\end{equation}
where it is understood that $Q_{|L-1,0\rangle}$ is absent when $L=0$.
\subsection{RR-charges}
The interface $_{y}I_{x}$ between the $SU(3)/U(2)$ Kazama-Suzuki model
and the two minimal models can also be used to relate correlators in
these theories. As a simple example we study the RR-charge, which can be
considered as a disc one-point function of the corresponding RR-field.
The chiral primaries in the $SU(3)/U(2)$ Kazama-Suzuki model are
labelled by an $SU(3)$ representations with Dynkin labels
$(\Lambda_{1},\Lambda_{2})$ (see~\eqref{chiralprimary}) and can be
expressed as polynomials in the variables $y_{1},y_{2}$ (see e.g.\ \cite{Behr:2010ug}),
\begin{equation}
\Phi_{(\Lambda_{1},\Lambda_{2})} (y_{1},y_{2}) =
\sum_{r=0}^{\lfloor\Lambda_{1}/2\rfloor} (-1)^{r}
\binom{\Lambda_{1}-r}{r} y_{1}^{\Lambda_{1}-2r}\,y_{2}^{\Lambda_{2}+r}
\ .
\end{equation}
The chiral primary fields are related to the Ramond ground states by
spectral flow. Only the Ramond ground states with zero
$U(1)_{R}$-charge have non-trivial one-point functions in the
presence of a B-type boundary conditions, the corresponding chiral
primary fields are given by $\Phi_{(k-2j,j)}$ with
$j=0,\dotsc ,\lfloor\frac{k}{2}\rfloor$. The one-point function in the
presence of the factorisation $Q_{|L,0\rangle}$ is given by
(see~\cite{Behr:2010ug})\footnote{Notice that the expression here
differs from the one in~\cite{Behr:2010ug} by a sign, which is only a
matter of convention regarding the definition of the one-point function.}
\begin{equation}
\langle \Phi_{(k-2j,j)}\rangle_{|L,0\rangle} = -\sum_{i=0}^{L}
\big(\eta^{(2i+1)(j+1)}+\eta^{-(2i+1)(j+1)} \big) \ .
\end{equation}
On the other hand in the minimal models, the chiral primary fields
corresponding to chargeless Ramond ground states are labelled by
\begin{equation}
\Psi_{j} (x_{1},x_{2}) = x_{1}^{j}x_{2}^{k+1-j} \ .
\end{equation}
In the presence of a boundary given by the factorisation
$Q_{|L,M\rangle_{\text{perm}}}$, one can straightforwardly compute the RR one-point
function using the Kapustin-Li formula~\cite{Kapustin:2003ga,Herbst2005}, and one finds
\begin{equation}
\langle \Psi_{j}\rangle_{|L,M\rangle_{\text{perm}}} =
\sum_{i=-\frac{M+L}{2}-1}^{-\frac{M-L}{2}-1} \eta^{(2i+1)(j+1)} \ .
\end{equation}
What is the relation between the RR-charges in the two theories? We
observed before (see~\eqref{KS-bc-from-minmod}) that the interface $_{y}I_{x}$ maps
$|2L,0\rangle_{\text{perm}}$ to $|L,0\rangle \oplus |L-1,0\rangle$. We
therefore have the expectation that\footnote{Similar computations have appeared for (generalised) orbifolds of Landau-Ginzburg models in~\cite{Brunner2014,Brunner2014a}.}
\begin{equation}\label{RRexpectation}
\langle \Phi_{(k-2j,j)}\rangle_{|L,0\rangle \oplus |L-1,0\rangle} =
\langle \tilde{\Phi}_{(k-2j,j)}\rangle_{|2L,0\rangle_{\text{perm}}} \ ,
\end{equation}
where $\tilde{\Phi}_{(k-2j,j)}$ is the minimal model field that is
obtained when the interface acts on $\Phi_{(k-2j,j)}$. This is
illustrated in figure~\ref{fig:interface}.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{RRchargeIllustration}
\caption{\label{fig:interface}Consider a disc correlator with a bulk
field $\Phi$ inserted at the centre, and the interface $_{y}I_{x}$
inserted around it (see the central illustration to the left). Then we
can either shrink the interface around the insertion to produce a
field insertion by a field $\tilde{\Phi}$, or we let the interface
cycle grow until it hits the boundary to produce a new boundary
condition. In this way we can relate two bulk one-point functions on
the disc.}
\end{figure}
In~\cite{Carqueville:2012st,Carqueville2012} it has been worked out how an interface
acts on a bulk field. Applying these methods one can see that the
action of a variable transformation interface $_{x}I_{y}$ on a field
$\Phi(y_{j})$ is in general given by
\begin{equation}
\tilde{\Phi} (x_{i}) = \det \left(\frac{\partial Y_{r}}{\partial
x_{s}} \right) \Phi \big(Y_{j} (x_{i})\big) \ .
\end{equation}
In our case we obtain
\begin{align}
\tilde{\Phi}_{(k-2j,j)} (x_{1},x_{2}) &= (x_{1}-x_{2}) \cdot \Phi_{(k-2j,j)} (x_{1}+x_{2},x_{1}x_{2})\nonumber\\
&= (x_{1}-x_{2}) \sum_{i=0}^{k-2j} x_{1}^{i+j}x_{2}^{k-i-j}\nonumber\\
&= x_{1}^{k-j+1}x_{2}^{j} - x_{1}^{j}x_{2}^{k-j+1} \nonumber\\
&= \Psi_{k-j+1} (x_{1},x_{2}) - \Psi_{j} (x_{1},x_{2})\ .
\end{align}
Therefore the right hand side of~\eqref{RRexpectation} evaluates to
\begin{align}
\langle \tilde{\Phi}_{(k-2j,j)}\rangle_{|2L,0\rangle_{\text{perm}}} &=
\sum_{i=-L-1}^{L-1}\big(\eta^{(2i+1)(k+2-j)}-\eta^{(2i+1)(j+1)}
\big)\nonumber\\
&=- \sum_{i=-L-1}^{L-1}\big(\eta^{-(2i+1)(j+1)}+\eta^{(2i+1)(j+1)}
\big)\nonumber\\
&=- \sum_{i=0}^{L-1} \big(\eta^{(2i+1)(j+1)} + \eta^{-(2i+1)(j+1)}
\big) \nonumber\\
&\qquad - \sum_{i=0}^{L} \big(\eta^{(2i+1)(j+1)} + \eta^{-(2i+1)(j+1)} \big)
\ ,
\end{align}
which precisely equals the left hand side
of~\eqref{RRexpectation}.
\subsection{Higher factorisations from cones}
To construct matrix factorisations for other rational boundary conditions,
one can make use of the known flows between different boundary
states~\cite{Behr:2010ug}, which we will review now. Evaluating the
flow~\eqref{simplestflow} for $\ell =0$,
we obtain
\begin{equation}\label{flow}
|L,0\rangle + |L,1\rangle \longrightarrow |L-1,0\rangle +
|L,0\rangle + |L+1,0\rangle \ .
\end{equation}
Translated in the matrix factorisation language this means that we
expect that the factorisation corresponding to the right hand side can
be obtained as a cone from the two factorisations that correspond to
the left hand side of the flow~\eqref{flow}.
In other words,
$Q_{|L,1\rangle}$ can be obtained as a cone from
$Q_{\overline{|L,0\rangle}}$ and the superposition $Q_{|L-1,0\rangle}\oplus
Q_{|L,0\rangle}\oplus Q_{|L+1,0\rangle}$. This in turn can be
rewritten~\cite{Behr:2010ug} as a cone of $Q_{|L,0\rangle}$ and the factorisation
\begin{equation}
\tilde{Q}_{L} = \begin{pmatrix}
0 & \mathcal{J}_{L+1}\mathcal{J}_{|L-1,0\rangle} \\
\mathcal{J}_{L}\mathcal{J}_{\overline{|L+1,0\rangle}} & 0
\end{pmatrix} \ .
\end{equation}
Explicitly we find
\begin{equation}
Q_{|L,1\rangle} = C
\left(
Q_{|L,0\rangle},\tilde{Q}_{L}, y_{1}
\begin{pmatrix}
0 & \mathcal{J}_{|L-1,0\rangle} \\
-\mathcal{J}_{\overline{|L+1,0\rangle}} & 0
\end{pmatrix}
\right) \ ,
\end{equation}
such that
\begin{subequations}
\begin{align}\label{L1factorisation1}
Q^{(1)}_{|L,1\rangle} &=
\begin{pmatrix}
\mathcal{J}_{L} & 0\\
y_{1} & \mathcal{J}_{L+1}
\end{pmatrix}\mathcal{J}_{|L-1,0\rangle}\\
Q^{(0)}_{|L,1\rangle} &=
\begin{pmatrix}
\mathcal{J}_{L+1} & 0\\
-y_{1} & \mathcal{J}_{L}
\end{pmatrix}\mathcal{J}_{\overline{|L+1,0\rangle}} \ .
\end{align}
\end{subequations}
In principle one can use the same strategy to obtain factorisations
for $|L,\ell\rangle$ for $\ell\geq 2$ by the cone construction. There are,
however, two obstacles in this approach, one of technical nature, the
other one being a conceptual problem. On the technical side one faces
the problem that the factorisations in question become larger and
larger, and the computations are feasible only by means of a computer
program. In fact, the flow rule~\eqref{flow} leads to a realisation of
$Q_{|L,1\rangle}$ as an $8\times 8$ matrix (that can then be reduced
to the $4\times 4$ matrix that we saw above), and similarly the
general flow rule~\eqref{simplestflow} leads to an ansatz where the
$Q_{|L,2\rangle}$ factorisations are already $32\times 32$ matrices,
and the $Q_{|L,3\rangle}$ are of size $128\times 128$.
Even with the help of rather efficient SINGULAR
codes and considerable amounts of computer processing power, the
authors were not able to push this type of search much beyond the
$Q_{|L,2\rangle}$ type factorisations, with only a few sporadic matches for
$Q_{|L,3\rangle}$, and the codes not being executable due to
memory limitations already for the $Q_{|L,4\rangle}$ type factorisations.
There is also a conceptual problem in this approach. For the
$|L,1\rangle$ boundary states, one can uniquely identify the field
that is responsible for the flow by its $U(1)_{R}$-charge, and
therefore one is led to a unique ansatz for the cone. This is in general
not true for $|L,2\rangle$ and beyond. This problem is also reflected
by the presence of marginal boundary fields for the $|L,2\rangle$
boundary condition (if $L\not= k/2$): it can be smoothly deformed to other
boundary states. Correspondingly, the associated matrix factorisations
can be deformed, and within this continuous family of $|L,2\rangle$-like
factorisations it is hard to identify the one that corresponds
precisely to $|L,2\rangle$.
This is why we look for a different approach to obtain the higher
factorisations, which will be based on special operator-like
defects in the theory as we will discuss in the following.
\subsection{Higher factorisations from defect fusion}\label{sec:HF1}
Besides the cone construction, which we employed in the last
subsection, we can also use fusion of defects or interfaces to
generate new factorisations. We have seen in
section~\ref{sec:polynomialMF} that we can generate the $|L,0\rangle$
factorisations from permutation factorisations in minimal models by
fusing the variable transformation interface $_{y}I_{x}$, namely
\begin{equation}
_{y}I_{x}\otimes Q_{|2L,0\rangle_{\text{perm}}} \cong Y_{*} (Q_{|2L,0\rangle_{\text{perm}}}) \cong Q_{|L-1,0\rangle}
\oplus Q_{|L,0\rangle} \ .
\end{equation}
What happens if we tensor $_{y}I_{x}$ to other permutation
factorisations? Let us look at the factorisations corresponding to
the permutation boundary states
$|2L+1,1\rangle_{\text{perm}}$. From~\eqref{permutationMF} we see that
the upper right entry is
\begin{equation}
Q^{(1)}_{|2L+1,1\rangle_{\text{perm}}} = (x_{1}-\eta^{-2L-3}x_{2}) (x_{1}-\eta^{-2L-1}x_{2})
\prod_{j=0}^{L-1}\mathcal{J}_{j} (y_{1},y_{2})\Big|_{\begin{array}{rcl}\ .
\end{equation}
Fusing the variable transformation interface to this factorisation,
i.e.\ applying the functor $Y_{*}$, we obtain
\begin{align}
&Y_{*}\big( Q^{(1)}_{|2L+1,1\rangle_{\text{perm}}} \big)
= \prod_{j=0}^{L-1} \mathcal{J}_{j} (y_{1},y_{2})\times \nonumber\\
&\times \begin{pmatrix}
\frac{1+\eta^{-4L-4}}{2}y_{1}^{2} - (1-\eta^{-2L-1}) (1-\eta^{-2L-3})
& \frac{1-\eta^{-2L-4}}{2}y_{1} (y_{1}^{2}-4y_{2}) \\
\frac{1-\eta^{-2L-4}}{2}y_{1} & \frac{1+\eta^{-4L-4}}{2}y_{1}^{2} - (1-\eta^{-2L-1}) (1-\eta^{-2L-3})
\end{pmatrix}\nonumber\\
& \to \begin{pmatrix}
\mathcal{J}_{L} & 0\\
y_{1} & \mathcal{J}_{L+1}
\end{pmatrix}\mathcal{J}_{|L-1,0\rangle}\ ,
\end{align}
where we performed a similarity transformation in the last step. This
is precisely $Q^{(1)}_{|L,1\rangle}$ (see~\eqref{L1factorisation1}),
so that we find
\begin{equation}
Y_{*}\big(Q_{|2L+1,1\rangle_{\text{perm}}} \big) \cong
Q_{|L,1\rangle} \ .
\end{equation}
We found again that a rational boundary condition is mapped to a
rational one by the variable transformation interface.
There is, however, much more that we can conclude from this
finding. In fact we expect from the rational conformal field theory description that
there is a defect $D_{[(0,0),0;1,3]}$ that maps $|L,0\rangle$ to
$|L,1\rangle$. A natural ansatz would be to look for a rational defect $\tilde{D}$
in the minimal model theory, and then fusing it from the left with
$_{y}I_{x}$ and from the right with $_{x}I_{y}$ to obtain a defect in
the Kazama-Suzuki model,
\begin{equation}
D_{[(0,0),0;1,3]} = {}_{y}I_{x}\otimes \tilde{D}\otimes {}_{x}I_{y} \ .
\end{equation}
We know that under fusion with $D_{[(0,0),0;1,3]}$ the factorisation
$Q_{|L,0\rangle}$ should be mapped to $Q_{|L,1\rangle}$. Fusing the
variable transformation interface onto $Q_{|L,0\rangle}$ leads to
the factorisation $Q_{|2L+1,-1\rangle_{\text{perm}}}$. On the other hand we just derived
that $Q_{|2L+1,1\rangle_{\text{perm}}}$ is mapped to $Q_{|L,1\rangle}$
when we fuse $_{y}I_{x}$. Therefore we demand that the defect
$\tilde{D}$ maps $|2L+1,-1\rangle_{\text{perm}}$ to $|2L+1,1\rangle_{\text{perm}}$.
In fact there is a symmetry defect, $Q_{\{1\}}\otimes
Q_{\{\eta^{2}\}}$ that acts as the identity defect in the first
minimal model factor, and as the symmetry defect realising the
automorphism $\sigma_{\eta^{2}}:x_{2}\to\eta^2 x_{2}$ in the second
minimal model. We therefore conjecture that
\begin{equation}
\tilde{D} = Q_{\{1\}} \otimes Q_{\{\eta^{2}\}} \ .
\end{equation}
This is again a simple example of a variable transformation interface,
whose fusion is described by the functor $\sigma_{\eta^{2}}^{*}$ that
acts trivially on the variable $x_1$ and replaces the variable $x_{2}$ by $\eta^{2}x_{2}$. The fusion of
the defect $D_{[(0,0),0;1,3]}$ can then be described by the functor
\begin{equation}\label{defofD}
D_{(1)} = Y_{*} \circ \sigma_{\eta^{2}}^{*} \circ Y^{*} \ .
\end{equation}
We have thus identified a candidate for a defect in the Landau-Ginzburg
theory whose action on the boundary conditions $Q_{|L,0\rangle}$
coincides precisely with what we expect from the fusion of the defect
$D_{[(0,0),0;1,3]}$ on the boundary condition $|L,0\rangle$. This is
of course not a proof that we identified the defect correctly in the
Landau-Ginzburg model, and we briefly want to discuss two obvious ways
how one could try to modify the proposal. Firstly we might modify the proposal by
choosing instead of $Q_{\{1 \}}\otimes Q_{\eta^{2}}$ the symmetry defect
\begin{equation}\label{}
Q_{\{\eta^{2m}\}}\otimes Q_{\{\eta^{2(m+1)}\}} \ ,
\end{equation}
which would lead to the same action on boundary conditions
$Q_{|L,0\rangle}$. To decide which choice is the correct one, we have
to act with the defect on other defects. From the conformal field theory we
expect the fusion
\begin{equation}
D_{[(0,0),0;1,3]} * D_{[(0,0),0;1,3]} = D_{[(0,0),0;2,6]} \oplus
D_{[(0,0),0;0,6]} \ .
\end{equation}
The second defect is a symmetry defect that corresponds to the phase
shifts
\begin{equation}
y_{1}\mapsto \eta^{2}y_{1}\,,\; y_{2}\mapsto \eta^{4}y_{2}\ ,
\end{equation}
which means that we know its identification on the Landau-Ginzburg
side. By looking at the above fusion of the defect $D_{[(0,0),0;1,3]}$
with itself in the Landau-Ginzburg theory (which we will present in~\cite{NBSFtwo2014}), we can therefore confirm that we made the correct choice.
The second obvious question one should investigate is whether there
are any smooth deformations of this defect, so that there would be a
whole family of defects with similar properties. As one can show
from a computation of the conformal field theory spectrum, we do not expect any fermionic morphisms of
the corresponding matrix factorisations, and
therefore no deformations. This provides
further evidence that we have identified the defect correctly.
Having identified $D_{[(0,0),0;1,3]}$ in the Landau-Ginzburg model,
one can then use it to construct higher factorisations, which we will
do in the following subsection.
\subsection{Matrix factorisations for all rational boundary conditions}
With the help of the defect $D_{[(0,0),0;1,3]}$ we can in principle
determine all matrix factorisations corresponding to rational boundary
conditions. In fact, we know from the conformal field theory that
(see~\eqref{examplefusion})
\begin{equation}
D_{[(0,0),0;1,3]} |L,\ell \rangle = |L,\ell -1\rangle
+ |L,\ell+1\rangle \ ,
\end{equation}
where it is understood that the first boundary condition on the right
is not present for $\ell=0$. For the factorisations this means that
\begin{equation}
D_{(1)} \big(Q_{|L,\ell\rangle} \big) \cong Q_{|L,\ell-1\rangle}
\oplus Q_{|L,\ell+1\rangle} \ .
\end{equation}
Starting from $Q_{|L,0\rangle}$ one can generate all
$Q_{|L,\ell\rangle}$ by successively applying $D_{(1)}$. The
technical challenge that remains is to decompose the fusion result
into the direct sum of two factorisations.
\subsubsection{A closed formula for rational matrix factorisations
$Q_{|0,\ell\rangle}$}\label{sec:zeroell}
We now want to investigate this problem for the factorisations of type $Q_{|0,\ell\rangle}$. They are
generated from the factorisation $Q_{|0,0\rangle}$ which is a $2\times
2$ matrix whose upper right block $Q_{|0,0\rangle}^{(1)}$ is the polynomial $\mathcal{J}_{0}$
(see~\eqref{eq:QLzeroMFs}). Applying $D_{(1)}$ once we obtain a matrix
factorisation for $|0,1\rangle$ whose upper right block (after a
similarity transformation) is given by (see~\eqref{L1factorisation1})
\begin{equation}
D_{(1)} (\mathcal{J}_{0}) \cong Q_{|0,1\rangle}^{(1)} = \begin{pmatrix}
\mathcal{J}_{0} & 0\\
y_{1} & \mathcal{J}_{1}
\end{pmatrix} \ .
\end{equation}
We see the polynomial factors $\mathcal{J}_{n}$ appearing on the diagonal. In
the full matrix factorisation $Q_{|0,1\rangle}$ they appear as part of
the matrix factorisation blocks
\begin{equation}
Q_{n} = \begin{pmatrix}
0 & \mathcal{J}_{n}\\
\bar{\mathcal{J}}_{n} & 0
\end{pmatrix}
\end{equation}
with $\bar{\mathcal{J}}_{n}=W^{y}_{2;k}/\mathcal{J}_{n}$.
When we want to apply $D_{(1)}$ once more, we first have to understand its
action on these blocks $Q_{n}$. We will need later a result not only
for $Q_{0}$ and $Q_{1}$, but for a general factorisation $Q_{n}$. Introducing the notation
\begin{align}\label{defplusminus}
\pi_{p}&=\frac{1}{2} \big(1+\eta^{p}\big) & \mu_{p}&=\frac{1}{2}\big (1-\eta^{p}\big) \ ,
\end{align}
the factor $\mathcal{J}_{n}$ (see~\eqref{cJs}) can be expressed as
\begin{equation}\label{eq:JpolyDef}
\mathcal{J}_{n} = y_{1}^{2}\mu_{2n+1}\mu_{-2n-1} +
\lambda_{1}^{2}\pi_{2n+1}\pi_{-2n-1} \ ,
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
\lambda_{1}^{2}:= y_{1}^{2}-4y_{2} = (x_{1}-x_{2})^{2}\Big|_{\begin{array}{rcl} \ .
\end{equation}
Applying $D_{(1)}$ (given in~\eqref{defofD}) to $Q_{n}$ we find for
the upper right block $Q_{n}^{(1)}=\mathcal{J}_{n}$
\begin{align}
D_{(1)} \big(\mathcal{J}_{n} \big) &= Y_{*} \Big( (x_{1}+\eta^{2}x_{2})^{2}\mu_{2n+1}\mu_{-2n-1} +
(x_{1}-\eta^{2}x_{2})^{2 }\pi_{2n+1}\pi_{-2n-1} \Big)\\
&= \begin{pmatrix}
y_1^2\mu_{2n+3}\mu_{-2n+1}+\lambda_1^2\pi_{2n+3}\pi_{-2n+1} & 2y_1\lambda_1^2 \mu_{2}\pi_{2}\\
2y_1\mu_{2}\pi_{2}
&y_1^2\mu_{2n+3}\mu_{-2n+1}+\lambda_1^2\pi_{2n+3}\pi_{-2n+1}
\end{pmatrix} \\
&= (\mathcal{U}^{(0)}_n)^{-1}\cdot \mathcal{J}_{n(1)}\cdot \mathcal{U}^{(1)}_n
\label{eq:D1onJn}
\end{align}
with
\begin{equation}\label{cJn1}
\mathcal{J}_{n(1)}=\begin{pmatrix}
\mathcal{J}_{n-1} & 0\\
y_1 & \mathcal{J}_{n+1}
\end{pmatrix}\ .
\end{equation}
In the last step we performed a similarity transformation to define a
convenient form $Q_{n(1)}$ for the factorisation $D_{(1)}(Q_{n})$,
\begin{equation}\label{Qn1}
Q_{n(1)} = \mathcal{U}_{n} \cdot \big(D_{(1)} (Q_{n}) \big)\cdot
\big(\mathcal{U}_n\big)^{-1}\ ,
\end{equation}
where the transformation $\mathcal{U}_{n}:={}^{1}\mathcal{U}_{n}$is defined by
\begin{align}
{}^{r}\mathcal{U}_n&:=
\mathcal{U}_{row\times}\left(r+1;\frac{1}{\mu_{4}}\right)\cdot
\mathcal{U}_{row\times}\left(r;\frac{\pi_{2n-1}}{\pi_{2n+3}}\right)\cdot
\mathcal{U}_{col\times}\left(r+1;\mu_{4}\frac{\pi_{-2n-3}}{\pi_{-2n+1}}\right)\cdot\nonumber\\
&\qquad \cdot
\mathcal{U}_{col}\left(r,r+1;-\frac{y_1 \mu_{2n+3}}{\pi_{2n+3}}\right)\cdot
\mathcal{U}_{row}\left(r+1,r;\frac{y_1 \mu_{2n-1}}{\pi_{2n-1}}\right)\ .
\label{cUr}
\end{align}
Here, $\mathcal{U}_{row\times}(r;\alpha)$ ($\mathcal{U}_{col\times}(r;\alpha)$) has the
effect of multiplying row $r$ (column $r$) of the upper right block
$Q^{(1)}$ of a matrix factorisation with the constant
$\alpha$. $\mathcal{U}_{col}(r,s;\alpha)$ ($\mathcal{U}_{row} (r,s;\alpha)$) has the
effect on the block $Q^{(1)}$ of adding row $r$ (column $r$) multiplied by
$\alpha$ to row $s$ (column $s$). The precise conventions and explicit formulae for the similarity transformations
are summarised in Appendix~\ref{sec:Utrafos}.
Let us now apply $D_{(1)}$ on $Q_{n(1)}$. The upper right block
$Q_{n(1)}^{(1)}=\mathcal{J}_{n(1)}$ is given in~\eqref{cJn1}, and it has the
factors $\mathcal{J}_{n-1}$ and $\mathcal{J}_{n+1}$ on the diagonal, which will be
mapped to $D_{(1)}(\mathcal{J}_{n\pm 1})$. We then directly apply the
similarity transformations to bring those to the form $\mathcal{J}_{n\pm 1(1)}$,
\begin{align}
D_{(1)} (\mathcal{J}_{n(1)}) & =\begin{pmatrix}
D_{(1)} (\mathcal{J}_{n-1}) & 0\\
D_{(1)} (y_{1}) & D_{(1)} (\mathcal{J}_{n+1})
\end{pmatrix}\\
&= \begin{pmatrix}
\mathcal{U}_{n-1}^{(0)} & 0\\
0 & \mathcal{U}_{n+1}^{(0)}
\end{pmatrix}^{\!\!\!-1}\cdot
\begin{pmatrix}
\mathcal{J}_{{n-1}(1)} & 0\\
\widetilde{D_{(1)}(y_1)}_n & \mathcal{J}_{{n+1}(1)}
\end{pmatrix}\cdot \begin{pmatrix}
\mathcal{U}_{n-1}^{(1)} & 0\\
0 & \mathcal{U}_{n+1}^{(1)}
\end{pmatrix}
\end{align}
with
\begin{align}
\widetilde{D_{(1)}(y_1)}_n&= \mathcal{U}_{n+1}^{(0)} \cdot
D_{(1)}(y_{1}) \cdot (\mathcal{U}_{n-1}^{(1)})^{-1}\\
&=\begin{pmatrix}
\frac{y_1\pi_{2n+3}}{\pi_{2n+5}} & \frac{\mathcal{J}_n \mu_{2}\mu_{4}}{\pi_{2n+5}\pi_{-2n+3}}\\
\frac{1}{2\pi_{2}} & \frac{y_1\pi_{-2n+1}}{\pi_{-2n+3}}
\end{pmatrix}\ .
\end{align}
The effect of the similarity transformation is summarised in the
transformation
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{U}_{n(1)}^{a}:={}^3{}\mathcal{U}_{n+1}\cdot {}^1{}\mathcal{U}_{n-1} \ ,
\end{equation}
where the left superscript $j$ on ${}^{j}\mathcal{U}_{m}$ denotes the row and
column where the corresponding $2\times 2$-block $\mathcal{U}_{m}$ starts (in accordance
with the definition in~\eqref{cUr}).
We can perform further similarity transformations to bring
$D_{(1)}(Q_{n(1)})$ into a convenient form:
\begin{equation}\label{firstsplitting}
\begin{split}
D_{(1)}\big( \mathcal{J}_{n(1)}\big)
&= \big(\mathcal{U}_{n(1)}^{b(0)} \cdot \mathcal{U}_{n(1)}^{a(0)} \big)^{-1}\cdot \begin{pmatrix}
\mathcal{J}_{n-2} & 0 & 0 & 0\\
y_1 & \mathcal{J}_{n} & 0 & 0\\
0 & -\frac{\mathcal{J}_n}{2\pi_{2}\chi_{(n)}} & \mathcal{J}_n & 0\\
\frac{1}{2\pi_{2}} & 0 & y_1 & \mathcal{J}_{n+2}
\end{pmatrix}\cdot \mathcal{U}_{n(1)}^{b(1)}\cdot\mathcal{U}_{n(1)}^{a(1)}\\
&= \big(\mathcal{U}_{n(1)}^{c(0)}\cdot \mathcal{U}_{n(1)}^{b(0)}\cdot \mathcal{U}_{n(1)}^{a(0)}\big)^{-1}\cdot\begin{pmatrix}
\mathcal{J}_{n-2} & 0 & 0 & 0\\
y_1 & 0 & \mathcal{J}_n & 0\\
0 & \mathcal{J}_n & 0 & 0\\
\chi_{(n)} & 0 & y_1 & \mathcal{J}_{n+2}
\end{pmatrix}\cdot\mathcal{U}_{n(1)}^{c(1)}\cdot\mathcal{U}_{n(1)}^{b(1)}\cdot\mathcal{U}_{n(1)}^{a(1)}\ .
\end{split}
\end{equation}
Here, the transformation $\mathcal{U}_{n(1)}^{b}$ is a simple row and column operation that deletes the entries $\propto y_1$,
\begin{equation}\label{defcUb}
\mathcal{U}_{n(1)}^b={}^2{}\mathcal{U}_{n(1)}\,,\quad {}^r{}\mathcal{U}_{n(1)}:=
\mathcal{U}_{col}\left(r+1,r;-\frac{\pi_{-2n+1}}{\pi_{-2n+3}}\right)\cdot\mathcal{U}_{row}\left(r,r+1;-\frac{\pi_{2n+3}}{\pi_{2n+5}}\right)\ ,
\end{equation}
while the transformation $\mathcal{U}_{n(1)}^c$ is defined as
\begin{equation}\label{defcUc}
\begin{split}
\mathcal{U}_{n(1)}^c&={}_{\tilde{c}}^2{}\mathcal{U}_{n(1)}\cdot{}_c^2{}\mathcal{U}_{n(1)}\,\\
{}_c^r{}\mathcal{U}_{n(1)}&:=\mathcal{U}_{col}\left(r,r+1;2\pi_{2}\chi_{(n)}\right)\cdot\mathcal{U}_{row}\left(r+1,r;2\pi_{2} \chi_{(n)}\right)\\
{}_{\tilde{c}}^r{}\mathcal{U}_{n(1)}&:=
\mathcal{U}_{row\times}\left(r-1;\frac{1}{2\pi_{2}\chi_{(n)}}\right)\cdot
\mathcal{U}_{col\times}\left(r-1;2\pi_{2}\chi_{(n)}\right)\\
&\qquad \cdot \mathcal{U}_{row\times}\left(r;\frac{1}{2\pi_{2}\chi_{(n)}}\right)\cdot
\mathcal{U}_{col\times}\left(r;-2\pi_{2}\chi_{(n)}\right) \ .
\end{split}
\end{equation}
For convenience we introduced the quantities
\begin{equation}\label{defchi}
\chi_{(p)}:= \frac{\pi_{-2p+3}\, \pi_{2p+5}}{4\pi_{2}^{2}\,\pi_{-2p+1}\, \pi_{2p+3}}\ .
\end{equation}
Looking at~\eqref{firstsplitting} we see that the matrix
factorisations can be split into the factorisation $Q_{n}$ and a new
factorisation $Q_{n(2)}$ whose upper right block
$Q_{n(2)}^{(1)}=\mathcal{J}_{n(2)}$ is
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{J}_{n(2)} = \begin{pmatrix}
\mathcal{J}_{n-2} & 0 & 0 \\
y_{1} & \mathcal{J}_{n} & 0 \\
\chi_{(n)} & y_{1} & \mathcal{J}_{n+2}
\end{pmatrix} \ .
\end{equation}
In particular, we can identify the factorisation for the boundary state
$|0,2\rangle$ as $Q_{|0,2\rangle}^{(1)}=\mathcal{J}_{0(2)}$.
One can now go on and apply $D_{(1)}$ again. We will show in appendix~\ref{app:B} that in this way one generates a family of factorisations $Q_{n(m)}$ with the property
\begin{equation}
D_{(1)} (Q_{n(m)}) \cong Q_{n(m-1)} \oplus Q_{n(m+1)} \ .
\end{equation}
The upper right block $\mathcal{J}_{n(m)}\equiv Q^{(1)}_{n(m)}$ of $Q_{n(m)}$ is given by
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
\mathcal{J}_{n(m)}&=\begin{pmatrix}
\mathcal{J}_{n-m} & 0 & \cdots &&&&&&\\
y_1 & \mathcal{J}_{n-m+2} & 0 & \cdots &&&&&&\\
\chi_{(n-m+2)} & y_1 & \mathcal{J}_{n-m+4} & 0 & \cdots &&&&&\\
0 & \chi_{(n-m+4)} & y_1 & \mathcal{J}_{n-m+6} & 0 & \cdots &&&&\\
\vdots & \ddots & \ddots & \ddots & \ddots & \ddots & &&&\\
\\
&&&&&& 0 & \chi_{(n+m-2)} & y_1 & \mathcal{J}_{n+m}
\end{pmatrix}\ .
\end{split}\label{eq:rMF}
\end{equation}
This formula applies for odd level $k$ for all $m\leq k+2$, whereas
for even level $k$ it applies for $m+|n|\leq k/2$.
In particular one therefore has found matrix factorisations
$Q_{|0,\ell\rangle}=Q_{0(\ell)}$ for the rational boundary states
$|0,\ell\rangle$. For odd $k$ this covers all boundary states of this
type, whereas for even $k$ we have the restriction $\ell \leq k/2$.
Note however that (see~\eqref{bsidentification})
\begin{equation}
|L,\ell \rangle = \overline{|L,k+1-\ell \rangle} \ ,
\end{equation}
therefore boundary states with $\ell\geq k/2+1$ can be related to boundary
states with smaller label. The operation of taking the anti-boundary state corresponds in the
matrix factorisation to an exchange of the blocks $Q^{(0)}$ and
$Q^{(1)}$. Therefore we have found factorisations for all boundary
states of the form $|0,\ell\rangle$.
\smallskip
As presented in appendix~\ref{sec:closed}, it is possible to
find a very compact alternative closed expression for the form of both
the $\mathcal{J}_{n(m)}\equiv Q^{(1)}_{n(m)}$ block as well as of the $\mathcal{E}_{n(m)}\equiv Q^{(0)}_{n(m)}$ block of the
matrix factorisations $Q_{n(m)}$. Referring to the appendix for the computational details, we would just like to mention here that the derivation is based on two major steps. In the first step, the structure of the $\mathcal{E}_{n(m)}$ blocks is inductively derived from the explicit formula~\eqref{eq:rMF} for $\mathcal{J}_{n(m)}$ via the basic equation
\begin{equation}
Q_{n(m)}^2=W\cdot \mathbb{1}\quad \Leftrightarrow\quad
\mathcal{E}_{n(m)}=W\cdot\left(\mathcal{J}_{n(m)}\right)^{-1}\ .
\end{equation}
The second step consists in applying a series of row and column
operations on the $\mathcal{J}_{n(m)}$ block in order to ``clear out'' all
rows and columns that intersect at a constant entry. According
to~\eqref{eq:rMF}, this leaves a $2\times2$ non-trivial block
$\widehat{\mathcal{J}}_{n(m)}$ in direct sum with $m-1$ trivial matrix factorisation blocks $\mathcal{J}_{triv}$. Upon closer inspection, the aforementioned similarity transformations induce operations on the $\mathcal{E}_{n(m)}$ block that leave the $2\times2$ subblock $\widehat{\mathcal{E}}_{n(m)}$ formed from the overlap of the last two lines and the first two columns of $\mathcal{E}_{n(m)}$ invariant. But since $\widehat{\mathcal{E}}_{n(m)}$ is thus just a subblock of $\mathcal{E}_{n(m)}$, in contrast to $\widehat{J}_{n(m)}$ we already know an explicit formula for $\widehat{\mathcal{E}}_{n(m)}$, and thus in turn also for $\widehat{\mathcal{J}}_{n(m)}$:
\begin{equation}\label{twotworealisation}
\boxed{
\begin{aligned}
\widehat{\mathcal{E}}_{n(m)}&=\begin{pmatrix}
\Psi_{n-1(m-1)} & \Psi_{n(m-2)}\\
\Psi_{n(m)} & \Psi_{n+1(m-1)}
\end{pmatrix}\ ,\\
\widehat{\mathcal{J}}_{n(m)}&=W\widehat{\mathcal{E}}_{n(m)}^{-1}=
\frac{1}{W}
\frac{\prod_{j=0}^{m}\mathcal{J}_{n-m+2j}}{\prod_{j=1}^{m-1}\chi_{(n-m+2j)}}
\begin{pmatrix}
\Psi_{n+1(m-1)} & -\Psi_{n(m-2)}\\
-\Psi_{n(m)} & \Psi_{n-1(m-1)}
\end{pmatrix}\ .
\end{aligned}}
\end{equation}
The explicit formula for the entries $\Psi_{n(m)}$ is given
in~\eqref{app:solforPsi} in appendix~\ref{sec:closed}.
\subsubsection{A closed formula for all rational matrix factorisations}
To obtain expressions for all rational matrix factorisations, we start from the factorisations
$Q_{|L,0\rangle}$ and apply $D_{(1)}$ successively to generate
factorisations for the boundary states $|L,\ell\rangle$,
\begin{equation}
D_{(1)}\big(Q_{|L,\ell\rangle} \big) \cong Q_{|L,\ell-1\rangle} \oplus
Q_{|L,\ell+1\rangle} \ .
\end{equation}
The biggest computational problem is then the decomposition into the
elementary factorisations on the right hand side. This was already
tedious for $L=0$ where we started from a degree~2 polynomial
$\mathcal{J}_{0}$, so a priori, it appears hopeless to find a
closed formula for the factorisations $Q_{|L,\ell\rangle}$ with $\ell>1$, where
the starting polynomial
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{J}_{|L,0\rangle} = \prod_{i=0}^L \mathcal{J}_i
\end{equation}
is of degree $2(L+1)$. We may however rewrite the higher polynomial
factorisations as cones of the elementary polynomial factorisations
(see e.g.\ \cite{Behr:2010ug}), such that (we will again only write
the upper right block of the matrix factorisations)
\begin{equation}\label{eq:JLzeroAlt}
\mathcal{J}_{|L,0\rangle}=\prod_{i=0}^L \mathcal{J}_i \cong \begin{pmatrix}
\mathcal{J}_0 & 0 & \cdots &&&&\\
1 & \mathcal{J}_1 & 0 & \cdots &&&\\
0 & 1 & \mathcal{J}_2 & 0 & \cdots & &\\
\vdots & \ddots & \ddots & \ddots & &&\\
&&&0& 1& \mathcal{J}_{L-1} & 0\\
&&&& 0& 1 & \mathcal{J}_L
\end{pmatrix}\ .
\end{equation}
Each of the diagonal entries of the cone is simply a polynomial
factor $\mathcal{J}_{n}$ of degree $2$. When we now apply $D_{(1)}$
successively, we can in principle use our results of the previous
subsection to obtain factorisations with blocks $\mathcal{J}_{n(m)}$ on the
diagonal.
The difficulty in this approach is that the similarity transformations
that are used to arrive at the blocks $\mathcal{J}_{n(m)}$ will also affect
the morphisms. When we apply $D_{(1)}$ in the first step its action on
the morphisms $1$ is trivial,
\begin{equation}
D_{(1)} (1) = \mathbb{1} \ ,
\end{equation}
but the similarity transformations will produce non-trivial entries. As an example
consider the matrix
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{J}_{p,q} = \begin{pmatrix}
\mathcal{J}_{p} & 0\\
1 & \mathcal{J}_{q}
\end{pmatrix} \ .
\end{equation}
When we apply $D_{(1)}$ on it and transform the diagonal blocks
$D_{(1)}\big(\mathcal{J}_{n}\big)$ into the form $\mathcal{J}_{n(1)}$
(see~\eqref{cJn1}) via the similarity transformations $\mathcal{U}_{n}$
(see~\eqref{Qn1}), we obtain
\begin{equation}
D_{(1)}\big( \mathcal{J}_{p,q}\big) \cong \begin{pmatrix}
\mathcal{J}_{p-1} & 0 & 0 & 0 \\
y_1 & \mathcal{J}_{p+1} & 0 & 0\\
\frac{\pi_{2q-1}}{\pi_{2q+3}} & \frac{y_1\mu_{4}\mu_{2q-2p-4}}{\pi_{2q+3}\pi_{-2p+1}} & \mathcal{J}_{q-1} & 0\\
0 & \frac{\pi_{-2p-3}}{\pi_{-2p+1}} & y_1 & \mathcal{J}_{q+1}\\
\end{pmatrix}\ .
\end{equation}
While now the diagonal blocks are in the right form to apply our
inductive mechanism for finding the result of applying $D_{(1)}$ to
them, we observe that since now the morphisms between the
$Q_{n(1)}$-type blocks have an entry of polynomial degree $>0$
($\propto y_1$), each time we apply $D_{(1)}$ we will generate
consecutively higher degree polynomial morphism entries, thus leading
to an extremely complex morphism structure.
We have instead to look for an alternative standard form for the
$\mathcal{J}_{n(m)}$ that is obtained by using similarity transformations
that leave the morphisms (the identity matrices) unchanged.
A prototype of such a transformation is one that
\begin{itemize}
\item does not depend on $n$, and
\item has identical diagonal blocks, $\mathcal{U}^{(0)}=\mathcal{U}^{(1)}$.
\end{itemize}
Then the morphism entries are unaffected,
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{U}^{(0)}\cdot \mathbb{1}\cdot \big(\mathcal{U}^{(1)}\big)^{-1} = \mathbb{1} \ .
\end{equation}
Our strategy, however, was to allow for all similarity transformations
a priori, and then make sure at the end that all morphisms are again
identity matrices. We conjecture that it is enough to use
transformations with the two properties described above, but it is not
guaranteed from our analysis.
To describe the alternative standard form we found in this way, we
have to introduce some notation. First let us define a
generalisation of the functor $D_{(1)}$,
\begin{equation}
\tilde{D}_{0,m} := Y_{*} \circ \sigma^{*}_{\eta^{2m}}\circ Y^{*} \ ,
\end{equation}
i.e.\ we first express the variables $y_{i}$ through the $x_{j}$, then
map $x_{2}\mapsto \eta^{2m}x_{2}$, and then apply the functor $Y_{*}$
to again obtain a matrix in the variables $y_{i}$. For $m=1$ we have
$D_{(1)}=\tilde{D}_{0,1}$ (see~\eqref{defofD}). The action of
$\tilde{D}_{0,m}$ on an elementary polynomial factor $\mathcal{J}_{n}$ is
given by\footnote{Note that the entries of $\Lambda$ as well as
$\lambda_{1}$ are not elements of the polynomial ring $\mathbb{C}[y_1,y_2]$,
but that the combination $\lambda_{1}\Lambda$ that appears in the
formulae has entries that can be written as polynomials in $y_{1},y_{2}$.}
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}\label{eq:D0monJn}
\tilde{D}_{0,m}\big( \mathcal{J}_n\big)
&=\left(y_1^2 \mu_{2m+2n+1}\mu_{2m-2n-1}+\lambda_1^2 \pi_{2m+2n+1}\pi_{2m-2n-1}\right)\cdot \mathbb{1} + 2y_1\lambda_1 \mu_{2m}\pi_{2m} \Lambda\ ,\\
\Lambda&:=\begin{pmatrix}
0 & \lambda_1\\
\frac{1}{\lambda_1} & 0
\end{pmatrix}\ .
\end{split}
\end{equation}
It is worthwhile to note the origin of the two elementary matrices
$\mathbb{1}$ and $\Lambda$ in this formula, which is simply the
application of the ``symmetrisation fusion functor'' $Y_{*}$ onto
$y_1\equiv x_1+x_2$ and $\lambda_1\equiv x_1-x_2$ (i.e.\ to $y_1$ upon
embedding into the polynomial ring $\mathbb{C}[x_1,x_2]$, and to $\lambda_1$
considered as an element of $\mathbb{C}[x_1,x_2]$):
\begin{equation}
Y_{*} (y_1)=y_1\mathbb{1}\quad ,\quad Y_{*}
(\lambda_1)=\lambda_1\Lambda\ .
\end{equation}
The crucial feature of~\eqref{eq:D0monJn} is the fact that the
off-diagonal entries of $\tilde{D}_{0,m}\big( \mathcal{J}_n\big)$ do not
depend on $n$, i.e.\ on the label of the elementary polynomial~$\mathcal{J}_n$.
For later convenience, we will also define the symbol
$\tilde{\tilde{D}}_{0,m}\big(\mathcal{J}_n\big)$ to denote the
following form for $\tilde{D}_{0,m}\big( \mathcal{J}_n \big)$, which
is obtained via a similarity transformation that rescales the
off-diagonal entries\footnote{This similarity
transformation is independent of $n$ and has identical diagonal
blocks, so it satisfies the two criteria specified above}:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:deftildetildeD}
\begin{split}
\tilde{\tilde{D}}_{0,m}\big( \mathcal{J}_n\big)&:=\tilde{\tilde{\mathcal{U}}}^{(0)}_{m,n}\cdot \left(\tilde{D}_{0,m}\big( \mathcal{J}_n \big)\right)\cdot \tilde{\tilde{\mathcal{U}}}_{m,n}^{(1)^{-1}}\\
&=
\left(y_1^2\mu_{2m+2n+1}\mu_{2m-2n-1}+\lambda_1^2\pi_{2m+2n+1}\pi_{2m-2n-1}\right)\mathbb{1}\\
&\quad +
\begin{pmatrix}
0 & 4\mu_{2m}^{2}\pi_{2m}^{2}y_{1}\lambda_1^2\\
y_1 & 0
\end{pmatrix}\\
\tilde{\tilde{\mathcal{U}}}_{m,n}&:=
\mathcal{U}_{col\times}\left(2;2\mu_{2m}\pi_{2m}\right)\cdot\mathcal{U}_{row\times}\left(2;\frac{1}{2\mu_{2m}\pi_{2m}}\right)\ .
\end{split}
\end{equation}
We want to take this as our new standard form for $\mathcal{J}_{n(1)}$, so we
define
\begin{equation}
\tilde{\mathcal{J}}_{n(1)} := \tilde{\tilde{D}}_{0,1}\big(\mathcal{J}_{n} \big) \ .
\end{equation}
We can immediately conclude that
\begin{equation}
D_{(1)}\big(\mathcal{J}_{|L,0\rangle} \big) \cong \begin{pmatrix}
\tilde{\mathcal{J}}_{0(1)} & 0 & \cdots &&&&\\
\mathbb{1} & \tilde{\mathcal{J}}_{1(1)} & 0 & \cdots &&&\\
0 & \mathbb{1} & \tilde{\mathcal{J}}_{2(1)} & 0 & \cdots & &\\
\vdots & \ddots & \ddots & \ddots & &&\\
&&&0& \mathbb{1}& \tilde{\mathcal{J}}_{L-1(1)} & 0\\
&&&& 0& \mathbb{1} & \tilde{\mathcal{J}}_{L(1)}
\end{pmatrix}\ .
\end{equation}
Now we have to look for similar expressions for $\mathcal{J}_{n(m)}$ for
$m\geq 2$. A tedious computation (some ideas of which are presented in
appendix~\ref{sec:alternativeform}) leads to the following claim: we have found an
alternative form of $Q_{n(m)}$ that we call $\tilde{Q}_{n(m)}$
(related by a similarity transformation) and that satisfies the
following property: denote by $C(p_{1},\dotsc,p_{r};m)$ the cone whose
upper right block is given by
\begin{equation}
C(p_{1},\dotsc,p_{r};m)^{(1)} = \begin{pmatrix}
\tilde{\mathcal{J}}_{p_{1}(m)} & 0 & \cdots &&&&\\
\mathbb{1} & \tilde{\mathcal{J}}_{p_{2}(m)} & 0 & \cdots &&&\\
0 & \mathbb{1} & \tilde{\mathcal{J}}_{p_{3}(m)} & 0 & \cdots & &\\
\vdots & \ddots & \ddots & \ddots & &&\\
&&&0& \mathbb{1}& \tilde{\mathcal{J}}_{p_{r-1}(m)} & 0\\
&&&& 0& \mathbb{1} & \tilde{\mathcal{J}}_{p_{r}(m)}
\end{pmatrix} \ ,
\end{equation}
where as usual $\tilde{\mathcal{J}}_{n(m)}$ is the upper right block of
$\tilde{Q}_{n(m)}$. Then
\begin{equation}\label{fusionofnewstandardform}
D_{(1)}\big( C(p_{1},\dotsc,p_{r};m) \big) \cong
C(p_{1},\dotsc,p_{r};m-1) \oplus C(p_{1},\dotsc,p_{r};m+1)
\end{equation}
for generic $p_{1},\dotsc ,p_{r}$. The alternative standard form $\tilde{\mathcal{J}}_{n(m)}$ is given by
\begin{subequations}
\label{eq:alternativestandardform}
\begin{align}
&\text{for even $m$:} \nonumber\\
&\ \tilde{\mathcal{J}}_{n(m)} ={\begin{pmatrix}
\scriptstyle\eta^{2m}\mathcal{J}_n & \scriptstyle 0 & \scriptstyle \cdots\\
\scriptstyle \eta^{2m-4}\Psi_{0,2} & \scriptstyle \eta^{2m-4}\tilde{\tilde{D}}_{0,2}\big( \mathcal{J}_n\big) & \scriptstyle 0 & \scriptstyle \cdots \\
\scriptstyle 0 & \scriptstyle \eta^{2m-8}\Psi_{2,4} & \scriptstyle \eta^{2m-8}\tilde{\tilde{D}}_{0,4}\big( \mathcal{J}_n\big) & \scriptstyle 0 & \scriptstyle \cdots \\
\scriptstyle\vdots & \scriptstyle\ddots & \scriptstyle \ddots & \scriptstyle \ddots & \scriptstyle \ddots \\
&&&&& \scriptstyle 0 & \scriptstyle \Psi_{m-2,m} & \scriptstyle \tilde{\tilde{D}}_{0,m}\big( \mathcal{J}_n \big)
\end{pmatrix}}\\
&\text{for odd $m$:}\nonumber\\
&\ \tilde{\mathcal{J}}_{n(m)} = {\begin{pmatrix}
\scriptstyle \eta^{2m-2}\tilde{\tilde{D}}_{0,1}\big( \mathcal{J}_n\big) & \scriptstyle 0 & \scriptstyle \cdots\\
\scriptstyle \eta^{2m-6}\Psi_{1,3} & \scriptstyle\eta^{2m-6}\tilde{\tilde{D}}_{0,3}\big( \mathcal{J}_n\big) & \scriptstyle 0 & \scriptstyle \cdots \\
\scriptstyle 0 & \scriptstyle \eta^{2m-10}\Psi_{3,5} & \scriptstyle \eta^{2m-10}\tilde{\tilde{D}}_{0,5}\big( \mathcal{J}_n\big) & \scriptstyle 0 & \scriptstyle \cdots \\
\scriptstyle\vdots & \scriptstyle \ddots & \scriptstyle \ddots & \scriptstyle \ddots & \scriptstyle \ddots \\
&&&&& \scriptstyle 0 & \scriptstyle \Psi_{m-2,m} & \scriptstyle \tilde{\tilde{D}}_{0,m}\big( \mathcal{J}_n\big)
\end{pmatrix}} \ .
\end{align}
\end{subequations}
This formula is obtained by an extrapolation of the pattern one
observes for small values $m$. We expect it to be correct for $m\leq
k+2$ if $k$ is odd, whereas for $k$ even we can from our derivation
only conclude that it should be valid for $m+|p_{i}|\leq k/2$ (see the
discussion in appendix~\ref{sec:finitelevelconstraints}). If on
the other hand our conjecture is correct that the decomposition
in~\eqref{fusionofnewstandardform} can also be done purely by using
similarity transformations that satisfy the two properties formulated
above, i.e.\ by blockwise transformations independent of the label
$p_{i}$, then also the constraint should not depend on the label
$p_{i}$ and we could conclude that the formula is valid for all $m\leq
k/2$.
We can then finally write down a matrix factorisation for a general rational boundary
state $|L,\ell\rangle$ in the form
\begin{equation}\label{eq:QLl}
\mathcal{J}_{|L,\ell\rangle} \cong \begin{pmatrix}
\tilde{\mathcal{J}}_{0(\ell)} & 0 & \cdots &&&&\\
\mathbb{1} & \tilde{\mathcal{J}}_{1(\ell)} & 0 & \cdots &&&\\
0 & \mathbb{1} & \tilde{\mathcal{J}}_{2(\ell)} & 0 & \cdots & &\\
\vdots & \ddots & \ddots & \ddots & &&\\
&&&0& \mathbb{1}& \tilde{\mathcal{J}}_{L-1(\ell)} & 0\\
&&&& 0& \mathbb{1} & \tilde{\mathcal{J}}_{L(\ell)}
\end{pmatrix}\ .
\end{equation}
For odd $k$ this formula should hold for all $L$ and $\ell$, whereas
for even $k$ we have constraints. From the discussion above we
conclude that it should be valid at least for $L+\ell\leq k/2$, but if
our conjecture on the similarity transformation is correct, it should
hold for all $\ell \leq k/2$. If this is true then using the
identification
\begin{equation}
|L,\ell \rangle = \overline{|L,k+1-\ell \rangle}
\end{equation}
one can get a factorisation for every rational boundary state also for
even $k$.
Up to this issue of the constraints due to the level $k$, we have
formulated a \emph{complete dictionary} between
matrix factorisations and rational boundary states for the
Kazama-Suzuki model of type $SU(3)_k/U(2)$.
\subsection{Effects of finite levels}
For a finite level $k$ there are only finitely many rational boundary
states, so that if we continue to apply $D_{(1)}$ we should see
dependencies between the factorisations that arise
due to the identity
\begin{equation}
\eta^{k+3}=-1 \ .
\end{equation}
Checking the dependencies is then another test that we identified the
correct matrix factorisation.
When we successively determine factorisations by applying the fusion
functor $D_{(1)}$ on factorisations $Q_{|L,\ell\rangle}$ we expect our first
interesting effect for the special value $\ell=\lfloor \frac{k+1}{2}\rfloor$:
\begin{align}
\label{app:evenkspecialfusion}
&k\in2\mathbb{Z} &D_{(1)}\big( Q_{|L,\tfrac{k}{2}\rangle}\big)&\cong Q_{|L,\tfrac{k}{2}-1\rangle}\oplus
\underset{=\,Q_{\overline{|L,\tfrac{k}{2}\rangle}}}{\underbrace{Q_{|L,\tfrac{k}{2}+1\rangle}}}\\
&k\in2\mathbb{Z}+1 & D_{(1)}\big( Q_{|L,\tfrac{k+1}{2}\rangle}\big)&\cong Q_{|L,\tfrac{k-1}{2}\rangle}\oplus
\underset{=\,Q_{\overline{|L,\tfrac{k-1}{2}\rangle}}}{\underbrace{Q_{|L,\tfrac{k+3}{2}\rangle}}}\ .
\end{align}
We notice a crucial difference in the cases $k$ odd and $k$ even,
respectively:\footnote{See also Figure~1 of~\cite{Behr:2010ug} for
illustration} for $k$ even, there exists one special irreducible
factor of the superpotential $W^y_{2;k}$ as defined
in~\eqref{eq:WKSdef}, namely the factor
$\mathcal{J}_{\tfrac{k}{2}}=y_1$. We will thus have to discuss the two
cases separately.
For the \emph{case $k$ odd}, all the irreducible factors
$\mathcal{J}_i$ of the superpotential $W_{2;k}^y$ are of the generic
form~\eqref{eq:JpolyDef}, so the only effect of the special label
$\ell=\frac{k+1}{2}$ consists in a number of identifications. For
concreteness, consider the case of the rational matrix factorisations
$Q_{|0,\ell\rangle}$, for which we found earlier the formula
(see~\eqref{eq:rMF})
\begin{equation}\label{app:eq:J0l}
\mathcal{J}_{0({\ell})}=\begin{pmatrix}
\mathcal{J}_{-{\ell}} & 0 & \cdots &&&&&&\\
y_1 & \mathcal{J}_{-{\ell}+2} & 0 & \cdots &&&&&&\\
\chi_{(-{\ell}+2)} & y_1 & \mathcal{J}_{-{\ell}+4} & 0 & \cdots &&&&&\\
0 & \chi_{(-{\ell}+4)} & y_1 & \mathcal{J}_{-{\ell}+6} & 0 & \cdots &&&&\\
\vdots & \ddots & \ddots & \ddots & \ddots & \ddots & &&&\\
\\
&&&&&& 0 & \chi_{({\ell-2})} & y_1 & \mathcal{J}_{{\ell}}
\end{pmatrix}\ ,
\end{equation}
with $\chi_{(p)}$ defined in~\eqref{defchi}.
Using the obvious identification of labels
\begin{equation}\label{app:eq:Jident}
\mathcal{J}_{-n}=y_1^2\mu_{-2n+1}\mu_{2n-1}+\lambda_1^2\pi_{-2n+1}\pi_{2n-1}=\mathcal{J}_{n-1}\ ,
\end{equation}
we observe that the negative labels in~\eqref{app:eq:J0l} are mapped
to positive labels in such a way that for $\ell=\frac{k+1}{2}$ the
list of diagonal entries of $\mathcal{J}_{|0,\ell\rangle}$ exhausts
the list of all irreducible factors (which are labelled
$\mathcal{J}_0,\mathcal{J}_1,\ldots, \mathcal{J}_{\tfrac{k+1}{2}}$ for
$k$ odd). It may be checked that (unlike in the case of $k$ even,
which will be discussed below) no special relations
play a role when applying $D_{(1)}$ to $Q_{|0,\tfrac{k+1}{2}\rangle}$, i.e.\ we obtain our usual result
\begin{equation}
D_{(1)}\big( Q_{|0,\tfrac{k+1}{2}\rangle}\big)\cong
Q_{|0,\tfrac{k-1}{2}\rangle}\oplus Q_{|0,\tfrac{k+3}{2}\rangle}\ .
\end{equation}
The only structural speciality in $Q_{|0,\tfrac{k+3}{2}\rangle}$ stems from the fact that
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{J}_{-\tfrac{k+3}{2}}=\mathcal{J}_{\tfrac{k+1}{2}}
=\mathcal{J}_{\tfrac{k+3}{2}}\ ,
\end{equation}
which may be checked by inspecting~\eqref{eq:JpolyDef}.
In addition, the relation
\begin{equation}\label{app:eq:chiId}
\chi_{(-m)}=\chi_{(m-1)}\ ,
\end{equation}
which follows immediately from the definition~\eqref{defchi} of
$\chi_{(m)}$, may be employed to convert every constant $\chi_{(m)}$
with negative label into one with positive label.
Additional arguments for proving the second part of the claim, i.e.\
that $Q_{|L,\frac{k+3}{2}\rangle}\cong
Q_{\overline{|L,\frac{k-1}{2}\rangle}}$, are introduced below when we discuss the
case of even $k$, but we refrain from carrying out the explicit
computations for brevity, since they are entirely analogous to those
necessary in the more interesting case of $k$ even.
\smallskip
For the \emph{case $k$ even}, we encounter the problem that the
formula~\eqref{app:eq:J0l} for $\mathcal{J}_{0(\ell)}$ is only valid for
$\ell\leq\frac{k}{2}$. Therefore when we want to
check~\eqref{app:evenkspecialfusion}, we cannot directly use the
formula~\eqref{app:eq:J0l} for $Q_{|0,\frac{k}{2}+1\rangle}$. The
problem occurs when $D_{(1)}$ hits the polynomial factor $\mathcal{J}_{p}$ with highest $p$ ($p=k/2$) on
the diagonal of $\mathcal{J}_{0(k/2)}$. We then have (see~\eqref{eq:D0monJn})
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}\label{app:eq:D1onJnSpecialkEven}
D_{(1)}\big( \mathcal{J}_{k/2}\big)&=
\left(y_1^2 \mu_{k+3}\mu_{-k+1}+\lambda_1^2 \pi_{k+3}\pi_{-k+1}\right)\cdot \mathbb{1} + y_1\lambda_1 \mu_{4} \Lambda\\
&=\pi_{-2k-2}y_1^2\mathbb{1}+\mu_{-2k-2}y_1\lambda_1\Lambda\ .
\end{split}
\end{equation}
It is now a straightforward computation to demonstrate that via the similarity transformations
\begin{equation}\label{app:defhatU}
\begin{split}
\hat{\mathcal{U}}_{(k)}&:=
\mathcal{U}_{col\times}\left(1; \frac{1}{\mu_{-2k-2}}\right)\cdot
\mathcal{U}_{row\times}\left(1; \mu_{2k+2}\right)\cdot\\
&\quad\cdot\mathcal{U}_{col}\left(1,2,\frac{y_1 \pi_{2k+2}}{\mu_{2k+2}}\right)\cdot
\mathcal{U}_{row}\left(1,2,\frac{y_1 \pi_{2k+2}}{\mu_{2k+2}}\right)
\end{split}
\end{equation}
we may realise the isomorphism
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}\label{app:eq:D1onJnSpecialkEvenB}
D_{(1)}\big( \mathcal{J}_{k/2}\big)&\cong
\begin{pmatrix}
0 & y_1 \big(\pi_{2k+2}\pi_{-2k-2}y_1^2+\mu_{2k+2}\mu_{-2k-2}\lambda_1^2\big)\\
y_1 & 0
\end{pmatrix}\\
&=\begin{pmatrix}
0 & y_1 \mathcal{J}_{\frac{k}{2}-1}\\
y_1 & 0
\end{pmatrix}\ .
\end{split}
\end{equation}
Here, we have made use of the fact that
\begin{equation}
\pi_{p} = \mu_{p+k+3} \ .
\end{equation}
We are now in the position to determine
$\mathcal{J}_{0(\frac{k}{2}+1)}$ that occurs in the
relation~\eqref{app:evenkspecialfusion} for $L=0$,
\begin{equation}\label{app:eq:SRkEven}
k\in2\mathbb{Z}:\quad D_{(1)}\circ Q_{|0,\frac{k}{2}\rangle}\cong Q_{|0,\frac{k}{2}-1\rangle}\oplus
Q_{|0,\frac{k}{2}+1\rangle}\overset{!}{\cong}
Q_{|0,\frac{k}{2}-1\rangle}\oplus
Q_{\overline{|0,\frac{k}{2}\rangle}}\ .
\end{equation}
We start from the explicit
formula~\eqref{app:eq:J0l} for the factorisation $Q_{|0,\ell\rangle}$, which reads
using the relations~\eqref{app:eq:Jident}
and~\eqref{app:eq:chiId}:
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{J}_{0({\ell})} =\begin{pmatrix}
\mathcal{J}_{\ell -1} & 0 & \cdots &&&&&&\\
y_1 & \mathcal{J}_{\ell -3} & 0 & \cdots &&&&&&\\
\chi_{(\ell-3)} & y_1 & \mathcal{J}_{\ell -5} & 0 & \cdots &&&&&\\
0 & \chi_{(\ell-5)} & y_1 & \mathcal{J}_{\ell -7} & 0 & \cdots &&&&\\
\vdots & \ddots & \ddots & \ddots & \ddots & \ddots & &&&\\
\\
&&&&&& 0 & \chi_{(\ell-2)} & y_1 & \mathcal{J}_{\ell}
\end{pmatrix}\ .
\end{equation}
Here, the entries on the diagonal run from $\mathcal{J}_{\ell-1}$ to
$\mathcal{J}_{\ell-m^{*}}$ in steps of two, where
\begin{equation*}
m^{*}:=\left\{\begin{array}{ll}
\ell & \ell \ \text{odd}\\
\ell -1 & \ell \ \text{even.}
\end{array} \right.
\end{equation*}
Then, if $m^{*}=\ell$, the next diagonal entries after $\mathcal{J}_0$ read
$\mathcal{J}_1,\mathcal{J}_3,\ldots$. Otherwise, we have that
$\mathcal{J}_{\ell-m^{*}}=\mathcal{J}_1$, after which the next entries
read $\mathcal{J}_0,\mathcal{J}_2,\mathcal{J}_4,\ldots$.
At $k=2$ we obtain
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{J}_{|0,1\rangle}=\begin{pmatrix}
\mathcal{J}_{-1} & 0\\
y_1 & \mathcal{J}_1
\end{pmatrix}\ ,
\end{equation}
and we immediately compute
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
D_{(1)}\big( \mathcal{J}_{|0,1\rangle} \big)\bigg\vert_{k=2}&=
\begin{SepA}{c|c}
D_{(1)}\big( \mathcal{J}_{{-1}}\big) & 0\\\hline
D_{(1)}[y_1] & D_{(1)}\big( \mathcal{J}_1\big)
\end{SepA}\\
&\overset{\eqref{app:eq:D1onJnSpecialkEven}}{=}
\begin{SepA}{cc|cc}
\left(y_{1}^2 \mu_1\mu_3+\lambda_1^2\pi_1\pi_3\right) & y_1\lambda_1^2\mu_4 & 0 & 0\\
y_1\mu_4 & \left(y_{1}^2 \mu_1\mu_3+\lambda_1^2\pi_1\pi_3\right) & 0 & 0\\\hline
y_1 \pi_2 & \lambda_1^2 \mu_2 & y_1^2 \mu_{-1} & y_1\lambda_1^2 \pi_{-1}\\
\mu_2 & y_1 \pi_2 & y_1 \pi_{-1} & y_1^2\mu_{-1}
\end{SepA}\ .
\end{split}
\end{equation}
Applying the transformation $\hat{\mathcal{U}}_{k}$ (see~\eqref{app:defhatU})
to the lower right block, and the standard transformation
${}^{1}\mathcal{U}_{-1}$ (given in~\eqref{cUr}) to the upper left block, we
obtain the intermediate result
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
D_{(1)}\big( \mathcal{J}_{|0,1\rangle} \big)\bigg\vert_{k=2}&\cong
\begin{SepA}{cc|cc}
\mathcal{J}_1 & 0 & 0 & 0\\
y_1 & \mathcal{J}_0 & 0 & 0\\\hline
y_1 \pi_3 & \mathcal{J}_0 \frac{\mu_1\pi_1}{\mu_{-1}} & 0 & y_1 \mathcal{J}_0\\
2\mu_1\pi_1 & y_1\frac{\pi_1\pi_{-1}}{\pi_3} & y_1 & 0
\end{SepA}\\
&\cong
\begin{SepA}{cc|cc}
\mathcal{J}_1 & 0 & 0 & 0\\
y_1 & \mathcal{J}_0 & 0 & 0\\\hline
0 & \mathcal{J}_0 \left(\frac{\mu_1\pi_1}{\mu_{-1}} - \pi_3\right)& 0 & y_1 \mathcal{J}_0\\
2\mu_1\pi_1 & 0 & y_1 & 0
\end{SepA}\\
&\cong
\begin{SepA}{cc|cc}
\mathcal{J}_1 & 0 & 0 & 0\\
y_1 & 0 & 0 & y_1 \mathcal{J}_0\\\hline
0 & \mathcal{J}_0 & 0 & 0\\
1 & 0 & y_1 & 0
\end{SepA}\ .
\end{split}
\end{equation}
It is then immediately obvious that this result can be transformed into the form
\begin{equation}
D_{(1)}\big( \mathcal{J}_{|0,1\rangle} \big)\bigg\vert_{k=2}\cong
\begin{SepA}{cc|cc}
0 & 0 & y_1 \mathcal{J}_1 & 0\\
0 & 0 & -y_1^2 & y_1 \mathcal{J}_0\\ \hline
0 & \mathcal{J}_0 & 0 & 0\\
1 & 0 & 0 & 0
\end{SepA}=\mathcal{J}_{triv}\oplus \mathcal{J}_{|0,0\rangle}\oplus
\mathcal{J}_{\overline{|0,1\rangle}}\ ,
\end{equation}
which provides an explicit check of the
relation~\eqref{app:eq:SRkEven} for $k=2$.
Using the same tools as introduced in the computation of the explicit
formula for the rational factorisations $Q_{|0,\ell\rangle}$, we can compute for
example the next two cases for the level $k$:
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
D_{(1)}\big(\mathcal{J}_{|0,2\rangle} \big)\bigg\vert_{k=4}&\cong \mathcal{J}_{|0,1\rangle}\oplus
\begin{SepA}{cc|cc}
\mathcal{J}_{-3} & 0 & 0 & 0\\
y_1 & \mathcal{J}_{-1} & 0 & 0\\
\chi_{(-1)} & y_1 & 0 & y_1 \mathcal{J}_1\\\hline
0 & 1 & y_1 & 0
\end{SepA}\\
D_{(1)}\big( \mathcal{J}_{|0,3\rangle}\big)\bigg\vert_{k=6}&\cong \mathcal{J}_{|0,2\rangle}\oplus
\begin{SepA}{ccc|cc}
\mathcal{J}_{-4} & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0\\
y_1 & \mathcal{J}_{-2} & 0 & 0 & 0\\
\chi_{(-2)} & y_1 & \mathcal{J}_0 & 0 & 0\\
0 & \chi_{(0)} & y_1 & 0 & y_1\mathcal{J}_2\\\hline
0 & 0 & 1 & y_1 & 0
\end{SepA}\ .
\end{split}
\end{equation}
We observe that the largest part of the factorisation
$Q_{|0,\frac{k}{2}+1\rangle}$ is of the form of an ordinary factorisation
$Q_{|0,\ell\rangle}$. From the first three even $k$
examples, we conjecture the formula
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{J}_{|0,\frac{k}{2}+1\rangle}=
\begin{SepA}{cccccccc|cc}
\mathcal{J}_{-\frac{k}{2}-1} & 0 & \cdots &&&&&&&\\
y_1 & \mathcal{J}_{-\frac{k}{2}+1} & 0 & \cdots &&&&&&\\
\chi_{(-\frac{k}{2}+1)} & y_1 & \mathcal{J}_{-\frac{k}{2}+3} & 0 & \cdots &&&&&\\
0 & \chi_{(-\frac{k}{2}+3)} & y_1 & \mathcal{J}_{-\frac{k}{2}+5} & 0 & \cdots &&&&\\
\vdots & \ddots & \ddots & \ddots & \ddots & \ddots & &&&\\
&&&&&&&&&\\
&&&&&& y_1 & \mathcal{J}_{\frac{k}{2}-3} & 0 & 0\\
&&&&&& \chi_{(\frac{k}{2}-3)} & y_1 & 0 & y_1 \mathcal{J}_{\frac{k}{2}-1}\\[1mm]\hline
&&&&&& 0 & 1 & y_1 & 0
\end{SepA}\ .
\end{equation}
It remains to check that
\begin{equation}\label{check}
Q_{|0,\frac{k}{2}+1\rangle}\cong
Q_{\overline{|0,\frac{k}{2}\rangle}}\ ,
\end{equation}
or in other words that the upper right block $\mathcal{J}_{|0,\frac{k}{2}+1\rangle}$ of
$Q_{|0,\frac{k}{2}+1\rangle}$ can be transformed to the lower left
block $\mathcal{E}_{|0,\frac{k}{2}\rangle}$ of the factorisation
$Q_{|0,\frac{k}{2}+1\rangle}$ by elementary row and column
operations.
Let us consider the example $k=4$. Note that
$\mathcal{J}_{|0,3\rangle}$ has two constant entries that we can use to remove
all other entries in their rows and columns, and we obtain
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
\mathcal{J}_{|0,3\rangle}\bigg\vert_{k=4}&=
\begin{SepA}{cc|cc}
\mathcal{J}_{2} & 0 & 0 & 0\\
y_1 & \mathcal{J}_{0} & 0 & 0\\
\chi_{(0)} & y_1 & 0 & y_1 \mathcal{J}_1\\\hline
0 & 1 & y_1 & 0
\end{SepA}\\
&\cong
\begin{SepA}{cc|cc}
0 & 0 & -y_1^2 \mathcal{J}_{2} & y_1 \mathcal{J}_{2}\mathcal{J}_1\\
0 & 0 & y_1 \left(y_1^2-\mathcal{J}_{0}\chi_{(0)} \right)& -y_1^2\mathcal{J}_1\\ \hline
0 & 1 & 0 & 0\\
1 & 0 & 0 & 0
\end{SepA}\ .
\end{split}
\end{equation}
The upper right block of this last form coincides with
$\widehat{\mathcal{E}}_{0(2)}$ given in~\eqref{app:hatE}, which
therefore proves the relation~\eqref{check} in this case. Similarly we
have verified~\eqref{check} explicitly also for $k=6$. We take this
as another convincing check that we identified the correct matrix
factorisations.
\section{Conclusion and outlook}
In this article we have constructed matrix factorisations for rational
boundary conditions in the $SU(3)/U(2)$ Kazama-Suzuki models. For the
construction it was essential to identify the rational defect
$D_{[(0,0),0;1,3]}$ in the Landau-Ginzburg description. Fusing this
defect to boundary conditions $|L,0\rangle$, one can generate all
boundary conditions $|L,\ell\rangle$. Therefore by fusing the defect
in the Landau-Ginzburg description to the matrix factorisations
describing $|L,0\rangle$, we can obtain all others.
To actually construct these matrix factorisations, it is important to
have an efficient way of computing the fusion. We found an
operator-like description for the fusion of the defect factorisation
corresponding to $D_{[(0,0),0;,1,3]}$ to another factorisation (see~\eqref{defofD}), which
is given by a specific operation on each entry of the
factorisation. In this way we worked out the \emph{matrix factorisations for
all rational boundary conditions} $|L,\ell\rangle$, and hence have obtained a conjecture for a \emph{complete dictionary} between the Landau-Ginzburg formulation and the rational conformal field theory description of the $SU(3)/U(2)$ Kazama-Suzuki models. More precisely, we proved our formula~\eqref{eq:rMF} (and the alternative compact version~\eqref{twotworealisation}) for the matrix factorisations $Q_{|0,\ell\rangle}$ explicitly, while for the $Q_{|L,\ell\rangle}$ factorisations with $L>0$ we have extrapolated the pattern we have observed for small values of $L$ to derive the conjecture for their explicit form (see~\eqref{eq:QLl}). Additional support for our conjecture comes from a detailed discussion of the effects of finite levels $k$, which are consistent with the expectations from the conformal field theory side of the dictionary. We will report in~\cite{NBSFtwo2014} a number of further structural arguments in favor of our conjecture.
Operator-like defects turn out to be very important for explicit
computations. The process of fusing a defect factorisation of
$W(x)-W(\tilde{x})$ to some matrix factorisation of $W(\tilde{x})$ is
described by the tensor product, resulting in a factorisation of
$W(x)$. This tensor product still contains the variables
$\tilde{x}$. To eliminate these auxiliary variables can be a
complicated task, though there are some strategies and algorithms
known how this can be
done~\cite{Brunner:2007qu,Carqueville:2011zea}. For operator-like
defects such as $D_{(1)}$, this step does not have to be
performed -- the process of fusing it to another factorisation is
implemented by a functor that acts on the category of modules over a
polynomial ring.\footnote{Of course, tensoring a defect matrix
factorisation $D$ always defines a functor in the category of matrix
factorisations. The functors we are considering, however, act on the
category of ring modules, and their action on a matrix factorisation
$Q$ is simply given by applying $D$ on $Q$ seen as a ring module
homomorphism.} In this functorial language one can also realise the
morphisms of operator-like defects as morphisms between the
corresponding functors, and in this way one can even define cones of
functors in certain situations. This will be presented in~\cite{NBSFthree2014}.
For the $SU(3)/U(2)$ Kazama-Suzuki models it turns out that all
rational B-type defects can be realised as operator-like defects with
corresponding fusion functors~\cite{NBSFtwo2014}. This
then opens the possibility to study the fusion semi-ring of these defects.
The fusion of rational defects is given by the rational
fusion rules, and with the functorial description one can then
identify the rational semi-ring structure also in the
Landau-Ginzburg description. We will report on this in an upcoming
publication~\cite{NBSFtwo2014}.
\smallskip
After having the $SU(3)/U(2)$ model under control, one may ask whether
a similar strategy also works for the higher rank models. Also in this
case there exists a variable transformation interface to a product of minimal
models~\cite{Behr:2012xg}, and the natural ansatz would be to study the effect
of fusing it to known factorisations in the minimal models, maybe to
the permutation factorisations of~\cite{Enger:2005jk}. Although it is
far from obvious, one might be lucky and generate in this way
factorisations for rational boundary conditions or defects.
\section*{Acknowledgements}
We thank Nils Carqueville, Dan Murfet and Ingo Runkel for helpful discussions.
|
\section{Introduction}
A wealth of cosmological probes have confirmed the accelerated expansion of the Universe first inferred with
observations of Type Ia SNae
\citep{Riess1998,Schmidt1998,Perlmutter1999,Riess2004,Astier2006,Kowalski2008,Kessler2009,Conley2011,Sullivan2011}.
These include the angular power spectrum of the cosmic microwave background (CMB) fluctuations and the integrated
Sachs-Wolfe effect
\citep{Jaffe2001,Giannantonio2008,Ho2008,Jarosik2011,Komatsu2011,Sherwin2011,Hinshaw2013,Planck2013_XV,Planck2013_XVI,
Planck2013_XIX}, the number counts of massive galaxy clusters
\citep{Haiman2001,Allen2004,Allen2008,Wang2004,Vikhlinin2009,Mantz2010,Rapetti2010,Rozo2010,Benson2013},
weak lensing
\citep{Hoekstra2006,Jarvis2006,Fu2008,Schrabback2010,Kilbinger2013},
galaxy clustering
\citep{Percival2001,Tegmark2004a,Cole2005,Guzzo2008,Reid2010,Blake2012,delaTorre2013a}
and baryon acoustic oscillations (BAO)
\citep{Eisenstein2005,Percival2010,Parkinson2012,Sanchez2014,Veropalumbo2014}.
To explain this acceleration, a new dark component with equation of state $w<-1/3$ has been introduced dubbed dark
energy (DE). As with dark matter (DM), the DE also does not interact with the electromagnetic field
\citep[and references therein]{Bertone2005,Bartelmann2010,Astier2012} and its nature is still completely unknown after
more than a decade of theoretical and observational investigations.
Continuous improvements in observations have led to the definition of a standard model in cosmology; in the
Concordance Cosmological Model (CCM) the Universe is filled with baryons ($\simeq 5\%$ of the total energy budget),
dark matter ($\simeq 27\%$) and dark energy ($\simeq 68\%$) \citep{Planck2013_XVI}.
In its simplest form, the dark energy is assumed to be a cosmological constant,
characterised by an equation of state ($w=-1$) and energy density constant throughout the whole cosmic history.
Despite its simplicity, the CCM fits virtually all the available observations
\citep[][and references therein]{Planck2013_XVI}. Nevertheless, the cosmological constant suffers severe problems
from a theoretical point of view. In particular the actual value of the cosmological constant requires an extreme
fine-tuning, giving rise to the coincidence \citep{Zlatev1999} and fine tuning problems
\citep{Weinberg1989,Sahni2000}. This provides motivation to find viable alternatives to overcome these fundamental
problems, for example considering dynamical dark energy models or modifications to gravity.
Moreover, despite the fact that the cosmological constant scenario can explain most observations at cosmological
scales, many phenomena at small and intermediate scales indicate possible problems with this simple model.
These include the lack of luminous satellites in cold dark matter haloes \citep{Navarro1996,BoylanKolchin2011}, the
observed low baryon fraction in galaxy clusters \citep{Ettori2003,McCarthy2007}, and the high velocities detected in
the large-scale bulk motion of galaxies \citep{Watkins2009}.
A simple explanation for these features may be related to the fact that our understanding of the baryonic physics
at these scales is still very incomplete, but nevertheless it is worth investigating whether alternative models could
accommodate or diminish the tension between these observations and theory.
One interesting direction is to study interactions in the dark sector between the dark energy and the dark matter
component. Coupled dark energy models were first introduced by \cite{Wetterich1995} and \cite{Amendola2000} in order
to alleviate the fine-tuning problem; these have since been studied in some detail
\citep{Amendola2004,Amendola2007a,Pettorino2008,Amendola2008,diPorto2008,CalderaCabral2009a,CalderaCabral2009b,
Boehmer2010, Koyama2009,LopezHonorez2010,Majerotto2010,Valiviita2010,Baldi2011c,Baldi2011d,Baldi2012,Clemson2012}.
Observational constraints on the interaction strength were obtained using the CMB
\citep{Bean2008,LaVacca2009,Xia2009}.
These models have also been investigated using numerical simulations
\citep{Maccio2004,Baldi2010,Li2011a,Li2011c,Li2011b,Baldi2011} which showed
that significant deviations from the $\Lambda$CDM model have to be expected in the non-linear regime.
In this class of models the role of dark energy is played by a dynamical scalar field and there is a coupling
describing an exchange of energy-momentum between dark matter and dark energy. While observations put strong
constraints on the amount of interaction between the baryons and the dark sector \citep{Hagiwara2002}, this is not
the case for interactions in the dark sector. A consequence of the coupling is the rise of a fifth force that modifies
the equations of motion of dark matter and significantly affects the evolution of the collapsing structures. To
account for this in the non-linear dynamics it is necessary to use expensive numerical simulations.
In this work we make use of the largest available suite of such N-body simulations called {\small CoDECS}
\citep[COupled Dark Energy Cosmological Simulation;][]{Baldi2012}. These simulations have been used to study the halo
mass function \citep{Cui2012}, the BAO \citep{Cervantes2012}, the galaxy rotation curves \citep{Baldi2012a},
the redshift-space distortions \citep{Marulli2012}, the pairwise infall velocity of colliding clusters
\citep[][]{Lee2012}, and the gravitational lensing effect \citep{Beynon2012,Carbone2013}.
\cite{Beynon2012} made predictions for the shear correlation function in the non-linear weak lensing regime based on
CoDECS simulations of three `standard' coupled dark energy models with an exponential potential and a reference
$\Lambda$CDM model. This work utilised the analytical relation between the matter power spectrum and the shear
correlation function: the shear power spectrum can be written as an integral along the line of sight of the
(non-linear) matter power spectrum \citep{Bartelmann2001}. Taking the input matter power spectrum obtained directly
from the particle distribution in the box, they derived predictions for the shear correlation; they also made
forecasts for the {\it Dark Energy Survey} (DES)\footnote{http://www.darkenergysurvey.org} and the Euclid
mission\footnote{http://www.euclid-ec.org} \citep{Laureijs2011,Amendola2013} and showed that it will be possible
to use lensing to distinguish between $\Lambda$CDM and coupled dark energy models at a $4-\sigma$ level.
\cite{Carbone2013} instead performed a raytracing analysis, focusing on CMB lensing rather than lower redshift
sources. Using the snapshots of the simulated box, the authors constructed deflection angle maps and studied the
statistical properties of the deflection angle and lensing potential power spectrum.
They analysed three different models: a reference $\Lambda$CDM model and two different coupled dark energy models; a
standard scenario with an exponential potential, and a bouncing model described by a SUGRA potential
\citep{Brax1999}. The authors showed that for the standard scenario, differences with the $\Lambda$CDM model arise
from the interplay between an enhanced growth and a modified non-linear structure formation, while for the bouncing
model these two effects make the power of the lensing signal $\approx 10\%$ smaller than for the reference
$\Lambda$CDM model.
In this work, we extend both previous works \citep{Beynon2012,Carbone2013} with a full numerical analysis of the
statistical properties of several lensing quantities.
In particular we analyse the superset of models studied in these two works from a completely numerical point of view,
basing our work on raytracing simulations.
An important goal of this work is to validate the semi-analytic method of \cite{Beynon2012} with a full numerical
approach, and to check whether previous results are in agreement with a full non-linear treatment.
Due to the different linear evolution in the coupled models, the perturbations have a different normalization of the
matter power spectrum. In addition, the non-linear dynamics is different from the $\Lambda$CDM model, and effects
induced by it might not be captured with the semi-analytical treatment. In order to separate the linear
normalisation differences from the differences in the non-linear physics, we also make a comparison with analytical
models in the $\Lambda$CDM cosmology.
The paper is organised as follows. In Section~\ref{sect:DEmodels} we briefly describe the main properties of the
coupled dark energy cosmologies. The corresponding N-body simulations are described in Section~\ref{sect:Nbody}.
In Section~\ref{sect:lensing} we describe the raytracing simulations. We present our results in
Section~\ref{sect:results}. Finally we conclude in Section~\ref{sect:conclusions}.
\section{Coupled dark energy models}\label{sect:DEmodels}
In this work we consider weak gravitational lensing in the framework of coupled dark energy models.
Dark energy is represented by a classical scalar field $\phi$ that evolves in a self-interaction potential $V(\phi)$
and interacts directly with cold dark matter particles by exchanging energy-momentum. This is due to a source term at
the level of the background continuity equations of the Dark Energy and CDM components, characterised by a coupling
function $\beta(\phi)$.
More quantitatively, the background dynamics for radiation (subscript $r$), baryons (subscript $b$), cold dark matter
(subscript $c$) and Dark Energy scalar field (subscript $\phi$), are respectively described by the following set of
equations:
\begin{eqnarray}
\dot{\rho}_r+4H\rho_r & = & 0\;,\label{eqn:r} \\
\dot{\rho}_b+3H\rho_b & = & 0\;,\label{eqn:b} \\
\dot{\rho}_c+3H\rho_c & = & -\sqrt{\frac{2}{3}}\beta_c(\phi)\frac{\rho_c\dot{\phi}}{M_{Pl}}\;,\label{eqn:c}\\
\ddot{\phi}+3H\dot{\phi}+V^{\prime}(\phi) & = & \sqrt{\frac{2}{3}}\beta_c(\phi)\frac{\rho_c}{M_{Pl}}\;,
\label{eqn:phi}
\end{eqnarray}
where the Hubble function is given as usual by
\begin{equation}
H^2=\frac{8\pi G}{3}\left(\rho_{\rm r}+\rho_{\rm c}+\rho_{\rm b}+\rho_\phi\right)\;,\label{eqn:H}
\end{equation}
and $M^2_{Pl}\equiv 1/8\pi G$ is the reduced Planck mass. The scalar field $\phi$ is expressed in units of
$M_{\rm Pl}$, the overdot represents a derivative with respect to proper time and a prime stands for the derivative
with respect to the scalar field.
The source terms in Eqs.~\ref{eqn:c}-\ref{eqn:phi} define the interaction between the dark matter and the dark energy
components. The coupling function $\beta_c(\phi)$ controls the strength of the interaction and the sign of the term
$\dot{\phi}\beta_c(\phi)$ controls the direction of the energy-momentum flow between the two coupled components, with
a positive sign implying the transfer of energy-momentum from CDM to DE. The presence of the coupling term implies
that the mass of the dark matter particles is not constant any more, but changes in time according to the following
equation:
\begin{equation}
\frac{d\ln(m_{\rm c}/M_{\rm Pl})}{dt}=-\sqrt{\frac{2}{3}}\beta_c\dot{\phi}\;.
\end{equation}
The sign of $\dot{m_c}$ depends therefore on the sign of the flow: a positive (negative) value of
$\dot{\phi}\beta_{\rm c}(\phi)$ implies a decrement (increment) of the mass of dark matter particles. The equation of
state of the dark energy component is given by $w_{\phi}\equiv P_\phi/\rho_\phi$, where the pressure $P_{\phi}$ and
the density $\rho_{\phi}$ of the scalar field are defined as $P_{\phi}\equiv\dot{\phi}^2/2-V(\phi)$ and
$\rho_{\phi}\equiv\dot{\phi}^2/2+V(\phi)$, respectively.
Coupled Dark Energy models do not affect only the background expansion history of the universe, but also the evolution
of matter density perturbations due to the appearance of a long-range {\it fifth}-force term in the Euler equation.
At the linear level, in the Newtonian limit and on sub-horizon scales, the linear perturbed equations read
\citep{Amendola2004,Pettorino2008,Baldi2011c}:
\begin{eqnarray}
\ddot{\delta}_{\rm c} & = & -2H\left[1-\beta_c\frac{\dot{\phi}}{\sqrt{6}H}\right]\dot{\delta}_{\rm c}+4\pi
G[\bar{\rho}_{\rm b}\delta_{\rm b}+\bar{\rho}_{\rm c}\delta_{\rm c}\Gamma_{\rm c}]\;,\\
\ddot{\delta}_{\rm b} & = & -2H\dot{\delta}_{\rm b}+
4\pi G[\bar{\rho}_{\rm b}\delta_{\rm b}+\bar{\rho}_{\rm c}\delta_{\rm c}]\;.
\end{eqnarray}
In the previous equations, $\bar{\rho}_k$ represents the background density of the fluid $k$ and
$\delta_k\equiv\delta\rho_k/\bar{\rho}_k$ its density perturbation. Note the presence of the factor
$\Gamma_c\equiv 1+4\beta^2_c/3$ due to the presence of the fifth-force appearing only in the CDM equation. The term
$\beta_c\dot{\phi}$ -- also appearing only in the CDM equation -- arises as a consequence of momentum conservation and
effectively describes an additional friction term.
At the non-linear level, the acceleration experienced by DM particles is characterised by the two additional terms in
the following equation:
\begin{equation}\label{eqn:friction}
\dot{\vec{v}}_c=\beta_c\frac{\dot{\phi}}{\sqrt{6}}\vec{v}_c-
\vec{\nabla}\left[\sum_c\frac{GM_c(\phi)\Gamma_c}{r_c}+\sum_b\frac{GM_b}{r_b}\right]\;,
\end{equation}
where $r_{\rm c,b}$ are the physical distances of the target coupled particle from the other CDM and baryonic
particles, respectively. Effects of the friction term have been studied in the literature
\citep{Amendola2004,Baldi2011c,Baldi2012b}.
\section{The CoDECS simulations}\label{sect:Nbody}
The basis for our lensing study is the suite of CoDECS N-body simulations \citep{Baldi2012}. Here we briefly describe
them and we refer to \cite{Baldi2012} for a more in-depth discussion.
The CoDECS simulations are the largest suite of coupled dark energy simulations to date and are performed with a
modified version \citep{Baldi2010} of the widely used TreePM N-body code {\small{GADGET}} \citep{Springel2005}.
The code self-consistently simulates the evolution of structure formation in coupled dark energy models, taking into
account the modified expansion history, the rise of a fifth-force and additional friction on each particle and the
time variation of the dark matter particle mass.
The set of CoDECS simulations consists of two different types of runs, the L-CoDECS and the H-CoDECS runs.
The H-CoDECS simulations are adiabatic hydrodynamical simulations of a box of only 80~Mpc/h comoving describing the
evolution of an equal number of dark matter and gas particles ($512^3$). As our focus is on larger scales, we
instead exploit the L-CoDECS runs, which follow the evolution of $1024^3$ DM particles and as many baryons in a box of
comoving side of 1~Gpc/h. Both DM and gas particles are treated as collisionless particles, but they experience
different dynamics, as a consequence of the interaction between the cold dark matter and the dark energy fluid.
In fact, not properly taking into account the effect of the uncoupled baryonic fraction in interacting dark energy
models would result in an incorrect evolution of structure formation. The run has a gravitational softening
$\epsilon_{\rm s}=20$~kpc/h comoving; DM and baryon particles have a mass
$m_{\rm DM}(z=0)=5.84\times 10^{10}~M_{\odot}/h$ and $m_{\rm b}=1.17\times 10^{10}~M_{\odot}/h$, respectively.
Six different cosmological models are simulated. The reference model is the standard $\Lambda$CDM model; three coupled
dark energy models (EXP001, EXP002 and EXP003) are characterised by a constant positive coupling $\beta_c>0$ and an
exponential self-interaction potential of the form $V(\phi)=A\exp{(-\alpha\phi)}$.
Another model (EXP008e3) has the same potential but an exponential coupling, $\beta_c(\phi)=\beta_0\exp{(\beta_1\phi)}$
and finally the last model (SUGRA003) has a constant negative coupling, $\beta_c<0$ and a SUGRA \citep{Brax1999}
self-interaction potential $V(\phi)=A\phi^{-\alpha}\exp{(-\phi^2/2)}$.
We refer to Table~2 in \cite{Baldi2012} for values of the potential parameters in each case.
The normalization of the models is consistent with the WMAP7 cosmology \citep{Komatsu2011} and the linear matter power
spectrum used to create initial conditions was computed with the publicly available code CAMB\footnote{www.camb.info}
\citep{Lewis2000}.
All the models have the same amplitude of perturbations at $z=z_{\rm CMB}$.
Initial conditions for the simulations have been created starting from a glass distribution
\citep{White1994,Baugh1995} evaluating particle displacements at $z=99$ using Zel'dovich approximation.
\section{Lensing and the raytracing simulations}\label{sect:lensing}
\subsection{The lensing observables}\label{subsect:lensing}
Due to the gravitational effects of matter on photons, light rays are deflected from their otherwise straight paths.
The coherence scale of structures is negligible with respect to the cosmological distances involved in weak lensing
studies, so it is reasonable to slice the matter distribution into thin shells using the well known {\it thin-lens}
approximation.
Under this hypothesis, cosmic lenses are effectively considered as two-dimensional objects whose projected mass
distribution $\Sigma(\vec{\theta})$ on the lens plane is given by
\begin{equation}
\Sigma(\vec{\theta})=\int\rho(\vec{\theta},l)dl\;,
\end{equation}
where $\vec{\theta}$ is the angular position on the lens plane and $l$ represents the direction along the line of
sight.
The {\em convergence} is defined as
\begin{equation}\label{eqn:kappa}
\kappa(\vec{\theta})\equiv \frac{\Sigma(\vec{\theta})}{\Sigma_{\rm crit}}\;,
\end{equation}
where $\Sigma_{\rm crit}$ represents the {\em critical surface density} and is defined as
\begin{equation}
\Sigma_{\rm crit}\equiv\frac{c^2}{4\pi G}\frac{D_{\rm ds}}{D_{\rm d}D_{\rm s}}\;,
\end{equation}
where $D_{\rm ds}$, $D_{\rm d}$ and $D_{\rm s}$ are the angular-diameter distances between the lens and
the source, between the observer and the lens and between the observer
and the source, respectively.
The ratio of the distances represents the {\it lensing efficiency} and its maximum value is for lensing approximately
half way between the observer and the source.
Under the thin-shell approximation, the lens is fully described by its convergence and therefore through the
two-dimensional Poisson equation by the {\em lensing potential} $\Psi$
\begin{equation}
\nabla^2_{\vec{\theta}}\Psi=2\kappa(\vec{\theta})\;,
\end{equation}
where the Laplacian is taken with respect to the angular position on the lens plane. The effect of the underlying
matter distribution is to deflect the paths of light-rays and it is possible to show that the bending angle
$\hat{\alpha}$ is related to the lensing potential $\Psi$ through:
\begin{equation}
\hat{\alpha}=\nabla_{\vec{\theta}}\Psi\;.
\end{equation}
As a consequence of the light deflection, the observed image of the sources gets distorted.
The mapping between the original source shape and the actual observed image, up to second order, is given by
\cite[][]{Goldberg2005,Bacon2006}:
\begin{equation}
\theta^{\prime}_i\simeq A_{ij}\theta_j+\frac{1}{2}D_{ijk}\theta_j\theta_k\;.
\end{equation}
In the previous equation, $A_{ij}\equiv\partial_j\theta^{\prime}_i$ is the Jacobian matrix of the mapping between the
lensed and unlensed images, $\theta^{\prime}_i$ is the unlensed coordinate and the tensor $D_{ijk}$ describing the
mapping at second order is the derivative of the Jacobian matrix with respect to the lensed coordinates $\theta_i$:
$D_{ijk}\equiv\partial_kA_{ij}$. In the previous equations, $\partial_k\equiv\partial/\partial\theta_k$.
While the convergence $\kappa$ gives a measure of the lensing strength weighted by the lens mass and the lensing
efficiency, the distortions induced by gravitational lensing are quantified by the complex shear
$\gamma=\gamma_1+i\gamma_2$, which is related to the second derivatives of the lensing potential $\Psi$
\cite[][]{Bartelmann2001}:
\begin{eqnarray}\label{eqn:gamma}
\gamma_1 & = & \frac{1}{2}(\partial^2_1-\partial^2_2)\Psi\;,\\
\gamma_2 & = & \partial^2_{12}\Psi\;.
\end{eqnarray}
The elements of the matrices $A_{ij}$ and $D_{ijk}$ are conveniently expressed as a function of the convergence, and
of the shear components and its derivatives \cite[see e.g.][]{Goldberg2005,Bacon2006,Pace2011}.
A suitable combination of the derivatives of the shear components gives rise to two new quantities, the 1-
and 3-flexion ($F$ and $G$ respectively) \cite[][]{Bacon2006}:
\begin{eqnarray}\label{eqn:flexion}
F & \equiv & F_1+iF_2 = (\gamma_{1,1}+\gamma_{2,2})+i(\gamma_{2,1}-\gamma_{1,2})\;,\\
G & \equiv & G_1+iG_2 = (\gamma_{1,1}-\gamma_{2,2})+i(\gamma_{2,1}+\gamma_{1,2})\;.
\end{eqnarray}
The results derived so far are valid only in the case of a single lens between the observer and the source; however
the whole formalism can be generalised to the case of a continuous matter distribution.
The procedure is very similar to the case of the single lens. The cosmic volume can be sliced in sufficiently small
sub-volumes whose thickness along the line-of-sight is sufficiently small with respect to the distances involved
(namely the distances between the observer, the lenses and the sources).
Therefore the thin-lens approximation should be valid and the matter distribution can be projected on a plane, and
consequently the lensing potential can be evaluated using the Poisson equation.
Also for multiple lenses therefore all the information is embedded in the lensing potentials on the slices.
The final quantities (convergence, shear and flexion) can now be estimated on the source plane as the weighted sum of
the contributions from all the different lensing planes.
Unlike the single lens case, the Jacobian matrix is no longer symmetric, due to the fact that rotation of the light
bundles can occur.
As shown with the help of numerical simulations \cite[see][]{Jain2000}, the rotation term is very small and can be
safely neglected; we verified that this is indeed the case for our simulations.
\subsection{Raytracing simulations}\label{sect:raytracing}
Raytracing techniques consist of shooting rays through an N-body simulation and evaluating the deflection angle and
related quantities by taking into account the underlying matter distribution.
The light cones are constructed by stacking snapshots of a single simulation; the snapshots are placed along the line
of sight so that the light cone distance to the centre of the simulation corresponds with the time of the snapshot.
We put sources at $z_{\rm s}=1$ ($z_{\rm s}=2$) using 10 (13) snapshots.
Sufficient snapshots are stacked in order to avoid gaps in the matter distribution; this leads to some overlap in the
stacking, which we account for by including only the volumes that do not overlap to the following snapshot in the
stack.
Since each snapshot represents the same matter distribution at different cosmic times, the structures will be at
roughly the same position in each volume.
To avoid artificial correlations between the matter density at different redshifts, we coherently rotate and shift
particle positions in each snapshot by a random amount, taking advantage of the periodic boundary conditions, so that
particles leaving the simulated box on one side, re-enter on the opposite one.
Finally, in order to estimate the sample variance errors, 100 different realizations were created for each model by
using different shifts and rotations of the snapshots.
\begin{table*}
\centering
\caption[]{Characteristic parameters for the raytracing simulations and normalization of the power spectrum.}
\begin{tabular}{lcccc}
\hline
\hline
Models & Opening angle (degrees) & Resolution (arc sec) & Source
comoving distance for $z_{\rm s}=1$ ($Mpc/h$) & $\sigma_8(z=0)$\\
\hline
$\Lambda$CDM & 24.34 & 21.39 & 2355.14 & 0.809 \\
EXP001 & 24.36 & 21.41 & 2353.19 & 0.825 \\
EXP002 & 24.39 & 21.44 & 2350.43 & 0.875 \\
EXP003 & 24.43 & 21.47 & 2346.42 & 0.967 \\
EXP008e3 & 24.55 & 21.58 & 2335.29 & 0.895 \\
SUGRA003 & 25.23 & 22.17 & 2272.19 & 0.806 \\
\hline
\label{tab:rayt_params}
\end{tabular}
\begin{flushleft}
\vspace{-0.5cm}
{\small}
\end{flushleft}
\end{table*}
The opening angle of the raytracing simulation is evaluated with the comoving size and distance of the source plane.
Due to a different background evolution, the distance of the source from the observer will slightly change with the
model. For the reference $\Lambda$CDM model, the opening angle is $\theta=24.34$ ($\theta=15.4$) degrees on a side
and the resolution of the map is 21.39 (13.5) arcsec for sources at $z_{\rm s}=1$ ($z_{\rm s}=2$). In
Table~\ref{tab:rayt_params} we report these parameters for the other models considered in this paper. Although very
similar, the map resolution is higher for the $\Lambda$CDM run since the sources are further away from the observer
with respect to the other models. As seen in the second column of Table~\ref{tab:rayt_params}, the opening angle is
minimum for the $\Lambda$CDM run and maximum for the SUGRA003 model. This is due to the fact that the opening angle
is evaluated as the ratio of the comoving size of the source plane and its comoving distance with respect to the
observer. (The comoving box size is the same for all the different models studied.) In the last column of
Table~\ref{tab:rayt_params} we present the normalization of the matter power spectrum for the different models. Note
how the models have considerably different values of $\sigma_8$. In particular all the EXP models have a higher
normalisation with respect to the $\Lambda$CDM model, while for the SUGRA model it is approximately the same. As we
will see later, this will have a crucial importance in explaining the differences between the models. All the models
have the same amplitude of scalar perturbations at $z_{\rm CMB}$, therefore the different normalizations at $z=0$
reflect the different structure evolution, as shown by the growth factor in Fig.~2 of \cite{Baldi2012}. All the EXP
models show a monotonic increase of the ratio of the linear growth factor with respect to the $\Lambda$CDM model,
while the SUGRA model recovers the amplitude of perturbations at $z=0$.
We next briefly sketch how we created the lensing maps. For more details we refer the reader to
\cite{Hamana2001,Pace2007.1,Pace2011}. For each lens plane (which corresponds roughly to the snapshots), we evaluate
the projected matter density field and then with FFT techniques we can recover the corresponding lensing potential.
The selected particles are projected parallel to the line-of-sight on a two dimensional grid of $4096^2$ pixels; to
assign particles to pixels, we use the triangular-shape-cloud (TSC) method as outlined in \citet{Hockney1988}.
Following the prescription of \citet{Hamana2001}, we project particles over a regular grid to obtain the projected
overdensity field for each lens plane:
\begin{equation}
\delta^{{\rm proj},k}_{ij}=\frac{M^{k}_{ij}}{A_{k}\bar{\rho}_k}-L_k\;,
\end{equation}
where the index $k$ runs over the lens planes, $M^{k}_{ij}$ is the mass projected in the box $k$ on the pixel $(ij)$,
$A_k$ the pixel area and $L_k$ the size of the projected box (in our case it will be smaller than the full box size,
due to the overlapping volumes). Finally, $\bar{\rho}_k$ is the comoving background density. Note that
$\bar{\rho}(a)=\bar{\rho}_0\Omega_{\rm 0}$ only for the $\Lambda$CDM model, since for other models the time evolution
of the matter density parameter is different from the standard $(1+z)^3$ behaviour.
Formally the lensing potential is still evaluated via the two-dimensional Poisson equation, but in this case we also
have to take into account the different matter density parameter evolution. We therefore write the Poisson equation as
\cite[][]{Hamana2001}
\begin{equation}\label{eqn:Poisson}
\nabla^2_{\vec{x}}\Psi^k=\frac{8\pi G\bar{\rho}_k}{c^2}\delta^{{\rm proj},k}\;.
\end{equation}
Eq.~\ref{eqn:Poisson} can be solved via FFT techniques taking advantage of the periodic boundary conditions.
As shown above (see Sect.~\ref{subsect:lensing}), the lensing potential fully characterises our system.
We can therefore obtain all the lensing quantities we are interested in via standard finite difference techniques.
The raytracing simulations are based on stacking multiple-lensing planes and the result evaluated on the source plane
is given by adding the weighted contribution of all the planes between the source and the observer.
Suppose the cosmic volume is sliced into $N$ lens planes and the source plane is labelled as $N+1$.
Light rays are shot from the observer and create a regular grid on the first lens plane.
The bend angle on a given plane $k$ is related to the image position $\vec{\theta}_1$ on the first lens plane ($N=1$)
through the relation
\begin{equation}\label{eqn:theta}
\vec{\theta}_k = \vec{\theta}_1-\sum_{i=1}^{k-1}\,\frac{f_K(w_k-w_i)}{f_K(w_k)a_i}\nabla_{\vec{x}}\Psi_i(\vec{x})\;,
\end{equation}
where $w$ is the comoving distance, $a_i$ the scale factor of the lens plane, $f_K$ a function depending on the
cosmology and $\Psi_i(\vec{x})$ the Newtonian potential projected along the line-of-sight on each lens plane.
The Jacobian on each lens plane is obtained by differentiating Eq.~\ref{eqn:theta} with respect to $\vec{\theta}_1$.
By defining $A_k\equiv\partial\vec{\theta}_k/\partial\vec{\theta}_1$ and indicating with $U_k$ the matrix whose
elements are the second derivatives of the lensing potential we derive the following equation:
\begin{equation}\label{eqn:Jacobian}
A_k=I-\sum_{i=1}^{k-1}\frac{f_K(w_i)f_K(w_k-w_i)}{f_K(w_k)a_i}U_iA_i\;,
\end{equation}
where $I$ represents the identity matrix.
A further derivative of Eq.~\ref{eqn:Jacobian} with respect to $\vec{\theta}_i$ gives a similar recursive relation for
the two flexions
\cite[][]{Pace2007.1,Pace2011}:
\begin{equation}\label{eqn:Dmatrix}
D_k^{1,2}=-\sum_{i=1}^{k-1}\frac{f_K(w_i)f_K(w_k-w_i)}{f_K(w_k)a_i}[f_K{w_i}G_U^{1,2}+U_iD_i^{1,2}]\;.
\end{equation}
In the previous equation, $G_U\equiv\nabla_{\vec{x}}U$ is a tensor containing the third derivatives of the lensing
potential.
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.42\textwidth]{maps/map_LCDM.eps}
\includegraphics[width=0.42\textwidth]{maps/map_SUGRA003.eps}
\includegraphics[width=0.42\textwidth]{maps/map_EXP001.eps}
\includegraphics[width=0.42\textwidth]{maps/map_EXP002.eps}
\includegraphics[width=0.42\textwidth]{maps/map_EXP003.eps}
\includegraphics[width=0.42\textwidth]{maps/map_EXP008e3.eps}
\caption{The effective convergence for one particular realization of the raytracing simulations used in this work.
Sources are at $z_{\rm s}=1$. Colour range is the same for all the models. Different panels refer to different
cosmological models, as labelled. We refer to Table~\ref{tab:rayt_params} for the field of view spanned by each
simulation.}
\label{fig:kappa_maps}
\end{figure*}
On the source plane, the matrices $A$ and $D^{1,2}$ can be related to observable quantities like the effective
convergence, shear and derivatives of the shear (that combined together provide the 1- and 3-flexion). They read
\begin{eqnarray}\label{eqn:matrixes}
A_{N+1} & = & \left( \begin{array}{cc}
1-\kappa-\gamma_1 & -\gamma_2+\omega \\
-\gamma_2-\omega & 1-\kappa+\gamma_1
\end{array}\right)\nonumber\\
D^1_{N+1} & = & \left( \begin{array}{cc}
-2\gamma_{1,1}-\gamma_{2,2} & -\gamma_{2,1}+\omega_1 \\
-\gamma_{2,1}+\omega_2 & -\gamma_{2,2}+\omega_3 \\
\end{array} \right)\\
D^2_{N+1} & = & \left( \begin{array}{cc}
-\gamma_{2,1}+\omega_4 & -\gamma_{2,2}+\omega_5 \\
-\gamma_{2,2}+\omega_6 & 2\gamma_{1,2}-\gamma_{2,1} \\
\end{array} \right) \nonumber\;.
\end{eqnarray}
The scalar $\omega$ is called the rotation term and describes the rotation of the light bundle due to multiple
lenses. Following \cite{Bacon2009}, we identify the additional quantities $\omega_i$, with $i=1-6$, as a combination
of the components of the twist $C\equiv C_1+\imath C_2$ and the turn $T=T_1+\imath T_2$:
\begin{eqnarray}
\omega_1 & = & -\frac{1}{2}(C_1+T_1+T_2) \\
\omega_2 & = & -\frac{1}{2}(C_1+T_1-T_2) \\
\omega_3 & = & T_1+T_2 \\
\omega_4 & = & T_1-T_2 \\
\omega_5 & = & \frac{1}{2}(C_1-T_1-T_2)\\
\omega_6 & = & -\frac{1}{2}(C_2+T_1+T_2)\;.
\end{eqnarray}
We performed several tests on our raytracing simulations and showed that our results are largely unaffected by their
presence, so we neglect them below.
As an example, in Fig.~\ref{fig:kappa_maps} we show one realization of the effective convergence maps. For all the
models we used the same random seed so to have the same distribution of structures along the light-cone. As expected,
the main pattern of the effective convergence $\kappa$ is very similar for all the models, but some differences can
be noticed even by eye. In particular we observe that the realization for the SUGRA003 model, despite having
basically the same normalization of the $\Lambda$CDM model, shows less pronounced structures and lower convergence
peaks. The EXP003 model, on the other hand, presents a larger number of structures and higher peaks, due to the
higher normalization of the matter power spectrum. Similar conclusions can be drawn for the other models, where
differences becomes more evident when the matter power spectrum normalization increases.
In the following sections these differences, already visible by eye, will be analysed in a more quantitative way
using various statistical tests and will be explained in terms of the different evolution of the matter density
perturbations in the various cosmological models.
\section{Results}\label{sect:results}
In this section we describe the results we obtained from the analysis of our simulated maps. In Sect.~\ref{sect:PS}
we discuss results related to the lensing power spectrum and in Sect.~\ref{sect:shear_aperture}
and~\ref{sect:CF} the shear in aperture and the correlation function, respectively.
In Sect.~\ref{sect:PDF} we illustrate results regarding the probability distribution function (PDF) of some of the
lensing quantities; in Sect.~\ref{sect:high_order} we examine higher order moments such as the variance, the skewness
and the kurtosis. All results shown in this section are the average (or median) values computed over 100 different
realizations, while the error bars (shown only for the reference $\Lambda$CDM model for clarity reasons) represent
the r.m.s. (or quartiles) of the same 100 realizations.
\subsection{Power spectrum}\label{sect:PS}
We begin with the study of the power spectra of different lensing observables in the simulated maps. The shear (or
effective convergence) power spectrum is a very important observational quantity that can be used to probe the
underlying cosmological model, to infer the normalization of the matter power spectrum and the growth of structures.
In the Born approximation, the shear power spectrum is related to the integral along the line of sight of the matter
power spectrum, weighted by distance factors taking into account the geometry of the system (in particular the
relative distances between source, lens and observer). As explained before, in cDE models, dark matter evolution no
longer follows the $a^{-3}$ time evolution, and the time evolution of the power spectrum is affected by this. The
relation between the matter $P_{\delta}(k)$ and the lensing $P_{\kappa}(\ell)$ power spectra is given by
\citep[see also][]{Beynon2012}
\begin{equation}\label{eqn:Pl}
P_{\kappa}(\ell)=\frac{9}{4}\left(\frac{H_0}{c}\right)^4\int_0^{\chi_H}d\chi W^2(\chi)f(a)
P_{\delta}\left(k=\frac{\ell}{\chi},\chi\right)\;,
\end{equation}
where $f(a)=a^4\Omega^2_{m}(a)E^4(a)$, $E\equiv H/H_0$ is the dimensionless Hubble function, $\chi_H$ the comoving
distance to the horizon and $\Omega_{\rm m}(a)$ the matter density evaluated at the scale factor $a$.
In the weak lensing regime (the one of interest for this work), the spectra of shear $\gamma$, reduced shear $g$,
convergence $\kappa$ and flexions $F$ and $G$ are all inter-related; in particular
\begin{eqnarray}
& & P_{\gamma}(\ell) = P_{\kappa}(\ell)=P_{g}(\ell)\\
& & P_{F}(\ell) = P_{G}(\ell)=\ell^2 P_{\kappa}(\ell)\;.
\end{eqnarray}
In reality the true observable is the power spectrum of the reduced shear $g$, defined as
\begin{equation}
g\equiv \frac{\gamma}{1-\kappa}\;,
\end{equation}
and its spectrum is approximately the same as the one for cosmic shear, as distortions of the images are very small.
To evaluate the power spectrum of the different lensing quantities we consider each pixelated map and evaluate
its Fourier transform on the grid. We then multiply each map in Fourier space by its complex conjugate and determine
the corresponding frequency at each pixel. A further binning of the spectrum obtained in this way gives the final
smoothed result.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.3\textwidth,angle=-90]{PSkappa_ratio}
\caption[]{Ratio between the convergence power spectrum of the coupled dark energy models and the reference
$\Lambda$CDM model as a function of the multipole $\ell$. Different colours and line styles represent different
models. The $\Lambda$CDM model is shown with solid black line, the EXP001 model with dashed red line, the EXP002
model with blue short-dashed line, the EXP003 model with orange dotted line, the EXP008e3 model with the light
violet dashed-dotted line and finally the SUGRA003 model with the green dashed-dot-dotted line. The curves and the
shaded region (shown only for the $\Lambda$CDM model) represent the average and the r.m.s. obtained from 100
different realizations, respectively.}
\label{fig:PSkappa}
\end{figure}
In Fig.~\ref{fig:PSkappa} we show the ratio between the lensing power spectrum of the coupled dark energy models and
the reference spectrum of the $\Lambda$CDM model. Since the power spectrum for the (reduced) shear is identical to
that of the effective convergence and the spectra of the two flexions are simple functions of the convergence, we
limit ourself to the ratios for the effective convergence. We show our results for wavelengths up to
$\ell\approx 2\times 10^4$, since for higher values, the noise in our simulations starts dominating.
The model EXP001 has a slightly different $\sigma_8$ and differences are of the order of
few percent; it is well within the error bars at all the wavelengths probed in our raytracing simulations, making it
very difficult to distinguish it from the reference model.
It is similarly difficult to discriminate between the SUGRA003 model and the $\Lambda$CDM model on large scales,
since the ratio is well within the simulation uncertainty from cosmic variance.
The largest deviations appear for the model EXP003 where on large scales the differences are around 40\%.
In the EXP models the power is higher than for the $\Lambda$CDM model: this is due to the faster growth of
perturbations and therefore to higher matter power spectrum normalization; this is reflected directly in the
different amplitude at small $\ell$.
The SUGRA003 model is quite different. Despite having basically the same $\sigma_8$ normalization as the $\Lambda$CDM
model, we notice approximately 10\% less power up to $\ell\approx 1000$. This is easily explained in terms of the
evolution of the matter density parameter, which for the SUGRA003 model is consistently smaller than that of the
$\Lambda$CDM model at the redshifts of interest for this work. This is due to the evolution of the dark matter mass.
As shown in Eq.~\ref{eqn:Pl}, the lensing power spectrum is proportional to the matter density parameter, therefore a
deficit in this quantity will directly translate into a lower power spectrum.
These conclusions follow closely and reproduce the results on the matter power spectrum presented in \cite{Baldi2012}
also in the weak lensing regime.
It is also interesting to notice an increase in the power with a peak at $\ell\approx 1000$, followed by a later
decrease in the region dominated by the shot noise (an increase for the SUGRA003 model).
These results, including the increase in the ratio, are in good qualitative agreement with \cite{Carbone2013}, though
that work probed a much smaller range of multipoles than in this work.
It is worth understanding whether the differences that arise are purely due to the different growth rate and power
spectrum normalisation, or reflect deeper physical differences in the models.
To address this question, we evaluate analytically the lensing power spectrum for a $\Lambda$CDM model with the same
normalization $\sigma_8=0.967$ as the EXP003 model and we show our results in Fig.~\ref{fig:LCDMps8}. On large scales,
we observe a fairly good agreement between the EXP003 model and the $\Lambda$CDM model with higher power spectrum
normalization.
(The lack of power for the largest modes is due to the missing power in the simulations arising from its finite size.)
The increase of power we observe for the cDE model at higher multipoles also appears in this case, so it is evidently
simply the result of the different normalization. This is consistent with the different $\sigma_8$; although the
amplitude is lower, it is in agreement with what was found for the three-dimensional matter power spectrum in
\cite{Baldi2012}.
The peak originates from the different evolution of the non-linear matter power spectrum; in particular, models
with a higher normalization will have non-linear effects kicking in at lower $\ell$s with respect to a model with a
lower normalisation. The feature occurs precisely at the linear-non-linear transition scale for the model with higher
normalisation (at the redshift being probed.)
However, the normalisation is not the only effect at play; at higher $\ell$s, the EXP003 spectrum drops away from the
analytical $\Lambda$CDM spectrum and the agreement is limited up to $\ell\approx 1000$. At the largest
multipoles, we do not expect agreement between the analytic and simulations due to the finite resolution of the
pixels in the ray-traced maps \citep[see also][]{Pace2007.1,Pace2011}.
Comparing analytic and simulated $\Lambda$CDM spectra, these effects are seen to suppress the spectra above
$\ell\approx 4000$, and so below this any suppressions we see in the coupled dark energy models are believed to
result from the modified physics.
In order to examine the impacts at higher resolutions, we focus our attention on ratios of simulations where the
pixel smoothing effects should cancel.
Note that these smoothing effects equally impact the shear in aperture (Sect.~\ref{sect:shear_aperture}) and the
probability distribution function (Sect.~\ref{sect:PDF}) observables.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.3\textwidth,angle=-90]{PSratio_sigma}
\caption[]{Ratio between the convergence power spectrum of the EXP003 (orange dotted line) and the reference
$\Lambda$CDM model. For comparison we show the same ratio obtained analytically for a $\Lambda$CDM model having the
same normalization $\sigma_8=0.967$ as the EXP003 model (black thin solid line).}
\label{fig:LCDMps8}
\end{figure}
While there is consensus that the reduced shear is the truly observable shear quantity, for flexion several
possibilities have been considered.
\cite{Viola2012} defined the reduced flexions in analogy to the reduced shear:
\begin{eqnarray}
\mathcal{F} & = & \frac{F}{1-\kappa}\label{eqn:rFVM}\\
\mathcal{G} & = & \frac{G}{1-\kappa}\label{eqn:rGVM}\;,
\end{eqnarray}
while \cite{Schneider2008} instead studied
\begin{eqnarray}
\mathcal{F} & = & \frac{F+gF^{\ast}}{1-\kappa}\label{eqn:rFSR}\\
\mathcal{G} & = & \frac{G+gF}{1-\kappa}\label{eqn:rGSR}\;,
\end{eqnarray}
where $F^{\ast}$ represents the complex conjugate of $F$.
We have created reduced flexion maps according to both definitions and find that the results are very similar.
In particular, ratios between the spectra of the reduced flexions for the coupled dark energy models and the
$\Lambda$CDM model are equivalent to what is found for the unreduced flexion.
It is well known that it is possible to gain information on the time evolution of the large scale structure of the
Universe by following a tomographic approach, i.e. studying the lensing effects produced on sources located at
different redshifts. To investigate this issue in the context of coupled dark energy models, we have also used a set
of effective convergence maps created for sources at $z_{\rm s}=2$, and we have evaluated for each model the ratio of
the power spectra for sources at $z_{\rm s}=2$ and the ones for sources at $z_{\rm s}=1$. The aim is to see whether
there is any signature due to the coupling that would make the ratio dependent on the multipoles in a peculiar way.
We find that this is unfortunately not the case, since all the ratios are very similar to what is found for the
$\Lambda$CDM model. Small differences are seen at very high $\ell$, where unfortunately we cannot completely trust
our results due to the increase of noise and to resolution effects. Therefore the study of the convergence power
spectrum with sources at different redshifts seems not to add any further information to what is inferred from the
analysis at $z_{\rm s}=1$. This is due to the combination of the evolution of the dark matter parameter and friction
terms.
We have seen that the ratios between the convergence power spectra of the different models faithfully reproduce
the behaviour of the matter power spectrum, as explained in detail in \cite{Baldi2012}. In particular the EXP (SUGRA)
models show a higher (lower) spectrum amplitude.
There will also be degeneracies between the EXP and the $\Lambda$CDM model with respect to different values of
$\sigma_8$ and between the SUGRA and the $\Lambda$CDM model with respect to different values for the matter density
parameter $\Omega_{\rm m}$. To investigate these degeneracies, it would be necessary to run a larger suite of N-body
simulations covering an array of models. This is beyond the scope of the present work, where we focus on the study of
the effects of the coupling between dark matter and dark energy on the lensing observables.
\subsection{Shear in aperture}\label{sect:shear_aperture}
An alternative statistic to the power spectrum is the shear in aperture.
The shear in aperture represents the variance of the shear field within a circular aperture of radius $\theta$ and it
is related to the power spectrum by
\begin{equation}\label{eqn:shear_aperture}
\left|\gamma_{\rm av}(\theta)\right|^2\equiv 2\pi\int_0^{\infty}d\ell\ell
P_{\gamma}(\ell)\left[\frac{J_1(\ell\theta)}{\pi\ell\theta}\right]^2\;,
\end{equation}
where $J_1(x)$ is the first-order Bessel function of the first kind.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=0.3\textwidth,angle=-90]{SV}
\includegraphics[width=0.3\textwidth,angle=-90]{SV_ratio}
\caption{Shear in aperture. Upper panel: the results for the reference $\Lambda$CDM model and for the two most
extreme coupled dark energy models (SUGRA003 and EXP003). For comparison we also show the analytical prediction for
the $\Lambda$CDM model (dashed black line). Lower panel: the ratio between the coupled dark energy models and the
$\Lambda$CDM model. Colour lines and styles are as in Fig.~\ref{fig:PSkappa}. The curves and the shaded region
(shown only for the $\Lambda$CDM model) represent the average and the r.m.s. obtained from 100 different
realizations, respectively.}
\label{fig:gamma_var}
\end{figure}
In Fig.~\ref{fig:gamma_var} we show our results for the shear in aperture as a function of the angular scale
$\theta$. In the upper panel we show a comparison between the values of the shear in aperture for the $\Lambda$CDM
model (black solid line) and the two most extreme coupled dark energy models, the EXP003 model (orange dotted line)
and the SUGRA003 model (green dashed-dot-dotted line). The power spectrum differences between the models translate to
differences in the shear in aperture, but in an integrated, cumulative way.
For smaller apertures, the finite resolution of the simulations also becomes an issue, as can be seen by comparing
with analytical predictions for the $\Lambda$CDM model (black dashed line). From Fig.~\ref{fig:gamma_var}, we see
that simulations reliably reproduce the expected analytical result only for angles $\theta\geqslant 2$ arcmin, while
on smaller scales the differences become substantial. For scales of the order of 0.3 arcmin, the lack of signal is
about $\approx 30\%$. Our plot is very similar to that shown in \cite{Bartelmann2001}, their Fig.~19. The deficit is
similar to what happens when the linear spectrum is used instead of the non-linear one. While our simulation is
obviously fully non-linear, due to resolution effects, we lose some of the power on non-linear scales.
In the lower panel of Fig.~\ref{fig:gamma_var}, we show the ratio of the coupled dark energy models with respect to
the reference model. Again, the shaded region represents the error bars obtained as r.m.s. of 100 different
realizations. Error bars increase with increasing angular scale, since there are fewer independent patches in the map
to average over. Since the simulation scatter is very small (shaded region), the EXP003 model could be easily
distinguished from the $\Lambda$CDM model given such an observation. In general, the ratios have similar values to
the ones found for the lensing power spectrum, and the ratio is approximately constant over the range of angular
scales investigated in this work. Once again the different behaviour of the models is easily interpreted in terms of
the different normalization of the matter power spectra (EXP models) and of the time evolution of the matter density
parameter (the SUGRA003 model).
The reason why the ratio is approximately constant on all scales relates to the definition of the shear in aperture
(Eq.~\ref{eqn:shear_aperture}). As noticed in Sect.~\ref{sect:PS}, the spectra are approximately a rescaled version
of the $\Lambda$CDM model, therefore also its integral over the multipoles will be such that the variance is
approximately a rescaled version of the $\Lambda$CDM expression. This is indeed confirmed in Fig.~\ref{fig:gamma_var}.
As in Section~\ref{sect:PS}, we wish to see whether the differences in the shear in aperture predictions are simply
due to the higher normalization or we can observe some feature more directly reflecting the new physics.
We again compared the EXP003 model with the predictions for a $\Lambda$CDM model having identical matter power
spectrum normalization. Such a comparison shows a qualitative agreement on the ratios with respect to the reference
$\Lambda$CDM model, including the peak in the ratio for $\theta\approx $ few arcmin. There is also a smaller
impact from the feature seen in the power spectrum ratios, as we verified with a control ratio of the shear in
aperture for two $\Lambda$CDM models with different matter power spectrum normalization.
Nevertheless, the amplitude of the EXP003 model is lower than the amplitude of the $\Lambda$CDM model with analogous
normalization of the matter power spectrum.
This is in agreement with our finding for the convergence power spectrum (see Fig.~\ref{fig:LCDMps8}) and it is due
to the friction term in the equations of motion. We refer to \cite{Baldi2012} for a further discussion of the subject.
\subsection{Shear correlation Function}\label{sect:CF}
Another counterpart of the lensing power spectrum discussed in Sect.~\ref{sect:PS} is the shear correlation
function defined as
\begin{equation}
\xi_{+}(\theta)=\int_0^{\infty}d\ell\frac{\ell}{2\pi}P_{\kappa}(\ell)J_{0}(\ell\theta)\;,
\end{equation}
where $J_{0}(x)$ is the Bessel function of order zero, $P_{\kappa}(\ell)$ the effective convergence power spectrum
and $\theta$ the angular distance between the correlated sources. Note that the kernel in the integrand is different
from the shear in aperture statistics, therefore these can be compared only qualitatively.
A detailed study of the shear correlation function was performed by \cite{Beynon2012}, which we refer to for more
details. However there is a substantial difference compared to that work: our simulations assume that all the
sources are at $z_{\rm s}=1$, while in \cite{Beynon2012} sources follow a different redshift distribution according
to the different weak lensing survey the prediction is made for. Moreover their shear correlation function is
presented only for the models EXP001, EXP002 and EXP003. We can therefore only make a qualitative comparison between
the two different analyses.
We present the correlation functions in Fig.~\ref{fig:gamma_cf} as a function of the angular scale $\theta$. In the
upper panel we
show a comparison between the values of the shear correlation function for the $\Lambda$CDM model (black solid line)
and the two most extreme coupled dark energy models, the EXP003 model (orange dotted line) and the SUGRA003 model
(green dashed-dot-dotted line).
As expected, with respect to the reference $\Lambda$CDM model, we see an excess (a lack) of correlation for the
EXP003 (SUGRA003) model. Once again, we can explain this result in terms of the different matter density evolution
(SUGRA003 model) and of the different matter power spectrum normalisation (EXP003 model).
In the lower panel of Fig.~\ref{fig:gamma_cf}, we present the differences of the shear correlation function
$\xi_{+}(\theta)$ between the coupled dark energy models and the $\Lambda$CDM model. The shaded region represents the
1-sigma error bar as obtained averaging over 100 realizations. In agreement with \cite{Beynon2012}, we see that
errors decrease with increasing the correlation angle. This is expected since there are more objects to average over.
The amplitude of the r.m.s. errors is different from \cite{Beynon2012}, since ours is based on the different
realizations performed, while the value presented in \cite{Beynon2012} refers to the discriminatory power of the
specific survey.
With respect to \cite{Beynon2012}, our predictions for the shear correlation function are somewhat higher. This is
expected since in our simulations all the sources are at the same redshift. The differences in the shear correlation
functions arising from different
redshift distributions of the sources is not a simple constant, but it is a function of the angular scale.
In addition, the behaviour at small angular scales is due to resolution effects that lead to a loss of power.
To summarise, our results are in good qualitative agreement with \cite{Beynon2012}. Models with higher power spectrum
normalisation show a higher amplitude of the shear correlation function while the SUGRA model presents a deficit in
the signal (since we take the absolute values, the SUGRA model lies above the EXP001 model). The trend closely
follows what found for the study of the power spectrum and of the shear in aperture. The model EXP001 is once again
barely above the 1-sigma error bars, making it therefore difficult to detect (differently from what found in
\cite{Beynon2012}), but on a wide range of angular scales the EXP003 will be clearly identified. Models EXP002 and
EXP008e3 behave in a very similar way, analogously to what found for the power spectrum and shear in aperture. All
the other models are within the error bars for $\theta\gtrsim 30-40$ arcmin, once again differently from
\cite{Beynon2012}. Taking into account that as shown in Fig.~5 of \cite{Beynon2012}, using Halofit \citep{Smith2003}
introduces errors of the same order of magnitude of the intrinsic differences between the models, we can conclude that
raytracing simulations are an important tool in studying this class of models.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.3\textwidth,angle=-90]{CF}
\includegraphics[width=0.3\textwidth,angle=-90]{CF_diff}
\caption{Shear correlation function. Upper panel: the results for the reference $\Lambda$CDM model and for the two
most extreme coupled dark energy models (SUGRA003 and EXP003). Lower panel: absolute value of the difference between
the coupled dark energy models and the $\Lambda$CDM model. Colour lines and styles are as in Fig.~\ref{fig:PSkappa}.
The curves and the shaded region (shown only for the $\Lambda$CDM model) represent the average and the r.m.s.
obtained from 100 different realizations, respectively.}
\label{fig:gamma_cf}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure*}
\includegraphics[width=0.3\textwidth,angle=-90]{PDFkappa_z1}
\includegraphics[width=0.3\textwidth,angle=-90]{PDFkappa_z1_ratio}
\includegraphics[width=0.3\textwidth,angle=-90]{PDFgamma_z1}
\includegraphics[width=0.3\textwidth,angle=-90]{PDFgamma_z1_ratio}
\includegraphics[width=0.3\textwidth,angle=-90]{PDFfflexion_z1}
\includegraphics[width=0.3\textwidth,angle=-90]{PDFfflexion_z1_ratio}
\includegraphics[width=0.3\textwidth,angle=-90]{PDFgflexion_z1}
\includegraphics[width=0.3\textwidth,angle=-90]{PDFgflexion_z1_ratio}
\caption{PDF for several lensing quantities analysed in this work. From top to bottom: effective convergence
$\kappa$, modulus of the shear $\gamma$, 1- and 3-flexion ($F$ and $G$, respectively). Left panels show the results
for the reference $\Lambda$CDM model and for the two most extreme coupled dark energy models (SUGRA003 and EXP003).
Right panels show the ratio between the coupled dark energy models and the $\Lambda$CDM model. Colour lines and
styles are as in Fig.~\ref{fig:PSkappa}. The curves and the shaded region (shown only for $\Lambda$CDM model)
represent the average and the r.m.s. obtained from 100 different realizations, respectively.}
\label{fig:PDF1}
\end{figure*}
\subsection{Probability Distribution Function}\label{sect:PDF}
While the power spectrum and shear in aperture fundamentally reflect the same statistical information, it is
interesting to explore whether non-Gaussianity of the lensing statistics can help distinguish between the different
physics. We explore this first by examining the full one-point probability distribution function (PDF), and discuss
moments of the PDF in the next section. We limit our discussion to quantities that can be effectively observed, in
particular to the effective convergence, the (modulus of the) shear, 1- and 3-flexion ($F$ and $G$) and finally the
magnification.
To infer the PDF from our simulated lensing maps, we first establish the absolute minimum and maximum of the
maps for a given quantity, then we bin the values of the maps in this interval. Since each map has a different range
of values, binning the pixels in a range enclosed by the absolute minima and maxima allows us to compute the ratio
between the different models straightforwardly, without the need to interpolate or extrapolate the numerical PDF.
As it is apparent from Fig.~\ref{fig:PDF1}, for the modulus of the shear and of the two flexions, differences between
the coupled dark energy models and the $\Lambda$CDM model are of the order of 20\%-40\%, and percentage differences
for the two flexions are similar to those for shear.
In particular the model EXP003 now shows differences of the order of 40\% with respect to the $\Lambda$CDM model.
We notice that error bars are relatively small for all the quantities, but at the two extremes representing
relatively rare extreme underdense and overdense regions.
As seen above, the models most significantly different from the reference one are the SUGRA003 and the EXP003, due
to the lower effective matter density parameter for the first and the higher matter power spectrum normalization for
the second.
The shear PDF instead is more sensitive to the matter power spectrum normalization; we see that differences can be up
to 40\% and approximately constant over a few decades of the shear values.
Regarding the effective convergence, we see in the top panel of Fig.~\ref{fig:PDF1} that differences between the
models grow largest in the high convergence tail. Note that unlike the shear and flexion moduli, the convergence can
take both positive and negative values and it can be well fitted by a lognormal distribution with mean
$\kappa_0=0.04$ and variance $\sigma=0.35$ [following the notation of \cite{Taruya2002} and \cite{Hilbert2011}].
For models with an increasing power spectrum normalization, differences become more pronounced, particularly for the
most extreme EXP003 model, which is characterised by a very high $\sigma_8$.
The models SUGRA003 and EXP008e3 are quite interesting; having a slightly lower normalization than the $\Lambda$CDM
model, the SUGRA003 model has an excess of high convergence points.
On the other hand, the EXP008e3 model, despite having a significantly higher normalisation, shows no change in the
tail with respect to the fiducial model. These demonstrate that the friction terms can have a very pronounced effect
on the formation of non-linear structures. This was also seen in small scale power spectrum in Fig.~\ref{fig:PSkappa}.
While gravitational lensing preserves the surface brightness, this is not the case for the apparent solid angle of a
source. The magnification $\mu$, defined as the ratio of the image area to the source area, can be expressed in terms
of the shear $\gamma$ and effective convergence $\kappa$ via the relation
\begin{equation}\label{eqn:mu}
\mu=\frac{1}{(1-\kappa)^2-\gamma^2}\;.
\end{equation}
Recently the magnification has become an active research field for cosmology due to its power in complementing shear
studies
\citep[][]{Bernstein2002,vanWaerbeke2010a,vanWaerbeke2010b,Hildebrandt2011,Ford2012,Casaponsa2013,
Heavens2013,Hildebrandt2013}.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.3\textwidth,angle=-90]{PDFmu_z1}
\includegraphics[width=0.3\textwidth,angle=-90]{PDFmu_z1_ratio}
\caption{PDF for the cosmic magnification. The upper panel shows the results for the reference $\Lambda$CDM model
and for the two most extreme coupled dark energy models (SUGRA003 and EXP003). The lower panel shows the ratio
between the coupled dark energy models and the $\Lambda$CDM model. Colour lines and styles are as in
Fig.~\ref{fig:PSkappa}. The curves and the shaded region (shown only for $\Lambda$CDM model) represent the average
and the r.m.s. obtained from 100 different realizations, respectively.}
\label{fig:PDFmu}
\end{figure}
Examining Fig.~\ref{fig:PDFmu}, we notice that magnification can also be an excellent discriminant between different
models, even if in this case error bars are much bigger than before at the high magnification tail. In particular, as
noticed with the effective convergence case, the model EXP003, having a much higher $\sigma_8$, makes a higher
magnification of the source more probable. This is easily understood by considering the relation between the
magnification and the effective convergence, $\mu\simeq 1+2\kappa$ (valid at first order) when both the shear and the
effective convergence are small. Therefore higher values of the convergence also imply higher values for the
magnification. At second order, taking into account both the effective convergence and the shear, the relation between
the magnification and these two quantities becomes \citep{Menard2003,Takahashi2011,Marra2013}
\begin{equation}\label{eqn:mukg}
\mu \simeq 1+2\kappa+3\kappa^2+\gamma^2+\mathcal{O}(\kappa^3,\gamma^3)\;.
\end{equation}
The magnification $\mu$, up to second order, depends on the convergence $\kappa$ and its square ($\kappa^2$) and on
the square of the modulus of the shear ($\gamma^2$). In Fig.~\ref{fig:PDF1} we saw that both the effective convergence
and the shear are sensitive to the background cosmological model; therefore we cannot neglect the contribution coming
from the shear. While at small shear and convergence we can relate the two PDFs via the expression
\citep{Takahashi2011}
\begin{equation}
\frac{dP_{\mu}}{d\mu}=\frac{(1-\kappa)^3}{2}\frac{dP_{\kappa}}{d\kappa}\;,
\end{equation}
where $dP_{\mu}/d\mu$ and $dP_{\kappa}/d\kappa$ are the PDF's of the magnification and of the effective convergence,
respectively, this is no longer accurate at larger values of convergence and shear. This is reflected in comparing
the top panels of Fig.~\ref{fig:PDF1} with Fig.~\ref{fig:PDFmu}.
As for the power spectrum, it is interesting to understand which PDF differences are simply due to the different
normalisation of the models and which are more intrinsic.
To evaluate the PDF of the effective convergence or of the shear, two different approaches have been
followed in the literature. On one hand, perturbation theory techniques
\citep[see e.g.][]{Munshi2000,Taruya2002,Valageas2000a,Valageas2000b,Menard2003,Valageas2004a,Valageas2004b,
Takahashi2011} and the halo model \citep{Takada2003c} were exploited to analytically infer the PDF of the effective
convergence $\kappa$, the modulus of $\gamma$ and of the magnification $\mu$; on the other hand, with the help of
N-body simulations, numerical fits to the PDF of the effective convergence were determined, so as to have a quick
recipe when cosmological parameters have to be changed, for example the matter density $\Omega_{\rm m,0}$ and the
matter power spectrum normalization $\sigma_8$ \citep[see e.g.][]{Hilbert2011,Marra2013}.
For this work we use the output of the turboGL code\footnote{http://www.turbogl.org/}
\citep{Kainulainen2009,Kainulainen2011}. The turboGL code is based on the stochastic approach to cumulative weak
lensing and on generating stochastic configurations of halos along the line of sight, or along the
photon geodesic from the source to the observer. Halos that model virialised structures are described by a
Navarro-Frenk-White density profile \citep[][]{Navarro1996,Navarro1997}, filaments as non-uniform cylindrical objects.
In addition, the modelling takes into account the fact that most of the cosmic volume is occupied by voids while most
of the mass is in virialised structures and filaments.
We show the comparison for the PDF of the effective convergence and of the magnification in Fig.~\ref{fig:turboGL}
with different normalization of the matter power spectrum for the $\Lambda$CDM and EXP003 model.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.3\textwidth,angle=-90]{PDFkappa_z1_turboGL_ratio_comparison}
\includegraphics[width=0.3\textwidth,angle=-90]{PDFmu_z1_turboGL_ratio_comparison}
\caption{Ratio between the PDF of the EXP003 (orange dotted line) and the reference $\Lambda$CDM model. For
comparison we show the same ratio obtained with the turboGL code for a $\Lambda$CDM model having the same
normalization $\sigma_8=0.967$ as the EXP003 model (black solid line). The upper and lower panels refer to the
effective convergence $\kappa$ and to the magnification $\mu$, respectively.}
\label{fig:turboGL}
\end{figure}
It is apparent that the differences between the EXP003 and the $\Lambda$CDM model can be entirely explained in terms
of the different normalization of the matter power spectrum. The range we can use is however limited, due to the
fact that the raytracing procedure underestimates the true PDF for the effective convergence and magnification: this
is due to the limited pixel resolution and mass assignment to create the lens planes \citep{Killedar2012}. In
addition, the tail of the two distributions are not very well sampled, therefore we can not draw any conclusion on
the fact that for high values of the effective convergence (and hence magnification), the two curves show small
differences.
\subsection{Mean, Median, Variance, Skewness \& Kurtosis}\label{sect:high_order}
Signatures of coupling between dark energy and dark matter can be more easily quantified by considering higher order
moments of the probability distribution function. The probability distribution function (Sect.~\ref{sect:PDF})
represents the one-point distribution, while the power spectrum (Sect.~\ref{sect:PS}) and the shear in aperture
(Sect.~\ref{sect:shear_aperture}) represent second-order moments.
Next we will focus on the mean, the median, the variance, the skewness and the kurtosis of the PDF of the effective
convergence, and by considering these at varying resolutions we effectively include the effect of spatial
correlations.
Unfortunately, these statistical quantities are often affected by large errors which make their use on real data more
difficult.
The mean $\mu_1$, the variance $\mu_2$, the skewness $\mu_3$ and the kurtosis $\mu_4$ are defined as
\begin{eqnarray}
\mu_1 & = & \frac{1}{N^2}\sum_{ij}\kappa_{i,j}\\
\mu_2 & = & \frac{1}{N^2}\sum_{ij}\left(\kappa_{i,j}-\bar{\kappa}\right)^2\\
\mu_3 & = & \frac{\mu^{-3/2}_2}{N^2}\sum_{ij}\left(\kappa_{i,j}-\bar{\kappa}\right)^3\\
\mu_4 & = & \frac{\mu^{-2}_2}{N^2}\sum_{ij}\left(\kappa_{i,j}-\bar{\kappa}\right)^4-3\;,
\end{eqnarray}
where $\bar{\kappa}\equiv \mu_1$ is the mean value of the effective convergence. To evaluate the different moments of
the convergence maps, we subtract the mean value $\bar{\kappa}$ from the maps, and divide by the total number of
pixels $N^2$ to get the appropriate normalization.
Since the distribution of the convergence is non-Gaussian and its mean is effectively zero, it is useful
to consider the median, $\mu_{1/2}$, i.e. the value at which the integrated probability is the same above and below.
In Fig.~\ref{fig:Resolution}, we show the median, the variance, the skewness and the kurtosis as a function of the
map resolution. To do so, we binned our high resolution convergence maps to progressively decrease the number of
pixels in the maps, and, as consequence, to make the map resolution progressively worse. Working with sources at
$z_{\rm s}=1$, we created new sets of maps, with 2048$^2$, 1024$^2$, 512$^2$, 256$^2$ and 128$^2$ pixels. The
corresponding resolutions are (for a $\Lambda$CDM model), from 4096$^2$ to 128$^2$ pixels, 0.356 arcmin, 0.71 arcmin,
1.4 arcmin, 2.9 arcmin, 5.7 arcmin and 11.4 arcmin, respectively.
For each quantity we show its median value and the shaded region represents the range between the first and the third
quartiles of the set of points for the $\Lambda$CDM simulation. Thus it envelopes the central 50\% of the
distribution, as opposed to the 1-$\sigma$ regions shown previously.
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.3\textwidth,angle=-90]{MedianResolution}
\includegraphics[width=0.3\textwidth,angle=-90]{MedianResolution_ratio}
\includegraphics[width=0.3\textwidth,angle=-90]{VarianceResolution}
\includegraphics[width=0.3\textwidth,angle=-90]{VarianceResolution_ratio}
\includegraphics[width=0.3\textwidth,angle=-90]{SkewnessResolution}
\includegraphics[width=0.3\textwidth,angle=-90]{SkewnessResolution_ratio}
\includegraphics[width=0.3\textwidth,angle=-90]{KurtosisResolution}
\includegraphics[width=0.3\textwidth,angle=-90]{KurtosisResolution_ratio}
\caption{From top to bottom: median of the distribution for the median ($\mu_{1/2}$), variance ($\mu_2$), skewness
($\mu_3$) and kurtosis ($\mu_4$) of the effective convergence field as a function of the pixel resolution scale.
Left panels show the results for the reference $\Lambda$CDM model and for the two most extreme coupled dark energy
models (SUGRA003 and EXP003). Right panels show the ratio between the coupled dark energy models and the $\Lambda$CDM
model. Colour lines and styles are as in Fig.~\ref{fig:PSkappa}. The curves and the shaded region (shown only for
$\Lambda$CDM model) represent the median and the quartiles obtained from 100 different realizations, respectively.}
\label{fig:Resolution}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.3\textwidth,angle=-90]{MinimumResolution}
\includegraphics[width=0.3\textwidth,angle=-90]{MinimumResolution_ratio}
\includegraphics[width=0.3\textwidth,angle=-90]{MaximumResolution}
\includegraphics[width=0.3\textwidth,angle=-90]{MaximumResolution_ratio}
\caption{Upper (lower) panels: median of the distribution of minima $m$ (maxima $M$) as a function of the map
resolution scale. Left panels show the results for the reference $\Lambda$CDM model and for the two most extreme
coupled dark energy models (SUGRA003 and EXP003). Right panels show the ratio between the coupled dark energy models
and the $\Lambda$CDM model. Colour lines and styles are as in Fig.~\ref{fig:PSkappa}. The curves and the shaded
region (shown only for $\Lambda$CDM model) represent the median and the quartiles obtained from 100 different
realizations, respectively.}
\label{fig:Resolution1}
\end{figure*}
As expected, the variance shows a very similar behaviour to the convergence power spectrum and shear in aperture,
also from a quantitative point of view. All the EXP models show higher values for the variance, while the expected
value for the SUGRA003 model is $\approx 12\%$ lower than the $\Lambda$CDM model. The EXP001 is just outside of the
quartile area, making therefore difficult to distinguish it at a 1-$\sigma$ level. Other models instead show
progressively higher differences. As expected, increasing the order of the moments makes the quartiles increase, to
the point that all the models will be indistinguishable from the reference one. In particular, while for the variance
only the EXP001 model is comparable with the quartiles, for the skewness only the EXP003 model is more than
1-$\sigma$ away than the $\Lambda$CDM model, and for the kurtosis all the models are basically within the error bars.
At high resolution the skewness has the potential of distinguishing between the different models, but its predictive
power decreases at lower resolutions.
In the case of the median, the area enclosed by the quartiles is rather large, making this statistical quantity
largely insensitive to the background model, with the exception once again of the EXP003 model. While the median
changes by a factor of two over the resolution scale analysed in this work, we see that the ratio is approximately
constant.
We conclude therefore that only the variance can be used as a discriminant between the different models, since for
higher order statistics, error bars overcome the inner differences between the models. A further comment has to be
made regarding the error bars and the possibility of using higher order moments of the effective convergence. Error
bars and quartiles represent effectively the variance between the maps, each of them covering an area of roughly 600
square degrees. Therefore our conclusions and the possibility of using the skewness and the kurtosis for lensing
studies are limited to surveys of this size. Larger surveys will have reduced errors bars and higher order moments
could be used as useful cosmological probes.
Finally, we investigate whether the most extreme behaviour, namely the maximum or minimum value in the entire map,
might be a good discriminant of the models. In Fig.~\ref{fig:Resolution1} we present the median of the maxima (M)
and of the minima (m) for the ensemble of effective convergence maps. As expected, these are moderate when the
resolution decreases and more pixels are averaged together. These highlight the asymmetry of the distributions, as
the minima are significantly smaller in magnitude compared to the maxima. However, the differences between models are
quite limited for the minima, at most 10\%-15\% with larger differences for the SUGRA003 and EXP003 models.
In particular the SUGRA003 (EXP003) model shows less (more) pronounced minima with respect to the $\Lambda$CDM model
and this can be explained with the different matter density evolution (normalization of the matter power spectrum).
Maxima instead show a clear trend with normalisation of the matter power spectrum: the higher $\sigma_8$, the higher
are the differences (up to $\approx 20\%$). It is also worth noting that the distribution of the maxima is very
sensitive to the map resolution: while minima change only by a factor 1.7, maxima change by a factor of 10.
As these are rare events, the intrinsic scatter is large, making these a poor discriminator of models.
\section{Conclusions}\label{sect:conclusions}
In this work we have studied weak lensing statistics of coupled dark energy models \citep{Baldi2012}, characterised
by an interaction between the dark matter and the dark energy. Our aim was to extend previous work on the subject
\citep[see][]{Beynon2012,Carbone2013}, going beyond the Born approximation with full raytracing simulations to provide
a realistic simulated suite for lensing quantities, in particular effective convergence, shear, flexions and
magnification. The advantage of the numerical approach is that full non-linearity is automatically
achieved and no approximation is necessary for a full analysis (which is usually required with analytical techniques).
A coupling between dark matter and dark energy has important effects on structure formation due to the different
non-linear evolution of dark matter particles, and the appearance of a fifth force term that, because of its
frictional nature, tends to suppress non-linear power.
We saw that all the statistical quantities analysed in this work faithfully reproduce features observed in the
study of the three-dimensional matter distribution. In particular, we observe that:
\begin{itemize}
\item The effective convergence (shear) power spectrum faithfully reproduces results from \cite{Baldi2012} regarding
the three-dimensional matter power spectrum. Differences on large scales can be explained by the different
normalization of the matter power spectrum, but a comparison with a $\Lambda$CDM model having the
same normalization of the matter power spectrum reveals the importance of the different non-linear evolution, showing
a suppression of power at small scales. Differences for the coupled dark energy model characterised by a SUGRA
potential can be explained by the different evolution of the matter density parameter.
\item PDFs are sensitive to the different background models and could be used to discriminate between the different
coupled dark energy models. We showed that differences between the models can be mainly explained by differences in
the normalization of the matter power spectrum, but the high convergence tail can signal differences in the non-linear
evolution arising from friction terms.
\item When evaluating the moments of the effective convergence, we find that only the variance can be used as a
statistical tool to infer the background cosmological model. Higher order statistics like the skewness and the
kurtosis are more prone to sample variability between the different realizations, making them less
sensitive for discriminating between the different models.
\end{itemize}
Our simulations have assumed that all the sources are at a fixed redshift, in order to make raytracing
simulations numerically less expensive.
The errors we infer are limited by the finite size of the simulations, and would correspond to a moderate sized
survey of order 600 square degrees, significantly smaller than ongoing or future surveys such as DES or Euclid. Our
primary aim has been to study whether in principle other weak lensing statistics can provide a useful probe to models
of coupled dark energy; at the same time, we have developed techniques that will be required to take into
account non-linear effects in weak lensing.
To conclude, differences on large scales between the coupled dark energy models and the
$\Lambda$CDM model can largely be explained by the modified growth rate and dark matter fraction, leading to different
normalisation of the matter
power spectrum. On small scales where non-linear effects kick in, a suppression of power is caused by friction
terms which lead to observable signatures in the power spectrum and the probability distribution function.
\section*{Acknowledgements}
Raytracing simulations were run on the Intel SCIAMA High Performance Compute (HPC) cluster which is supported by the
ICG, SEPNet and the University of Portsmouth. F.~P., D.~B. and R.~C. are supported by STFC grant ST/H002774/1.
M.~B. is supported by the Marie Curie Intra European Fellowship ``SIDUN" within the 7th Framework Programme of
the European Commission.
M.~B. and L.~M. acknowledge financial contributions from contract ASI/INAF I/023/12/0, from PRIN MIUR 2010-2011 ”The
dark Universe and the cosmic evolution of baryons: from current surveys to Euclid” and from PRIN INAF 2012
”The Universe in the box: multi-scale simulations of cosmic structure”. F.~P. thanks Andrea Macci\`o for discussions
at an early stage of the project.\\
The authors also thank the anonymous referee whose comments helped us to improve the presentation of our results.
\bibliographystyle{mn2e}
|
\section{Introduction} \label{Intro}
Richard Stanley has been a pioneer in modern combinatorics, and a key figure in the development of both enumerative combinatorics and algebraic combinatorics.
In enumerative combinatorics two crucial building blocks are \textbf{(a)} the generating series for a set of combinatorial objects, and \textbf{(b)}~the relationship between algebraic operations on types of generating series and combinatorial operations on the set. The enumerative significance of a generating series is, of course, that the normalized coefficient of each of its monomials counts the objects in the set of combinatorial objects indexed by the monomial. Stanley contributed early to these important building blocks in his paper with Doubilet and Rota~\cite{drs} -- part of Gian-Carlo Rota's seminal series \emph{``On the foundations of combinatorial theory''}. Further early work appeared in paper~\cite{s1}.
The power of algebraic combinatorics often seems to depend on the efficacy of the analogue relationship between algebra and the combinatorics, in which methods from one may assist in solving questions raised in the other. Stanley has been particularly attracted by combinatorics that has made an impact in other branches of mathematics, and was himself an early developer of many of these analogue relationships.
Our own work has been inspired by these early developments. In an essential way, they have influenced our work in enumerative combinatorics, both together and separately, which has, in its turn, contributed to the further study of the connection between combinatorial structure and algebraic structure, and its application to other parts of mathematics and the mathematical sciences.
\section{Transitive factorizations of permutations}
In this article, we describe our longtime work on transitive factorizations of permutations. The themes that it illustrates include:
\begin{itemize}
\item the fundamental underlying combinatorial problem is very simple to state;
\item the contexts in which instances of this combinatorial problem arise are diverse within mathematics and mathematical physics;
\item the interplay between algebra and combinatorics is exhibited in both directions, with methods from other parts of mathematics applied to combinatorial problems, as well as combinatorial methods applied within other parts of mathematics;
\item work in this area continues to be the subject of intense research activity both in algebraic combinatorics and in other parts of mathematics;
\item Stanley's work has made an important contribution in a number of places.
\end{itemize}
We now describe the fundamental factorization problem that we consider in this article, with two variations. The following notation will be used: $\mathfrak{S}_n$ is the symmetric group acting on the symbols $\{1,\ldots,n\}$; we write $\alpha\vdash n$, or equivalently $|\alpha |=n$, to indicate that $\alpha$ is a partition of $n$; the number of parts in $\alpha$ is denoted by $l(\alpha )$; $\mathcal{C}_\alpha$ is used to denote the conjugacy class of $\mathfrak{S}_n$ with natural index $\alpha$. If $m_i$ is the number of parts of $\alpha$ equal to $i$, $i\geq 1$, then $|\mathrm{Aut}\, \alpha |=\prod_{i\geq 1} m_i!$.
\begin{problem}[{\bf The Permutation Factorization Problem}]\label{pfp}
For fixed partitions $\alpha, \beta_1, \ldots, \beta_m$ of $n$, find the number of permutations $\rho\in\mathcal{C}_{\alpha}$ and $\pi_i\in\mathcal{C}_{\beta_i}$, $i=1,\ldots ,m$, such that
\begin{equation}\label{permfactn}
\pi_1 \pi_2 \cdots \pi_m = \rho.
\end{equation}
We shall call $(\pi_1,\ldots, \pi_m)$ a \emph{factorization} of $\rho$.
\end{problem}
\begin{problem}[{\bf The Transitive Permutation Factorization Problem}]\label{tpfp}
For fixed partitions $\alpha, \beta_1, \ldots, \beta_m$ of $n$, find the number of permutations $\rho\in\mathcal{C}_{\alpha}$ and $\pi_i\in\mathcal{C}_{\beta_i}$, $i=1,\ldots ,m$, that satisfy equation~(\ref{permfactn}), and such that $\langle\pi_1,\ldots ,\pi_m\rangle$, the group generated by the factors $\pi_1,\ldots, \pi_m$, acts transitively on the underlying symbols $\{ 1,\ldots ,n\}$.
In this case we shall call $(\pi_1,\ldots, \pi_m)$ a \emph{transitive factorization} of $\rho$.
\end{problem}
There were a number of papers in the combinatorics literature on permutation factorization problems in the 70's by various authors. These relied on elementary methods only; see, for example, Walkup~\cite{wa}. In his 1981 paper~\cite{s2}, Stanley applied the powerful mathematical methodology of symmetric group characters to solve the problem in the case in which all factors are $n$-cycles (in the conjugacy class $\mathcal{C}_{(n)}$). As part of this, he was able to prove a conjecture from~\cite{wa}.
A convenient way of describing the method of symmetric group characters is to work in the centre of the group algebra of $\mathfrak{S}_{n}$. One basis of the centre is the set
$\{\mathsf{K}_{\theta} = \sum_{\sigma\in\mathcal{C}_{\theta}} \sigma\; \colon \theta\vdash n\}$ of classes, and another is the set $\{\mathsf{F}_\alpha \colon \alpha\vdash n\}$ of orthogonal idempotents. These bases are related by the linear relations
\begin{equation}\label{classidem}
\mathsf{F}_\alpha = \frac{\chi^{\alpha}(1^n)}{n!} \sum_{\theta\vdash n} \chi^{\alpha}(\theta) \mathsf{K}_{\theta},\qquad\qquad \mathsf{K}_{\theta} = |\mathcal{C}_{\theta}| \sum_{\alpha\vdash n} \frac{\chi^\alpha(\theta)}{\chi^{\alpha}(1^n)} \mathsf{F}_{\alpha},
\end{equation}
where $\chi^\alpha(\theta)$ is the character $\chi^\alpha$ of the (ordinary) irreducible representation of $\mathfrak{S}_{n}$ indexed by $\alpha$, and evaluated on the class $\mathcal{C}_\theta$.
Encoded in this way, the answer to the Permutation Factorization Problem is given by
\begin{equation}\label{classsoln}
|\mathcal{C}_{\alpha}|\cdot\Big( [\mathsf{K}_{\alpha}]\mathsf{K}_{\beta_1}\cdots\mathsf{K}_{\beta_m}\Big) ,
\end{equation}
where the notation $[X]Y$ denotes the coefficient of $X$ in the expansion of $Y$. The factor $|\mathcal{C}_{\alpha}|$ appears in~(\ref{classsoln}) since each element of the class $\mathcal{C}_{\alpha}$ is created in the product with the same frequency; the factor $|\mathcal{C}_{\alpha}|$ would be removed if in~(\ref{permfactn}) we were considering permutation factorizations of a fixed and arbitrary element $\rho$ of the class $\mathcal{C}_{\alpha}$. Of course, to apply~(\ref{classsoln}), one simply applies~(\ref{classidem}), and uses the fact that $\mathsf{F}_{\alpha}\cdot\mathsf{F}_{\beta} = \mathsf{F}_{\alpha}$ if $\alpha =\beta$, and $\mathsf{F}_{\alpha}\cdot\mathsf{F}_{\beta} = 0$ otherwise. Thus, one has changed bases to one in which multiplication is ``trivial'', before changing back to the basis of conjugacy classes. In general, the resulting expression is a sum over partitions of $n$ involving arbitrary characters of the symmetric group. Such summations are generally regarded as intractable, but significant simplification occurs in the case considered by Stanley~\cite{s2}, where all factors are $n$-cycles (so $\beta_i=(n)$ for $i=1,\ldots ,m$).
In this case, the characters have explicit evaluations, almost always equal to $0$.
Since the group generated by any single $n$-cycle acts transitively on $\{1,\ldots,n\}$, the factorizations that Stanley considered in that paper were in fact transitive, though this condition is not caused by any particularly ``natural'' mathematical reason. The remainder of the paper deals with applications of transitive permutation factorization in which the transitivity condition is quite natural, and involve factors in arbitrary conjugacy classes, not simply $n$-cycles.
\section{Maps in orientable surfaces}\label{maporient}
A \emph{rooted map} is a graph embedded in a surface so that all faces are two-cells (homeomorphic to a disc). In the case of orientable surfaces, one vertex is distinguished, called the root vertex, and one edge incident with the root vertex is distinguished, called the root edge. In order to construct permutation factorizations corresponding to a rooted map in an orientable surface with $n$ edges, assign labels to the two ends of the edges with the integers $1,\ldots ,2n$ subject only to the restriction that the end of the root edge incident with the root vertex is assigned the label $1$. We call the resulting object a \emph{decorated rooted map}, and of course, there are $(2n-1)!$ decorated rooted maps corresponding to every rooted map with $n$ edges. An example with $9$ edges using the standard polygonal representation of the torus is given in Figure~\ref{otblefig}.
\begin{figure}
\scalebox{.4}{\includegraphics{otblemapGJ.pdf}}
\caption{A decorated rooted map embedded in the torus}\label{otblefig}
\end{figure}
\begin{construction} \label{mapperms}
(see, \textit{e.g.}, Tutte~\cite{t} for full details) Given a decorated rooted map with $n$ edges, construct three permutations $\nu ,\varepsilon ,\phi $ in $\mathfrak{S}_{2n}$ as follows:
\begin{itemize}
\item
the disjoint cycles of $\nu$, the \emph{vertex permutation}, are the clockwise circular lists of end labels of edges incident with each vertex;
\item
the disjoint cycles of $\varepsilon$, the \emph{edge permutation}, are the pairs of labels on the two ends of each edge;
\item
the disjoint cycles of $\phi$, the \emph{face permutation}, are the counterclockwise circular lists of the second label on each edge encountered when traversing the interior of the faces.
\end{itemize}
\end{construction}
As an example of Construction~\ref{mapperms}, the three permutations that we construct from the decorated rooted map given in Figure~\ref{otblefig} are:
\begin{align*}
\nu &= (1\, 8\, 5\, 15)(1\, 12\, 10\, 14\, 16\, 11)(3\, 18\, 17\, 7)(4\, 9\, 13)(6),\\
\epsilon &= (1\, 14)(2\, 17)(3\, 7)(4\, 10)(5\, 13)(6\, 8)(9\, 18)(11\, 15)(12\, 16),\\
\phi &= (1\, 6\, 8\, 13\, 10)(2\, 16\, 15\, 14\, 12\, 4\, 18)(3\, 9\, 5\, 11\, 17)(7).
\end{align*}
From the description in Construction~\ref{mapperms}, it is clear that in general, as in the above example,
\begin{itemize}
\item
the lengths of the cycles of $\nu$ specify the vertex-degrees of the underlying rooted map,
\item
all cycles of $\varepsilon$ have length $2$,
\item
the lengths of the cycles of $\phi$ specify the face-degrees of the underlying map.
\end{itemize}
\noindent
Moreover, by construction we have $\varepsilon\nu = \phi$, and the fact that $\langle \varepsilon , \nu\rangle$ acts transitively on the symbols $1,\ldots ,2n$ follows immediately from the fact that the embedded graph is connected. Finally, the genus of the embedding surface can be obtained from $\nu ,\varepsilon ,\phi$ by Euler's formula.
Consequently, the enumeration of rooted maps embedded in orientable surfaces is, up to scaling, a special case of the Transitive Permutation Factorization Problem (Problem~\ref{tpfp}), in which there are precisely two factors. When we solve this enumerative question in terms of group characters by means of~(\ref{classsoln}), and form the generating series, we find that symmetric functions are introduced in a natural way because the linear relations~(\ref{classidem}) are scale equivalent to the linear relations
\begin{equation*}
s_{\alpha}= \sum_{\theta\vdash n}\frac{|\mathcal{C}_{\theta}|}{n!} \chi^{\alpha}(\theta) p_{\theta}, \qquad\qquad p_{\theta} =\sum_{\alpha\vdash n} \chi^{\alpha}(\theta) s_{\alpha},
\end{equation*}
between the Schur functions $s_{\alpha}$ and power sums $p_{\theta}$. Thus, for $\lambda$, $\mu$ partitions of $2n$, if $m^{\lambda}_{\mu}$ is the number of rooted maps in orientable surfaces with $n$ edges, vertex degrees given by the parts of $\lambda$, and face degrees given by the parts of $\mu$, then we obtain
\begin{equation*}\label{coefforient}
m^{\lambda}_{\mu} = [p_{\lambda}(\mathbf{x})p_{\mu}(\mathbf{y})p_{(2^n)}(\mathbf{z})t^{2n}] H_O\left( p(\mathbf{x}), p(\mathbf{y}), p(\mathbf{z}), t \right) ,
\end{equation*}
where
\begin{equation}\label{gseriesorient}
H_O\left( p(\mathbf{x}), p(\mathbf{y}), p(\mathbf{z}), t \right) =
t\frac{\partial}{\partial t} \log \left( \sum_{\theta\in\mathcal{P}}
\frac{|\theta|!}{\chi^\theta (1^{|\theta|})} \,
s_\theta(\mathbf{x}) s_\theta(\mathbf{y}) s_\theta(\mathbf{z}) \, t^{|\theta|} \right),
\end{equation}
and $\mathcal{P}$ is the set of all (integer) partitions, $p(\mathbf{x}) := (p_1(\mathbf{x}), p_2(\mathbf{x}), \ldots)$, $p_k(\mathbf{x})$ is the degree $k$ power sum symmetric function in the indeterminates $\mathbf{x} =(x_1, x_2, \ldots)$. Full details of this was developed with Visentin in \cite{jv1, jv2}, so we make only a few technical remarks here: \textbf{(a)} the generating series $H_O$ is actually an \emph{exponential} generating series in the indeterminate $t$, but for the number of \emph{decorated} rooted maps, \textbf{(b}) the ``$\log$'' appears in~(\ref{gseriesorient}) to restrict to the connected objects in the usual way for exponential generating series, \textbf{(c}) the effect of $t\partial/\partial t$ in~(\ref{gseriesorient}) is to multiply the coefficient of $t^{2n}$ by $2n$, thus adjusting the exponential monomial $\frac{t^{2n}}{(2n)!}$ to $\frac{t^{2n}}{(2n-1)!}$; this division by $(2n-1)!$ is the correct scaling between decorated rooted maps and rooted maps, \textbf{(d)} the coefficient of arbitrary monomials $p_{\tau}(\mathbf{z} )$ in $H_O$ also has combinatorial meaning; it accounts for rooted \emph{hypermaps}.
\section{Maps in surfaces and Jack symmetric functions}
This enumerative approach to rooted maps was extended in~\cite{gj4} from orientable surfaces to all surfaces (includes non-orientable surfaces). For all surfaces, the class algebra of the symmetric group -- products of conjugacy classes, was replaced by the Hecke algebra associated with the hyperoctahdedral group -- products of double cosets of the symmetric group multiplied by the hyperoctahedral subgroup on both sides. Stanley's paper with Hanlon and Stembridge~\cite{hss} was an essential source, describing completely the character theory of this algebra, and the relationship with symmetric functions, in this case the zonal polynomials $Z_{\theta}$.
For the generating series, again with $\lambda$, $\mu$ partitions of $2n$, let $\ell^{\lambda}_{\mu}$ be the number of rooted maps in locally orientable surfaces with $n$ edges, vertex degrees given by the parts of $\lambda$, and face degrees given by the parts of $\mu$. Then we obtain
\begin{equation*}\label{coefflocorient}
{\ell}^{\lambda}_{\mu} = [p_{\lambda}(\mathbf{x})p_{\mu}(\mathbf{y})p_{(2^n)}(\mathbf{z})t^{2n}] H\left( p(\mathbf{x}), p(\mathbf{y}), p(\mathbf{z}), t \right) ,
\end{equation*}
where
\begin{equation*}\label{gserieslocorient}
H\left( p(\mathbf{x}), p(\mathbf{y}), p(\mathbf{z}), t \right) =
2t\frac{\partial}{\partial t} \log \left( \sum_{\theta\in\mathcal{P}}
\frac{\chi^{2\theta}(1^{|2\theta|})}{|2\theta|!} \,
Z_\theta(\mathbf{x}) Z_\theta(\mathbf{y}) Z_\theta(\mathbf{z}) \, t^{|\theta|} \right) ,
\end{equation*}
and $2\theta:=(2\theta_1, 2\theta_2,\ldots)$ for $\theta=(\theta_1, \theta_2, \ldots)$. Again, the coefficient of arbitrary monomials $p_{\tau}(\mathbf{z} )$ in $H$ accounts for rooted \emph{hypermaps}.
But there is more that we can say. We showed in~\cite{gj3} that $H_O$ and $H$ have a common generalization as the cases $\alpha =1$ and $\alpha=2$, respectively, of
\begin{equation}\label{Jacksum}
\Psi(\mathbf{x}, \mathbf{y}, \mathbf{z}; t,\alpha )
:= \alpha \, t \frac{\partial}{\partial t} \log \sum_{\theta\in\mathcal{P}} \frac{1}{\Jnorm{\theta}{\alpha }}
J_\theta(\mathbf{x}; \alpha ) \, J_\theta(\mathbf{y}; \alpha ) \, J_\theta(\mathbf{z}; \alpha )\, t^{|\theta|} ,
\end{equation}
where $J_\theta(\mathbf{x}; \alpha )$ is the Jack symmetric function with parameter $\alpha$ and $\langle\cdot,\cdot\rangle_{\alpha}$ is the standard inner product on the ring of symmetric functions.
In this work, our source for the necessary results on Jack symmetric functions was again a paper of Stanley, in this case~\cite{s3}.
Following extensive computer algebra computations with the generating series $\Psi$, we conjectured the following:
\begin{conjecture}[{\bf The $b$-conjecture}]\label{bconjecture}
The series $\Psi(\mathbf{x}, \mathbf{y}, \mathbf{z}; t,1+b)$ has coefficients that are \emph{polynomial} in $b$ with \emph{non-negative integer coefficients}. In this polynomial, the constant term, obtained with $b=0$ (so $\alpha =1$), accounts for rooted hypermaps embedded in orientable surfaces, and the sum of all terms, obtained with $b=1$ (so $\alpha =2$), accounts for rooted hypermaps embedded in all surfaces. Accordingly, the indeterminate $b$ marks a \emph{statistic of nonorientability} associated with rooted hypermaps.
\end{conjecture}
The $b$-conjecture has not yet been resolved, but some progress towards determining a suitable statistic of nonorientabilty has been made, and work is ongoing. Recent progress with La Croix~\cite{JlaC} has involved providing combinatorial interpretations, in terms of maps and hypermaps (or of transformations of the series in terms of polynomial glueings), for sums of coefficients rather than for individual coefficients. Despite success with these marginal sums, a complete understanding of the $b$-Conjecture for maps and hypermaps continues to elude us.
There is a closely related $b$-conjecture for \emph{matchings} that we conjectured in \cite{gj3}. Previously, progress on the matching version has appeared in~Do{l}ega and F\'{e}ray~\cite{df} and Do{l}ega, F\'{e}ray and \'{S}niady~\cite{dfs}.
\section{Maps, matrix integrals and virtual Euler characteristic}
Stanley's paper with Hanlon and Stembridge~\cite{hss} also contained matrix integral results associated with symmetric functions. Especially due to the influence of mathematical physics, such results are important in algebraic combinatorics, and this continues to be an area of active research interest. The generating series for maps, whose symmetric function expressions have been discussed in the previous two sections, also have matrix integral forms, and we present a brief discussion of these in this section.
For $\mathbf{i}=(i_1,i_2,\ldots )$, let $m_O(\mathbf{i},j,n)$ denote the number of rooted maps in orientable surfaces with $i_k$ vertices of degree $k$, $k\ge 1$, $j$ faces, and $n$ edges, and let $m(\mathbf{i},j,n)$ denote the corresponding number in all surfaces. Define the generating series
$$
M_O(\mathbf{y},x,z) = \sum_{\mathbf{i}, j, n} m_O(\mathbf{i},j,n) \, \mathbf{y}^\mathbf{i} x^j z^n
\quad\mbox{and}\quad
M(\mathbf{y},x,z) = \sum_{\mathbf{i}, j, n} m(\mathbf{i},j,n) \, \mathbf{y}^\mathbf{i} x^j z^n
$$
where $\mathbf{y}^\mathbf{i} := \prod_{k\ge1} y_k^{i_k}$. A matrix integral, over Hermitian complex matrices, was given in \cite{j2} for $M_O$. Using a different argument, a matrix integral over real symmetric matrices was given
in \cite{gj65} for $M$. These integrals can be transformed by the Weyl integration theorems
(the diagonalizing groups are the unitary group and the orthogonal group, respectively; the measure may be factored into Haar measure for the manifold of the groups, and an $\mathbb{R}^N$ integral over the spectra $\lambda$), and with Harer~\cite{ghj} we obtained a common generalization $M(\mathbf{y},N,z; \alpha )$ of the diagonalized integrals, where $M(\mathbf{y},x,z; 1 )= M_O(\mathbf{y},x,z)$ and $M(\mathbf{y},x,z; 2 )= M(\mathbf{y},x,z)$, with
\begin{equation}\label{RNalphaintegral}
M(\mathbf{y},N,z; \alpha )
=2\alpha z\frac{\partial}{\partial z}\log
\left(
\frac
{\int_{\mathbb{R}^N} \left|V(\lambda)\right|^{\frac{2}{\alpha}}e^{\sum_{k\ge1} \frac{1}{k} y_k \sqrt{z}^k p_k(\lambda)}
\cdot e^{- \frac{1}{2\alpha} p_2(\lambda)} d\lambda}
{\int_{\mathbb{R}^N} \left|V(\lambda)\right|^{\frac{2}{\alpha}} e^{- \frac{1}{2\alpha} p_2(\lambda)} d\lambda}
\right) ,
\end{equation}
and $V$ is the Vandermonde determinant. For combinatorial reasons, the coefficients of $z^n$ are polynomials in $N$; we may formally replace $N$ by $x$ to obtain $M(\mathbf{y},x,z;\alpha )$ from $M(\mathbf{y},N,z;\alpha )$.
Note that the parameter $\alpha$ in~(\ref{RNalphaintegral}) specializes in the same way as the Jack parameter in~(\ref{Jacksum}) or Conjecture~\ref{bconjecture}, but we do not have a matrix integral (undiagonalized) that involves the parameter $\alpha$.
An immediate application in~\cite{ghj} was to obtain $\chi(\mathcal{M}^s_g(\tau))$, the virtual Euler characteristic of the moduli spaces of real curves of genus $g$, with $s$ marked points and a fixed topological type of orientation reversing involution $\tau$. Harer and Zagier~\cite{hz} had earlier obtained $\chi(\mathcal{M}^s_g)$, the virtual Euler characteristic for the case of complex curves, using the fact that it can be obtained from a sum over rooted \emph{monopoles} -- maps with a single face. A further application in \cite{ghj}, of the common generalization~(\ref{RNalphaintegral}), was to determine a common generalization $\xi^s_g(\alpha )$ of these virtual Euler characteristics, that gave the complex case when $\alpha =1$ and the real case when $\alpha =2$. Comparing this with the $b$-conjecture (Conjecture~\ref{bconjecture}) suggests that the coefficients of $b$ in the polynomial $\xi^s_g(1+b)$ have a geometric interpretation in the context of the moduli spaces of curves, but this has not been resolved to date.
There are applications of $\xi^s_g(\alpha )$ to string theory. For example, the expressions for the virtual Euler characteristics for real and complex curve confirm the case $g=1$ determined by Ooguri and Vafa~\cite{ov} associated with the $SO(N)$ and $Sp(N)$ gauge groups.
We conclude this section with the following observation. By comparing the symmetric function and matrix integral expressions for the map generating series, we conjectured in \cite{gj65} that
$$
\left\langle J_\theta(\lambda;\alpha)\right\rangle_{\mathbb{R}^N} = J_\theta(1_N;\alpha) \cdot [p_2^m]\,J_\theta, \mbox{where}\; \left\langle f(\lambda)\right\rangle_{\mathbb{R}^N} := \frac {\int_{\mathbb{R}^N} |V(\lambda)|^{\frac{2}{\alpha}} e^{-\frac{1}{2\alpha} p_2(\lambda)} f(\lambda) d\lambda} {\int_{\mathbb{R}^N} |V(\lambda)|^{\frac{2}{\alpha}} e^{-\frac{1}{2\alpha} p_2(\lambda)} d\lambda},
$$
and $\theta\vdash 2m$. This conjecture was subsequently proved by Okounkov~\cite{ok}.
\section{Branched covers of the sphere and Hurwitz numbers} \label{S:EncTranFact}
In Section~\ref{maporient}, we showed that the special case of the Transitive Factorization Problem (Problem~\ref{tpfp}) with two factors has a geometric interpretation in terms of rooted maps, or embedded graphs, in orientable surfaces. In that case the genus of the embedding surface could be determined from the factors by Euler's polyhedral formula. In this Section, we consider a second geometric interpretation of the Transitive Factorization Problem, in this case in terms of \emph{branched covers} from algebraic geometry.
Consider branched covers of the sphere by an $n$-sheeted Riemann surface of genus $g$. Suppose that the branch points are $P_0,P_1,\ldots, P_m$, with branching at $P_i$ specified by permutation $\pi_i\in\mathfrak{S}_n$, for $i=0,1,\ldots ,m$, where $\pi_0\in\mathcal{C}_{\alpha}$ and $\pi_i\in\mathcal{C}_{\beta_i}$, $i=1,\ldots ,m$. (This means that if one walks in a small neighbourhood, counterclockwise, around $P_i$, starting at sheet $j$, then one ends at sheet $\pi_i(j)$.) Hurwitz~\cite{h} proved that, up to homeomorphism, each $\pi_0,\pi_1,\ldots ,\pi_m$ as defined above determines a unique branched cover precisely when, in the language of Problem~\ref{tpfp}, $(\pi_1,\ldots ,\pi_m)$ is a transitive factorization of $\rho =\pi_0^{-1}$. Note the following points:
\begin{itemize}
\item
the fact that the permutations form a factorization is a \emph{monodromy} condition on the sheets;
\item
the transitivity condition on the factorization means that the cover is connected;
\item
we say that the \emph{branching type} of $P_0$ is $\alpha$, and of $P_i$ is $\beta_i$, $i=1,\ldots ,m$;
\item
the genus of the surface $g$ is obtained from the branching types of the permutations by the \emph{Riemann-Hurwitz} formula, which gives
\begin{equation}\label{RieHur}
\sum_{i=1}^m \left( n-l(\beta_i)\right) = n+l(\alpha)+2g-2;
\end{equation}
\item
the minimum number of factors in such a transitive factorization, from~(\ref{RieHur}), is $n+l(\alpha)-2$ which are obtained with genus $g=0$. We call such factorizations \emph{minimal} transitive factorizations;
\item
if branching at a branch point is a transposition then it is called \emph{simple}.
\end{itemize}
Our own work on the enumeration of branched covers was initiated through Richard Stanley. Arising from joint work with Crescimanno \cite{ct}, Washington Taylor (Dept. of Physics, MIT) had asked Stanley about a particular transitive factorization problem for permutations, that turned out to be a special case of \emph{Hurwitz numbers} in genus $0$. Stanley suggested he should contact me (DMJ). Taylor's e-mail languished unanswered for three months on an old main frame computer at Waterloo. It was only through Stanley's well-known and encyclop{\ae}dic grasp of progress on active questions that I became aware of the oversight, after he e-mailed asking about progress.
The Hurwitz number $H_{\alpha}^g$ is the number of topologically distinct branched covers in genus $g$, in which branching is of type $\alpha$ at one specified branch point, and branching is simple at $r$ remaining branch points. \emph{Topologically distinct} means that we divide the number of branched covers by $n!$, for geometric reasons. Thus $H_{\alpha}^g$ equals $\frac{1}{n!}$ times the number of transitive factorizations of an element of $\mathcal{C}_{\alpha}$ into $r$ transpositions, where:
\begin{itemize}
\item
from~(\ref{RieHur}), the number of transpositions is given by $r=n+l(\alpha)+2g-2$;
\item
the group generated by the $m$ transpositions acts transitively on $\{ 1,\ldots ,n\}$. Equivalently, the multigraph with vertex-set $\{ 1,\ldots ,n\}$, and $r$ edges, one edge $\{ a,b\}$ for each transposition $(a\, b)$, is connected.
\end{itemize}
In this language, Taylor was asking about the number of transitive factorizations of the identity permutation into $2n-2$ transpositions. These are minimal transitive factorizations, with genus $g=0$, and hence are given by the Hurwitz number $H_{(1^n)}^0$.
\section{The join-cut equation}
In our first attempts to solve Taylor's problem, we applied group characters, to obtain a generating series in the form of a logarithm of a Schur function summation, analogous to the map generating series given in~(\ref{gseriesorient}). We were not able to obtain an explicit formula for Taylor's problem from this symmetric function form of the generating series, so we moved on to the following more indirect analysis: Form the generating series
\begin{equation*}
H^0=\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}z^n \sum_{\alpha\vdash n} \frac{H_{\alpha}^0}{(n+l(\alpha )-2)!} p_{\alpha}
\end{equation*}
in the indeterminates $z,p_1,p_2,\ldots$, and suppose that the last transposition in the factorization is $(a\, b)$. Then when we multiply a permutation by $(a\, b)$, there are two possibilities:
\begin{itemize}
\item[\textbf{Case 1:}] $a$ and $b$ occur on \emph{different} cycles of lengths $i$ and $j$, and the cycles are \emph{joined} to form a single cycle of length $i+j$;
\item[\textbf{Case 2:}] $a$ and $b$ occur on the \emph{same} cycle, of length $i+j$, and this cycle is \emph{cut} into a cycle of length $i$ and a cycle of length $j$.
\end{itemize}
This analysis (which we call a join-cut analysis) leads immediately to the formal partial differential equation
\begin{equation}\label{jcutpde}
\frac{1}{2}\sum_{i,j\ge 1} \left( p_{i+j} \, i\frac{\partial H^0}{\partial p_i} j\frac{\partial H^0}{\partial p_j} + p_i p_j (i+j)\frac{\partial H^0}{\partial p_{i+j}} \right)
-z\frac{\partial H^0}{\partial z} - \sum_{i\ge 1} p_i \frac{\partial H^0}{\partial p_i} + 2H^0 = 0,
\end{equation}
which we call the \emph{join-cut equation} for the series $H^0$. Together with the initial condition $[z^0]H^0=0$, this uniquely determines $H^0$.
It turns out that working with equation~(\ref{jcutpde}) is greatly simplified by changing variables from $z$ to $s$ by means of the functional equation
\begin{equation}\label{szeqn}
s=z\exp\left( \sum_{i\ge 1}\frac{i^i}{i!}p_i\, s^i \right) .
\end{equation}
This change of variables is pefectly natural within algebraic combinatorics, and is quite tractable by means of Lagrange's Implicit Function Theorem. For example, we can express the series $H^0$ in terms of $s$ in the simple form
\begin{equation*}
\left( \frac{\partial^2}{\partial z^2}\right) H^0 = \log \left( \frac{s}{z} \right) ,
\end{equation*}
and it follows immediately from Lagrange's Theorem that the Hurwitz number for genus $0$ has the explicit form
\begin{equation}\label{H0alpha}
H^0_{\alpha}= \frac{(n+\ell -2)!}{|\mathrm{Aut}\,\alpha |} \, n^{\ell -3} \, \prod_{j=1}^{\ell } \frac{\alpha_j^{\alpha_j}}{\alpha_j!},
\end{equation}
where $\alpha\vdash n$ and $\ell = l(\alpha )$ (see \cite{gj1} for full details). In this notation, D\'{e}nes~\cite{d1} and Crescimanno and Taylor~\cite{ct} had previously obtained the results for $\alpha = (n)$ and $\alpha=(1^n)$, respectively. We were unaware when writing the paper that this explicit form for all $\alpha$ had been obtained much earlier by Hurwitz~\cite{h}.
The join-cut analysis can be extended to Hurwitz numbers in arbitrary genus. Again the change of variables in~(\ref{szeqn}) helps to simplify, and in~\cite{gjvn} (see also \cite{gj7} and \cite{gjv1}) we were led to conjecture the existence of a polynomial $P_{g,\ell}$, for each $g\ge 0$ and $\ell\geq 1$, such that for all partitions $\alpha \vdash n$ with $\ell=l(\alpha )$ parts,
\begin{equation}\label{Hgalpha}
H^g_{\alpha} = \frac{(n+\ell +2g-2)!}{|\mathrm{Aut}\,\alpha |} \, P_{g,\ell}(\alpha_1, \dots, \alpha_\ell) \, \prod_{j=1}^\ell \frac{\alpha_j^{\alpha_j}}{\alpha_j!}.
\end{equation}
For example, from~(\ref{H0alpha}), since $\alpha\vdash n$, we have
\begin{equation*}
P_{0,\ell}(\alpha_1,\ldots ,\alpha_{\ell}) = \left( \alpha_1+\cdots +\alpha_{\ell} \right)^{\ell -3}.
\end{equation*}
\section{Hodge integrals, the moduli space of curves, and integrable hierarchies}
Hurwitz numbers have been the subject of much research interest over the last couple of decades, with a variety of mathematical areas making substantial contributions, including mathematical physics, algebraic geometry and algebraic combinatorics. For example, soon after we conjectured the existence of the polynomial $P_{g,\ell }$ in~(\ref{Hgalpha}), Ekedahl, Lando, Shapiro and Vainshtein \cite{elsv} proved it by constructing an explicit expression for the polynomial as a \emph{Hodge integral}. The expression is the celebrated ELSV formula
\begin{equation}\label{eq:elsvf}
P_{g,\ell}(\alpha_1, \dots, \alpha_\ell) = \int_{{\overline{\mathcal{M}}}_{g,\ell}} \frac{1 - \lambda_1 + \cdots + (-1)^g \lambda_g}{(1 - \alpha_1 \psi_1) \cdots (1 - \alpha_\ell \psi_\ell)},
\end{equation}
where ${\overline{\mathcal{M}}}_{g,\ell}$ is the (compact) moduli space of stable $\ell$-pointed genus $g$ curves, $\psi_1$, $\dots$, $\psi_{\ell}$ are (codimension $1$) classes corresponding to the $\ell$ marked points, and $\lambda_k$ is the (codimension $k$) $k$th Chern class of the Hodge bundle. Equation~(\ref{eq:elsvf}) should be interpreted as follows: formally invert the denominator of the integrand as a geometric series; select the terms of codimension $\dim {\overline{\mathcal{M}}}_{g,\ell}=3g - 3 + \ell$; and ``intersect'' these terms on ${\overline{\mathcal{M}}}_{g,\ell}$.
Earlier, and perhaps most notably, Witten~\cite{wi} had initiated much of this work by his conjecture that a transform of the generating series for Hurwitz numbers is a $\tau$-function for the KdV hierarchy from integrable systems. Witten's motivation for the conjecture was that two different models of two-dimensional quantum gravity have the same partition function. For one of these models, the partition function can be described in terms of intersection numbers on moduli space, but also in terms of Hurwitz numbers. Witten's Conjecture \cite{wi} was proved soon after by Kontsevich \cite{kon}, and a number of proofs have appeared since, for example Kazarian and Lando \cite{kl}.
A variant of Hurwitz numbers called \emph{double} Hurwitz numbers have also been the subject of recent research interest. They were introduced by Okounkov \cite{ok2}, motivated by a conjecture of Pandharipande \cite{p} in Gromow-Witten theory. Okounkov showed that a particular generating series for double Hurwitz numbers is a $\tau$-function for the Toda lattice hierarchy from integrable systems.
The double Hurwitz number $H_{\alpha ,\beta}^g$ is the number of topologically distinct branched covers in genus $g$, where branching is of type $\alpha$ at one specified branch point, type $\beta$ at another specified branch point, and branching is simple at $r$ remaining branch points. Thus $H_{\alpha ,\beta}^g$ equals $|\mathrm{Aut}\,\alpha |\cdot |\mathrm{Aut}\, \beta |/n!$ (this factor is chosen for geometric reasons) times the number of transitive factorizations of an element of $\mathcal{C}_{\alpha}$ into an element of $\mathcal{C}_{\beta}$ together with $r$ transpositions, where:
\begin{itemize}
\item
from~(\ref{RieHur}), the number of transpositions is given by $r=l(\alpha)+l(\beta)+2g-2$;
\item
the group generated by the element of $\mathcal{C}_{\beta}$ and the $r$ transpositions acts transitively on $\{ 1,\ldots ,n\}$.
\end{itemize}
In joint work with Vakil \cite{gjv2}, we used both group characters and a join-cut analysis to obtain various results for double Hurwitz numbers. One of these was the following conjectured ELSV-type formula for double Hurwitz numbers where one of the partitions has a single part:
$$
H^g_{\alpha ,(n)} = n\, (\ell +2g-1)! \,\int_{\overline{\mathsf{Pic}}_{g,\ell }}
\frac{\Lambda_0 -\Lambda_2 + \cdots \pm\Lambda_{2g}}
{(1-\alpha_1\psi_1) \cdots (1-\alpha_{\ell}\psi_{\ell})} ,
$$
where $\alpha =(\alpha_1,\ldots ,\alpha_{\ell})$, $\overline{\mathsf{Pic}}_{g,n}$ is a conjectural compactification of the universal Picard variety, and $\Lambda_{2k}$ is a conjectural (codimension $2k$) class.
A second result we obtained for double Hurwitz numbers, reminiscent of the polynomiality result given in~(\ref{Hgalpha}) for Hurwitz numbers, was a \emph{piecewise} polynomiality result. In particular, for fixed $g,\ell ,k$, and $\alpha =(\alpha_1,\ldots ,\alpha_{\ell})$ with $\ell$ parts, and $\beta =(\beta_1,\ldots ,\beta_k)$ with $k$ parts, then $H^g_{\alpha ,\beta}$ is piecewise polynomial (and \emph{not} polynomial) in the parts $\alpha_1,\ldots ,\alpha_{\ell},\beta_1,\ldots ,\beta_k$, of degree $4g-3+\ell -k$. Our proof of Piecewise Polynomiality used ribbon graphs to interpret double Hurwitz numbers as counting lattice points in certain polytopes. We then required Ehrhart's Theorem and Ehrhart polynomials, whose properties have been studied extensively by Stanley, see for example \cite{s4}. The piecewise polynomiality property of the double Hurwitz numbers has prompted further study of the chamber structure and wall crossings in these polytopes; see for example \cite{cjm, ssv}.
Finally, a substantially different but related geometric setting in which transitive permutation factorizations have been applied is given in Lando and Zvonkin \cite{lz}, where they are called \emph{constellations}.
\bibliographystyle{amsplain}
|
\section{Introduction}
The boundary-value problem of nonlinear partial differential equation of elliptic-type:
\begin{equation} \label{mastereq} \left\{ \begin{array}{ll}
- \nabla^2 u - m u - V(u) u = 0 \quad {\rm in}~ \Omega, \vspace{2.5mm}\\
u = 0 \quad {\rm on}~ \partial \Omega,
\end{array} \right. \end{equation}
is studied, where $m$ is a real number, and $\Omega \in R^3$ is a closed
domain with a sufficiently smooth boundary.
The unknown complex function $u$ consists of the unknown state $\psi$ and the reference state ${\bar \psi}$:
\[ u = \psi - {\bar \psi}, \]
where ${\bar \psi}$ (corresponding to a generalized concept of the vacuum) is not necessarily a solution of Eq.~(\ref{mastereq}), although the most simplest case ${\bar \psi}=0$ (the simplest vacuum) satisfies Eq.~(\ref{mastereq}).
Let a part of the inhomogeneous term $V(u)$, whose spectral set is assumed to be included in a
real axis, satisfy
\begin{equation} \label{inhomcond} \begin{array}{ll}
\partial_{u} (V(u) u)|_{u=0} = V_L.
\end{array} \end{equation}
For the simplicity $V_L$, which corresponds to the signed strength of linearized
interaction being independent of $u$, is assumed to be a real number.
As is readily seen, the function $u = \psi - {\bar \psi} = 0$ is always a solution of this problem (refer to the
trivial solution).
In this sense let us imagine a simple case when ${\bar \psi} = 0$, and
then the emergence of a solution $\psi$ from another solution ${\bar \psi}=0$ is true if $u \ne 0$ is the solution of Eq.~(\ref{mastereq}).
Here we seek the non-trivial solution $u \ne 0$ ($\psi \ne {\bar \psi}$) to Eq.~(\ref{mastereq}).
The corresponding situation is nothing but the co-existence of different states $\psi$ and ${\bar \psi}$.
Equation ~(\ref{mastereq}) is associated with the stationary problem of nonlinear
Schr\"odinger equations as well as nonlinear Klein-Gordon equations.
In the context of Klein-Gordon equations, it is possible to associate $\sqrt{-m}$ with
the mass (if $m < 0$).
Note that the statistical property inherent to many-body system, which might
bring about rather interesting physical properties, is not taken into account
in order to see the most fundamental properties associated with the
co-existence in both nonlinear
Schr\"odinger equations and nonlinear Klein-Gordon equations.
\section{Theory describing the co-existence}
\subsection{Mathematical settings}
Let $X$ and $Y$ be functional spaces
\[ \begin{array}{ll}
X = W_0^{1,2}(\Omega) \cap W^{2,2}(\Omega), \vspace{1.5mm} \\
Y = L^2(\Omega)
\end{array} \]
respectively (for mathematical notation, see \cite{80yosida}).
An inclusion relation $X \subset Y$ is true.
For $u \in X$, a mapping $f:R^1 \times X \to Y$ is defined by
\[
f(\lambda, u) := - \nabla^2 u - m u - V(u) u.
\]
The original master equation is written by $f(\lambda, u)= 0$.
Since the trivial solution $u = 0$ always exists, $f(\lambda, 0)= 0$ is satisfied.
According to the Sobolev embedding theorem $- \nabla^2$
is a $C^2$-mapping from $X$ to $Y$, where the detail setting of $V(u)$ is necessary to know the regularity of the mapping $f$.
The space $W_0^{1,2}(\Omega)$ denotes all the functions included in $W^{1,2}(\Omega)$ satisfying $u|_{\partial \Omega} = 0$.
\subsection{Linearized analysis} \label{linear}
Linearized problem is derived.
The Fr${\acute {\rm e}}$chet derivative of $f(\lambda, u)$ is calculated as
\begin{equation} \label{linemastereq}
f_{u}(\lambda, 0) [u] = - \nabla^2 u - \lambda u = 0,
\end{equation}
where $\lambda = m + V_L$.
This corresponds to the master equation for the linearized eigen-value problem.
It is well known that the linearized problem (with the Dirichlet boundary condition) is solvable.
Furthermore it is known that a infinite set of eigen-values $\{ \lambda_i
\}_{i=0}^{\infty}$ of $-\nabla^2$ satisfy
\begin{itemize}
\item $0 < \lambda_0 < \lambda_1 \le \lambda_2 \le \cdots$;
\item $\lambda_0$ is a simple eigen-value.
\end{itemize}
Let the eigen-function corresponding to the eigen-value $\lambda_0$ be $u_0$ (i.e., $-\nabla^2 u_0 = \lambda_0 u_0$).
First, according to the simple property of the eigen-value $\lambda_0$, it is clear that
\[ {\rm Ker}(f_{u}(\lambda_0,0)) = \{ t u_0;~ t \in R^1 \}, \]
so that the dimension of ${\rm Ker}(f_{u}(\lambda_0,0))$ is equal to 1.
Second, if there exists a solution $v \in X$ for $\nabla^2 v - \lambda_0 v = h$
with $h \in Y$, then
\[ R(f_{u}(\lambda_0,0)) = \left\{ h \in Y; \int_{\Omega} h(x) u(x) dx = 0 \right\}, \]
so that $R(f_{u}(\lambda_0,0))$ is a closed subset of $Y$ with its co-dimension 1 (cf. the Riesz-Schauder theory~\cite{80yosida}).
Third, it is valid that
\begin{equation}
f_{u \lambda}(\lambda_0, 0) [u] = - \lambda_0 u \notin R(f_{u}(\lambda_0, 0)).
\end{equation}
Consequently, according to the bifurcation theory~\cite{71crandall, 73crandall}, $\lambda = \lambda_0$ has
been clarified to be a bifurcation point (corresponding to ($\lambda_0,0$) in Fig.~1).
Note that only sufficient conditions for
the existence of the bifurcation point is presented in the bifurcation theory.
\begin{figure} \label{fig1}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=9pc]{fig1.eps}\hspace{2pc}
\includegraphics[width=9pc]{fig2.eps}\hspace{2pc}
\includegraphics[width=9pc]{fig3.eps}\hspace{2pc} \\
\includegraphics[width=9pc]{fig4.eps}\hspace{2pc}
\includegraphics[width=9pc]{fig5.eps}\hspace{2pc}
\includegraphics[width=9pc]{fig6.eps}\hspace{2pc} \\
\includegraphics[width=9pc]{fig7.eps}\hspace{2pc}
\includegraphics[width=9pc]{fig8.eps}\hspace{2pc}
\includegraphics[width=9pc]{fig9.eps}\hspace{2pc} \\
\end{center}
\caption{\label{label}
9 types of co-existence based on Eqs.~(\ref{res1}) and
(\ref{res2}): cases (i), (ii), and
(iii) appear if $\mu_s(0) =0$, cases (iv), (v),
and (vi)) appear if $\mu_s(0) > 0$, cases (vii),
(viii), and (ix) appear if $\mu_s(0) < 0$;
cases (i), (iv), and (vii) appear if $\mu_{ss}(0) > 0$, cases (ii), (v), and (viii) appear if $\mu_{ss} = 0$,
cases (iii), (vi), and (ix) appear if $\mu_{ss} < 0$. }
\end{figure}
\subsection{Nonlinear analysis}
Co-existence of different states (i.e., existence of non-trivial solution $u \ne 0$) is shown.
We set a closed interval $[-\epsilon_0, \epsilon_0]$ and a $C^1$-function
$\lambda(s)$ satisfying $\lambda(0)= \lambda_0$, where $s$ parametrizes the functional space $X$.
Under the three conditions confirmed in Sec.~\ref{linear}, let the corresponding solution $u$ be represented by
\[ u(\lambda,s,x) = s u_0(\lambda,x)+ s z(\lambda,s,x), \]
where $s$ is defined on the interval, and $z(\lambda,s,x)$ is a sufficiently smooth function of $s$
defined on $R^1 \times R^1 \times X$.
The function $z(\lambda,s,x)$ satisfies $z(\lambda,0,x)=0$ and
\[ \int_{\Omega} z(x) u_0(x) dx = 0. \]
The function $u(\lambda,s,x)$ satisfies the condition $u(\lambda,0,x)= 0$, which means the existence of the trivial
solution.
It is useful to define a linear operator
\[
A := -\nabla^2 - \lambda_0,
\]
with its domain $X$, and then it is readily seen that $A$ is a self-adjoint operator in $Y$.
The original equation is written by $A u = \mu(s) u + (V(u) -V_L) u$
with $\mu(s) = \lambda(s)- \lambda_0$, and the linearized problem is written by $A u_0 =0$.
By differentiating the original equation with respect to $s$, step by step
\[ \begin{array}{ll}
(A u)_s = \mu_s u + \mu u_s + \partial_s (V(u)u) -V_L u_s \vspace{1.5mm} \\
\quad = \mu_s u + \mu u_s + (\partial_s V(u)) u +
V(u)u_s -V_L u_s \vspace{2.5mm} \\
(A u)_{ss} = \mu_{ss} u + 2 \mu_s u_s + \mu u_{ss} +
\partial_s^2 (V(u)u) -V_L u_{ss} \vspace{1.5mm} \\
\quad = \mu_{ss} u + 2 \mu_s u_s + \mu u_{ss}
+ (\partial_s^2 V(u)) u + 2 (\partial_s V(u)) u_s +
V(u)u_{ss} -V_L u_{ss} \vspace{2.5mm} \\
(A u)_{sss} = \mu_{sss} u + 3 \mu_{ss} u_s + 3
\mu_s u_{ss} + \mu u_{sss} + \partial_{s}^3
(V(u)u) -V_L u_{sss} \vspace{1.5mm} \\
\quad = \mu_{sss} u + 3 \mu_{ss} u_s + 3
\mu_s u_{ss} + \mu u_{sss}
+ (\partial_s^3 V(u)) u
+ 3 (\partial_s^2 V(u)) u_s + 3 (\partial_s V(u)) u_{ss} \vspace{1.5mm} \\
\quad + V(u)u_{sss} -V_L u_{sss}
\end{array} \]
where the functions are represented by
$u_s =u_0 + s z_s + z$, $u_{ss} = s z_{ss} + 2 z_s$, and $u_{sss}
= s z_{sss} + 3 z_{ss}$ respectively.
The derivatives of the inhomogeneous terms become
\[ \begin{array}{ll}
\partial_s V(u) = (\partial_{u} V(u)) ~ u_s \vspace{1.5mm} \\
\partial_s^2 V(u) = (\partial_{u}^2 V(u)) ~ u_s^2 +
(\partial_{u} V(u)) ~ u_{ss} \vspace{1.5mm} \\
\partial_s^3 V(u) = (\partial_{u}^3 V(u)) ~ u_s^3 + 3
(\partial_{u}^2 V(u)) ~ u_s u_{ss}
+ (\partial_{u} V(u)) ~ u_{sss}.
\end{array} \]
By taking $s=0$, the bi-linear forms become
\[ \begin{array}{ll}
(A u)_{s}|_{s=0} = \mu_s(0) u|_{s=0} + \mu(0) u_s|_{s=0} +
\partial_{u}( V(u) u) u_s|_{s=0} - V_L u_s |_{s=0} \vspace{1.5mm} \\
\quad = V_L u_s|_{s=0} - V_L u_s|_{s=0} = 0, \vspace{1.5mm} \\
((A u)_{s}|_{s=0}, u_0) = 0, \vspace{5mm} \\
(A u)_{ss}|_{s=0} = \mu_{ss}(0) u|_{s=0} + 2 \mu_s(0) (u_0 +
z|_{s=0}) + 2 \mu(0) z_{s}|_{s=0} + \partial_s^2 (V(u) u)|_{s=0} - 2 V_L z_s|_{s=0} \vspace{1.5mm} \\
\quad = 2 \mu_s(0) u_0 + \partial_s^2 (V(u) u)|_{s=0} - 2 V_L z_s|_{s=0}, \vspace{1.5mm} \\
((A u)_{ss}|_{s=0}, u_0) = 2 \mu_s(0) ( u_0, u_0) +
(\partial_s^2 (V(u) u)|_{s=0}, u_0) - (2 V_L ~ z_s|_{s=0},u_0), \vspace{5mm} \\
(A u)_{sss}|_{s=0} = \mu_{sss}(0) u|_{s=0} + 3 \mu_{ss}(0)
(u_0 + z|_{s=0} + 6
\mu_s(0) z_{s}|_{s=0} + 3 \mu(0) z_{ss}|_{s=0} \vspace{1.5mm} \\
\quad + \partial_s^3
(V(u)u)|_{s=0} - 3 V_L ~ z_{ss}|_{s=0} \vspace{1.5mm} \\
\quad = 3 \mu_{ss}(0) u_0 + 6
\mu_s(0) z_{s}|_{s=0}
+ \partial_s^3
(V(u)u)|_{s=0} - 3 V_L ~ z_{ss}|_{s=0}, \vspace{1.5mm} \\
((A u)_{sss}|_{s=0}, u_0) = 3 \mu_{ss}(0) ( u_0, u_0)
+ (6 \mu_s(0) z_{s}|_{s=0},u_0)
+ (\partial_s^3(
V(u)u)|_{s=0},u_0) - 3 (V_L ~ z_{ss}|_{s=0},u_0),
\end{array} \]
where $u|_{s=0}= 0$, $z|_{s=0}=0$, and $\mu(0)=0$ are utilized, as well
as Eq.~(\ref{inhomcond}).
$(A u_{ss}|_{s=0}, u_0) = (u_{ss}|_{s=0},
A u_0) = 0$ due to $A
u_0 =0$.
Consequently
\begin{equation} \label{res1} \begin{array}{ll}
2 \mu_s(0) = - (\partial_s^2 (V(u) u)|_{s=0}, u_0) + 2( V_L z_s|_{s=0},u_0),
\end{array} \end{equation}
and the sign of $\lambda_s(0) = \mu_s(0)$ is determined by $-(\partial_s^2
(V(u) u)|_{s=0}, u_0)+ 2( V_L z_s|_{s=0},u_0)$.
In the same manner $(A u_{sss}|_{s=0}, u_0) = (u_{sss}|_{s=0},
A u_0) = 0$.
It leads to
\begin{equation} \label{res2} \begin{array}{ll}
3 \mu_{ss}(0) = -(\partial_s^3 ( V(u) u)|_{s=0},u_0) - (6
\mu_s(0) z_{s}|_{s=0},u_0) + 3 (V_L z_{ss}|_{s=0},u_0),
\end{array} \end{equation}
and the sign of $\lambda_{ss}(0) = \mu_{ss}(0)$ is determined by $ -(\partial_s^3
(V(u)u )|_{s=0},u_0) - (6 \mu_s(0) z_{s}|_{s=0},u_0)+ 3 (V_L z_{ss}|_{s=0},u_0)$.
In particular, if $\lambda_s(0) = \mu_s(0) = 0$ is true, the sign of $\lambda_{ss}(0)$ is determined by $ -(\partial_s^3
(V(u)u )|_{s=0},u_0)+ 3 (V_L z_{ss}|_{s=0},u_0)$.
According to Eqs.~(\ref{res1}) and (\ref{res2}), the co-existence of states is classified into 9 types (Fig.~1).
In Figure~1, around the neighbour of the bifurcation point $(\lambda_0,0)$,
two solutions co-exist in types (iv) to (ix), while the transition from
single-existence to co-existence is described in types (i) and (iii).
\begin{table}[t] \label{table}
\caption{Systematic analysis for $\psi^k$-interaction theory.
Possible classification of co-existence is shown in the column ``Type'', where
$\sigma = 4\eta ( u_0 z_s|_{s=0} ,u_0) - 2
\eta (u_0^2, u_0) ( z_{s}|_{s=0},u_0) $.}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{|l||c|c||c|c||c|c||c||} \hline
$k$ & $\partial_s V(u)$ & $\partial_s^2 V(u)$ & $\partial_s^2 (V(u) u)|_{s=0}$ & $ \partial_s^3 (V(u)
u)|_{s=0}$ & $\mu_s(0)$ & $\mu_{ss}(0)$ & Type \\ \hline \hline
= 3 & $-\eta u_s$ & $-\eta u_{ss}$ &
$ - 2 \eta u_0^2 $ &
$- 12 \eta u_0 z_{s}|_{s=0}$ & $ \eta (u_0^2, u_0)$ & $\sigma$ & all \\ \hline
= 4 & 0 & $-2 \eta u_{s}^2$ & $0$ & $-6 \eta u_{0}^3 $ & 0
& $2 \eta (u_{0}^3, u_0) $ & (i),(ii),(iii) \\ \hline
$\ge$ 5 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & (ii) \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\end{table}
\section{Application to $ \psi^k$-interaction theory}
If the Lagrangian includes the $k$th-order nonlinearity in its interaction part (for example, see
textbooks of particle physics),
the inhomogeneous term of the master equation becomes
\[ V(u) u = - \eta u^{k-1}, \]
for integers $k \ge 1$, where $\eta$ is assumed to be a real number.
Here $V_L = 0$ and $V(u)|_{s=0} = V(u)|_{u=0} = 0$ are true.
The first derivative is
\[ \begin{array}{ll}
\partial_{u} V(u)|_{u=0} = - (k-2) \eta u^{k-3}|_{u=0}
\end{array} \]
for $k \ge3$, so that it is equal to $- \eta $ for $k=3$, and zero for $k \ge 4$.
The second derivative is
\[ \begin{array}{ll}
\partial_{u}^2 V(u)|_{u=0} = - (k-2)(k-3) \eta u^{k-4}|_{u=0}
\end{array} \]
for $k \ge4$, so that it is equal to zero for $k=3$, $-2 \eta$ for $k=4$, and zero for $k \ge 5$.
The third derivative is
\[ \begin{array}{ll}
\partial_{u}^3 V(u)|_{u=0} = - (k-2)(k-3)(k-4) \eta u^{k-5}|_{u=0}
\end{array} \]
for $k \ge5$, so that it is equal to zero for $k \le 4$, $-6 \eta$ for $k=5$,
and zero for $k \ge 6$.
Results are summarized in Table~1.
In case of $k=4$ ($\psi^4$-interaction theory), the non-trivial solution
corresponds to type (i) of Fig.~1 if $\eta > 0$, to type (ii) if $\eta = 0$,
and to type (iii) if $\eta < 0$.
In particular when $\eta >0$, the co-existence emerges only if $m > \lambda_0$
(cf. spontaneous symmetry breaking).
If there is no interaction (free particle condition: $\eta=0$), $\mu_s(0)= \mu_{ss}(0)= 0$ is
true, and the co-existence is classified into type (ii).
If the interaction is linear ($V(u)= V_L \ne 0$; $\psi^2$-interaction theory), the derivatives are
\[ \begin{array}{ll}
\partial_{u} V(u)|_{u=0} = \partial_{u}^2 V(u)|_{u=0} = \partial_{u}^3 V(u)|_{u=0} = 0,
\end{array} \]
so that $\partial_s V(u) = \partial_s^2 V(u) = \partial_s^3 V(u) =
0$.
It leads to $\partial_s^2 (V(u) u)|_{s=0} = V_L u_{ss}|_{s=0}$ and
$\partial_s^3 (V(u) u)|_{s=0} = V_L u_{sss}|_{s=0}$ so that
$\mu_s(0) = - ( V_L z_s|_{s=0} , u_0) + ( V_L z_s |_{s=0},u_0) = 0$
and
$ \mu_{ss}(0) = -( V_L z_{ss}|_{s=0},u_0) + (V_L z_{ss}|_{s=0},u_0) = 0$
follows.
The co-existence is classified into type (ii).
As a result the nonlinearity can be identified by the classification other than type (ii).
\ack{
This work was supported by HPCI Strategic Programs for Innovative Research Field 5 ``The origin of matter and the universe".
The author is grateful to Prof. Emeritus Dr. Hiroki Tanabe for reading the manuscript.
}
\section*{References}
|
\section{Introduction}
\label{sec:intro}
Machine learning algorithms require train and test instances to be represented
using a set of features. For example, in supervised document classification \cite{Crammer:2006},
a document is often represented as a vector of its words and the value of a feature is set to the
number of times the word corresponding to the feature occurs in that document.
However, different features occupy different value ranges, and often one must scale
the feature values before any supervised classifier is trained.
In our example of document classification, there are both highly frequent words
(e.g. stop words) as well as extremely rare words. Often, the relative difference of a value of
a feature is more informative than its absolute value. Therefore, feature scaling
has shown to improve performance in classification algorithms.
Typically, feature values are scaled to a standard range in a preprocessing step before
using the scaled features in the subsequent learning task. However, this preprocessing approach
to feature value scaling is problematic because of several reasons. First, often feature scaling
is done in an unsupervised manner without consulting the labels assigned to the training
instances. Although this is the only option in unsupervised learning tasks such as document
clustering, for supervised learning tasks such as document classification,
where we do have access to the label information, we can use
the label information also for feature scaling.
Second, it is not possible to perform feature scaling as a preprocessing step in \textit{one-pass}
online learning setting. In one-pass online learning we are allowed to traverse through the
set of training instances only once. Learning from extremely large datasets such as twitter
streams or Web scale learning calls for algorithms that require only a single pass over the
set of training instances. In such scenarios it is not possible to scale the
feature values beforehand by using statistics from the entire training set.
Third, even if we pre-compute scaling parameters for a feature, those values might become
obsolete in an online learning setting in which the statistical properties of the training instances
vary over the time. For example, a twitter text stream regarding a particular keyword
might change overtime and the scaling factors computed using old data might not be
appropriate for the new data.
We study the problem of dynamically scaling feature values at run time for online learning.
The term \textit{dynamic feature scaling} is used in this paper to refer to the practice of
scaling feature values at run time as opposed to performing feature scaling as a pre-processing step
that happens prior to learning. We focus on binary classifiers as a specific example.
However, we note that the proposed method can be easily extended to multi-class classifiers.
We propose two main approaches for dynamic feature scaling in this paper:
(a) \textit{Unsupervised Dynamic Feature Scaling} (Section \ref{sec:unsupscale}), in which we do not consider the label information
assigned to the training instances for feature scaling, and
(b) \textit{Supervised Dynamic Feature Scaling} (Section \ref{sec:supscale}), in which we consider the label information
assigned to the training instances for feature scaling.
All algorithms we propose in this paper can be trained under the one-pass online learning setting, where only
a single training instance is provided at a time and only the scale parameters and feature
weights are stored in the memory. This enables the proposed method to
(a) efficiently adapt to the varying statistics in the data stream,
(b) compute the optimal feature scales such that the likelihood of the training data
under the trained model is maximized,
and (c) train from large datasets where batch learning is impossible because of memory requirements.
We evaluate the proposed methods in combination with different online learning algorithms
using three benchmark datasets for binary classification.
Our experimental results show that, interestingly, the much simpler unsupervised dynamic feature scaling
method consistently improves all of the online binary classification algorithms we compare, including the state-of-the-art
classifier of \cite{Crammer:2006}.
\section{Related Work}
\label{sec:related}
Online learning has received much attention lately because of the necessity to learn from large training datasets
such as query logs in a web search engine \cite{pantel-lin-gamon:2012:ACL2012},
web-scale document classification or clustering \cite{Madani:2010}, and sentiment analysis
on social media \cite{Jiang:ACL:2011,Dredze:EMNLP:2010}.
Online learning toolkits that can efficiently learn from large datasets are made available
such as Vowpal Wabbit\footnote{\url{https://github.com/JohnLangford/vowpal_wabbit}}
and OLL\footnote{\url{https://code.google.com/p/oll/}} (Online Learning Library).
Online learning approaches are attractive than their batch learning counterparts when the training data involved
is massive due to two main reasons. First, the entire dataset might not fit into the main memory of a single computer
to perform a batch optimization. Although there has been some recent progress in distributed learning algorithms
\cite{Gopal:ICML:2013,Duchi:NIPS:2010,Liu:WWW:2010}
that can distribute the batch optimization process across a series of machines, setting up and debugging such
a distributed learning environment remains a complex process. On the other hand, online learning algorithms consider only
a small batch (often referred to as a \textit{mini batch} in the literature) or in the extreme case a single training
instance. Therefore, the need for large memory spaces can be avoided with online learning.
Second, a batch learning algorithm requires at least one iteration over the entire dataset to produce a classifier.
This can be time consuming for large training datasets. On the other hand, online learning algorithms
can produce a relatively accurate classifier even after observing a handful of training instances.
Online learning is a vast and active research field and numerous algorithms have been proposed
in prior work to learn classifiers
\cite{Crammer:EMNLP:2019,Crammer:NIPS:2008,Mejer:EMNLP:2010,Mejer:2011,Duchi:COLT:2010,Ma:AISTAT:2010}.
A detailed discussion of online classification algorithms is beyond the scope of this paper.
Some notable algorithms are the passive-aggressive (PA)
algorithms \cite{Crammer:2006}, confidence-weighted linear classifiers \cite{Dredze:ICML:2008} and
their multi-class variants \cite{Crammer:EMNLP:2019,Crammer:NIPS:2008}.
In passive-aggressive learning, the weight vector for the binary classifier is updated only when
a misclassification occurs. If the current training instance can be correctly classified using the current
weight vector, then the weight vector is not updated. In this regard, the algorithm is considered \textit{passive}.
On the other hand, if a misclassification occurs, then the weight vector is \textit{aggresively} updated such that it can correctly
classify the current training instance with a fixed margin. Passive-aggressive algorithm has consistently outperformed
numerous other online learning algorithms across a wide-range of tasks. Therefore, it is considered as a state-of-the-art
online binary classification algorithm. As we demonstrate later, the unsupervised dynamic feature scaling method proposed in this paper
further improves the accuracy of the passive-aggressive algorithm.
Moreover, active-learning \cite{Dredze:ACL:2008} and transfer learning \cite{Zhao:ICML:2011}
approaches have also been proposed for online classifier learning.
One-Pass Online Learning (\textbf{OPOL}) (also known as \textit{stream learning}) \cite{Dredze:EMNLP:2010}
is a special case of online learning in which \textit{only a single-pass is allowed over the set of train instances} by the learning algorithm.
Typically, an online learning algorithm requires multiple passes over a training dataset to reach a convergent point.
This setting can be considered as an extreme case where
the train batch size is limited to only one instance.
The OPOL setting is more restrictive than the classical online learning setting where a learning
algorithm is allowed to traverse multiple times over the training dataset. However, OPOL becomes the
only possible alternative in the following scenarios.
\begin{enumerate}
\item The number of instances in the training dataset is so large that it is impossible to traverse
multiple times over the dataset.
\item The dataset is in fact a stream where we encounter new instances continuously.
For example, consider the situation where we want to train a sentiment classifier from tweets.
\item The data stream changes over time. In this case, even if we can store old data instances
they might not be much of a help to predict the latest trends in the data stream.
\end{enumerate}
It must be noted that OPOL is not the only solution for the first scenario where we have a
large training dataset. One alternative approach is to select a subset of examples from
the dataset at each iteration and only use that subset for training in that iteration.
One promising criterion for selecting examples for training is curriculum learning \cite{Bengio:ICML:2009}.
In curriculum learning, a learner is presented with easy examples first and gradually with
the more difficult examples. However, determining the criteria for selecting easy examples
is a difficult problem itself, and the criterion for selecting easy examples
might be different from one task to another.
Moreover, it is not clear whether we can select easy examples from the training dataset
in a sequential manner as required by online learning without consulting the unseen training
examples.
The requirement for OPOL ever increases with the large training datasets and data streams
we encounter on the Web such as social feeds. Most online learning algorithms require several
passes over the training dataset to achieve convergence. For example, Passive-Aggressive algorithms \cite{Crammer:2006}
require at least $5$ iterations over the training dataset to converge,
whereas, for Confidence-Weighted algorithms \cite{Dredze:ICML:2008} the number of
iterations has shown to be less (ca. $2$). Our focus in this paper is not to develop online
learning algorithms that can classify instances with high accuracy by traversing only once
over the dataset, but to study the effect of feature scaling in the OPOL setting.
To this end, we study both an unsupervised dynamic feature scaling method (Section \ref{sec:unsupscale})
and several variants of a supervised dynamic feature scaling methods (Section \ref{sec:supscale}).
\section{Unsupervised Dynamic Feature Scaling}
\label{sec:unsupscale}
In unsupervised dynamic feature scaling, given a feature $x_j$,
we compute the mean, $\mu (x_j)$ and the standard deviation $\delta (x_j)$ of the
feature and perform an affine transformation as follows,
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:unsup}
x_j' = \frac{x_j - \mu_j}{\delta_j} .
\end{equation}
This scaling operation corresponds to a linear shift of the feature values by the
mean value of the feature, followed up by a scaling by its standard deviation.
From a geometric point of view, this transformation will shift the origin to the
mean value and then scale axis corresponding to the $j$-th feature to unit standard
deviation. It is used popularly in batch learning setting, in which one can compute the
mean and the standard deviation using \textit{all} the training instances in the training
dataset. However, this is not possible in OPOL, in which we encounter only one instance
at a time. However, even in the OPOL setting, we can compute the mean and the standard
deviation on the fly and constantly update our estimates of those values as new training
instances (feature vectors) are observed. The update equations for the mean $m^k_j$ and
the standard deviation $\sqrt{s^k_j / (k - 1)}$ for the $j$-th feature are as follows \cite{Ling:1974,Randall:1983},
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{eq:mu_sigma}
m^k_j &=& m^{k-1}_{j} + \frac{x^k_j - m^{k-1}_{j}}{k} , \\
s^k &=& s^{k-1} + (x^{k}_{j} - m^{k-1}_{j})(x^k_j - m^k_j) .
\end{eqnarray}
We use these estimates for the mean and the standard deviation to scale features in Equation \ref{eq:unsup}.
The mean and standard deviation are updated throughout the training process.
\section{Supervised Dynamic Feature Scaling}
\label{sec:supscale}
We define the task of supervised dynamic feature scaling task for binary classification in the OPOL setting as follows.
Given a stream of labeled training instances $(\vec{x}_n,t_n)$, in which the class label $t_n$
of the $n$-th training instance $x_n$, denoted by a feature vector $\vec{x}_n$, is assumed to be
either $+1$ (positive class) or $-1$ (negative class).
Furthermore, let us assume that the feature space is $M$ dimensional and the value of the $i$-th feature of the
$n$-th instance in the training data stream is denoted by $x_i^n$. In this paper, we
consider only real-valued features (i.e. $x_i^n \in \R$) because feature scaling is particularly
important for real-valued features.
We define the feature scaling function $\sigma_i(x_i^n)$ for the $i$-th feature as a function
that maps $\R$ to the range $[0,1]$ as follows:
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:trans}
\sigma_i(x_i^n) = \frac{1}{1+\exp(-\alpha_i x_i^n + \beta_i)}.
\end{equation}
Here, $\alpha_i$ and $\beta_i$ are the scaling parameters for the $i$-th dimension of the
feature space. Several important properties of the feature scaling function defined by
Equation \ref{eq:trans} are noted. First, the feature transformation function maps all
feature values to the range $[0,1]$ irrespective of the original range in which each feature
value $x_i$ was. For example, one feature might originally be limited to the range $[0,0.001]$,
whereas another feature might have values in the full range of $[0,10000]$.
By scaling each feature into a common range we can concentrate on the relative values of
those features without being biased by their absolute values.
Second, the scaling parameters $\alpha_i$ and $\beta_i$ are defined per-feature basis.
This enables us to scale different features using scale parameters appropriate for their
value ranges. Third, the linear transformation $\alpha_i x_i^n - \beta_i$ within
the exponential term of the feature scaling function resembles the typical affine transformations
performed in unsupervised feature scaling. For example, assuming the mean and the standard
deviation of the $i$-th feature to be respectively $\mu_i$ and $\delta_i$, in supervised
classification, features are frequently scaled to $(x_i - \mu_i) / \delta_i$ prior to training
and testing. The linear transformation within the exponential term in Equation \ref{eq:trans}
can be seen as a special case of this approach with values $\alpha_i = 1 / \delta_i$ and
$\beta_i = \mu_i / \delta_i$.
Then, the posterior probability, $P(t=1 | \vec{x}^n, b, \vec{\alpha}, \vec{\beta})$
of $\vec{x}^n$ belonging to the positive class
is given as follows according to the logistic regression model \cite{PRML}:
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{eq:score}
P(t_n = 1 | \vec{x}^n, b, \vec{\alpha}, \vec{\beta}) = \frac{1}{1+\exp\(-\sum_{i=1}^{M} w_i\sigma_i(x_i^n) - b\)}, \\ \nonumber
P(t_n =1 | \vec{x}^n, b, \vec{\alpha}, \vec{\beta}) = \frac{1}{1+\exp\(-\frac{w_i}{1+\exp(-\alpha_i x_i^n + \beta_i)} -b\)} .
\end{eqnarray}
Here, $w_i$ is the weight associated with the $i$-th feature and $b \in \R$ is
the bias term. We arrange the weights $w_i$, scaling parameters $\alpha_i$ and $\beta_i$
respectively using $\R^M$ vectors $\vec{w}$, $\vec{\alpha}$, and $\vec{\beta}$.
The cross-entropy loss function per instance including the L2 regularization terms for
the weight vector $\vec{w}$ and scale vector $\vec{\beta}$ can be written as follows:
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{eq:loss}
L(\vec{w},b,\vec{\alpha},\vec{\beta}) = -t_n \log y_n - (1-t_n) \log (1-y_n)
\end{eqnarray}
Here, we used $y_n = P(t=1 | \vec{x}^n, b, \vec{\alpha}, \vec{\beta})$ to minimize the cluttering
of symbols in Equation \ref{eq:loss}.
To avoid overfitting to training instances and to minimize the distortion of the training instances,
we impose L2 regularization on $\vec{w}$, $\vec{\alpha}$, and $\vec{\beta}$.
Therefore, the final objective function that must be minimized with respect to
$\vec{w}$, $\vec{\alpha}$, $\vec{\beta}$, and $b$ is give by,
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{eq:total}
E(\vec{w},b,\vec{\alpha},\vec{\beta}) = L(\vec{w},b,\vec{\alpha},\vec{\beta}) + \lambda \norm{w}_2^2 + \mu \norm{\alpha}_2^2 + \nu \norm{\beta}_2^2
\end{eqnarray}
Here, $\lambda$, $\mu$ and $\nu$ respectively are the L2 regularization coefficients corresponding to
the weight vector $\vec{w}$ and the scale vectors $\vec{\alpha}$, $\vec{\beta}$.
Because we consider the minimization of Equation \ref{eq:total} per instance basis,
in our experiments, we divide the regularization parameters $\lambda$, $\mu$, and $\nu$ by the
total number of training instances $N$ in the dataset such that we can compare the values
those parameters across datasets of different sizes.
By setting the partial derivatives $\frac{\partial E}{\partial w_j}$, $\frac{\partial E}{\partial b}$,
$\frac{\partial E}{\partial \alpha_j}$, and $\frac{\partial E}{\partial \beta_j}$
to zero and applying Stochastic Gradient Descent (SGD) update rule the following updates can be derived,
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{eq:w_update}
w_j^{k+1} = w_j^{k}(1 - 2 \lambda \eta_k) + \eta_k (t_n - y_n) \sigma_j(x^n_j) ,
\end{eqnarray}
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{eq:b_update}
b^{k+1} = b^{k}+ \eta_k(t_n - y_n) ,
\end{eqnarray}
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{eq:alpha_update}
\alpha_j^{k+1} &= \alpha_j^k (1 - 2 \mu \eta_k) + \eta_k x^n_j w_j \sigma_j(x^n_j) (1 - \sigma_j(x^n_j)) (t_n - y_n) ,
\end{eqnarray}
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{eq:beta_update}
\beta_j^{k+1} &= \beta_j^k (1 - 2 \nu \eta_k) - \eta_k (t_n - y_n) w_j \sigma_j(x^n_j) (1 - \sigma_j(x^n_j)) .
\label{eq:beta_update}
\end{eqnarray}
In Equations \ref{eq:w_update}-\ref{eq:beta_update}, $k$ denotes the $k$-th update and
$\eta_k$ is the learning rate for the $k$-th update.
We experimented with both linear and exponential decaying and found linear decaying to perform
better for the proposed method. The linear decaying function for $\eta_k$ is defined as follows,
\begin{equation}
\eta_k = \frac{\eta_0}{1 + \frac{k}{T \times N}} .
\end{equation}
Here, $T$ is the total number of iterations for which the training dataset containing $N$ instances
will be traversed. Because we are considering OPOL, we set $T=1$. The initial learning rate
$\eta_0$ is set to $0.1$ throughout the experiments described in the paper.
This value of $0.1$ was found to be producing the best results in our preliminary experiments
using development data, which we selected randomly from the benchmark datasets described
later in Section \ref{sec:datasets}.
Several observations are in order. First, note that the scaling factors $\alpha_j$
and $\beta_j$ distort the original value of the feature $x_i$.
If this distortion is too much, then we might loose the information conveyed by the
feature $x_i$. To minimize the distortion of $\vec{x}$ because of
scaling, we have imposed regularization on both $\vec{\alpha}$ and $\vec{\beta}$.
This treatment is similar to the slack variables often used in non-separable
classification tasks and imposing a penalty on the total slackness.
Of course, the regularization on $\vec{\alpha}$ and $\vec{\beta}$ can be removed
simply by setting the corresponding regularization coefficients $\mu$ and $\nu$
to zero. Therefore, the introduction of regularization on $\vec{\alpha}$
and $\vec{\beta}$ does not harm the generality of the proposed method.
The total number of parameters to train in this model is $M + M + M + 1 = 3M + 1$,
corresponding to $\vec{w}$, $\vec{\alpha}$, $\vec{\beta}$, and $b$.
Note that we must not regularize the bias term $b$ and let it to adjust arbitrarily.
This can be seen as a dynamic scaling for the score (i.e. inner-product between $\vec{w}$ and $\vec{x}$),
although this type of scaling is \textit{not} feature specific.
The sigmoid-based feature scaling function given by Equation \ref{eq:trans} is by no means the only
function that satisfies the requirement for a scaling function (i.e. maps all feature values
to the same range such as $[0,1]$). However, the sigmoid function has been widely used in various fields
of machine learning such as neural networks \cite{Zhang:2000}, and has desirable properties such as differentiability
and continuity.
Next, we introduce several important variants of Equation \ref{eq:trans} and present the
update equations for each of those variants. In Section \ref{sec:exps}, we empirically study the
effect of the different variants discussed in the paper.
For the ease of reference, we name the original formulation given by Equation \ref{eq:trans}
as \textbf{FS} (Supervised Feature Scaling) method.
The objective function given by Equation \ref{eq:total} is convex with respect to
$\vec{w}$. This can be easily verified by computing the second derivative of the
objective function with respect to $w_i$, which becomes
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:w_d2}
\frac{\partial^2 E}{\partial w_i^2} = {\sigma(x_i)}^2 y_n (1 - y_n) + 2\lambda .
\end{equation}
Because $0 < \sigma(x_i) < 1$, $0 < y_n < 1$, and $0 < \lambda$ hold,
the second derivative $\frac{\partial^2 E}{\partial w_i^2} > 0$,
which proves that the objective function is convex with respect to $w_i$.
Likewise, the objective function can be shown to be convex with respect to the bias term $b$.
It is interesting to note that the convexity holds irrespective of the form of the
scaling function $\sigma$ for both $\vec{w}$ and $b$ as long as $\sigma(x_i) \neq 0$ is satisfied.
If $\sigma(x_i) = 0$ for some value of $x_i$, then the convexity of $E$ also
depends upon $\lambda$ not being equal to zero.
Although, in the case of sigmoid feature scaling functions $\sigma(x_i) \to 0$ when $x_i \to -\infty$
this is irrelevant because feature values are finite in practice.
Unfortunately, the objective function is \textit{non-convex} with respect to
$\vec{\alpha}$ and $\vec{\beta}$. Although SGD updates are empirically shown to work well even
when the objective function is non-convex, there is no guarantee that the update
Equations \ref{eq:w_update} - \ref{eq:beta_update} will find the global minimum of the
objective function.
\subsection{\textbf{FS-1}}
\label{sec:FS1}
In this variant we fix the scaling factor $\vec{\alpha} = \vec{1}$, thereby reducing the
number of parameters to be tuned. However, this model cannot adjust for the different
value ranges of features and can only learn the shiftings required.
We name this variant as \textbf{FS-1} and is given by,
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:FS1}
\sigma_i(x_i^n) = \frac{1}{1+\exp(-x_i^n + \beta_i)}.
\end{equation}
The update equations for $w_j$, $b$, and $\beta_j$ are as follows,
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{eq:FS1:w_update}
w_j^{k+1} = w_j^{k}(1 - 2 \lambda \eta_k) + \eta_k (t_n - y_n) \sigma_j(x^n_j) ,
\end{eqnarray}
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{eq:FS1:b_update}
b^{k+1} = b^{k}+ \eta_k(t_n - y_n) ,
\end{eqnarray}
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{eq:FS1:beta_update}
\beta_j^{k+1} &= \beta_j^k (1 - 2 \nu \eta_k) - \eta_k (t_n - y_n) w_j \sigma_j(x^n_j) (1 - \sigma_j(x^n_j)) .
\end{eqnarray}
Note that although the update Equations \ref{eq:FS1:w_update}, \ref{eq:FS1:b_update}, and \ref{eq:FS1:beta_update}
appear to be similar in their form to Equations \ref{eq:w_update}, \ref{eq:b_update}, and \ref{eq:beta_update},
the transformation functions in the two sets of equations are different.
As discussed earlier under \textbf{FS}, \textbf{FS-1} is also convex with respect to $\vec{w}$ and $b$, but non-convex
with respect to $\vec{\beta}$.
\subsection{\textbf{FS-2}}
\label{sec:FS2}
We design a convex form of the objective function with respect to all parameters by replacing the
sigmoid feature scaling function with a linear combination as follows,
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:sigma_conex}
\sigma_i(x_i) = \alpha_i x_i + \beta_i .
\end{equation}
The class conditional probability is computed using the logistic sigmoid model as,
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:convex_sigmoid}
P(t_n = 1 | \vec{w}, b, \vec{\alpha}, \vec{\beta}) = \frac{1}{1 + \exp(-\sum_{j=1}^{M} w_j (\alpha_j x^n_j + \beta_j) -b)} .
\end{equation}
Then the update equations for $\vec{w}$, $b$, $\vec{\alpha}$, and $\vec{\beta}$ are given as follows,
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{eq:FS2:w_update}
w^{k+1}_j = w^{k}_j (1 - 2 \lambda \eta_k) - \eta_k (y_n - t_n) (\alpha_j x^n_j + \beta_j) ,
\end{eqnarray}
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{eq:FS2:b_update}
b^{k+1} = b^k - \eta_k (y_n - t_n),
\end{eqnarray}
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{eq:FS2:alpha_update}
\alpha^{k+1}_j = \alpha^k_j (1 - 2 \mu \eta_k) - \eta_k (y_n - t_n) w_j x^n_j,
\end{eqnarray}
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{eq:FS2:beta_update}
\beta^{k+1}_j = \beta^k_j (1 - 2 \nu \eta_k) - \eta_k (y_n - t_n) w_j .
\end{eqnarray}
Here, we used $y_n = P(t_n = 1 | \vec{w}, b, \vec{\alpha}, \vec{\beta})$ to simplify the equations.
Moreover, the second-order partial derivatives of the objective function $E$, with respect to
$\vec{w}$, $b$, $\vec{\alpha}$, and $\vec{\beta}$ can be computed as follows,
\begin{eqnarray}
\nonumber
\frac{\partial^2 E}{\partial w_j^2} &=& y_n (1 - y_n) {(\alpha_j x^n_j + \beta_j)}^{2} + 2 \lambda, \\ \nonumber
\frac{\partial^2 E}{\partial \alpha_j^2} &=& y_n (1 - y_n) w_j^2 x^{n2}_j + 2 \mu, \\ \nonumber
\frac{\partial^2 E}{\partial \beta_j^2} &=& y_n (1 - y_n) w_j^2 x^{n2}_j + 2 \mu, \\ \nonumber
\frac{\partial^2 E}{\partial w_j^2} &=& y_n (1 - y_n) .
\end{eqnarray}
From, $0 < y_n < 1$, $\lambda > 0$, $\mu > 0$, and $\nu > 0$ it follows that all of the above-mentioned
second-order derivatives are positive, which proofs the convexity of the objective function.
We name this convex formulation of the feature scaling method as the \textbf{FS-2} method.
\subsection{\textbf{FS-3}}
\label{sec:FS3}
Although \textbf{FS-2} is convex, there is an issue regarding the determinability among
$\vec{w}$, $\vec{\alpha}$, and $\vec{\beta}$ because the product between $\vec{w}$ and $\vec{\alpha}$,
and the product between $\vec{w}$ and $\vec{\beta}$ appear inside the exponential term
in Equation \ref{eq:convex_sigmoid}. This implies that the probability $P(t_n = 1 | \vec{w}, b, \vec{\alpha}, \vec{\beta})$ will be invariant under a constant scaling of $\vec{w}$, $\vec{\alpha}$, and $\vec{\beta}$.
We can absorb the $w_j$ terms from the objective function into the corresponding $\alpha_j$
and $\beta_j$ terms thereby effectively both reducing the number of parameters to be trained
as well as eliminating the issue regarding the determinability.
We name this variant of the feature scaling method as the \textbf{FS-3} method.
The class conditional probability for \textbf{FS-3} is give by,
\begin{equation}
P(t_n = 1 | b, \vec{\alpha}, \vec{\beta}) = \frac{1}{1 + \exp(-\sum_{j=1}^{M} (\alpha_j x^n_j + \beta_j) -b)} .
\end{equation}
This can be seen as a special case of \textbf{FS-2} where we set $\vec{w} = \vec{1}$ and $\lambda = 0$.
The update equations for \textbf{FS-3} can be derived as follows,
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{eq:FS3:b_update}
b^{k+1} = b^k - \eta_k (y_n - t_n),
\end{eqnarray}
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{eq:FS3:alpha_update}
\alpha^{k+1}_j = \alpha^k_j (1 - 2 \mu \eta_k) - \eta_k (y_n - t_n) x^n_j,
\end{eqnarray}
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{eq:FS3:beta_update}
\beta^{k+1}_j = \beta^k_j (1 - 2 \nu \eta_k) - \eta_k (y_n - t_n) .
\end{eqnarray}
Here, we used $y_n = P(t_n = 1 | b, \vec{\alpha}, \vec{\beta})$ to simplify the equations.
Because \textbf{FS-2} is convex and \textbf{FS-3} is a special case of \textbf{FS-2},
it follows that \textbf{FS-3} is also convex.
\section{Datasets}
\label{sec:datasets}
To evaluate the performance of the numerous feature scaling methods introduced in Section \ref{sec:supscale},
we train and test those methods under the one-pass online learning setting. We use three datasets
in our experiments: \textbf{heart} dataset, \textbf{liver} dataset, and the \textbf{diabetes} dataset.
All three datasets are popularly used as benchmark datasets to evaluate binary classification
algorithms. Moreover, all three datasets contain real-valued and unscaled features values,
which are appropriate for the current evaluation purpose. All three datasets can be downloaded from
the UCI Machine Learning Repository\footnote{\url{http://archive.ics.uci.edu/ml/}}.
Details of the three datasets are summarized in Table \ref{tbl:datasets}.
\begin{table}[h]
\caption{Statistics regarding the three datasets used in the experiments.}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{|l||c|c|c|}\hline
Dataset & Attributes & Train instances & Test instances \\ \hline \hline
heart & $13$ & $216$ & $54$ \\ \hline
liver & $6$ & $276$ & $69$ \\ \hline
diabetes & $8$ & $611$ & $157$ \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\label{tbl:datasets}
\end{table}
\section{Experiments and Results}
\label{sec:exps}
To compare the performance of the different dynamic feature scaling methods we proposed in
the paper, we use those methods to scale features in the following online learning algorithms.
\begin{description}
\itemsep 10pt
\item[SGD (Stochastic Gradient Descent):]
This method implements logistic regression using stochastic gradient descent.
It does not use any feature scaling and uses the original feature values as they are
for training a binary classifier. This method demonstrates the lower baseline performance
for this task.
\item[SDG+avg (Stochastic Gradient Descent with Model Averaging):]
This method is the same as \textbf{SGD} described above, except that it uses the average
weight vector during training and testing. Specifically, it computes the average of the
weight vector $\vec{w}$ over the updates and uses this average vector for prediction.
By considering the average weight vector instead of the final weight vector we can
avoid any bias toward the last few training instances encountered by the online learner.
Moreover, it has been shown both theoretically and empirically that consideration of the average weight
vector results in faster convergence in online learning \cite{Collins:EMNLP:2002}.
\item[GN (Unsupervised Dynamic Scaling):]
This is the unsupervised dynamitc feature scaling method described in Section \ref{sec:unsupscale}.
It trains a binary logistic regression model by scaling the features using the unsupervised
approach.
\item[GN+avg (Unsupervised Dynamic Scaling with Model Averaging):]
This is the unsupervised feature scaling method described in Section \ref{sec:unsupscale}
using the average weight vector for predicting instead of the final weight vector.
It trains a binary logistic regression model by scaling the features using the unsupervised
approach.
\item[FS (Supervised Dynamic Feature Scaling):]
This is the supervised dynamic feature scaling method described in Section \ref{sec:supscale}.
\item[FS+avg (Supervised Dynamic Feature Scaling with Model Averaging):]
This is the \textbf{FS} method, where we use the average values for all parameters:
$\vec{w}$, $b$, $\vec{\alpha}$, and $\vec{\beta}$.
\item[FS-1 (Supervised Dynamic Feature Scaling variant FS-1):]
This is the method described in Section \ref{sec:FS1}.
\item[FS-1+avg (Supervised Dynamic Feature Scaling variant FS-1 with Model Averaging):]
This is the method described in Section \ref{sec:FS1} with averaged parameter vectors.
\item[FS-2 (Supervised Dynamic Feature Scaling variant FS-2):]
This is the method described in Section \ref{sec:FS2}.
\item[FS-2+avg (Supervised Dynamic Feature Scaling variant FS-1 with Model Averaging):]
This is the method described in Section \ref{sec:FS2} with averaged parameter vectors.
\item[FS-3 (Supervised Dynamic Feature Scaling variant FS-3):]
This is the method described in Section \ref{sec:FS3}.
\item[FS-3+avg (Supervised Dynamic Feature Scaling variant FS-1 with Model Averaging):]
This is the method described in Section \ref{sec:FS3} with averaged parameter vectors.
\item[PA (Passive-Aggressive):]
This is the Passive-Aggressive binary linear classification algorithm proposed by \cite{Crammer:2006}.
\item[PA+avg (Passive-Aggressive with Model Averaging):]
This is the Passive-Aggressive binary linear classification algorithm proposed by \cite{Crammer:2006}
using the averaged weight vector to predict during both training and testing stages.
\item[PA-1 (Passive-Average variant 1):]
This is the Passive-Aggressive PA-I version of the binary
linear classification algorithm proposed by \cite{Crammer:2006}.
\item[PA-1+avg (Passive-Aggressive variant 1 with Model Averaging):]
This is the Passive-Aggressive PA-1 version of the binary
linear classification algorithm proposed by \cite{Crammer:2006} using
the averaged weight vector to predict during both training and testing stages.
\item[PA-2 (Passive-Aggressive variant 2):]
This is the Passive-Aggressive PA-2 version of the binary
linear classification algorithm proposed by \cite{Crammer:2006}.
\item[PA-2+avg (Passive-Aggressive variant 2 with Model Averaging):]
This is the Passive-Aggressive PA-2 version of the binary
linear classification algorithm proposed by \cite{Crammer:2006} using
the averaged weight vector to predict during both training and testing stages.
\end{description}
\begin{table}[t]
\caption{Results on the heart dataset.}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{|l||c|c|c|}\hline
Algorithm & Train Accuracy & Test Accuracy & Best Parameters \\ \hline \hline
SGD & $0.537037$ & $0.574074$ & $\lambda=0.01$ \\
SGD+avg & $0.481481$ & $0.435185$ & $\lambda=0$ \\
\textbf{GN} & $\mathbf{0.87037}$ & $\mathbf{0.824074}$ & $\lambda=0.01$ \\
GN+avg & $0.777778$ & $0.768519$ & $\lambda=0.1$ \\
FS & $0.592593$ & $0.49537$ & $\lambda=0.1, \mu=1.0, \nu=0$ \\
FS+avg & $0.481481$ & $0.435185$ & $\lambda=0, \mu=0 \nu=0$ \\
FS-1 & $0.703704$ & $0.564815$ & $\mu=100.0, \nu=0.1$ \\
FS-1+avg & $0.759259$ & $0.564815$ & $\mu=0.1, \nu=10.0$ \\
FS-2 & $0.740741$ & $0.569444$ & $\lambda=10.0, \mu=0, \nu=10.0$ \\
FS-2+avg & $0.574074$ & $0.467593$ & $\lambda=0, \mu=1.0, \nu=0$ \\
FS-3 & $0.592593$ & $0.476852$ & $\mu=0.1, \nu=0$ \\
FS-3+avg & $0.574074$ & $0.421296$ & $\mu=0.1, \nu=1.0$ \\
PA & $0.648148$ & $0.675926$ & $c=0.01$ \\
PA+avg & $0.611111$ & $0.662037$ & $c=0.01$ \\
PA1 & $0.648148$ & $0.675926$ & $c=0.01$ \\
PA1+avg & $0.611111$ & $0.662037$ & $c=0.01$ \\
PA2 & $0.648148$ & $0.675926$ & $c=0.01$ \\
PA2+avg & $0.611111$ & $0.662037$ & $c=0.01$ \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\label{tbl:heart}
\end{table}
\begin{table}[t]
\caption{Results on the liver dataset.}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{|l||c|c|c|}\hline
Algorithm & Train Accuracy & Test Accuracy & Best Parameters \\ \hline \hline
SGD & $0.608696$ & $0.561594$ & $\lambda=0.1$ \\
SGD+avg & $0.550725$ & $0.586957$ & $\lambda=0$ \\
GN & $0.695652$ & $0.637681$ & $\lambda=100.0$ \\
\textbf{GN+avg} & $\mathbf{0.777778}$ & $\mathbf{0.768519}$ & $\lambda=0.1$ \\
FS & $0.637681$ & $0.586957$ & $\lambda=10.0, \mu=0.1, \nu=0.1$ \\
FS+avg & $0.550725$ & $0.586957$ & $\lambda=0, \mu=0 \nu=0$ \\
FS-1 & $0.623188$ & $0.413043$ & $\mu=1.0, \nu=0$ \\
FS-1+avg & $0.623188$ & $0.413043$ & $\mu=0.1, \nu=0.1$ \\
FS-2 & $0.681159$ & $0.59058$ & $\lambda=0, \mu=0.01, \nu=0$ \\
FS-2+avg & $0.550725$ & $0.586957$ & $\lambda=0, \mu=0, \nu=0$ \\
FS-3 & $0.623188$ & $0.550725$ & $\mu=0, \nu=0$ \\
FS-3+avg & $0.550725$ & $0.586957$ & $\mu=0, \nu=0$ \\
PA & $0.434783$ & $0.427536$ & $c=0.01$ \\
PA+avg & $0.565217$ & $0.594203$ & $c=0.01$ \\
PA1 & $0.434783$ & $0.427536$ & $c=0.01$ \\
PA1+avg & $0.565217$ & $0.594203$ & $c=0.01$ \\
PA2 & $0.434783$ & $0.427536$ & $c=0.01$ \\
PA2+avg & $0.565217$ & $0.594203$ & $c=0.01$ \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\label{tbl:liver}
\end{table}
\begin{table}[t]
\caption{Results on the diabetes dataset.}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{|l||c|c|c|}\hline
Algorithm & Train Accuracy & Test Accuracy & Best Parameters \\ \hline \hline
SGD & $0.643312$ & $0.653028$ & $\lambda=1.0$ \\
SGD+avg & $0.643312$ & $0.653028$ & $\lambda=0$ \\
GN & $0.656051$ & $0.656301$ & $\lambda=0.01$ \\
\textbf{GN+avg} & $\mathbf{0.656051}$ & $\mathbf{0.671031}$ & $\lambda=100.0$ \\
FS & $0.643312$ & $0.653028$ & $\lambda=0, \mu=0, \nu=0$ \\
FS+avg & $0.643312$ & $0.653028$ & $\lambda=0, \mu=0 \nu=0$ \\
FS-1 & $0.643312$ & $0.653028$ & $\mu=10, \nu=0$ \\
FS-1+avg & $0.643312$ & $0.653028$ & $\mu=0, \nu=0$ \\
FS-2 & $0.643312$ & $0.653028$ & $\lambda=0, \mu=0, \nu=1.0$ \\
FS-2+avg & $0.643312$ & $0.653028$ & $\lambda=0, \mu=0, \nu=0$ \\
FS-3 & $0.643312$ & $0.653028$ & $\mu=0.01, \nu=100.0$ \\
FS-3+avg & $0.643312$ & $0.653028$ & $\mu=0, \nu=0.01$ \\
PA & $0.611465$ & $0.656301$ & $c=0.01$ \\
PA+avg & $0.636943$ & $0.657938$ & $c=0.01$ \\
PA1 & $0.648148$ & $0.675926$ & $c=0.01$ \\
PA1+avg & $0.636943$ & $0.657938$ & $c=0.01$ \\
PA2 & $0.611465$ & $0.656301$ & $c=0.01$ \\
PA2+avg & $0.636943$ & $0.657938$ & $c=0.01$ \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\label{tbl:diabetes}
\end{table}
We measure train and test classification accuracy for each of the above-mentioned $18$ algorithms.
Classification accuracy is defined as follows:
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:error}
\mbox{Classification Accuracy} = \frac{\mbox{total no. of correctly classified instances}}
{\mbox{total no. of instances in the dataset}} .
\end{equation}
Note that all three benchmark datasets described in Section \ref{sec:datasets} are balanced
(i.e. contains equal numbers of positive and negative train/test instances).
Therefore, a method that randomly classifies test instances would obtain an accuracy of $0.5$.
The experimental results for heart, liver, and diabetes datasets are shown respectively in Tables \ref{tbl:heart},
\ref{tbl:liver}, and \ref{tbl:diabetes}.
We vary the values for the numerous parameters in a pre-defined set of values for each parameter
and experiment with all possible combinations of those values. For the regularization
coefficients $\lambda$, $\mu$, and $\nu$ we experiment with the values in the set
$\{0, 0.01, 0.1, 1, 10, 100\}$. For the $c$ parameter in passive-aggressive algorithms we
chose from the set $\{0.01, 0.1, 1, 10, 100\}$.
In each dataset, we randomly set aside $1/5$-th of all training data for validation purposes.
We search for the parameter values for each algorithm that produces the highest accuracy on
the validation dataset. Next, we fix those parameter values and evaluate on the test portion
of the corresponding dataset. The best parameter values found through the search procedure are
shown in the fourth column in Tables \ref{tbl:heart}-\ref{tbl:diabetes}.
Online learning algorithms have been shown to be sensitive to the order in which
training examples are presented to them. Following the suggestions in prior work,
we randomize the sequence of training data instances during training \cite{Berrtsekas:2010}.
All results shown in the paper are the average of $10$ random initializations.
As can be seen from Tables \ref{tbl:heart}, \ref{tbl:liver}, and \ref{tbl:diabetes}
the unsupervised dynamic feature scaling methods (\textbf{GN} and \textbf{GN+avg}) consistently
outperform joint supervised feature scaling methods and PA algorithms.
Model averaged version of the unsupervised dynamic feature scaling method (\textbf{GN+avg})
shows better performance than its counterpart that does not perform model averaging (\textbf{GN})
in two out of the tree datasets. Compared to the unsupervised dynamic feature scaling methods
(\textbf{GN} and \textbf{GN+avg}), the supervised dynamic feature scaling methods
(\textbf{FS}, \textbf{FS-1}, \textbf{FS-2}, and \textbf{FS-3}) report lower test accuracies.
Compared to the unsupervised dynamic feature scaling methods, the number of parameters that must be estimated
from labeled data is larger in the supervised dynamic feature scaling methods.
Although the unsupervised dynamic feature scaling method requires us to estimate the
mean and standard deviation from train data, those parameters can be estimated without using the
label information in the training instances.
Therefore, the unsupervised dynamic feature scaling is less likely to overfit to the train data,
which results in better performance.
Recall that \textbf{SGD} and \textbf{SGD+avg} do not perform any dynamic feature scaling and
demonstrate the level of accuracy that we would obtain if we had not perform feature scaling.
In all datasets, the \textbf{GN} and \textbf{GN+avg} methods significantly outperform
(according to a two-tailed paired t-test under $0.05$ confidence level) the SGD counterparts
showing the effectiveness of feature scaling when training binary classifiers.
Among the variants of the proposed \textbf{FS} methods, the \textbf{FS-2} method reports
the best performance. We believe that this can be attributable to the convexity of the objective function.
Because we are allowed only a single pass over the training dataset in OPOL setting,
convergence becomes a critical issue compared to the classical online learning setting
where the learning algorithm traverses multiple times over the dataset.
Convex functions can be relatively easily optimized using gradient methods compared to
non-convex functions. \textbf{FS-3} method which constrains the parameters in the \textbf{FS-2}
method shows poor performance in our experiments. Specifically, \textbf{FS-3} absorbs the
weight parameters into the scaling parameters in the \textbf{FS-2} method.
However, the experimental results show that we should keep the two sets of parameters separately.
In our future work, we plan to study other possible ways to reduce the number of parameters
in the supervised dynamic feature scaling methods in order to reduce the effect of overfitting.
Among the three datasets, the performance differences of the methods compared are least
significant on the diabetes dataset. In fact, $10$ of the $18$ methods report the same test
accuracy on this dataset and learns the same classification model. However, the model averaged
version of the unsupervised dynamic feature scaling method (\textbf{GN+avg}) outperforms all
the methods compared even in the diabetes dataset that shows its ability to perform well even
in situations where other methods cannot.
\begin{figure}[t]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=90mm]{all_heart_nonscaled.pdf}
\caption{Cumulative training errors on the heart dataset.}
\label{fig:cum_heart}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[t]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=90mm]{all_liver_nonscaled.pdf}
\caption{Cumulative training errors on the liver dataset.}
\label{fig:cum_liver}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
To study the behavior of the different learning algorithms during train time, we
compute the cumulative number of errors. Cumulative number of errors represents
the total misclassification errors encountered up to the current train instance.
In an one-pass online learning setting, we must continuously both train as well as apply the trained
classifier to classify new instances on the fly. Therefore, a method that obtains a lower
number of cumulative errors is desirable. To compare the different methods described in the paper,
we plot the cumulative number of errors against the total number of training instances encountered as shown in
Figures \ref{fig:cum_heart} and \ref{fig:cum_liver},
respectively for heart and liver datasets.
During training, we use the weight vector (or the averaged weight vector for the \textbf{+avg} methods)
to classify the current training instances and if it is misclassified by the
current model, then it is counted as an error.
The 45 degree line in each plot corresponds to the situation where all instances
encountered during training are misclassified. All algorithms must lie below this line.
To avoid cluttering, we only show the cumulative number of error curves for
the following six methods: \textbf{FS-2}, \textbf{FS-2+avg}, \textbf{SGD},
\textbf{SGD+avg}, \textbf{GN}, and \textbf{GN+avg}.
Overall, we see that the unsupervised dynamic feature scaling methods \textbf{GN} and
\textbf{GN+avg} stand out among the others and report lower numbers of cumulative errors.
\section{Conclusion}
\label{sec:conclusion}
We studied the problem of feature scaling in one-pass online learning (OPOL) of binary linear classifiers.
In OPOL, a learner is allowed to traverse a dataset only once.
We presented both supervised as well as unsupervised approaches to dynamically scale feature
under the OPOL setting. We evaluated $18$ different learning methods using three popular datasets.
Our experimental results show that
the unsupervised approach significantly outperforms the supervised approaches and improves the
classification accuracy in a state-of-the-art online learning algorithm proposed by \cite{Crammer:2006}.
Among the several variants of the supervised feature scaling approach we evaluated,
the convex formulation performed best.
In future, we plan to explore other forms of feature scaling functions and their effectiveness
in numerous online learning algorithms proposed for classification.
\bibliographystyle{plain}
|
\section{Introduction}
Massive stars transfer energy into the interstellar medium (ISM)
in two ways during their lifetime: by radiative luminosity ($L_{\star}$)
and by mechanical luminosity due to winds ($L_{\rm w}$)--- where $L_{\rm w}= \frac {1}
{2}\dot M_{\rm w} \rm v_{\rm w}^2$, $\dot M_{\rm w}$ is the mass loss rate and $ \rm v_{\rm w}$ is
the wind terminal velocity---. In the ``single scattering upper
limit'' approximation, which assumes that the momentum of the
wind is equal that of the radiation, the mechanical luminosity of the
stellar wind is less than one per cent of the stellar radiative
luminosity, $L_{\rm w}/L_{\star}=\frac {1}{2} \rm v_{\rm w}/c \lesssim 0.002$,
for a typical terminal velocity of winds from early-type stars
(corresponding to $\rm v_{\rm w}=1000$ km s$^{-1}$ and
$\dot M_{\rm w}=10^{-6}M_{\odot}$~yr$^{-1}$), and $c$ is the speed of light. However,
mechanical luminosity transfers energy to the interstellar medium
(ISM) more efficiently.
A classical example is found in OB
associations (OBAs), which are composed of early-type massive stars that contain
strong stellar winds, which in turn produce shock waves that sweep up
the surrounding ISM, creating a superbubble (SB) around the OBA.
The standard model \citep{w77} describes these SBs as structures that
consist of a shell of swept-up ISM, cool and bright in optical
emission lines, that contains shock-heated gas emitting X-rays in its
interior.
The standard model has been tested with observations of the kinematics and
the X-ray emission of bubbles and superbubbles.
Of particular relevance are the studies of SBs in the Large Magellanic Cloud (LMC) that have
large-diameter shells, which in several cases are larger than
predicted by the standard model. \cite{chum90} and \cite{wh91} found
that most SBs had X-ray luminosities an order of
magnitude higher than predicted by this model. Nevertheless,
there are superbubbles with luminosities consistent with the predictions
of the standard model. \cite{oey96b} --based on
observations by \cite{ros81}, \cite{ros82} and \cite{ros86}-- proposed
two SB categories in terms of dynamical data: high-velocity and low-velocity
superbubbles, latter type being more consistent with the standard
model. \citet{oey96b} concluded that X-ray emitting SBs with
high expansion velocities and intermediate [\ion{S}{2}]/[H $\alpha$]
line-ratios ($\geq 0.5$) cannot be explained by the mechanical
energy of stellar winds alone, and must be associated with supernova
explosions that occurred in their interiors. The energy released by the
supernova explosion would be an additional source of heating for the
gas inside the superbubble, which would explain the observed X-ray
excess. At the same time, the explosion would produce an acceleration of
the shell that could explain the high expansion velocities
observed. In a previous work \citep{ary11} it has been confirmed
the high expansion velocities in the models in which a supernova event
has taken place.
For instance, the Gum Nebula is a case in which a supernova explosion
can explain the X-ray emission \citep{lea92}. However, as discussed
in \cite{ros86} the detection of non-thermal radio emission is
essential to have a definitive confirmation of the presence of a
supernova remnant (SNR) in the SB.
In this work we study two SBs belonging to
the high-velocity type: the N\,70 and N\,185 (both in the LMC). This
characteristic makes these two superbubbles provide excellent laboratories
in which to study the X-ray emission.
The superbubble N\,70 (DEM L301) is an almost circular shell,
about $100$ pc in diameter. It contains the
OBA LH~114 \citep{lh70}, with more than $1000$ stellar
sources (The SIMBAD Astronomical Database); of these, seven are O-type
stars \citep{oey96a}. The mean age of this star association is
about $5$ Myr, a sufficient time for the first supernova
explosion to occur. While radio observations are inconclusive about
the non-thermal character of its radio continuum emission
\citep{mil80}, a subsequent work by \citep{fil98} reported a spectral
index $\alpha=-0.02$ which is larger than the typical $\alpha=-0.43$
value for SNRs.
Observations in the optical and X-ray bands have
found evidence of a supernova explosion inside the superbubble
\citep{ros81}. \cite{ros81} and \cite{george83} obtained intermediate
[\ion{S}{2}]/[H$\alpha$] line-ratios in N\,70, larger than those
typical of photoionized HII regions, but lower than those
typical of SNRs in the LMC. The range of values found in the outer filamentary
shell is ($[0.8-2.0]$), are close to the range of excitation in some
of the supernova remnants observed in the LMC \citep{sk99}.
These line ratios can be explained by models with shock velocities of
about $40-70$ km~s$^{-1}$, in agreement with the measured expansion
velocity of this superbubble. The high expansion velocity is in contradiction
with the standard model (Oey et al. 1996b).
Using archival data from the Einstein observatory, \cite{chum90}
reported an X-ray luminosity of N\,70 an order of
magnitude higher than predicted by the classical wind-blown bubbles
model.
The superbubble N\,185 (DEM L25) is very similar to N\,70. N\,185 has a
spherical shape, with a diameter between $92$ and $112$ pc. \cite{ros82}
measured an expansion velocity of $70$ km~s$^{-1}$ for this
superbubble. N\,185 contains an OB association in its interior,
consisting of more than 800 stellar sources (The
SIMBAD Astronomical Database); where only one is an O-type star
\citep{oey96a}. The likelihood that it had some additional massive stars in
the past, along the high expansion velocity, and the intermediate
[\ion{S}{2}]/[H $\alpha$] line-ratio \citep{ros82, george83} suggest
that this superbubble could have originated from a supernova
explosion, or explosions.
Radio observations have reported a spectral index $\alpha=-0.67$,
which is typical of SNR candidates \citep{fil98}. N\,185 was detected
by ROSAT, with an X-ray luminosity of $L_{\rm X}\sim 1.8 \times
10^{35}$~erg~s$^{-1}$ in \cite{oey96a}; this is higher than what is
expected from standard model predictions.
To unravel the origin of these high-velocity superbubbles, we will
focus our attention to their X-ray emission, now observed with
more sensitive instruments such as XMM-Newton observatory. We selected
these two SBs because of their high expansion velocities, their
high [\ion{S}{2}]/[H $\alpha$] line-ratios, and their X-ray excess. A
detailed study of the X-ray emission could help us to determine if
stellar winds alone are the origin of the large diameter shells, or if
supernovae are required to produce the large shells. If supernova
explosions have occurred in their interiors, then the X-ray emission
might allow us to determine the relative contributions to the bubble
expansion from the stellar winds and from the supernova explosions.
Our study of diffuse X-ray emission from SBs N\,70 and N\,185
is made with archival data from XMM-Newton observations. This
paper is organized in the following way: In Section 2 we present
a brief overview to the theory of superbubbles. Section 3 we
present the data and describe its reduction. Sections 4 and 5 are
dedicated to the observational results for the SBs N\,70 and
N\,185, respectively. Finally, in Section 6 we give a discussion and
our conclusions.
\section{Superbubble dynamics and soft X-ray emission}
The standard model used to describe the structure of SBs is based on
the original model of \citep{w77}, which describes the structure
produced by the interaction of a wind of a single star with its
environment, and it was later extended to include the winds of several
stars in a OBA \citep{chu95}.
The mechanical energy that the stars of the OBA deposit to the ISM in the
form of stellar winds, is given by
\begin{equation}
\label{eq1}
L_{\rm w}=\sum_{i=1}^{N}\frac{1}{2}\dot M_{{\rm w},i} \rm v_{{\rm w},i}^2
\;,
\end{equation}
where $\dot M_{{\rm w},i}$ and $\rm v_{{\rm w},i}$ are the mass-loss rate and the wind terminal velocity of the $i$th star, respectively, and $N$ is the total number of stars.
The interaction of this winds with ISM creates a superbubble structure
with the following four regions (see Figure \ref{fig1}):
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[angle=0,scale=0.4]{fig1.jpg}
\caption{A generalization of the standard model \citep{w77} conceived for a single star. Schematic structure of a superbubble produced by an OBA :
(A) star cluster region, (B) free-wind region, (C) shocked-wind
region, and (D) shocked-ISM region.
\label{fig1}}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\begin{itemize}
\item (A) An inner zone where the stars are located and inject their
winds. This region is delimited by the OBA radius $R_{\rm
C}$. Outside this region a common OBA wind is established.
\item (B) A free-wind zone is the region between the OBA radius and
the reverse shock.This region is filled by the unperturbed stellar
OBA wind.
\item (C) A shocked OBA wind zone located between a reverse shock
(or inner shock) and the contact discontinuity.
\item (D) An external zone, between the contact discontinuity and the
external shock. This region contains shocked ISM material that has
been swept by the external shock.
\end{itemize}
In zone A, stellar winds of the massive stars collide with each other,
thermalizing all the gas injected inside the cluster volume forming a
common OBA wind --for this to be possible $R_{\rm C} \ll R$, where $R$
is the radius of superbubble--.
The OBA wind expands freely inside zone B.
Zone C is formed by gas of the stellar cluster wind that has been
shocked by the inner or reverse shock. This outflow is thermalized and
emits in soft X-ray energy range. Finally, zone D is formed by
shocked-ISM gas emitting in optical; it is the densest zone according
to the standard model. This description corresponds to the
intermediate stage of evolution of the superbubble, there are
important radiative losses in the region (D) but in region (C) there
are small; and in the contact discontinuity that separates them
thermal conduction transports heat due to the large temperature
gradient between the regions (C) and (D) which have
temperatures of $10^{6}$ and $10^{4}$, respectively.
The equations that described the dynamics of the shell or region (D)
according to the \citet{w77} model are:
\begin{equation}
\label{eq2}
R=(42 \, {\rm pc})L_{\rm w37}^{1/5}n_{\rm 0}^{-1/5}t_{\rm 6}^{3/5}
\;,
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\label{eq3}
V=\frac{dR}{dt}=(0.59 \, {\rm km \, s}^{-1}) R_{\rm pc}/t_{\rm 6}
\;.
\end{equation}
$R$ and $V$ are the radius and expansion velocity of the SB; where
$R_{\rm pc}$ is the radius in units of pc, $L_{\rm w37}$ is the
mechanical luminosity of the OBA in units of $10^{37}$ erg s$^{-1}$,
$n_{\rm 0}$ and $t_{\rm 6}$ are the number density of the ambient
medium in units of cm$^{-3}$ and the age of the bubble in
$10^{6}$ years, respectively.
The X-ray luminosity of a spherically symmeric gas distribution is
given by the integral X-ray emissivity in the layer of shocked
stellar wind --region (C)--:
\begin{equation}
\label{eq4}
L_{\rm X}= \int n^{2}(R)\Lambda_{\rm X}(Z,T)d^{3}R
\;,
\end{equation}
where $R$ is the radial coordinate, $n(R)$ is the numerical density,
and $\Lambda_{\rm X}(Z, T)$ is the X-ray emissivity as a function of
its temperature and metallicity. The X-ray luminosity that arises from
the shocked gas (zone C) in the superbubble evolving inside a homogeneous
ISM can be estimated by integrating Eq (4) from center to radius
$R_{\rm max}$ where the temperature drops to the minimum (i.e.,
$T(R_{\rm max})=T_{\rm min}$). As presented by \cite{w77} and
\cite{chu95}, the integral can be written as:
\begin{equation}
\label{eq5}
L_{\rm X}=1.1\times 10^{35}I(\tau)\xi L_{\rm w37}^{33/35}n_{\rm
0}^{17/35}t_{\rm 6}^{19/35} ({\rm erg~s}^{-1})\;,
\end{equation}
where $\xi$ is the gas metallicity, and
\begin{equation}
\label{eq6}
I(\tau)=\frac{125}{33}-5\tau^{1/2}+\frac{5}{3}\tau^{3}-\frac{5}{11}\tau^{11/3}
\;,
\end{equation}
with
\begin{equation}
\label{eq7}
\tau=0.16L_{w37}^{-8/35}n_0^{-2/35}t_6^{6/35}
\;.
\end{equation}
The expression for the X-ray luminosity --Equation(\ref{eq5})-- is
practical because $L_{x}$ can be derived from physical parameters
obteined from observations such as ISM density, expansion velocity and the
size of the SB, and the mechanical energy of the OBA wind.
\section{XMM-Newton data and data reduction}
Superbubbles N\,70 and N\,185 were observed with The European Photon
Imaging Ca\, mera (EPIC), on board of the XMM-Newton observatory. EPIC
consists of two Metal Oxide Semi-conductor (MOS) CCD arrays (MOS1 \&
MOS2, \citealt{turn21}) and a pn-CCD \citep{stru21}. A summary of the
observations is given in Table~\ref{tab1}. The EPIC MOS cameras were
operated in the Prime Full-Window Mode and the EPIC pn camera was
operated in the Extended Prime Full-Window Mode. Two of the cameras
contain seven MOS CCDs, while the third uses twelve PN CCDs, defining
a circular field of vision (FOV) of $\sim 30 \arcmin$ in diameter,
allowing the inclusion of the entire superbubbles (sizes between
$6\arcmin-10\arcmin$) in one pointing.
In both observations, a medium filter was used to block
ultraviolet photons (\cite{vill98} and \cite{ste96}). The XMM-Newton
pipeline products were processed using the XMM-Newton Science Analysis
Software (SAS version 11.0.0).
Since the emission from these superbubbles is extended, the data
were processed with the XMM-Newton Extended Source Analysis software
package (XMM-ESAS) \citep{snow08} for the analysis of EPIC MOS and pn
observations. XMM-ESAS documentation can be found at the SAS Package
documentation web pages: {\it http://xmm.esac.esa.int/sas/ \, \,
current/howtousesas.shtml}. This package automatically filters times
of high background contamination. The resulting effective exposure
times are given in Table~\ref{tab1}.
After filtering the event files, we created mosaic images of the EPIC
cameras. We used the ``cheese'' task to identify points sources and
remove them. The package includes tasks to create and model the
non-cosmic background, correct the exposures and subtract the
backgrounds.
We generate combined images (with a pixel size of 2.5$\arcsec$) of the
EPIC cameras in the $([0.4-1.5])$~ keV bands; there is no significant
emission of the diffuse X-ray emission above 2.0 keV for both
superbubbles. Finally, they were smoothed as described in Section 4.1
and 5.1.
A good background knowledge is crucial for the spectral analysis. For
a point source, a local background extracted from a neighboring region
can be used. In the case of a diffuse source, as in the case of SBs
N\, 70 and N\,185 corresponding to an area of diffuse X-ray emission
that covers one third of the XMM-Newton FOV --filling entirely CCD\#1
or the central CCD of EPIC MOS--, it is inappropriate to estimate the local
background from the same data; many effects can be produced due to
differences in chip position. The high-energy particles that interact
with material surrounding the detector produce fluorescence, which
varies with position on the detector, especially for the PN
detector. In addition, the spectral response depends on the position
on the detector. To estimate the background of diffuse sources, the
XMM-Newton EPIC Background working group has created the so called
blank sky data for each EPIC \citep{cart07}. The blank sky data have
been merged with data from different pointings after the point sources
were eliminated. This data set consists in the detector
background and an average cosmic X-ray background. In this paper we
used the blank sky data obtained by XMM-Newton EPIC Background
Working Group (Request id: 0573-0575) in the direction of the SBs
N\,70 and N\,185.
Before extracting the spectra, we have first corrected both the
observed data and the blank sky data for vignetting using the XMMSAS
command evigweight. The spectra of the diffuse X-ray emission from
N\,70 and N\,185 were extracted from the event files of the EPIC
cameras. These spectra were extracted from a circular region
encompassing the entire superbubble, while the background spectrum is
extracted from the blank sky data at the same location on the detector
as the source spectrum. For this we use the script skycast, which
converts the detector coordinates of the XMM EPIC background into sky
coordinates, using the pointing direction of the observation. Finally,
the spectra are grouped with a minimum of 25 counts/bin.
\section{Results for N\,70}
\subsection{Images: X-ray brightness distribution}
\begin{figure*}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[angle=0,scale=.435]{fig2.jpg}
\caption{The mosaic EPIC images of N\, 70, in the ($[0.4-1.5]$) keV
energy band. Top row: left, the raw data, combined EPIC MOS1/2 and
pn image; right, the combined EPIC smoothed image. Bottom row: left,
X-ray contours at $3\sigma$, $4\sigma$ and $5\sigma$ above the
cosmic background level are superposed onto the smoothed image; right, a
comparison between the H$\alpha$ emission of N\,70, which was taken
from the Magellanic Cloud Emission Line Survey (MCELS; Smith et
al. 1998), and the X-ray emission (in black contours). Note the
X-ray emission observed to the West, it is external to the optical
superbubble, which is related to some field sources detected in
this observation.
\label{fig2}}
\end{center}
\end{figure*}
Figure \ref{fig2} shows a mosaic of images in the $([0.4-1.5])$~ keV
energy band in the direction of SB N\,70. The top-left panel
displays a combined EPIC MOS1/2 and pn FOV image, which have been
obtained by using the task {\it comb}. The top-right panel shows the
combined EPIC smoothed (with a kernel of $80$ counts) image, with a size
of $15\arcmin \times 15\arcmin$, where the non-cosmic background was
subtracted and the exposure has been corrected. Besides, several point
sources have been identified and removed from this observation, which
are indicated by small circular voids in this image. A $15 \arcmin$
square smoothed image is displayed in the bottom-left panel of
Fig. \ref{fig2}, which is overlayed by the X-ray contours at
$3\sigma$, $4\sigma$ and $5\sigma$ above the cosmic background
level. In order to analyze the spatial distribution of the soft X-ray
emission, in the bottom-right panel we show a comparison between the
H$\alpha$ emission of N\,70, which was taken from the Magellanic Cloud
Emission Line Survey (MCELS; Smith et al. 1998), and the X-ray
emission (in black contours). We note that the soft X-ray emission is
well-confined within the H$\alpha$ shell. This spatial distribution
suggests that the X-ray emission is produced by hot gas inside
the optical superbubble. This distribution is recreated with an RGB
image--panel (Figure \ref{fig3}) where the H$\alpha$ emission is
displayed in red and the diffuse soft X-ray is shown in green. Note
the emission to the East, external to the optical superbubble, it is
related to some sources found in the field of vision.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[angle=0,scale=0.7]{fig3.jpg}
\caption{ RGB image of N\,70. MCELS image of H$\alpha$ emission is
shown in red, while the diffuse soft X-ray emission is displayed in
green.
\label{fig3}}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Spectra and X-ray luminosity from diffuse emission}
For spectral analysis of the EPIC MOS data, we used XSPEC version
12.5.0 (distributed with the HEASsoft 6.6.1 software). The spectra of
the EPIC MOS1/2 and EPIC pn were extracted from a circular region
encompassing entirely the N\,70 superbubble. The point sources inside
this region were excluded. The background contribution was estimated
from blank sky data for each EPIC-MOS1/2 and EPIC-PN; these contain
both contributions (i.e., instrumental and cosmic). The background
subtracted source spectra are shown in Figure \ref{fig4}. We present
the EPIC MOS1/2 and pn spectra in the interval of energy
($[0.2-1.1]$) keV and ($[0.4-1.1]$), respectively.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=0.35]{fig4.jpg}
\caption{XMM-EPICs background subtracted source spectra of the diffuse X-ray emission from N70. The solid lines show the best-fit model. In black, red and green EPIC MOS1, MOS2 and PN, respectively.
\label{fig4}}
\end{figure}
In order to obtain the physical conditions of the X-ray-emitting gas,
the EPIC spectra were fitted simultaneously with a thermal model
(APEC) \citep{smith01} convolved with the interstellar absorption. The
best fit gives a reduced $\chi^{2}=1.3$
($\chi^{2}/d.o.f=320.6/242$). We used a single absorbing column
density via the photoelectric absorption model \citep[PHABS][]{bal92},
using reasonable values for the absorption column
density, $N_{H}=5.0 \times 10^{20}$ cm$^{-2}$, which is in
agreement with the measures of column densities in the LMC direction,
average $N_{H}=6.4 \times 10^{20}$ cm$^{-2}$ \citep{dic90}. The
chemical abundance was set to $0.3$ times the solar abundance, i.e.,
the average value of the ISM in the LMC \citep{rus92,hug98}. This
best-fit has plasma temperatures of $kT=0.22$~keV. The observed total
flux of the diffuse X-ray emission, corrected for absorption, is $
(0.7 \pm 0.1) \times 10^{-12}$~erg~cm$^{-2}$~s$^{-1}$ in the
$[0.2-1.1]$ keV range, which corresponds to X-ray luminosity (at the
LMC distance of $54$~kpc, \citet{fea99}) of $2.4 \pm 0.4 \times
10^{35}$~erg~s$^{-1}$. The best-fit model is overplotted on the EPIC
spectra with a solid curves in Figure \ref{fig4}, and the best-fit
parameters are listed un Table~\ref{tab2}.
\section{Results for N\,185}
\subsection{X-ray brightness distribution}
\begin{figure*}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[angle=0,scale=.435]{fig5.jpg}
\caption{The mosaic EPIC images from N\, 185, in the $([0.4-1.5])$ keV
energy band. Top row: left, the raw data, combined EPIC MOS1/2 and
pn image; right, the combined EPIC smoothed image. Bottom row: left,
X-ray contours at $5\sigma$, $6\sigma$ and $9\sigma$ above the
cosmic background level are superposed onto smoothed image; a
comparison between the H$\alpha$ emission of N\,185, which was taken
from the MCELS (Smith et
al. 1998), and the X-ray emission (in black contours).
\label{fig5}}
\end{center}
\end{figure*}
Figure \ref{fig5} shows an image mosaic of N\,185, in the
$([0.4-1.5])$~ keV energy band, which is similar to that shown in
Figure \ref{fig2} for the case of N\,70. The combined EPIC MOS1/2 and pn FOV
image is displayed in the top-left panel while in the top-right panel
is shown the combined EPIC smoothed image (in this case with a kernel
of 50 counts). The bottom-left panel show the smoothed X-ray image,
which is overlayed by X-ray contours at $5\sigma$, $6\sigma$ and
$9\sigma$ above the cosmic background level. Finally, the comparison between
H$\alpha$ (color-scale) and X-ray (black contours) emission is shown in
the bottom-right panel. As in Figure \ref{fig2}, the H$\alpha$ emission
was taken from the Magellanic Cloud Emission Line Survey (MCELS; Smith
et al. 1998).
We note that, in the case of N\,185, the soft X-ray emission is only
partially confined by the H$\alpha$ shell, X-ray emission extends well
beyond the optical shell to the southeast direction, where the
optical shell appears bright and well defined, so it is probable that
the gas is escaping towards the
back of the SB.
This comparison is recreated with an RGB image (Figure
\ref{fig6}) where H$\alpha$ and soft X-ray emission are displayed
in red and green, respectively.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[angle=0,scale=0.8]{fig6.jpg}
\caption{ RGB image of N\,185. As in Figure \ref{fig5} the MCELS
H$\alpha$ and the diffuse soft X-ray
emissions are displayed in red and green, respectively.
\label{fig6}}
\end{figure}
\subsection{X-ray spectra and luminosity from diffuse emission}
The same method was employed to extract the spectra of the diffuse
emission and make the analysis of the superbubble N\,185. The
spectra of the EPIC MOS1/2 and EPIC PN were extracted from a circular
region encompassing the entirety of N\, 185 superbubble. The point
sources in this region were excluded from the analysis. The background
contribution was estimated from blank sky data for each EPIC-MOS1/2
and EPIC-PN data. The background subtracted source spectra are shown
in Figure \ref{fig7}. We present the EPIC MOS1 and pn spectra in the
interval of energy ($[0.2-1.1]$) keV and ($[0.4-1.1]$),
respectively. Absorbed APEC model was used to fit this
spectrum. Figure~\ref{fig7} displays both the observed spectra and the
best-fit model spectrum. To obtain this best-fit model, with a
reduced $\chi^{2}=1.6$, we have set the chemical abundance at the
LMC average values (i.e., $0.3$ times solar abundance
\citep{rus92,hug98}), and we used a column density value $N_H=5.0
\times 10^{20}$~cm$^{-2}$ in agreement with previous measurements of
column densities in the LMC direction \citep{dic90}. Plasma
temperatures of $kT=0.20$~keV, the observed total flux of the diffuse
X-ray emission, corrected for absorption, is $ (0.6 \pm 0.1) \times
10^{-12}$~erg~cm$^{-2}$~s$^{-1}$ in the $[0.2-1.1]$ keV range (see
Table \ref{tab3} ), which corresponds to X-ray luminosity (at the LMC
distance of $54$~kpc, \citet{fea99}) of $2.1 \pm 0.7 \times
10^{35}$~erg~s$^{-1}$.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[angle=-90,scale=0.35]{fig7.jpg}
\caption{XMM-EPICs background subtracted source spectra of the diffuse X-ray emission from N\,185. The solid lines show the best-fit model. In black EPIC MOS1
and PN in green.
\label{fig7}}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\section{Discussion and conclusions}
We conducted a detailed study based on XMM-Newton data of the SBs
N\,70 and N\,185, in the LMC. We have generated both X-ray images and
spectra of these objects. In both SBs, we find soft diffuse X-ray
emission. Soft X-ray emission comes from the inner region of the SBs
(i.e., interior to the optical shells). Our results show thermal
spectra from SBs which are associated with the soft X-ray emission.
As discussed in Section 2, there is an analytical model that aims to explain
the soft X-ray emission from bubbles and superbubbles \citep{w77}, and has
become the standard model for SBs. According to this model, the supersonic
winds from massive (OB stars) interact with the interstellar medium
forming an expanding cold shell ($\sim 10^{4}$~K) with a hot interior
($\sim 10^{6}$~K) of shocked wind. We have calculated the X-ray
luminosity from superbubbles N\,70 and N\,185, using the Eq.
(\ref{eq5}). In this calculation we only take into account the stars
that dominate the mechanical luminosity of the stellar cluster
associated with these superbubbles
\citep[see][]{ros81,ros82,oey96a}.
Using the high terminal velocities and mass loss rates
of stars with similar spectral types and luminosities, and considering
the average observational parameters for both superbubbles: an
expansion velocity of $70$ km s$^{-1}$, SB radius of $50$ pc, and
ambient density of $0.1$ cm$^{-3}$ (from Eq. \ref{eq5}), the soft X-ray
luminosity is $6\times$10$^{34}$~erg~s$^{-1}$ for N\,70 and
$5\times$10$^{33}$~erg~s$^{-1}$ for N\,185. From our observations
we obtain an X-ray luminosity of $2.4\times$10$^{35}$~erg~s$^{-1}$
for N\,70, and of $2.1\times$10$^{35}$~erg~s$^{-1}$ for N\,185 (see
Table \ref{tab4}).
Therefore, the X-ray luminosity predicted by the standard model is four times
lower than the observed values for N\,70, and $40$ times lower than
observed for N\,185. In this cases the standard model of wind-blown bubbles
cannot explain the observed soft X-ray emission of these SBs.
In a previous work, \citet{ary11} carried out numerical models of
the SB evolution applied to N\,70. As does the standard model, their
models predict that the primary X-ray emission will be in the soft
X-ray band and that it has a thermal origin ($\sim 10^6$~K). In that work
several models were performed in order to reproduce the soft X-ray luminosity,
the high expansion velocity and the large radius of this
superbubble. The model including both a supernova explosion (absent in
the standard model of \citealt{w77}) and the
stellar winds fits quite well with the kinematics of the optical
shell, and the excess of thermal X-ray emission of N\,70. An X-ray
luminosity of $ 2\times10^{35}$~erg~s$^{-1}$ was obtained for this model,
a value that agrees with the observed X-ray luminosity obtained for
N\,70 in this paper (see Table \ref{tab4}).
For N\,185, the same arguments can be employed to justify the
inclusion of a supernova, and indeed, non-thermal radio emission has
been detected as mentioned in the Introduction. A supernova
explosion is also consistent with the stellar population
models for N\,70 and N\,185 presented by \cite{oey96b}, in which 13
and 15 massive stars, respectively, are found between $12$ and
$40~M_{\odot}$. A ~ $60~M_{\odot}$ star could be expected using a
standard initial mass function for both superbubbles and, if formed
with the rest of the cluster, it would already have exploded as an
SN. Thus, the kinematics, the size and the excess soft X-ray emission
of these SBs can be explained by a SN exploding in a wind-blown SB.
\acknowledgments
We thank F. De Colle for insightful discussions and acknowledge
financial support from the PAPIIT-UNAM (IA101413-2). PFV and ARG
acknowledge finantial support by CONACyT grants 167611 and 167625, and
DGAPA-PAPIIT grant IG100214.
|
\section{Introduction}
Jet-quenching observables are considered as significant probes of the
medium evolution during a heavy-ion collision. Below, we investigate
a generic jet-energy loss model coupled to different temperature fields
of the quark-gluon plasma (QGP) that interpolates between running coupling
pQCD-based models and AdS/CFT-inspired holographic prescriptions.
The results are compared to recent data on the nuclear modification factor
$R_{AA}$ and the high-$p_T$ elliptic flow \cite{data1,data2}, examining the
dependence on the transverse momentum, the azimuthal angle, the centrality,
and the collision energy to study the jet-medium coupling
$\kappa$ and the impact of the jet path-length dependence. The latter one
is usually considered to differentiate pQCD-based and AdS/CFT-inspired
prescriptions with a linear and a squared path-length dependence, respectively.
The generic energy loss model studied is parametrized as
\begin{eqnarray}
\frac{dE}{dx}=\frac{dE}{d\tau}(\vec{x}_0,\phi,\tau)=
-\kappa(T) E^a(\tau) \, \tau^{z} \, T^{c=2+z-a} \, \zeta_q
\;,
\label{Eq1}
\end{eqnarray}
with the jet-energy dependence, the path-length dependence, and the temperature
dependence being characterized by the exponents $(a,z,c)$. The jet-medium
coupling, $\kappa(T)$, may depend non-monotonically on the local temperature field,
where $\kappa(T)=C_r\kappa^\prime(T)$ for quark $C_r=1$
and gluon $C_r=\frac{9}{4}$ jets.
$T=T[\vec{x}(\tau)=\vec{x}_0+ (\tau-\tau_0) \hat{n}(\phi),\tau]$
describes the local temperature along the jet path at time $\tau$ for a jet
initially produced time $\tau_0$.
The jets are distributed according to a transverse initial profile specified by
the bulk QGP flow fields given by three variants of transverse plus Bjorken
(2+1)d expansion \cite{background}: (1) VISH2+1, (2) viscous RL hydro, and (3) a
$v_\perp=0.6$ blast wave flow assuming radial dilation of the initial transverse
profile.
\begin{figure}[t]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics*[width=15cm]{Fig01}
\caption{The nuclear modification factor in- and out-of-plane at RHIC (left panel)
as well as the nuclear modification factor (middle panel) and the high-$p_T$ elliptic flow
(right panel) at the LHC for a pQCD-based energy loss
$dE/d\tau=\kappa E^0 \tau^1 T^3 \zeta_{-1}$ without jet-energy loss fluctuations for
various backgrounds \cite{background} compared to the measured data \cite{data1,data2}.
\vspace*{-0.4cm}}
\label{Fig01}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
We include skewed jet-energy loss fluctuations about the path-averaged mean by
using a scaling factor $\zeta_q$ describing the distributions according to
$f_q(\zeta_q)= \frac{(1 + q)}{(q+2)^{1+q}} (q + 2- \zeta_q)^q $.
This class of skewed distributions is controlled by a parameter $q>-1$ that
interpolates between non-fluctuating ($q=-1$, $\zeta_{-1}=1$), uniform Dirac
distributions and distributions increasingly skewed towards small $\zeta_q < 1$
for $q>-1$, similar to pQCD based models \cite{us}.
The above jet-energy loss prescription allows for an easy comparison of
perturbative QCD (pQCD) based models with exponents $(0,1,3,q)$ \cite{us} and conformal
AdS holography models with non-linear path length $(0,2,4,q)$ \cite{us,AdS},
as well as phenomenological models based on a $\kappa(T)$ and $\kappa(\phi)$ \cite{us} as
discussed below.
\section{Results}
Fig.\ \ref{Fig01} shows the results for a pQCD-based model $(0,1,3,-1)$
without energy-loss fluctuations for the three different transverse backgrounds
mentioned above both at RHIC (left panel) and at LHC energies (middle and right
panel). Please note that the $R_{AA}$ in- and out-of-plane
[$R_{AA}^{\rm in/out}=R_{AA}(1\pm 2v_2)$] allows for a simultaneous prescription
of the measured nuclear modification factor {\it and} the high-$p_T$ elliptic
flow. Here, the elliptic flow is given by the size of the gap between the nuclear
modification factor in- and out-of-plane.
\begin{figure}[b]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics*[width=15cm]{Fig02}
\caption{The nuclear modification factor in- and out-of-plane at RHIC (left panel)
as well as the nuclear modification factor (middle panel) and the high-$p_T$ elliptic flow
(right panel) at the LHC for an AdS/CFT-inspired energy loss
$dE/d\tau=\kappa E^0 \tau^2 T^4 \zeta_{-1}$ without jet-energy loss fluctuations for
various backgrounds \cite{background} compared to the measured data \cite{data1,data2}.
\vspace*{-0.4cm}}
\label{Fig02}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
Fig.\ \ref{Fig01} clearly reveals that the results for both hydrodynamic prescriptions
reproduce the measured data within the uncertainties of the bulk space-time
evolution, given by the initial conditions, the viscosity ($\eta/s$), the
intial time $\tau_0$, the freeze-out time $T_f$, etc.\ considered. For this
pQCD-based model we account for a running coupling \cite{RunCoup,Xu} explaining the
``surprising transparency''of the QGP at the LHC.
Fig.\ \ref{Fig02} demonstrates that the {\it conformal} AdS/CFT-inspired
prescription $(0,2,4,-1)$ without energy-loss fluctuations does certainly serve as
a description of the measured data at RHIC energies but does not reproduce
the observed transparency at LHC by overpredicting the jet-energy loss
as shown in the middle panel of Fig.\ \ref{Fig02}. Please note that a conformal
theory does not have an additional scale, i.e.\ the coupling considered {\rm cannot}
run, in contrast to the pQCD scenario considered in Fig.\ \ref{Fig01}. If, however,
a {\it non-conformal} AdS/CFT prescription is introduced allowing for a
reduction of the running-coupling constant (at about the same magnitude
as used for pQCD prescriptions), this {\it novel, non-conformal} ansatz will also
describe both the nuclear modification factor and the high-$p_T$ elliptic flow
measured at RHIC and at LHC considering a (viscous) hydrodynamic background,
as was shown in Refs.\ \cite{us}.
Moreover, Fig.\ \ref{Fig02} reveals that the background described by the simple
blast wave model can also be ruled out as it usually leads to an elliptic flow
that is too small as compared to data \cite{us}.
For pQCD, a reduction of the effective jet-medium coupling with $\sqrt{s}$ is natural
due to the vacuum running of the perturbative QCD coupling $\alpha_s(Q)$.
However, even after this reduction is taken into account, there is a tendency
shown in Fig.\ \ref{Fig01} that the high-$p_T$ elliptic flow is underpredicted
as compared to the measured data. This is in line with various pQCD-based
models (AMY, HT, ASW, Molnar, CUJET2.0) \cite{data1,Xu,Molnar} that are
below the data.
To overcome this ``high-$p_T$ $v_2$ problem'' of pQCD-based jet-energy loss
prescriptions, Ref.\ \cite{Xu} suggested that there could well be an
additional running of the running coupling constant w.r.t.\ the temperature,
$\alpha_{\rm eff}(Q,T)$, as suggested by Lattice QCD \cite{Kaczmarek:2004gv}
that might cause a modest ($10-15\%$) variation of the path-averaged coupling
in non-central collisions with a coupling constant enhanced out-of-plane.
To simulate this effect, we study an azimuthal dependence of the jet-medium coupling by
$\kappa(\phi) = \kappa\cdot(1+\vert\sin(\phi)\vert\cdot X)$,
where $X$ is a given value in percentage.
Fig.\ \ref{Fig03} demonstrates that indeed a small azimuthal variation of $10-15\%$ of the
jet-medium coupling is sufficient to account for the high-$p_T$ $v_2$ problem at
the LHC while it simultaneously allows for a decent description of the nuclear modification
factor and the $R_{AA}^{\rm in/out}$ at RHIC. Here we considered again the pQCD-
inspired prescription $(0,1,3,0)$ including energy-loss fluctuations. As
shown in Ref.\ \cite{us} (and Fig.\ \ref{Fig04}), the influence of the jet-energy loss fluctuations
themselves is significant for the yield of the nuclear modification factor but
not for the high-$p_T$ elliptic flow.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics*[width=15cm]{Fig03}
\caption{The nuclear modification factor in- and out-of-plane at RHIC (left panel)
as well as the nuclear modification factor (middle panel) and the high-$p_T$ elliptic flow
(right panel) at the LHC for a pQCD-based energy loss
$dE/d\tau=\kappa(\phi) E^0 \tau^1 T^3 \zeta_{0}$ with an azimuthal variation of the
jet-medium coupling for two different hydrodynamic backgrounds
\cite{background} compared to the measured data \cite{data1,data2}.
\vspace*{-0.8cm}}
\label{Fig03}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
The fact that a moderate azimuthal dependence of the jet-medium coupling
with a coupling enhanced out-of-plane can describe the measured data,
in general supports a jet-medium coupling enhanced for lower temperatures
\cite{Liao:2008dk} as a jet traversing out-of-plane will propagate longer
through a comparably cooler medium.
In Fig.\ \ref{Fig04} we exemplary consider an exponentially falling ansatz
for the jet-medium coupling, $\kappa(T) = \kappa_1 e^{-b(T-T_1)}$, assuming
that the coupling is zero below a certain temperature $T_1$, representing the freeze-out.
At this $T_1$ the coupling peaks at a value of $\kappa_1$ and then falls off for
larger temperatures to a value of $1/e$ at a temperature $T_e$ \cite{us}. Please note
that this exponential drop of the jet-medium coupling implies an {\em effective}
reduction of the jet-medium coupling at the LHC as compared to RHIC.
The results shown in Fig.\ \ref{Fig04} demonstrate that this exponential ansatz
for the jet-medium coupling also describes the measured data within the present
error bars even though the high-$p_T$ elliptic flow is again rather low.
Surprisingly enough, the values of $T_1=160$~MeV and $T_e=200$~MeV indicate
that the high-temperature medium is basically transparent \cite{us,RunCoup,Xu}.
\section{Conclusions}
We compared the results of a generic jet-energy loss model,
$dE/d\tau = -\kappa(T) E^a \tau^{z} T^{c=2+z-a} \zeta_q$, that
interpolates between pQCD-based $(a=0,z=1,c=3)$ and AdS/CFT-inspired
$(a=0,z=2,c=4)$ prescriptions to recent data \cite{data1,data2} on the
nuclear modification factor and the high-$p_T$ elliptic flow both at
RHIC and at LHC energies. The model discussed includes possible jet-energy loss
fluctuations via the multiplicative factor $\zeta_q$. We found that the
running coupling energy-loss models motivated by pQCD appears to be favored,
while the AdS/CFT-inspired ansatz excluding by first principles the running
of the coupling constant $\kappa$ cannot reproduce the measured data.
We showed that the running of the coupling constant either with collision energy
(Fig.\ \ref{Fig01}) or with temperature (Fig.\ \ref{Fig04}) reproduces
the measured data within the present error bars considering (viscous)
hydrodynamic background fields \cite{background}. However, these prescriptions
do not describe the high-$p_T$ elliptic flow with best accuracy which
can only be reachted (Fig.\ \ref{Fig03}) once an additional azimuthal
dependence of the jet-medium coupling \cite{us,Xu} is considered with
a coupling enhanced out-of-plane.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics*[width=15cm]{Fig04}
\caption{The nuclear modification factor in- and out-of-plane at RHIC (left panel)
as well as the nuclear modification factor (middle panel) and the high-$p_T$ elliptic flow
(right panel) at the LHC for a pQCD-based energy loss
$dE/d\tau=\kappa(T) E^0 \tau^1 T^3 \zeta_{q}$ for a temperature-dependent jet-medium
coupling with ($q=0$) and without ($q=-1$) flucutations and a hydrodynamic background
\cite{background} compared to the measured data \cite{data1,data2}.
\vspace*{-0.8cm}}
\label{Fig04}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\section{Acknowledgement}
This work was supported in part through the Helmholtz International Centre for FAIR
within the framework of the LOEWE program (Landesoffensive zur Entwicklung
Wissenschaftlich-\"Okonomischer Exzellenz) launched by the State of Hesse,
the US-DOE Nuclear Science Grant No.\ DE-AC02-05CH11231 within the framework
of the JET Topical Collaboration, and the US-DOE Nuclear Science Grant No.\
DE-FG02-93ER40764.
|
\section{Introduction}
\begin{wrapfigure}[14]{R}{0.45\textwidth}
\centering
\begin{tikzpicture}
\input{figure-clique}
\end{tikzpicture}
\caption{A graph with maximum clique $\{1, 2, 3, 4, 5\}$, using all four edge labels. If our
budget is only three, a maximum feasible clique has size four. There are several such cliques,
but $\{4, 5, 6, 7\}$ is optimal since it uses only two labels, whilst every other
uses at least three.}
\label{fig:clique}
\end{wrapfigure}
A clique in a graph is a set of vertices, where every vertex in this set is adjacent to every other
in the set. Finding the size of a maximum clique in a given graph is one of the fundamental \NP-hard
problems. Carrabs et al.\ \cite{Carrabs:2014} introduced a variant called the maximum labelled
clique problem. In this variant, each edge in the graph has a label, and we are given a budget $b$: we
seek to find as large a clique as possible, but the edges in our selected clique may not use more
than $b$ different labels in total. In the case that there is more than one such maximum, we must
find the one using fewest different labels. We illustrate these concepts in \cref{fig:clique}, using
an example graph due to Carrabs et al.; our four labels are shown using different styled edges.
Carrabs et al.\ give example applications involving social network analysis and telecommunications.
For social network analysis, vertices in the graph may represent people, and labelled edges describe
some kind of relationship such as a shared interest. We are then seeking a large, mutually connected
group of people, but using only a small number of common interests. For telecommunications, we may
wish to locate mirroring servers in different data centres, all of which must be connected for
redundancy. Labels here tell us which companies operate the connections between data centres: for
simplicity and cost, we have a budget on how many different companies' connections we may use.
A mathematical programming approach to solving the problem was presented by Carrabs et al., who used
CPLEX to provide experimental results on a range of graph instances. Here we introduce the first
dedicated algorithm for the maximum labelled clique problem, and then describe how it may be
parallelised to make better use of today's multi-core processors. We evaluate our implementation
experimentally, and show that it is consistently faster than that of Carrabs et al., sometimes by
four or five orders of magnitude. These results suggest that state of the art maximum clique
algorithms are not entirely inflexible, and can sometimes be adapted to handle side constraints and
a more complicated objective function without losing their performance characteristics.
\paragraph{Definitions and Notation}
Throughout, let $G = (V, E)$ be a graph with vertex set $V$ and edge set $E$. Our graphs are
undirected, and contain no loops. Associated with $G$ is a set of labels, and we are given a mapping
from edges to labels. We are also given a budget, which is a strictly positive integer.
The \emph{neighbourhood} of a vertex is the set of vertices adjacent to it, and its \emph{degree} is
the cardinality of its neighbourhood. A \emph{colouring} of a set of vertices is an assignment of
colours to vertices, such that adjacent vertices are given different colours. A \emph{clique} is a
set of pairwise-adjacent vertices. The \emph{cost} of a clique is the cardinality of the union of
the labels associated with all of its edges. A clique is \emph{feasible} if it has cost not greater
than the budget. We say that a feasible clique $C'$ is \emph{better than} a feasible clique $C$ if
either it has larger cardinality, or if it has the same cardinality but lower cost. The
\emph{maximum labelled clique problem} is to find a feasible clique which is either better than or
equal to any other feasible clique in a given graph---that is, of all the maximum feasible cliques,
we seek the cheapest.
The hardness of the maximum clique problem immediately implies that the maximum labelled clique
problem is also \NP-hard. Carrabs et al.\ showed that the problem remains hard even for complete
graphs, where the maximum clique problem is trivial.
\section{A Branch and Bound Algorithm}
In \cref{algorithm:main} we present the first dedicated algorithm for the maximum labelled clique
problem. This is a branch and bound algorithm, using a greedy colouring for the bound. We start by
discussing how the algorithm finds cliques, and then explain how labels and budgets are checked.
\begin{algorithm}\DontPrintSemicolon
\nl $\FuncSty{maximumLabelledClique}$ :: (Graph $G$, Int $\mathit{budget}$) $\rightarrow$ Vertex Set \;
\nl \Begin{
\nl permute $G$ so that vertices are in non-increasing degree order \label{line:permute} \;
\nl $\KwSty{global}$ ($C^\star$, $L^\star$) $\gets$ ($\emptyset$, $\emptyset$) \label{line:cbest} \;
\nl $\FuncSty{expand}$($\KwSty{true}$, $\emptyset$, every vertex of $G$, $\emptyset$) \label{line:initial} \label{line:pass1} \;
\nl $\FuncSty{expand}$($\KwSty{false}$, $\emptyset$, every vertex of $G$, $\emptyset$) \label{line:pass2} \;
\nl $\KwSty{return}$ $C^\star$ (unpermuted) \;
}
\vspace{0.5em}
\nl $\FuncSty{expand}$ :: (Boolean $\mathit{first}$, Vertex Set $C$, Vertex Set $P$, Label Set $L$) \;
\nl \Begin{
\nl ($\mathit{order}$, $\mathit{bounds}$) $\gets$ $\FuncSty{colourOrder}$($P$) \label{line:colour} \;
\nl \For{$i$ $\gets$ $|P|$ $\KwSty{downto}$ 1 \label{line:loopstart}}{
\nl \If{\textnormal{$|C|$ + $\mathit{bounds}[i]$ $<$ $|C^\star|$ $\KwSty{or}$
($\mathit{first}$ $\KwSty{and}$ $|C|$ + $\mathit{bounds}[i]$ $=$ $|C^\star|$)}\label{line:bound}}{
\nl $\KwSty{return}$}
\nl $v$ $\gets$ $\mathit{order}[i]$ \label{line:v} \;
\nl add $v$ to $C$ \label{line:vinstart} \label{line:vtoc} \;
\nl $L'$ $\gets$ $L$ $\cup$ the labels of edges between $v$ and any vertex in $C$ \label{line:lprime} \;
\nl \If{\textnormal{$|L'|$ $\le$ ($\mathit{budget}$ $\KwSty{if}$ $\mathit{first}$, $\KwSty{otherwise}$ $|L^\star| - 1$)}\label{line:lcheck}}{
\nl \lIf{\textnormal{($C$, $L'$) is better than ($C^\star$, $L^\star$)}}{($C^\star$, $L^\star$) $\gets$ ($C$, $L'$) \label{line:unseat}}
\nl $P'$ $\gets$ the vertices in $P$ that are adjacent to $v$ \label{line:pprime} \;
\nl \lIf{$P'$ $\ne$ $\emptyset$}{$\FuncSty{expand}$($\mathit{first}$, $C$, $P'$, $L'$) \label{line:recurse}}
} \label{line:vinend}
\nl remove $v$ from $C$ and from $P$ \label{line:vnotin} \label{line:vfromc} \label{line:loopend} \;
}
}
\vspace{0.5em}
\nl $\FuncSty{colourOrder}$ :: (Vertex Set $P$) $\rightarrow$ (Vertex Array, Int Array) \;
\nl \Begin{
\nl ($\mathit{order}$, $\mathit{bounds}$) $\gets$ ($[]$, $[]$) \;
\nl $\mathit{uncoloured}$ $\gets$ $P$ \;
\nl $\mathit{colour}$ $\gets$ $1$ \;
\nl \While{$\mathit{uncoloured}$ $\ne$ $\emptyset$\label{line:cloopoutstart}}{
\nl $\mathit{colourable}$ $\gets$ $\mathit{uncoloured}$ \;
\nl \While{$\mathit{colourable}$ $\ne$ $\emptyset$\label{line:cloopstart}}{
\nl $v$ $\gets$ the first vertex of $\mathit{colourable}$ \label{line:cv} \;
\nl append $v$ to $\mathit{order}$, and $\mathit{colour}$ to $\mathit{bounds}$ \label{line:cgive} \;
\nl remove $v$ from $\mathit{uncoloured}$ and from $\mathit{colourable}$ \;
\nl remove from $\mathit{colourable}$ all vertices adjacent to $v$ \label{line:removeadjacent}\label{line:cloopend} \;
}
\nl add $1$ to $\mathit{colour}$ \label{line:cnewcolour}\label{line:cloopoutend}
}
\nl $\KwSty{return}$ ($\mathit{order}$, $\mathit{bounds}$) \;
}
\caption{An algorithm for the maximum labelled clique problem.}
\label{algorithm:main}
\end{algorithm}
\paragraph{Branching:}
Let $v$ be some vertex in our graph. Any clique either contains only $v$ and possibly some vertices
adjacent to $v$, or does not contain $v$. Thus we may build up potential solutions by recursively
selecting a vertex, and branching on whether or not to include it. We store our growing clique in a
variable $C$, and vertices which may potentially be added to $C$ are stored in a variable $P$.
Initially $C$ is empty, and $P$ contains every vertex (line~\ref{line:initial}).
The $\FuncSty{expand}$ function is our main recursive procedure. Inside a loop
(lines~\ref{line:loopstart} to~\ref{line:loopend}), we select a vertex $v$ from $P$
(line~\ref{line:v}). First we consider including $v$ in $C$ (lines~\ref{line:vinstart}
to~\ref{line:vinend}). We produce a new $P'$ from $P$ by rejecting any vertices which are not
adjacent to $v$ (line~\ref{line:pprime})---this is sufficient to ensure that $P'$ contains only
vertices adjacent to \emph{every} vertex in $C$. If $P'$ is not empty, we may potentially grow $C$
further, and so we recurse (line~\ref{line:recurse}). Having considered $v$ being in the clique, we
then reject $v$ (line~\ref{line:vnotin}) and repeat.
\paragraph{Bounding:}
If we can colour a graph using $k$ colours, we know that the graph cannot contain a clique of size
greater than $k$ (each vertex in a clique must be given a different colour). This gives us a bound
on how much further $C$ could grow, using only the vertices remaining in $P$. To make use of this
bound, we keep track of the largest feasible solution we have found so far (called the
\emph{incumbent}), which we store in $C^\star$. Initially $C^\star$ is empty (line~\ref{line:cbest}).
Whenever we find a new feasible solution, we compare it with $C^\star$, and if it is larger, we
unseat the incumbent (line~\ref{line:unseat}).
For each recursive call, we produce a constructive colouring of the vertices in $P$
(line~\ref{line:colour}), using the $\FuncSty{colourOrder}$ function. This process produces an array
$\mathit{order}$ which contains a permutation of the vertices in $P$, and an array of bounds, $\mathit{bounds}$, in
such a way that the subgraph induced by the first $i$ vertices of $\mathit{order}$ may be coloured using
$\mathit{bounds}[i]$ colours. The $\mathit{bounds}$ array is non-decreasing ($\mathit{bounds}[i + 1] \ge \mathit{bounds}[i]$), so if
we iterate over $\mathit{order}$ from right to left, we can avoid having to produce a new colouring for each
choice of $v$. We make use of the bound on line~\ref{line:bound}: if the size of the growing clique
plus the number of colours used to colour the vertices remaining in $P$ is not enough to unseat the
incumbent, we abandon search and backtrack.
\begin{figure}[b]
\centering
\begin{tikzpicture}
\input{figure-colour}
\end{tikzpicture}
\caption{The graph on the left has been coloured greedily: vertices 1 and 3 were given the first
colour, then vertices 2, 4 then 8 were given the second colour, then vertices 5 and 7 were given
the third colour, then vertex 6 was given the fourth colour. On the right, we show the $\mathit{order}$
array, which contains the vertices in the order which they were coloured. Below, the $\mathit{bounds}$
array, containing the number of colours used so far.}
\label{figure:colour}
\end{figure}
The $\FuncSty{colourOrder}$ function performs a simple greedy colouring. We select a vertex
(line~\ref{line:cv}) and give it the current colour (line~\ref{line:cgive}). This process is
repeated until no more vertices may be given the current colour without causing a conflict
(lines~\ref{line:cloopstart} to~\ref{line:cloopend}). We then proceed with a new colour
(line~\ref{line:cnewcolour}) until every vertex has been coloured (lines~\ref{line:cloopoutstart}
to~\ref{line:cloopoutend}). Vertices are placed into the $\mathit{order}$ array in the order in which they
were coloured, and the $i$th entry of the $\mathit{bounds}$ array contains the number of colours used at the
time the $i$th vertex in $\mathit{order}$ was coloured. This process is illustrated in \cref{figure:colour}.
\paragraph{Initial vertex ordering:}
The order in which vertices are coloured can have a substantial effect upon the colouring produced.
Here we will select vertices in a static non-increasing degree order. This is done by permuting the
graph at the top of search (line~\ref{line:permute}), so vertices are simply coloured in numerical
order. This assists with the bitset encoding, which we discuss below.
\paragraph{Labels and the budget:}
So far, what we have described is a variation of a series of maximum clique algorithms by Tomita et
al.\ \cite{Tomita:2003,Tomita:2007,Tomita:2010} (and we refer the reader to these papers to justify
the vertex ordering and selection rules chosen). Now we discuss how to handle labels and budgets. We
are optimising subject to two criteria, so we will take a two-pass approach to finding an optimal
solution.
On the first pass ($\mathit{first} = \KwSty{true}$, from line~\ref{line:pass1}), we concentrate on finding
the largest feasible clique, but do not worry about finding the cheapest such clique. To do so, we
store the labels currently used in $C$ in the variable $L$. When we add a vertex $v$ to $C$, we
create from $L$ a new label set $L'$ and add to it any additional labels used
(line~\ref{line:lprime}). Now we check whether we have exceeded the budget (line~\ref{line:lcheck}),
and only proceed with this value of $C$ if we have not. As well as storing $C^\star$, we also keep
track of the labels it uses in $L^\star$.
On the second pass ($\mathit{first} = \KwSty{false}$, from line~\ref{line:pass2}), we already have the size
of a maximum feasible clique in $|C^\star|$, and we seek to either reduce the cost $|L^\star|$, or
prove that we cannot do so. Thus we repeat the search, starting with our existing values of $C^\star$
and $L^\star$, but instead of using the budget to filter labels on line~\ref{line:lcheck}, we use
$|L^\star| - 1$ (which can become smaller as cheaper solutions are found). We must also change the
bound condition slightly: rather than looking only for solutions strictly larger than $C^\star$, we
are now looking for solutions with size equal to $C^\star$ (line~\ref{line:bound}). Finally, when
potentially unseating the incumbent (line~\ref{line:unseat}), we must check to see if either $C$ is
larger than $C^\star$, or it is the same size but cheaper.
This two-pass approach is used to avoid spending a long time trying to find a cheaper clique of size
$|C^\star|$, only for this effort to be wasted when a larger clique is found. The additional
filtering power from having found a clique containing only one additional vertex is often extremely
beneficial. On the other hand, label-based filtering using $|L^\star| - 1$ rather than the budget is
not possible until we are sure that $C^\star$ cannot grow further, since it could be that larger
feasible maximum cliques have a higher cost.
\paragraph{Bit parallelism:}
For the maximum clique problem, San Segundo et al.\ \cite{SanSegundo:2011,SanSegundo:2011b} observed
that using a bitset encoding for SIMD-like parallelism could speed up an implementation by a factor
of between two to twenty, without changing the steps taken. We do the same here: $P$ and $L$ should
be bitsets, and the graph should be represented using an adjacency bitset for each vertex (this
representation may be created when $G$ is permuted, on line~\ref{line:permute}). Most importantly,
the $\mathit{uncoloured}$ and $\mathit{colourable}$ variables in $\FuncSty{colourOrder}$ are also bitsets, and the
filtering on line~\ref{line:removeadjacent} is simply a bitwise and-with-complement operation.
Note that $C$ should not be stored as a bitset, to speed up line~\ref{line:lprime}. Instead, it
should be an array. Adding a vertex to $C$ on line~\ref{line:vtoc} may be done by appending to the
array, and when removing a vertex from $C$ on line~\ref{line:vfromc} we simply remove the last
element---this works because $C$ is used like a stack.
\paragraph{Thread parallelism:}
Thread parallelism for the maximum clique problem has been shown to be extremely beneficial
\cite{Depolli:2013,McCreesh:2013}; we may use an approach previously described by the authors
\cite{McCreesh:2013,McCreesh:2014.shape} here too. We view the recursive calls to $\FuncSty{expand}$
as forming a tree, ignore left-to-right dependencies, and explore subtrees in parallel. For work
splitting, we initially create subproblems by dividing the tree immediately below the root node (so
each subproblem represents a case where $|C| = 1$ due to a different choice of vertex). Subproblems
are placed onto a queue, and processed by threads in order. To improve balance, when the queue is
empty and a thread becomes idle, work is then stolen from the remaining threads by resplitting the
final subproblems at distance 2 from the root.
There is a single shared incumbent, which must be updated carefully. This may be stored using an
atomic, to avoid locking. Care must be taken with updates to ensure that $C^\star$ and $L^\star$ are
compared and updated simultaneously---this may be done by using a large unsigned integer, and
allocating the higher order bits to $|C^\star|$ and the lower order bits to the bitwise complement of
$|L^\star|$.
Note that we are not dividing a fixed amount of work between multiple threads, and so we should not
necessarily expect a linear speedup. It is possible that we could get no speedup at all, due to
threads exploring a portion of the search space which would be eliminated by the bound during a
sequential run, or a speedup greater than the number of threads, due to a strong incumbent being
found more quickly \cite{Lai:1984}. A further complication is that in the first pass, we could find
an equally sized but more costly incumbent than we would find sequentially. Thus we cannot even
guarantee that this will not cause a slowdown in certain cases \cite{Trienekens:1990}.
\section{Experimental Results}
\afterpage{\clearpage\begin{landscape}
\begin{table}
\caption{Experimental results. For each graph, we use three different label set sizes and three
different budgets, with randomly allocated labels, and show averages over 100 runs. In each
case, we show the average size and cost of the result, the sequential runtime in seconds, the
parallel runtime in seconds (2 cores, 4 threads) and then the ``Enhanced'' times reported by
Carrabs et al.\ \cite{Carrabs:2014}.}\label{table:results}
\centering\setlength{\tabcolsep}{4.5pt}
\begin{tabular}{lS[table-format=2] c@{\hskip 8pt}
S[table-format=1.2]S[table-format=2.2]S[table-format=1.2]S[table-format=1.2]S[table-format=4.2] c@{\hskip 8pt}
S[table-format=2.2]S[table-format=2.2]S[table-format=2.2]S[table-format=1.2]S[table-format=4.2] c@{\hskip 8pt}
S[table-format=2.2]S[table-format=2.2]S[table-format=2.2]S[table-format=1.2]S[table-format=4.2]}
\toprule
& & &
\multicolumn{5}{c}{25\% budget} &
&
\multicolumn{5}{c}{50\% budget} &
&
\multicolumn{5}{c}{75\% budget} \\
\cmidrule(lr){4-8}
\cmidrule(lr){10-14}
\cmidrule(lr){16-20}
\textbf{Instance} &
$|L|$ &
&
{size} &
{cost} &
{$t_{\mathit{seq}}$} &
{$t_{\mathit{par}}$} &
{\cite{Carrabs:2014}} &
&
{size} &
{cost} &
{$t_{\mathit{seq}}$} &
{$t_{\mathit{par}}$} &
{\cite{Carrabs:2014}} &
&
{size} &
{cost} &
{$t_{\mathit{seq}}$} &
{$t_{\mathit{par}}$} &
{\cite{Carrabs:2014}} \\ \midrule
\inputhaxx{gen-table-problems}
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
\end{landscape}}
We now evaluate an implementation of our sequential and parallel algorithms experimentally. Our
implementation was coded in C++, and for parallelism, C++11 native threads were used. The bitset
encoding was used in both cases. Experimental results are produced on a desktop machine with an
Intel i5-3570 CPU and 12GBytes of RAM. This is a dual core machine, with hyper-threading, so for
parallel results we use four threads (but should not expect an ideal-case speedup of 4). Sequential
results are from a dedicated sequential implementation, not from a parallel implementation run with
a single thread. Timing results include preprocessing time and thread startup costs, but not the
time taken to read in the graph file and generate random labels.
\paragraph{Standard Benchmark Problems}
In \cref{table:results} we present results from the same set of benchmark instances as Carrabs et
al.\ \cite{Carrabs:2014}. These are some of the smaller graphs from the DIMACS implementation
challenge\footnote{\url{http://dimacs.rutgers.edu/Challenges/}}, with randomly allocated labels.
Carrabs et al.\ used three samples for each measurement, and presented the average; we use one
hundred. Note that our CPU is newer than that of Carrabs et al., and we have not attempted to scale
their results for a ``fair'' comparison.
The most significant result is that none of our parallel runtime averages are above seven seconds,
and none of our sequential runtime averages are above twenty four seconds (our worst sequential
runtime from any instance is 32.3 seconds, and our worst parallel runtime is 8.4 seconds). This is
in stark contrast to Carrabs et al., who aborted some of their runs on these instances after three
hours. Most strikingly, the keller4 instances, which all took Carrabs et al.\ at least an hour, took
under 0.1 seconds for our parallel algorithm. We are using a different model CPU, so results are not
directly comparable, but we strongly doubt that hardware differences could contribute to more than
one order of magnitude improvement in the runtimes.
We also see that parallelism is in general useful, and is never a penalty, even with very low
runtimes. We see a speedup of between 3 and 4 on the non-trivial instances. This is despite the
initial sequential portion of the algorithm, the cost of launching the threads, the general
complications involved in parallel branch and bound, and the hardware providing only two ``real''
cores.
\paragraph{Large Sparse Graphs}
In \cref{table:erdos} we present results using the Erd\H{o}s collaboration graphs from the Pajek
dataset by Vladimir Batagelj and Andrej
Mrvar\footnote{\url{http://vlado.fmf.uni-lj.si/pub/networks/data/}}. These are large, sparse graphs,
with up to 7,000 vertices (representing authors) and 12,000 edges (representing collaborations). We
have chosen these datasets because of the potential ``social network analysis'' application
suggested by Carrabs et al., where edge labels represent a particular kind of common interest, and
we are looking for a clique using only a small number of interests.
For each instance we use 3, 4 and 5 labels, with a budget of 2, 3 and 4. The ``3 labels, budget 4''
cases are omitted, but we include the ``3 labels, budget 3'' and ``4 labels, budget 4''
cases---although the clique sizes are the same (and are equal to the size of a maximum unlabelled
clique), we see in a few instances the costs do differ where the budget is 4. Again, we use randomly
allocated labels and a sample size of 100.
Despite their size, none of these graphs are at all challenging for our algorithm, with average
sequential runtimes all being under 0.2 seconds. However, no benefit at all is gained from
parallelism---the runtimes are dominated by the cost of preprocessing and encoding the graph, not
the search.
\begin{table}[tb]
\caption{Experimental results on Erd\H{o}s collaboration graphs. For each instance, we use three
different label set sizes and three different budgets, with randomly allocated labels, and
show averages over 100 runs. In each case, we show the average size and cost of the result,
and the sequential runtime in seconds.}\label{table:erdos}
\centering\setlength{\tabcolsep}{4.5pt}
\begin{tabular}{lS[table-format=1] c@{\hskip 8pt}
S[table-format=1.2]S[table-format=1.2]S[table-format=1.2] c@{\hskip 8pt}
S[table-format=1.2]S[table-format=1.2]S[table-format=1.2] c@{\hskip 8pt}
S[table-format=1.2]S[table-format=1.2]S[table-format=1.2]}
\toprule
& & &
\multicolumn{3}{c}{budget = 2} &
&
\multicolumn{3}{c}{budget = 3} &
&
\multicolumn{3}{c}{budget = 4} \\
\cmidrule(lr){4-6}
\cmidrule(lr){8-10}
\cmidrule(lr){12-14}
\textbf{Instance} &
$|L|$ &
&
{size} &
{cost} &
$t_{\mathit{seq}}$ &
&
{size} &
{cost} &
$t_{\mathit{seq}}$ &
&
{size} &
{cost} &
$t_{\mathit{seq}}$ \\ \midrule
\inputhaxx{gen-table-problems2}
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
\section{Possible Improvements and Variations}
We will briefly describe three possible improvements to the algorithm. These have all been
implemented and appear to be viable, but for simplicity we do not go into detail on these points. We
did not use these improvements for the results in the previous section. We also suggest a variation
of the problem.
\paragraph{Resuming where we left off:} Rather than doing two full passes, it is possible to start
the second pass at the point where the last unseating of the incumbent occurred in the first pass.
In the sequential case, this is conceptually simple but messy to implement: viewing the recursive
calls to $\FuncSty{expand}$ as a tree, we could store the location whenever the incumbent is
unseated. For the second pass, we could then skip portions of the search space ``to the left'' of
this point. In parallel, this is much trickier: it is no longer the case that when a new incumbent
is found, we have necessarily explored every subtree to the left of its position.
\paragraph{Different initial vertex orders:} We order vertices by non-increasing degree order at the
top of search. Other vertex orderings have been proposed for the maximum clique problem, including a
dynamic degree and exdegree ordering \cite{Tomita:2010}, and minimum-width based orderings
\cite{Prosser:2012,SanSegundo:2014}. These orderings give small improvements for the harder problem
instances when labels are present. However, for the Erd\H{o}s graphs, dynamic degree and exdegree
orderings were a severe penalty---they are more expensive to compute (adding almost a whole second
to the runtime), and the search space is too small for this one-time cost to be ignored.
\paragraph{Reordering colour classes:} For the maximum clique problem, small but consistent benefits
can be had by permuting the colour class list produced by $\FuncSty{colourOrder}$ to place colour
classes containing only a single vertex at the end, so that they are selected first
\cite{McCreesh:2014.reorder}. A similar benefit is obtained by doing this here.
\paragraph{A multi-label variation of the problem:} In the formulation by Carrabs et al., each edge
has exactly one label. What if instead edges may have multiple labels? If taking an edge requires
paying for all of its labels, this is just a trivial modification to our algorithm. But if taking an
edge requires selecting and paying for only one of its labels, it is not obvious what the best way
to handle this would be. One possibility would be to branch on edges as well as on vertices (but
only where none of the available edges matches a label which has already been selected).
This modification to the problem could be useful for real-world problems: for Carrabs et al.'s
example where labels represent different relationship types in a social network graph, it is
plausible that two people could both be members of the same club and be colleagues. Similarly, for
the Erd\H{o}s datasets, we could use labels either for different journals and conferences, or for
different topic areas (combinatorics, graph theory, etc.). When looking for a clique of people using
only a small number of different relationship types, it would make sense to allow only one of the
relationships to count towards the cost. However, we suspect that this change could make the problem
substantially more challenging.
\section{Conclusion}
We saw that our dedicated algorithm was faster than a mathematical programming solution. This is not
surprising. However, the extent of the performance difference was unexpected: we were able to solve
multiple problems in under a tenth of one second that previously took over an hour, and we never
took more than ten seconds to solve any of Carrabs et al.'s instances. We were also able to work
with large sparse graphs without difficulty.
Of course, a more complicated mathematical programming model could close the performance gap. One
possible route, which has been successful for the maximum clique problem in a SAT setting
\cite{Li:2011}, would be to treat colour classes as variables rather than vertices. But this would
require a pre-processing step, and would lose the ``ease of use'' benefits of a mathematical
programming approach. It is also not obvious how the label constraints would map to this kind of
model, since equivalently coloured vertices are no longer equal.
On the other hand, adapting a dedicated maximum clique algorithm for this problem did not require
major changes. It is true that these algorithms are non-trivial to implement, but there are at least
three implementations with publicly available source code (one in Java \cite{Prosser:2012} and two
with multi-threading support in C++ \cite{Depolli:2013,McCreesh:2013}). Also of note was that bit-
and thread-parallelism, which are key contributors to the raw performance of maximum clique
algorithms, were similarly successful in this setting.
A further surprise is that threading is beneficial even with the low runtimes of some problem
instances. We had assumed that our parallel runtimes would be noticeably worse for extremely easy
instances, but this turned out not to be the case. Although there was no benefit for the Erd\H{o}s
collaboration graphs, which were computationally trivial, for the DIMACS graphs there were clear
benefits from parallelism even with sequential runtimes as low as a tenth of a second. For the
non-trivial instances, we consistently obtained speedups of between 3 and 4. Even on inexpensive
desktop machines, it is worth making use of multiple cores.
\bibliographystyle{spmpsci}
|
\section{Introduction and statement of results}
For ${\mathbf G}=O, U, SO, SU, Sp, Pin, \textrm{or }Spin,$ the Madsen-Tillmann spectrum $MT{\mathbf G}(n)$ (\cite{GMTW}) is
defined to be
$B{\mathbf G}(n)^{-\gamma_n}$, the Thom
spectrum of $-\gamma_n$ where $\gamma ^n \lra B{\mathbf G}(n)$ is the canonical $n$-dimensional bundle and $B{\mathbf G}(n)$
is the classifying
space for $n$-dimensional $G$-vector bundles; the dimension is understood to be over $\C$ in the cases of $U,SU$, and over $\Hp$ in
the case of ${\mathbf G}=Sp$. Since the associated infinite loop space $\Omega^\infty MT{\mathbf G}(n)$ classifies fibre bundles
whose fibres are
homeomorphic to an $n$-dimensional manifold with $G$-structure (see e.\,g.\, \cite{Eb} for a nice account), the cohomology ring
$H^*(\Omega^\infty MT{\mathbf G}(n);R)$ then contains the $R$-characteristic classes for such bundles, where
$R$ is some relevant ring. It is known that $H^*(\Omega^\infty _0MT{\mathbf G}(n);\mathbb{Q})$ is just a free commutative
algebra generated by $H^{*>0}(MT{\mathbf G}(n);\mathbb{Q})$. As the torsion-free quotient of $H^{*>0}(MT{\mathbf G}(n);\mathbb{Z})$ injects to $H^{*>0}(MT{\mathbf G}(n);\mathbb{Q})$, this gives us a good knowledge of the torsion-free quotient of $H^{*>0}(MT{\mathbf G}(n);\mathbb{Z})$. To understand
the remaining torsion part, we need to understand $\Z/p$-coefficient case.
However, the problem over $R=\Z/p$ seems rather difficult. In fact, over $\Z/2$, the only existing computations in the literature are due to Galatius and Randal-Williams; they have shown that there exist short exact sequences of Hopf algebras
$$ H_*(\Omega^\infty_0 MT{\mathbf G}(n);\Z /2)\lra H_*(Q_0B{\mathbf G}(n)_+;\Z /2)\lra H_*(\Omega^\infty_0 MT{\mathbf
G}(n-1);\Z /2)$$
where ${\mathbf G}=SO$ with $n=2$ (equivalently with ${\mathbf G}=U$ and $n=1$) \cite[Theorem 1.3]{G}, and ${\mathbf G}=O$
with $n=1,2$ \cite[Theorem A, Theorem B]{Ra}. Here, $Q=\Omega^\infty\Sigma^\infty$ and the subindex $0$ corresponds to the base point component of the
related loop space. The maps in these short exact sequences are induced by maps of spectra given by a cofibration of spectra in the
case of ${\mathbf G}=O,SO$ \cite[Proposition 3.1]{GMTW}
$$MT{\mathbf G}(n)\stackrel{\omega}{\lra} B{\mathbf G}(n)_+\lra MT{\mathbf G}(n-1).$$
The case for ${\mathbf G}=Spin$ with $n=2$ has been treated in \cite[Therorems 1.2, 1.3, 1.7]{Gspin}, the results don't allow a
description
{as} simple as the cases above.
At odd primes, as far as we are aware, aside from some degenerate cases, the only computation is due to Galatius for the case of ${\mathbf G}=U$, $n=1$
\cite[Theorem 1.4]{G}. It is therefore of interest for people working in the field to proceed with further computations, or at least identify nontrivial torsion classes in (co-)homology of $\Omega^\infty MT{\mathbf G}(n)$. We are interested in splitting these spectra, so that some more familiar pieces could be
identified which consequently tell us about pieces of cohomology rings $H^*(\Omega^\infty MT{\mathbf G}(n);\Z/p)$. We shall use standard
methods of stable homotopy theory, which in this paper is mainly based on using various transfer maps, and Steinberg idempotent
{as well as the Whitehead conjecture in a
sequel \cite{KZ}.}
Our first result reads as follows. First, without any localisation, we have
\begin{subtheorem}{thm}
\begin{thm}\label{thsplitmainallp}
Let $(K,G)$ be a pair where
\begin{enumerate}
\item $K=O(2n)$, $G=SO(2n+1)$;
\item $K=Pin^{+}(4n)$, $G=Spin(4n+1)$;
\item $K=Pin^{-}(4n+2)$, $G=Spin(4n+3)$;
\end{enumerate}
Then $BG_+$ splits off stably off $MTK$.
\end{thm}
At odd primes, we have some more
\label{thsplitmain}
\begin{thm}\label{thsplitmainoddp}
Let $(K,G)$ be a pair where
\begin{enumerate}
\item $K=SO(2n)$, $G=SO(2n+1)$ or equivalently $K=Spin(2n)$, $G=Spin(2n+1)$;
\item $K=O(2n)$, $G=O(2n+1)$;
\end{enumerate}
Then localized at an odd prime $p$, $BG_+$ splits off stably off $MTK$ and we have $MTK\simeq BG_+\vee\Sigma MTG$.
Furthermore, in case (ii), after localisation at an odd prime, the splitting reduces to $MTO(2n)\simeq
BO(2n)_+$, $MTO(2n-1)\simeq *.$\end{thm}
Thus we have, at odd primes,
$$MTO(2n)\simeq BSO(2n+1)_+\simeq BO(2n)_+\simeq BO(2n+1)_+\simeq BSp(n)_+,$$
Note that the homotopy equivalence $BSO(2n+1)_+\simeq BO(2n+1)_+$ implies that at an odd prime $p$,
Theorem \ref{thsplitmainallp} (i) is a part of \ref{thsplitmainoddp} (ii).
For complex Lie groups, we need somewhat odd looking condition on $p$, and we have
\begin{thm}\label{thsplitmainusu}
Let $K=U(n)$, $G=SU(n+1)$. Suppose that $p$ doesn't divide $n+1$. Then $BG_+$ splits off stably off $MTK$, after $p$-localisation.
\end{thm}
\end{subtheorem}
Since a splitting of spectra implies that of infinite loop spaces, we have the following:
\begin{cor}\label{infsplit}
Let $(K,G)$ and $p$ be as in one of the above theorems. Then $QBG_+$ splits off $\Omega ^{\infty}MTK$ as an infinite loop space.
\end{cor}
An immediate implication of the above observation is that $H^*(\Omega^\infty
MTK;\Z/p)$ contains as a tensor factor a copy of $H^*(QBG_+;\Z/p)$. Hence, we obtain infinitely many nontrivial classes in
$H^*(\Omega ^{\infty}MTK;\Z/p)$. Next, notice that for any space $X$, we have $\Sigma ^{\infty }(X_+)\cong \Sigma ^{\infty
}(X)\vee S^0$, which implies the following.
\begin{cor}\label{cor.Szero}
$S^0$ splits off $MTK$ if $K=O(2n),Pin^{+}(4n)$ or $Pin^{-}(4n+2)$ without localisation involved, if
$K=SO(2n)$ after localised at an odd prime
$p$, or if $K=U(n)$ after localised at a prime not dividing $n+1$.
At the level of infinite loop spaces, $QS^0$ splits off
$\Omega ^{\infty}MTK$ at $p$ under one of these hypotheses.
\end{cor}
Our next observation is that splitting $S^0$ off $MT{\mathbf G}(n)$ can also be obtained using the Madsen-Tillmann-Weiss map,
including the case ${\mathbf G}=Sp$, hence a slightly stronger result.
\begin{thm}\label{splitbyMTW}
Suppose there exists a manifold $M$ with $K$-structure. Then $S^0$ splits off $MTK$ at a prime $p$ if $p$ doesn't divide
$\chi (M)$. In particular,
\begin{enumerate}
\item $S^0$ splits off $MTK$ when ${ K}=O(2n)$, $Pin^{+}(4n)$ or $Pin^{-}(4n+2)$.
\item $S^0$ splits off $MTK$ when ${ K}=SO(2n)$ after localized at an odd prime.
\item $S^0$ splits off $MTK$ when $K=U(n)$ or $Sp(n)$ { if $p$ doesn't divide $n+1$}.
\end{enumerate}
\end{thm}
We note that in both cases, the map from $MTK$ to $S^0$ is obtained by the composition
$$MTK\stackrel{\omega}{\to}BK_+\stackrel{c}{\to}S^0,$$
where $c$ is the ``collapse'' map, that is the map that sends the base point to the base point, all the rest to the other point in $S^0$.
At the relevant primes, the above results show the potential complication in computing ${_p\pi_*}MT{\mathbf G}(n)$ whereas from homological
point of view it shows that $\Z/p$-homology of $\Omega^\infty_0MT{\mathbf G}(n)$ contains a copy of $H_*(Q_0S^0;\Z/p)$, which imply results
on some famillies of characteristic classes as we will discuss in Sections \ref{sec:pf},\ref{sec:ucc}:
our splitting results
allow us to obtain information on the (co-)homology of $\Omega^\infty MT{\mathbf G}(n)$, with {various choices for $G$,}
for infinitely many values of $n$ at the relevant primes, by identifying infinitely many algebraically independent classes. For example, we can identify polynomial subalgebras in $H^*(\Omega^\infty MT{\mathbf G}(n);\Z/p)$.
\begin{thm}\label{charclass1}
Let $G$ be $O(2n)$, $U(2n)$, $Sp(2n)$, $Pin^{+}(4n)$ or $Pin^{-}(4n+2)$. The composition
$$ MTG\stackrel{\omega}{\lra} BG_+\stackrel{c}{\lra} S^0\stackrel{i}{\lra} KO,$$
where $c$ is the ``pinch map'', i.e., map that sends the basepoint to the basepoint, and all the rest to the other point in $S^0$,
and $i$ is the unit map, induces an injection in mod $2$ cohomology of infinite loop spaces
$$H^*(\Z \times BO;\Z/2)\hookrightarrow H^*(\Omega^{\infty }MTG;\Z/2).$$
Thus if we define the class $\xi _i\in H^*(\Omega^{\infty }_0MTG;\Z/2)$ by
$$\xi _i=(\omega \circ c \circ i)^*(w_i), $$ then we have
$$\Z /2[\xi _1,\ldots ,\xi _k,\ldots ]\subset H^*(\Omega ^{\infty }_0MTG;\Z/2).$$
\end{thm}
Let $F\lra E\stackrel{\pi}{\lra} B$ be a manifold (with suitable structure) bundle, with the Madsen-Tillmann-Weiss map
$f:B\rightarrow \Omega ^{\infty} _0MTG$. One can define the characteristic class $\xi _i(E)$ of this bundle simply as the pull-back
$\xi _i(E)=f^*(\xi _i)$.
Note that as in \cite[Theorem 6.2]{Ra}, one can give a more geometrical interpretation of these characteristic classes, with
the equality $\xi _i(E)=w_i(trf_{\pi}^*(1))$ where $trf$ is the transfer in $KO$-cohomology, and
$trf_{\pi}^*(1)$ is the virtual bundle defined by $\Sigma (-1)^i[H^i(F_b,\R)]$ (\cite[Theorem 6.1]{BS}.)
Note that in the case of $MTO(2)$, we have, $\tau (\xi _i) = \chi _i$ where the $\tau $ is the conjugation of the Hopf algebra
$H^*(\Omega ^{\infty} _0MTO(2))$, where $\chi _i$'s are defined in \cite[Theorem C]{Ra}. This is because $w_i(V)$ and
$w_i(-V)$ are related by the conjugation of the Hopf algebra $H^*(BO)$, and the maps of Hopf algebra respect the conjugation.
At prime $2$, noting that $H^*(BU ;\Z/2)$ injects to $H^*(BO ;\Z/2)$, we can define a similar polynomial family in $H^*(\Omega ^{\infty }MTG;\Z /2)$ by using Chern classes instead of Stiefel-Whitney classes. Of course, this is of limited interest as the Chern classes are simply the square of Stiefel-Whitney classes. At odd primes, however, the use of Chern classes seems to be appropriate. We have the following.
\begin{thm}\label{charclass2}
Let $G$ and $p$ be as in Corollary \ref{cor.Szero}. Then after localisation at $p$, the composition
$$MTG\stackrel{\omega}{\lra} BG_+\stackrel{c}{\lra} S^0 \stackrel{i}{\lra} KU $$
where $c$ is the ``pinch map'' and $i$ is the unit map,
factors through the Adams summand $E(1)$ and
induces an injection in mod $p$ cohomology of infinite loop spaces
$$H^*(\Omega ^{\infty }E(1);\Z/p)\cong \Z/p[c_{p-1},c_{2(p-1)},\ldots ]\hookrightarrow H^*(\Omega ^{\infty} MTG;\Z/p).$$
Thus if we define the class $\xi _i\in H^*(\Omega^{\infty }_0MTG;\Z/2)$ by
$$\xi _i=(\omega \circ c \circ i)^*(c_i), $$
then we have
$$\Z /2[\xi _1,\ldots ,\xi _k,\ldots ]\subset H^*(\Omega ^{\infty }_0MTG;\Z/2).$$
\end{thm}
Again we can interpret the characteristic class $\xi _i$ geometrically as before, using appropriate Chern classes and
$KU$-cohomology instead of Stiefel-Whitney classes and $KO$-cohomology.
Another family of characteristic classes, arising from the cohomology of the classifying space $BG$, are discussed in \cite[Subection 2.4]{Ra}.
\begin{defn}
A universally defined characteristic class is an element in the image of the map
$$H^*(BK;R)\stackrel{{\sigma^\infty}^{{*}}}{\lra} H^*(Q_0(BK_+);R)\stackrel{\omega ^*}{\lra} H^*(\Omega ^{\infty}_0MTK;R).$$
We write $\overline{\nu}_c$ for the image of $c\in H^*(BK;R)$ in $H^*(\Omega ^{\infty}_0MTK;R).$
For a manifold bundle with $K$ structure over $B$ claissified by the Madsen-Tillmann-Weiss map $B\to \Omega ^{\infty}_0MTK$,
$\overline{\nu}_c(E)$ is defined by $\overline{\nu}_c(E)=f^*(\overline{\nu}_c)\in H^*(E;R)$.
\end{defn}
Although this is not the usual definition, the arguments as in the proof of \cite[Theorem 2.4]{Ra} show that
this agrees with the usual one. This includes Wahl's $\zeta$ classes, Randal-Williams' $\mu$-classes, and the Miller-Morita-Mumford
$\kappa$ classes, we will come back to this later. The method shown in \cite[Example 2.6]{Ra} gives some relations among them. For concreteness' sake, let's
specialize to the case where $K=O(2n),G=SO(2n+1)$ and $R=\Z/2$, although similar results can be obtained for
other pairs $(K,G)$ and other base field $R=\Z/p$ satisfying one of hypotheses of Theorems
\ref{thsplitmainallp}, \ref{thsplitmainoddp}, or \ref{thsplitmainusu}. Our splitting theorem can be used to show that, for classes arising from the summand
$H^*(BSO(2n+1);\Z /2)\subset H^*(BO(2n);\Z /2)$, there can be no other relations. In
a subsequent work {\cite{KZ}}, we will discuss relations among other classes, and in particular establish a complete set of relations when $n=1$.
\begin{thm} Let \label{univ}
$\nu _{i_2,\cdots ,i_{m+1}}$ be the image of
$w_2^{i_2}\cdots w_{m{+1}}^{i_{m+1}}\in H^*(BSO(m+1);\Z/2)$ in
$H^*(\Omega ^{\infty}_0MTO(m);\Z /2)$ where $m=2n$ by the composition
$$H^*(BSO(m+1);\Z/2)\to H^*(BO(m);\Z/2)\to H^*(Q_0(BO(m));\Z/2)\to H^*(\Omega ^{\infty}_0MTO(m);\Z/2).$$
In other words, $\nu _{i_2,\cdots ,i_{m+1}}=\overline{\nu}_{Bj^*(w_2^{i_2}\cdots w_{m
{+1}}^{i_{m+1}})}$ where $j:O(2n)\rightarrow
SO(2n+1)$ will be defined in Section \ref{transfersplitsection}.
Then the only relations among these classes are the ones generated by
$$\nu _{i_2,\cdots ,i_{m+1}}^2=\nu _{2i_2,\cdots ,2i_{m+1}}.$$
Thus the classes $\nu _{i_2,\cdots ,i_{m+1}}$ with at least one $i_k$ odd are algebraically independent.
\end{thm}
Our method can also be applied to the cohomology with integer coefficient: we will show
\begin{thm}\label{wahlc}
The classes $\zeta _{i_1,\ldots ,i_m}$ are not divisible in $H^*(\Omega ^{\infty}_0MTO(2m);\Z)$ where
$\zeta _{i_1,\ldots ,i_m}$ are the universally defined characteristic as in above from the Pontryagin classes
$p_1^{i_1}\cdots p_m^{i_m}\in H^*(BO(2m);\Z)$, that is $\zeta _{i_1,\ldots ,i_m}=\overline{\nu}_{p_1^{i_1}\cdots p_m^{i_m}}$.
\end{thm}
The case $m=1$, combined with the homological stability theorem of \cite{Wa} is Theorem A of \cite{ER}.
Our next observation, is somehow a `non-theorem'; it tells that computations such as Galatius' and Randal-Williams' were somehow
exceptional cases and for an infinite family of Madsen-Tillmann spectra, such a description in terms of short exact sequences is not
available. We have the following.
\begin{prop}\label{nonexact}
Suppose the pair of groups $({\mathbf K}(m),G)$, and the prime $p$ satisfies hypotheses of Theorems \ref{thsplitmainallp}, \ref{thsplitmainoddp} or
\ref{thsplitmainusu}, so that $BG_+$ splits off $MT{\mathbf K}(m)$, and that $G$ is non-trivial. Suppose further if $K=O$, then $p=2$. Then, at the prime $p$, the sequence of Hopf algebras
$$ H_*(\Omega^\infty_0MT{\mathbf K}(m+1);\Z/p)\lra H_*(Q_0B{\mathbf K}(m+1)_+;\Z/p)
\lra H_*(\Omega^\infty_0 MT{\mathbf K}(m);\Z/p)$$
induced by the cofibration for Madsen-Tillmann spectra is not short exact.
\end{prop}
{
However, in our subsequent work \cite{KZ}, we will exhibit summands of $MTO(n)$'s for which such exact sequences exist. We conclude by saying that in the case of $MTO(2)$, the results here together with results from \cite{KZ} reveals the following.
\begin{thm}\label{MTO(2)}
Let $D(n)$ be the cofibre of $Sp^{2^{n-1}}S^0\to Sp^{2^n}S^0$ induced by {the $2$-fold diagonal} $X\to X^{\times 2}$ where $Sp^{2^n}S^0$ is the
$2^n$-th symmetric power of $S^0$. Then, completed at $p=2$, we have
$$MTO(2)\simeq BSO(3)_+\vee \Sigma^{-2}D(2).$$
\end{thm}
}
Throughout the paper, we identify a (pointed) space with its suspension spectrum when there is no risk of confusion, and for a space
$X$, we note $X_+$ the space $X$ with the disjoint basepoint added. For a (virtual) vector bundle $\alpha\to B$ over some $CW$-complex $B$, we write $B^\alpha$ for the Thom (spectrum) space of $\alpha$. For a space $B$, we use both notations $\R^k$ and $B\times\R^k$ for the $k$-dimensional trivial vector bundle which will be clear from the context; the notation
$\R^k$ also denotes the $k$-dimensional Euclidean space as usual. The notation $\simeq$ denotes (local) homotopy equivalence of
spectra. By abuse of notation, $\cong$ is used to denote homeomorphism of spaces or isomorphism of algebraic objects which will be
clear from the context. We shall write $\Z/p$ for the cyclic group of order $p$, and $\Z_{(p)}$ for $p$-localisation of the
ring of integers. $p$ will always denote a (postivie) prime integer, and all spaces and spectra are localised at $p$ unless
stated otherwise.
\section{Preliminaries}\label{sec:rec}
In this section, we collect some preliminary materials, most of which are rather standard in homotopy theory, for the convenience
of the reader.
\subsection{Grassmanian and classifying spaces}
Denote by $G(k,d+k)$ the Grassmanian, the manifold of $d$-codimensional linear subspaces of $\R^{d+k}$. Given {a $d$-codimensional subspace} $V\subset \R^{d+k}$,
{via identification $\R^{d+k+1}\cong \R^{d+k}\times \R$ we can think of $V\times \R$ as a $d$-codimensional subspace of $\R^{d+k+1}$.}
Thus one can consider $G(k,d+k)$ as a subset of $G({k+1},d+k+1)$. By taking the union over all $k$'s, we obtain
$$BO({d})\cong \cup _kG(k,d+k).$$
This space classifies $d$-dimensional vector bundles, and as is well-known, it is also the classifying space of the group $O(d)$.
We can also consider the $G^{+}(k,d+k)$, the manifold of oriented $d$-codimensional linear subspaces of $\R^{d+k}$. This gives rise to
$$BSO({d})\cong \cup _kG^+(k,d+k),$$
which classifies $d$-dimensional oriented vector bundles. When $d=0$, with our definition, we get $BSO(0)\cong S^0$, which is {\it not}
homotopy equivalent to the classifying space of the group $SO(0)$. This occurs because in dimension $0$, giving an orientation
to a vector bundle is {\it not} equivalent to the reduction of the structure group to the special orthogonal group, unlike in higher
dimensions. Although this is an abuse of notation, we will write $BSO(0)$ to denote the ``classifying space'' of $0$-dimensional
vector bundle obtained by the Grassmanian construction.
For other groups $G$, we can apply similar construction, and except for the case ${\mathbf G}=Spin$ or ${\mathbf G}=SU$ and $d=0$
when we get $BSpin(0)\simeq B\Z/2\times S^0$ and $BSU(0)\simeq S^1$, our $B{\mathbf G}(d)$'s agree
with the classifying spaces of the groups ${\mathbf G}(d)$.
\subsection{{Thom spaces and Thom spectra}}
Let $X$ be a space, $\zeta $ a $n$-dimensional (real) vector bundle over it. In our applications, $X$ will be a classifying space of
some Lie group, $\zeta $ will be a bundle obtained by its representation, but what follows here will be valid for any vector bundle
over any (good) space. Denote $X^{\zeta}=D/S$ where $D$ and $S$ are the total spaces of the
associated disc and sphere bundles respectively. This is the Thom space of the vector bundle $\zeta $ . If $\zeta$ is orientable
in the usual sense, then for any coefficient $k$, we have the Thom isomorphism $H^*(X)\cong \tilde{H}^{*+n}(X^{\zeta};k)$.
For any vector bundle $\zeta$, we still have the Thom isomorphism for $k=\Z/2$. For convenience sake, we say that
$\zeta$ is orientable for $H^*(-;k)$ if the Thom isomorphism $H^*(X)\cong \tilde{H}^{*+n}(X^{\zeta};k)$ holds, that is,
an orientable vector bundle is orientable for $H^*(-;k)$ for any $k$, and any vector bundle is orientable for $H^*(-;\Z /2)$.
The Thom isomorphism is stable in the sense that, if $\zeta '=\zeta \oplus \R ^m$, then the Thom isomorphism
for $X^{\zeta '}\cong \Sigma ^mX^{\zeta }$ is given by the composition of the Thom isomorphism for $X^{\zeta }$ and
the cohomology suspension isomorphism. Thus it makes sense to talk about the Thom isomorphism for $X^{\zeta }$ when
$\zeta$ is a virtual bundle of the form $\zeta '-\R ^m$ with $\zeta '$ a genuine vector bundle over $X$, and in this case
$X^{\zeta }$ is defined to be $\Sigma ^{-m}X^{\zeta '}$.
On the other hand, if $X$ is a finite complex, then $KO^0(X)$ is finite, which implies that any virtual bundle
$\zeta $ over $X$ can be written as $\zeta '-\R ^m$ with$\zeta '$ a genuine vector bundle. Thus we see that we can define
the Thom spectra for any virtual bundle over a finite complex in such a way as Thom isomorphism (if oriented) holds. For general
$X$, by filtering it by its finite subcomplexes, and using the naturality arguments, we see that we can define the Thom spectra
so that the Thom isomorphism holds when it should.
The Thom isomorphism, when it holds, allows us to consider $\tilde{H}^*(X^{\zeta };k)$ as a module over $H^*(X;k)$, free of rank 1.
However, we would like to make $\tilde{H}^*(X^{\zeta };k)$ a $H^*(X;k)$ without the orientability hypothesis. For this purpose, we have
the ``generalized cup product'' (\cite[IV.5.36]{Rudyak},\cite[2.0.1]{Dobson}) at hand. That is, if $\zeta $ is a (genuine) vector bundle
over $X$, then the diagonal $X\rightarrow X\times X$ pulls $\zeta \times {0}$ back to $\zeta$, thus induces a map of Thom spaces
$X^{\zeta}\to (X\times X)^{\zeta \times {0}}\cong X^{\zeta}\wedge X_{+}$. This map is {\it Thom diagonal}, and it induces
in cohomology a map $H^*(X;k)\otimes \tilde{H}^*(X^{\zeta};k)\to \tilde{H}^*(X^{\zeta};k)$, which is called {\it generalized cup
product}. This construction is ``stable'' in the above sense, thus can be generalized to virtual bundles.
\subsection{Cohomology of classifying spaces and characteristic classes}
The following is well-known: the ring structure is given by \cite[Proposition 23.2]{Bo53} for ${\mathbf G}=SO$, Theorem 19.1 loc.cit in other cases. The computation for ${\mathbf G}=SO,O$ with integral coefficient is \cite[Theorem A, Theorem 12.1]{Thomas}. The identification of generators with characteristic classes follow, for example, from \cite[Section 9]{BH}.
\begin{thm}\label{cohoclassic}
Let $k$ be any ring if ${\mathbf G}=U,Sp$ or $SU$, an algebra over $\Z/2$ if ${\mathbf G}=O$ or $SO$, $k'$ be a ring in which
$2$ is invertible. Then
$H^*(B{\mathbf G}(n);k)$ is given as follows:
for $n\geq 0$ we have
$$
\begin{array}{lll}
H^*(BO(n);k)& \cong & k[w_1,w_2,\ldots ,w_n]\\
H^*(BU(n);k) & \cong & k[c_1,c_2,\ldots ,c_n]\\
H^*(BSp(n);k) & \cong & k[p_1,p_2,\ldots ,p_n]\\
\end{array}
$$
and for $n\geq 1$ we have
$$
\begin{array}{lll}
H^*(BSO(n);k) & \cong & k[w_2,\ldots ,w_n] \\
H^*(BSU(n);k) & \cong & k[c_2,\ldots ,c_n]
\end{array}
$$
and further for $m\geq 1$ we have
$$
\begin{array}{lll}
H^*(BSO(2m);\Z) & \cong & \Z[p_1,\cdots p_m,\chi]/(\chi ^2-p_m)\oplus T\\
H^*(BSO(2m);k') & \cong & k'[p_1,\cdots p_m,\chi]/(\chi ^2-p_m)\\
H^*(BSO(2m+1);\Z )\cong H^*(BO(2m+1);\Z ) \cong H^*(BO(2m);\Z )& \cong & \Z [p_1,\cdots p_m] \oplus T\\
H^*(BSO(2m+1);k')\cong H^*(BO(2m+1);k') \cong H^*(BO(2m);k')& \cong & k'[p_1,\cdots p_m]
\end{array}
$$
where $w_i$, the $i$-th Stiefel-Whitney class, has degree $i$, $c_i$, the $i$-th Chern class, has degree $2i$, and
{$p_i\in H^{4i}(BSp(n);k)$}, the $i$-th symplectic Pontryagin class, $p_i\in H^{4i}(BSO(n);k')$, the $i$-th Pontryagin class, $T$ is
an elementary abelian $2$-group. Furthermore, the standard inclusions $SO(n)\subset O(n)$
induce the obvious projections sending $w_1$ to $0$ and other $w_i$'s to $w_i$'s
with $k$ coefficients, and similar statement holds for the standard inclusions $SU(n)\subset U(n)$.
The inclusions $O(n)\subset U(n)$, sends $c_i$ to $w_i^2$ when characteristic of $k$ is 2, otherwise $c_{2i}$ to $p_i$.
\end{thm}
This can be stated in a more economic way by saying that for ${\mathbf G}=O,U$ or $Sp$, $H^*(B{\mathbf G(n);k})\cong
k[x_1,\ldots x_n]$ with the degree of $x_i$ equal to $di$, where $d=1,2$ or $4$ depending on whether ${\mathbf G}=O,U$ or $Sp$,
similarly for $H^*(B{\mathbf SG(n);k})$. Then the standard inclusions ${\mathbf G}(n-1)\subset {\mathbf G}(n)$ induce the obvious
projections sending $x_n$ to $0$, and other $x_i$'s to $x_i$.
As the names suggest, these polynomial generators are characteristic classes, more precisely the characteristic classes for universal
bundles, or the universal characteristic classes. That is, for example, if $V$ is a real $n$-dimensional vector bundle over the base
space $X$ with classifying map $f:X\rightarrow BO(n)$, that is, $V$ is the pull-back of the universal $n$-dimensional vector bundle over
$BO(n)$ via $f$, then the $i$-th Stiefel-Whitney class of $V$ is given by $w_i(V)=f^*(w_i)$.
We will need the following property of these classes (the injectivity is given by \cite[Proposition 29.2]{Bo53}, the image of
characteristic classes in \cite[9.1, 9.2, and 9.6]{BH}):
\begin{thm}\label{cohoclassicdetect}
Let ${\mathbf G}=O,U$ or $Sp$, $k$ be any ring if ${\mathbf G}=U$ or $Sp$, a $\Z /2$-algebra if ${\mathbf G}=O$, $d$ as above.
The
usual inclusion $j:{\mathbf G}(1)^n\rightarrow {\mathbf G}(n)$ induces an injection in cohomology, such that we have
$$Bj^*(x_i)=\sigma _i(t_1,\ldots , t_n)\in H^*(B{\mathbf G}(1)^n)\cong k[t_1,\ldots ,t_n]$$
where $t_i$'s have degree $d$, and $\sigma _i $ denotes the $i$-th elementary symmetric polynomial.
\end{thm}
\subsection{Central extension of Lie groups}
Let $\alpha: A\rightarrow H\rightarrow G$ be a central extension of Lie groups with $A$ finite. That is,
$A$ lies in the centre of $H$ with an isomorphism $H/A\cong G$. Then we get a principal fibration
$BA\rightarrow BH \rightarrow BG$, which is classified by a map $BG\rightarrow K(A,2)$, which corresponds to
a cohomology class $f(\alpha)\in H^2(BG;A)$. According to \cite[Chapter IV, Lemma 1.12]{AM},
$f$ is well-defined and bijective when $G$ is finite. It is easy to see that for $G$ Lie groups, $f$ is still
well-defined. Unfortunately, the proof of bijectivity given there doesn't generalize to the Lie group case as is.
However, according to \cite[Theorem 4]{Wig}, $H^*(BG;A)$ is isomorphic to the ``Borel cohomology'' of
$G$ with coefficients in $A$, and \cite{MCC} identifies the second Borel cohomology with the set of central extension.
It is now easy to see that our map $f$ coincides with the composition of the two bijections. Thus we get:
\begin{prop}
Denote $E(A,G)$ be the set of isomorphism classes of central extension of $G$ by $A$. Then the above construction gives
a well-defined bijection $f_G:E(A,G)\rightarrow H^2(BG;A)$.
\end{prop}
An immediate corollary is the following:
\begin{cor}\label{pullbackext}
Let $\alpha _i: A\rightarrow H_i\rightarrow G_i$ be a central extension of Lie groups with $A$ finite
for $i=1,2$, $\varphi :G_1
\rightarrow G_2$ be a Lie group homomorphism. There is a Lie group homomorphism
${\varphi}^{\prime}:H_1\rightarrow H_2$ that makes the followind diagram
commutative if and only if $\varphi ^*(f_{G_2}(\alpha _2))=\alpha _1$.
{
$$
\begin{diagram}
\node{H_1}\arrow{e}\arrow{s,r}{\varphi} \node{G_1}\arrow{s,r}{\varphi ^{\prime}}\\
\node{H_2}\arrow{e} \node{G_2}
\end{diagram}
$$
}
\end{cor}
\subsection{$Pin$ groups and $Pin$-bundles}
The orthogonal group $O(n)$ admits several double covers, notably we have central extensions
$\Z /2 \rightarrow Pin^+(n)\rightarrow O(n)$ corresponding to $w_2$ and $\Z /2 \rightarrow Pin^-(n)\rightarrow O(n)$
corresponding to $w_2+w_1^2$ in $H^2(BO(n);\Z /2)$. Similary the special
orhtogonal group $SO(n)$ admits a central extension $\Z /2 \rightarrow SPin(n)\rightarrow SO(n)$ corresponding to $w_2$ (\cite[p.434]{KT}).
These groups can also be defined directly using
Clifford algebras \cite{ABS,KTlow,Lam}.
Given a real vector bundle $V$ over $X$, one can ask whether the structure map can be lifted through the {\it canonical projection}
$Pin^{\pm}(n)\rightarrow O(n)$. Such a lift is called $Pin^{\pm}(n)$-bundle structure. $V$ admits a $Pin^+$ ( $Pin^-$ respectively)
structure if and only if $w_2(V)$ ($w_2(V)+w_1(V)^2$ resp.) vanishes (\cite[Lemma 1.3]{KTlow}). For a $n$-dimensional manifold $M$, we say that $M$ admits
a $Pin^{\pm}(n)$ structure if its tangent bundle admits a $Pin^{\pm}(n)$ structure. Here we note that this is about a factorisation
through particular maps $Pin^{\pm}(n)\rightarrow O(n)$. Thus although as abstract Lie groups, $Pin^+(4n)$ and $Pin^-(4n)$
are isomorphic (c.f. \cite[example 3 in 1.7, pp. 25-27]{CBDWM}{, communicated to us by Theo Johnson-Freyd,)} where they are called $Pin(4n,0)$ and $Pin(0,4n)$), they are not
isomorphic as double covers of $O(4n)$, thus the notion of $Pin^+(4n)$ bundle structure and that of $Pin^-(4n)$ structure don't
agree.
\subsection{Real projective spaces and their tangent bundle}
The following is well-known (e.g. \cite{KT} p.434):
\begin{prop}\label{rpispin}
$\R P^{4k}$ has a $Pin^{+}$ structure and $\R P^{4k+2}$ has a $Pin^{-}$ structure.
\end{prop} For the convenience of the reader,
we record a proof here. Consider the canonical line bundle $V_n$ over $\R P^n$. Since
$V_n$ is the restriction of the canonical line bundle $\gamma_1$ over $BO(1)$, if we write
$H^*(\R P^n;\Z/2)=\Z/2[x]/(x^n)$, $x$ is just $w_1(V_n)$. Of course, $V_n$ being one dimensional,
all higher Stiefel-Whitney classes vanish. Now, as we have (c. f. \cite[Chapter 2, Example 4.8]{Hu}
$$T(\R P^n) \oplus 1_{\R} \cong (n+1)V_n$$
we get
$$w_1(T(\R P^n))=w_1(T(\R P^n) \oplus 1_{\R})=w_1((n+1)V_n)=(n+1)x, \ w_2(T(\R P^n))=w_2((n+1)V_n)=\binom{n+1}{2}x^2.$$
Thus for $n=4k$ and $n=4k+2$, $w_1(T(\R P^n))=x$ , whereas for $n=4k$, $w_2(T(\R P^n))=x^2$,
and for $n=4k+2$, $w_2(T(\R P^n))=0$. Thus we get the Proposition.
\subsection{Localisation of spectra and spaces}
Most of the time we work at one prime at a time. Thus we can replace safely a spectrum $E$ with its $p$-localisation $E _{(p)}$,
that is, a spectrum such that there is a natural map $l_E:E\rightarrow E _{(p)}$ such that $H_*(l_E;k)$ is an isomorphism for any
$p$-local coefficients $k$, and $\pi_*( E _{(p)})$ as well as $H_*(E _{(p)};\Z )$ are $p$-local \cite[Proposition 2.4 and Theorem
3.1]{Bspec}. We have, notably,
\begin{lmm}{\cite[Proposition 2.4]{Bspec}} \label{Lem:locspec}
$\pi _*( E _{(p)})\cong \pi _*( E )\otimes \Z _{(p)}$.
\end{lmm}
One can also define localisation with respect to any multiplicatively closed set with similar property. { Notably,
one can talk about a localisation ``away from $p$'', or even localisation ``at $0$'', in other words rationalisation $E_{\Q}$
with similar properties.
H}owever, as is well-known, and as we shall review later, the rational stable homotopy theory is rather trivial, so we are
very little concerned with rationalisation. Thus we {\it don't} adopt a wide-spread convention according to which
$0$ is considered as a prime number so that
``localisation at a prime $p$'' includes the rationalisation.
The localisation exists as well in the homotopy category of spaces. A space $X$ is called nilpotent if $\pi _n(X)$ has a finite filtration
such that $\pi _1(X)$ acts trivially on each successive filtration quotient. Then we have
\begin{lmm}{\cite[Proposition 3.1]{BK}} \label{Prop:loc}
If $X$ is nilpotent, then its localisation $X_{(p)}$ satisfies
$H_*(X_{(p)};\Z )\cong H_*(X;\Z )\otimes \Z _{(p)}\mbox{, }\pi _*(X_{(p)})\cong \pi _*(X)\otimes \Z _{(p)}$.
\end{lmm}
\subsection{Infinite loop spaces}
An infinite loop space is understood to be a topological space $X$ together with a collection of spaces $X_i$, $i=0,1,2,\ldots$, and
homotopy equivalences $X_i\to\Omega X_{i+1}$ such that $X=X_0$. Let $E$ be a $CW$-spectrum with spaces $E_i$ and structure
maps $\Sigma E_i\to E_{i+1}$. The infinite loop space associated to $E$ is defined by $\Omega^\infty E=\colim \Omega^iE_i$; in
particular, for a pointed space $X$, $\Omega^\infty \Sigma^\infty X$ is denoted by $QX$. By definition $\Omega \Omega^\infty\Sigma
E=\Omega^\infty E$. By the adjointness of $\Omega$ and $\Sigma$, the space $\Omega^\infty E$ has the property that it captures
the homotopy of $E$ in nonnegative dimensions, i.e. $\pi_kE\simeq\pi_k\Omega^\infty E$ with $k>-1$.
Furthermore, the functor $\Omega^\infty$ from the category of spectra to that of spaces is the right adjoint to the functor
$\Sigma ^{\infty}$.
A map $f:X\to Y$ between infinite loop maps is said to be an infinite loop map if there exist maps $f_i:X_i\to Y_i$ such that the
diagrams
$$
\begin{diagram}
\node{\Omega X_{i+1}} \arrow{e,t}{\Omega f_{i+1}} \node{\Omega Y_{i+1}} \\
\node{X_i} \arrow{n}\arrow{e,t}{f_i} \node{Y_i}\arrow{n}
\end{diagram}
$$
are commutative. A map of spectra $f:E\to F$, by its definition, provides an infinite loop map of infinite loop spaces
$\Omega^\infty f:\Omega^\infty E\to \Omega^\infty F$. Finally, we note that the $\Omega^\infty$ has the property that applied to a cofibration of
spectra, it yields a fibration of infinite loop spaces and maps; in particular applying $Q$ to a cofibration of spaces results in a fibration
of spaces.
If we denote by $\Omega^\infty _0E$ the connected component corresponding to
$$0\in \pi _0(\Omega^\infty E)\cong E^0(pt),$$
then we have homotopy equivalence
$$\Omega^\infty E\cong \pi _0(\Omega^\infty E)\times \Omega^\infty _0E$$
where $\pi _0(\Omega^\infty E)$ is equipped with the discrete topology.
Thus the study of homological properties of $\Omega^\infty E$ is more or less reduced to that of $\Omega^\infty _0E$.
To conclude the subsection, we note that for a space $X$, $\pi _1(\Omega X)$ acts trivially on $\pi _n(\Omega X)$, so any loop space is
nilpotent. In particular, an infinite loop space is nilpotent. Thus by using Lemmas \ref{Lem:locspec} and \ref{Prop:loc} we see that the
functor $\Omega ^{\infty}$ commutes with the localisation. Thus for all purpose of this paper, we can replace safely a spectrum $E$
with its $p$-localisation $E _{(p)}$, which we we will do throughout the rest of the paper.
\subsection{Splitting of spectra}
For a spectrum $E$, we say $E$ splits if there is a homotopy equivalence $E_1\vee E_2\to E$. In practice, often we start with known spectra $E$, $E_1$ and a map among them going one way or the other, and ask whether if there is such a spectrum $E_2$. We say that $E_1$ splits off $E$ when this is the case. We note that the existence of such a spectrum $E_2$ is equivalent to the existence of a section. That is, we have
\begin{lmm}
\begin{enumerate}
\item Let $i:E_1\rightarrow E $ be a map of spectra. Then $E_1$ splits off $E$ if and only if there is a map of spectra
$r:E\rightarrow E_1$ such that $r\circ i$ is a self homotopy equivalence.
\item Let $r:E\rightarrow E_1$ be a map of spectra. Then $E_1$ splits off $E$ if and only if there is a map of spectra $i:E_1\rightarrow E $ such that $r\circ i$ is a self homotopy equivalence.
\end{enumerate}
\end{lmm}
\begin{proof}
It suffices to take $E_2$ to be the cofibre of $i$.
\end{proof}
We note that in the category of spectra, the wedge sum is a product, that is, for any spectra $X$, we have
a natural isomorphism
$$[X,E_1\vee E_2]\cong [X,E_1]\times [X,E_2].$$ As the infinite loop space functor $\Omega ^{\infty}$ is
the right adjoint of the infinite suspension $\Sigma ^{\infty}$, $\Omega ^{\infty}$ commutes with the product,
thus we see that
\begin{lmm}
If the spectrum $E$ splits as $E_1\vee E_2\to E$ then so does the infinite loop space
$\Omega ^{\infty}E$ and we have $\Omega ^{\infty}E\cong \Omega ^{\infty}E_1 \times \Omega ^{\infty}E_2.$
\end{lmm}
{
\begin{rem}
For spaces, we have two distinct notions of {\it splitting}. We say, when $X\cong Y\times Z$, $Y$ splits off $X$
(as a direct factor). As we identify a space with its suspension spectra, we also say, when $\Sigma ^{\infty}
X\cong \Sigma ^{\infty}Y\vee \Sigma ^{\infty}Z'$, that $Y$ splits off $X$ (as a stable wedge summand). It is easy
to see that the first implies the second. In this paper we use the same word for two notions, as the meaning should be
clear from the context.
\end{rem}
}
\subsection{The rational stable homotopy theory}
As we wrote earlier, the rational stable homotopy theory is well-known to be rather trivial. More precisely
the homotopy group functor $\pi _*$, or the homology group functor $H_*(-;\Q )$ provides
an equivalence between the category of $\Q$-local spectra and
that of graded vector spaces over $\Q$. One way to see this is that any spectrum is
a module over the sphere spectrum $S^0$, so after rationalisation it becomes a module over $S^0_{\Q}$. However,
the latter is just $H{\Q}$. Thus a rationalised spectrum is a module over $H_{\Q}$. However, for any (ungraded) ring $R$, the
category
of spectra over $HR$ is equivalent to that of graded modules over $R$.
Therefore, splitting $\Q$-local spectra is equivalent to splitting its homology as a graded vector space. As we have seen that
for any spectrum $X$,
$$H_*(\Omega ^{\infty }_0(X);\Q)\cong H_*(\Omega ^{\infty }\overline{X};\Q)\cong H_*(\Omega ^{\infty }(\overline{X}_{\Q});\Q),$$
where $\overline{X}$ denotes the $0$-connective cover of $X$, that is a spectrum $\overline{X}$ characterized by the property
that there exists a map $q:\overline{X}\rightarrow X$ such that
$\pi _i(\overline{X})\stackrel{\pi _i(q)}{\cong}(X)$ for $i>0$ and $\pi _i(\overline{X})\cong 0$ for $i\leq 0$, and that $\overline{X}_{\Q}$ splits as a wedge of the Eilenberg-Maclane spectra $\Sigma ^nH\Q$'s, it suffices to determine
the homology of $K(\Q ,n)$'s with $n>0$ to determine $H_*(\Omega ^{\infty }_0(X);\Q)$ as a functor of $H_*(\overline{X};\Q)\cong
H_{*>0}(X;\Q)$. $H^*(K(\Q ,n))$ is known to be the free commutative (in the graded sense) algebra generated by
$\Q$ concentrated in degree $n$. Thus we see
\begin{prop}\label{hinfrational}
Let $X$ be any spectrum. Then $H_*(\Omega ^{\infty }_0(X);\Q)$ is naturally isomorphic to the free commutative (in the graded
sense) algebra generated by $H_{*>0}(X;\Q)$.
\end{prop}
We also note that this follows from \cite[Theorem 4.10]{Ku}.
\subsection{Hopf algebras}
All Hopf algebras in this article are understood to be graded, commutative and cocommutative over the base field $\Z /p$. We say that
such a Hopf algebra $A$ is called
connected if the degree zero part $A_0$ is isomorphic to the base field $\Z /p$. Connected Hopf algebras
form an abelian category \cite{S,T}. The only thing we use in this paper concerning this abelian category structure is the fact that
a map in the category of connected Hopf algebras is epimorphism if and only if it is surjective as a map of sets. We also note that
Hopf algebras are equipped with the conjugation, or canonical (anti)automorphism, that corresponds to the
``additive inverse'' in the abelian category.
\subsection{Homology of infinite loop spaces}
For an infinite loop space $X$, since $X\simeq\Omega^2X_2$, the homology $H_*(X;\Z/p)$ is a graded
commutative ring under the Pontryagin product. Moreover, there are Kudo-Araki-Dyer-Lashof homology operations that
we will call Dyer-Lashof operations, $Q^i$ which act on $H_*(X;\Z/p)$. The
operation $Q^i$ is a group homomorphism, is natural with respect to infinite loop maps, and is stable with respect to the homology
suspension $\sigma_*:H_*(\Omega X;\Z/p)\to H_{*+1}(X;\Z/p)$, i.e. $\sigma_*Q^i=Q^i\sigma_*$ \cite[Theorem 1.1]{Maybook}. At odd primes
($p=2$ stated inside brackets) they have the property that:\\
$(1)$ $Q^i$ raises the dimension by $2i(p-1)$ (raises the dimension by $i$);\\
$(2)$ If $x\in H_*(X;\Z/p)$ with $2i<\dim x$ ($i<\dim x$) then $Q^ix=0$;\\
$(3)$ If $x\in H_*(X;\Z/p)$ with $2i=\dim x$ ($i=\dim x$) then $Q^ix=x^p$;\\
$(4)$ For the identity element $1\in H_0(X;\Z/p)$, if $i>0$ then $Q^i(1)=0$.\\
These operations satisfy Adem relations, various Cartan formulae, and Nishida relations \cite[Theorem 1.1]{Maybook}. The algebra
wherein these operations live is the Dyer-Lashof algebra $R$; it is the free algebra generated by these operations, modulo Adem
relations and excess relations. The homology of $H_*(X;\Z/p)$ then becomes an $R$-module. In some cases, these operations allow a neat
description of $H_*(X;\Z/p)$. For instance, if $X=QY$ with $Y$ some path connected space, then as an algebra, and as an $R$-module, we
have \cite[{Chapter 1,} Lemma 4.10]{Maybook}
$$H_*(QY;\Z/2)\simeq\Z/2[Q^Iy_\alpha:\ex(Q^Iy_\alpha)>0, I\textrm{ admissible}]$$
where $\{y_\alpha\}$ is an additive basis for $\widetilde{H}_* (Y;\Z/p)$, elements of $\widetilde{H}_* (Y;\Z/p)$being considered
elements of $\widetilde{H}_* (QY;\Z/p)$ via the map induced by $Y\rightarrow QY\simeq \Omega ^{\infty }\Sigma ^{\infty }Y$ adjoint
of the identity of $\Sigma ^{\infty }Y$; for $I=(i_1,\ldots,i_s)$,
$s\geqslant 0$, $Q^I=Q^{i_1}\cdots Q^{i_s}$, $\ex(Q^Iy_\alpha)=i_1-(i_2+\ldots+i_s+\dim y_\alpha)$, and $I$ is called admissible if $i_j\leqslant 2i_{j+1}$. By convention the empty sequence $\phi$ is admissible, $Q^\phi y_\alpha=y_\alpha$ and $\ex(Q^\phi y_\alpha)=+\infty$.
Denote by $V$ the Verschiebung (also called $p$-th root) map, that is the dual of the $p$-th power.
As $Q^i$'s satisfy the Cartan formula with respect to the coproduct, we have \cite[Lemma 3.5]{W}
$$V(Q^{pi}(y))=Q^i(V(y)).$$
Thus when $p=2$, if the Verschiebung on
$H_*(X;\Z/2)$ is surjective, then so it is on $H_*(Q_0X;\Z/2)$ as well, which implies that
if $H^*(X;\Z/2)$ is polynomial, so is $H^*(Q_0X;\Z/2)$ (\cite[Theorem 3.11]{W}).
{We note that
rational homology of $Q_0X$ is given by Proposition \ref{hinfrational}. By comparing the two results, we see that
all mod $p$ classes involving the Dyer-Lashof operations that are not $p$-th powers don't have rational counter part.
This means, either by an inspection on the universal coefficient theorem or by use of the Bockstein spectral sequence,
that integral homology of $QX$ contains torsion groups whose ranks are roughly half of the rank of the part of the
mod $p$ homology of $QX$ containing those Dyer-Lashof operations. More precisely, \cite[Theorem 4.13]{Maybook} determines
the Bockstein spectral sequence for $QX$ in terms of that for $X$. Thus in theory, one can recover the integral homology
of $QX$ from that of $X$. In any case, even when $H_*(X;\Z)$ is torsion-free, $H_*(QX;\Z)$ and $H^*(QX;\Z)$ posses lots
of torsion classes.}
The other cases that we shall consider in this paper, are the spaces $\Z\times BO$ and $\Z\times BU$ which are infinite loop spaces
under Bott periodicity; the monoid structure coming from the Whitney sum is compatible with Bott periodicity.
They correspond to ring spectra $KO$ and $KU$, thus there are maps $QS^0\to \Z \times BO$ and $QS^0\to \Z \times BU$.
We have notably
$$
\begin{array}{lllll}
H^*(BO;\Z/2) &\cong & \Z /2[w_1,w_2, \ldots w_n, \ldots ] & \cong & \varprojlim H^*(BO(n);\Z/2)\\
H_*(BO;\Z/2) &\cong & \Z /2[a_1,a_2, \ldots a_n, \ldots ] & \cong & \varinjlim H_*(BO(n);\Z/2)\\
H^*(BU;\Z) &\cong & \Z [c_1,c_2, \ldots c_n, \ldots ] & \cong & \varprojlim H^*(BU(n);\Z)\\
H_*(BU;\Z) &\cong & \Z [b_1,b_2, \ldots b_n, \ldots ] & \cong & \varinjlim H_*(BU(n);\Z)
\end{array}
$$
The elements $w_i$'s and $c_i$'s are as in Theorem \ref{cohoclassic}.
As $BO$ classifies stable virtual bundles, this means that we can define the Stiefel-Whitney class
$w_i(V)$ for a stable virtual bundle over $X$ with classifying map $f:X\rightarrow BO$ by
$w_i(V)=f^*(w_i)$. We note that the multiplication by $(-1)$ on the set of virtual bundles corresponds to
the ``multiplication by $(-1)$'' self-map on $BO$, thus the conjugation $\tau$ on $H^*(BO;\Z/2)$ satisfies
$f^*\tau(w_i)=w_i(-V)$. Similar statements hold for $BU$. {As to the homology is concerned, we will use the fact that the elements
$a_i$'s and $b_i$'s are respectively the image of a generator of $H_i(BO(1);\Z/2)$ and $H_{2i}(BU(1);\Z)$.}\\
The map induced in homology by the unit map was determined in \cite{Priddyoperations}, in particular, we have
\begin{lmm}\label{QS-BO} \cite[Proposition 4.10, $n=1$ case]{Priddyoperations}
The map $H_*(QS^0;\Z/2)\lra H_*(\Z\times BO;\Z/2)$ is an epimorphism.
\end{lmm}
Basically this is because $H_*(BO;\Z/2)$ is generated by $H_*(BO(1);\Z/2)$, $H_*(BO(1);\Z/2)$ is ``contained''
in $H_*(Q_0S^0;\Z/2)$, and the inclusions $H_*(BO(1);\Z/2)\subset H_*(\Z\times BO;\Z/2)$ and $H_*(BO(1);\Z/2)\subset
H_*(Q_0S^0;\Z/2)$ are compatible.
\subsection{Adams' splittings of $\C P^{\infty }$ and $KU$ and the Segal splitting}
Let $p$ be an odd prime, $KU$ the complex $K$-theory spectrum. After localising at $p$, $KU$ splits as $KU\simeq \vee _{i=0}^{p-2}\Sigma ^{2i}E(1)$, where $\pi_*(E(1))\cong \Z _{(p)}[v_1,v_1^{-1}]$ with degree of $v_1$ equal to $2(p-1)$ \cite[Lecture 4]{A}. Denote $j_E$ the resulting splitting map $E(1)\rightarrow KU$. Similary we have a splitting {$\C P^{\infty }\cong \vee _{i=0}^{p-2}X(i)$} with $H^*(X(i))=0$ unless $*\equiv 2i.\bmod 2(p-1)$\cite{MNT}.
Since $BU\times \Z_{(p)}$ is the infinite loop space associated to $KU$, it also splits as a product of spaces
$${BU\times\Z_{(p)}\simeq \Pi _{i=0}^{p-2}\Omega ^{\infty}\Sigma ^{2i}E(1).}$$
Thus $\Omega ^{\infty}E(1)$ is a summand of $BU\times\Z_{(p)}$. Its cohomology can be described as follows:
\begin{lmm}Let $k=\Z _{(p)},\Q$ or $\Z /p$.\label{cohe1}
$H^*(\Omega ^{\infty}E(1),k)\cong k[c_{p-1},c_{2(p-1)},\ldots c_{m(p-1)},\ldots]$, and $j_E^*$ sends $c_{m(p-1)}\in
H^{2m(p-1)}(BU;k)$ to $c_{m(p-1)}$ and other $c_i$'s to $0$.
\end{lmm}
\begin{proof}
This can be shown using \cite{HH}, but here we follow rather the arguments in \cite{HR}.
Let's start with the case $k=\Q$. For $k$-vector spaces $V$, denote by $Sym_k(V)$ the symmetric algebra generated by $V$,
i.e., $\oplus _q V^{\otimes _kq}/\Sigma _q$ with the product induced by the concatenation.
Proposition \ref{hinfrational}, we see that for any spectra $X$ with
$\pi _{odd}(X)=0$, we have natural isomorphisms
$$H^*(\Omega ^{\infty}_0X;\Q)\cong H^*((\Omega ^{\infty}_0X)_{\Q};\Q)\cong H^*(\Omega ^{\infty}_0(X_{\Q});\Q)\cong
Sym _{\Q}Hom(\pi _{*>0}(X);\Q ).$$ Since $\pi _*(j_E)$ is bijective for $*=2m(p-1)$ and $0$ otherwise, we get the desired result in
this case.
As $\Omega ^{\infty}E(1)$ is a summand of $BU\times \Z_{(p)}$,
$H_*(\Omega ^{\infty}E(1);\Z_{(p)})$ is torsion-free. Therfore $H_*(\Omega ^{\infty}E(1);\Z_{(p)})$ injects to
$H_*(\Omega ^{\infty}E(1);\Q )$. Similary for $BU\times \Z_{(p)}$. Thus we get the result when $k=\Z_{(p)}$. Finally, one can derive the case $k=\Z /p$ follows from this by the universal coefficient theorem.
\end{proof}
There is another splitting involving the spaces related to them. Consider the orientation map for the $KU$-theory $\C P^{\infty }\to BU$.
Since the target is an infinite loop space, by the adjointness, it factors through $Q\C P^{\infty }$. Then the map
$Q\C P^{\infty }\to BU$ splits as a map of spaces, that is, there is a space $F$ such that $Q\C P^{\infty }
\simeq BU \times F$ \cite[Theorem]{Seg}. It turns out that the {Adams'} splittings of $KU$ and $\C P^{\infty }$ are compatible, so that Segal's spliting can be refined to the splitting of corresponding Adams' pieces \cite[Theorem 1.1]{Kono}. We have
\begin{prop}\label{splitkono}
The map $\Omega ^{\infty}X(0)\to \Omega ^{\infty}E(1)$ splits, that is we have a space $F^{\prime}$ such that
$\Omega ^{\infty}X(0)\simeq \Omega ^{\infty}E(1)\times F^{\prime}$. In particular, it induces a surjection in homology with
any coefficient.
\end{prop}
This fact leads to the following ``complex analogue'' of Lemma \ref{QS-BO}
\begin{lmm}
The unit map of the ring spectrum $E(1)$ induces a surjection $H_*(QS^0;\Z /p)\to H_*(\Omega ^{\infty}E(1);\Z /p)$.
\end{lmm}
\begin{proof}
By Proposition \ref{splitkono} the map $H_*(\Omega ^{\infty}X(0);\Z /p)\to H_*(\Omega ^{\infty}E(1);\Z /p)$ is surjective.
However, as $X(0)$ is a retract of a space $\C P^{\infty }$, $H_*(\Omega ^{\infty}X(0);\Z /p)$ is generated by elements of
$H_*(X(0);\Z /p)$ under the Pontrjagin product and Dyer-Lashof operations. But $H_*(X(0);\Z /p)$
is the even degree part of $H_*(B\Sigma _p;\Z/p)$, that is we have a following commutative diagram
$$\begin{diagram}
\node{B\Z/p}\arrow{e}\arrow{s} \node{\C P^{\infty}}\arrow{s}\\
\node{B\Sigma _p}\arrow{e} \node{X(0)}
\end{diagram}
$$
so that the horizontal arrows kill $H_{odd}(-;\Z/p)$ and induce isomorphisms on $H_{even}(-;\Z/p)$. So the image of $H_*(X(0);\Z/p)$
in $H_*(\Omega ^{\infty}E(1);\Z /p)$ is just Dyer-Lashof operations applied to the image of the fundamental class of
$H_*(QS^0;\Z /p)$ in $H_*(\Omega ^{\infty}E(1);\Z /p)$, up to translation by connected component.
Thus $H_*(\Omega ^{\infty}E(1);\Z /p)$ is generated by the image of the fundamental class of
$H_*(QS^0;\Z /p)$ under the Pontrjagin product and Dyer-Lashof operations. In other words, the map
$H_*(QS^0;\Z /p)\to H_*(\Omega ^{\infty}E(1);\Z /p)$ is surjective.
Alternatively, this can be deduced from \cite[Proposition 4.6]{Priddyoperations} and Proposition \ref{cohe1}.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Homology suspension}
First, let $k$ be any coefficient ring, $X$ a pointed space, and consider the identity $1_{\Omega X}:\Omega X\to\Omega X$.
The evaluation map $e:\Sigma\Omega X\to X$ is the adjoint of $1_{\Omega X}$. The homology suspension
$\sigma_*:H_*(\Omega X;k)\to H_{*+1}(X;k)$ is defined by the composition
$$H_*(\Omega X;k)\stackrel{\cong}{\lra}H_{*+1}(\Sigma\Omega X;k)\stackrel{e_*}{\lra}H_{*+1}(X;k).$$
Homology suspension commutes with loop maps, i.e. for a map $f:X\to Y$ of pointed spaces $\sigma_*(\Omega f)_*=f_*\sigma_*$.
Next, let $E$ be a spectrum. The homology $H_*(E;k)$ where $k$ is some coefficient ring is defined by $H_*(E;k)=\colim
H_{*+i}(E_i;k)$; in particular, $H_*(\Sigma^\infty X;k)\cong \widetilde{H}_*(X;k)$, the reduced homology of the
space $X$, and $H_*(\Sigma^\infty X_+;k)\cong \widetilde{H}_*(X_+;k) \cong {H}_*(X;k)$ the unreduced homology of the space $X$.
The stable homology suspension homomorphism $\sigma_*^\infty:H_*(\Omega^\infty E;k)\to H_*(E;k)$ is the map induced by the
evaluation map $\Sigma^\infty\Omega^\infty E\to E$
with the latter being adjoint to the identity map $\Omega^\infty E\to \Omega^\infty E$.
{ When $X$ is a ssuspension spectrum, the generalities of adjoint functors ( \cite[Chapter IV, Theorem 1
(8)]{Maclanebook}) imply
the following:
\begin{lmm}\label{suspensiononto}
For a pointed topological space $X$, the composition
$\Sigma ^{\infty }X\rightarrow \Sigma ^{\infty }QX\rightarrow \Sigma ^{\infty }X$ is the identity, i.e., $\Sigma ^{\infty }X$
splits off $\Sigma ^{\infty }QX$.
Thus stable homology suspension $$\sigma_*^\infty:H_*(QX;k)\to H_*(\Sigma^\infty
X;k)\cong \widetilde{H}_*(X;k)$$ is an epimorphism.
\end{lmm}}
However, this is not sufficient for our purpose, since we often have to deal with the map from $H_*(Q_0X;k)$ which is slightly smaller
if $X$ is not connected because of the decomposition
$$QX\simeq Q_0(X)\times \pi _0(QX), \pi _0(QX)\cong \lim \pi _0(\Omega ^n\Sigma ^nX)\cong \pi _0^S(X).$$
Fortunately, the spaces $X$ we deal with have the form $Y_+$ with $Y$ connected. Thus we have the decomposition
$$QX\simeq QY_+\simeq QY\times QS^0=Q_0Y\times QS^0,$$ which leads to the following:
\begin{lmm}\label{suspensiononto0}
For a connected topological space $Y$, the composition
$$\sigma_*^\infty:H_*(Q_0Y_+;k)\to \widetilde{H}_*(Y_+;k)\to \widetilde{H}_*(Y;k)$$
is onto.
\end{lmm}
Another well-known fact about the homology suspension is the following.
\begin{lmm}\label{suspensionkilldec}Let $k$ be a field.
The homology suspension $\sigma_*:H_*(\Omega X;k)\to H_{*+1}(X;k)$ factors through the module of indecomposables (with respect
to the Pontrjagin product) $QH_*(\Omega X;k)$. In particular, $\sigma_*^\infty:H_*(QX;k)\to H_*(\Sigma^\infty X;k)$ factors through
$QH_*(QX;k)$. Dually, $\sigma ^{\infty *}: \widetilde{H}^*(X;k)\to H^*(QX;k)$ factors through the set of
primitives $PH^*(QX;k)$.
\end{lmm}
Of course, $\sigma ^{\infty *}$ doesn't preserve the cup product. However, the stability of Steenrod operations implies that
$\sigma ^{\infty *}$ commutes with the Steenrod operations. In particular, it commutes with the $p$-th power.
Finally, we note that if $f:E\to F$ is a map of spectra then there is a commutative diagram as
$$
\begin{diagram}
\node{H_*(\Omega^\infty E;k)} \arrow{e,t}{\Omega^\infty f}\arrow{s,t}{\sigma_*^\infty} \node{H_*(\Omega^\infty F;k)}
\arrow{s,t}{\sigma_*^\infty} \\
\node{H_*(E;k)} \arrow{e,t}{f} \node{H_*(F;k)}
\end{diagram}
$$
that is $\sigma_*^\infty(\Omega^\infty f)_*=f_*\sigma_*^\infty$.
\section{Transfer maps and a cofibration of Thom spectra}
Our main results are obtained by considering various (twisted) transfer maps among Thom spectra, the relations among these maps,
and cofibre sequences for transfer maps, which are still subject of study \cite{ABG}. We provide the reader with a relatively coherent
account on Becker-Gottlieb transfer, Becker-Schultz-Mann-Miller-Miller transfer, umkehr maps, Gysin homoomrphisms (integration
along fibres), and the relation between these maps. {
Most of the material here ought to be well-known, but some of them, such as our
account of twisted Becker-Gottlieb transfer, might be new or we have not found a published account on them.}
\subsection{Hopf's vector field Theorem}\label{Hopf}
{We wish to recall a variant of Hopf's theorem, or rather its useful corollary for us, of which implies
the main property of transfer \cite[Theorem 5.5]{BG}.}
Suppose {that} $G$ is a compact Lie group. By a $G$-module $V$, we mean a real finite dimensional representation
{$V$ of $G$} equipped with $G$-invariant metric. We shall write $S^V$ for the $G$-equivariant sphere obtained by one
point compactification of $V$. If $F$ is a compact manifold, then there exists a $G$-module $V$ together with a $G$-equivariant
embedding $i:F\to V$ \cite[Section 2]{BG}. By Pontrjagin-Thom construction, this yields a map $c:S^V\to F^{\nu_i}$. Use the
embedding $i$ to equip $F$ with a Riemannian metric obtained from the metric of $V$. This allows us to consider a trivialisation
$\psi:\nu_i+TF\to i^*TV=F\times V$. The map $\psi$ induces a map of Thom space $F^{\nu_i+TF}\to F_+\wedge S^V$ which we
denote by $\psi$. Finally, let $\pi:F_+\wedge S^V\to S^V$ be the projection. By Becker-Gottlieb, the following can be obtained from
Hopf's vector field thoerem.
\begin{thm}\label{Hopfthm}
\cite[Theorem 2.4]{BG} The composition
$$S^V\stackrel{c}{\to} F^{\nu_i}\stackrel{s}{\to} F^{\nu_i+TF}\stackrel{\psi}{\to} F_+\wedge S^V\stackrel{\pi}{\to} S^V$$
where $s$ is the obvious section, is a map of degree $\chi(F)$ - the Euler characteristic of $F$.
\end{thm}
We have a few comments in order:
\begin{enumerate}
\item Since $V$ is finite dimensional, the above composite then provides an unstable map.
\item If $W$ is
another $G$-module, then the axial embedding $V\to V+W$, determined by $v\mapsto(v,0)$, allows to consider the embedding $F\to
V\to V+W$ which is still $G$-equivariant. The Hopf Theorem then implies that the composition
$$S^{V+W}\to F^{\nu_i+W}\to F^{(\nu_i+TF)+W}\stackrel{\psi+1}{\to} F_+\wedge S^{V+W}\stackrel{\pi}{\to} S^{V+W}$$
is a map of degree $\chi(F)$.
\item A real finite dimensional inner product space $W$ can be equipped with the trivial $G$-action, thus can be considered as a
`trivial' $G$-module.
\end{enumerate} The last observation will turn out to be useful while working with twisted Becker-Gottlieb transfer maps.
\subsection{The Becker-Gottlieb transfer}\label{BGtransfer}
Let $\pi:E\to B$ be a fibre bundle whose {fibre $F$} is a smooth compact manifold{, and where
$B$ is a space that admits a filtration by finite subcomplexes (compact subspaces). This includes the case where $B$ is a finite
complex.}
Roughly speaking, the transfer construction of \cite{BG} and \cite{BG2}, uses a `geometric integration along fibres' to generalise
Theorem \ref{Hopfthm} as follows. The Becker-Gottlieb transfer provides a stable map $t_\pi:B_+\to E_+$ whose
stable homotopy class depends on homotopy class of $\pi$, such that -
\begin{thm}\label{transcomp}\cite[Theorem 5.5]{BG}
The composition
$$B_+\stackrel{t_\pi}{\to}E_+\stackrel{\pi}{\to} B_+$$
induces multiplication by $\chi(F)$ in $\widetilde{H}^*(-;\Lambda)$ for any Abelian group $\Lambda$.
\end{thm}
The above theorem implies that if $\chi(F)$ is not divisible by $p$ then stably, localised at $p$, $B_+$ splits off $E_+$.
{Moreover, for a variety of reasons, it is useful to twist the above transfer map with a} (virtual) {vector}
bundle $\zeta\to B$ {whose construction we postpone to} Subsection \ref{umkehr} as well as the Appendix. In this
case, one obtains a stable map
$$t_\pi^\zeta:B^\zeta\lra E^{\pi^*\zeta}$$
which we call the twisted Becker-Gottlieb transfer{, and whose stable homotopy class depends on homotopy class of
$\pi$ and the bundle isomorphism class of $\zeta$}. We have -
\begin{thm}\label{twistedtranscomp}
The composition
$$B^\zeta\stackrel{t_\pi^\zeta}{\to}E^{\pi^*\zeta}\stackrel{\pi^{{\zeta}}}{\to} B^\zeta$$
induces multiplication by $\chi(F)$ in $\widetilde{H}^*(-;\Lambda)$ for any Abelian group $\Lambda$ where $\pi^{{\zeta}}$ detnoed the induced map among Thom spectra. Consequently, if $\chi(F)$ is not divisible by $p$ then stably, localised at
$p$, $B^\zeta$ splits off $E^{\pi^*\zeta}$.
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
As we don't use this result in the rest of the paper, we only provide a sketch. The diagram (5.1) of \cite{BG} together with
twisting with the pull-back of the bundle $\zeta\times 0$ (our $\zeta$ corresponds to their $\xi$) leads to a commutative
diagram similar to the diagram (5.2) of \cite{BG}, where suspension spectra are replaced with appropriate Thom spectra,
and diagonals with Thom diagonals. Thus, by taking the cohomology, we get our version of \cite[formula (5.3)]{BG}, that is:
$${t_\pi^\zeta}^*( \pi^{\zeta *} (x)\cup y)=x\cup t_{\pi}^*(y)\mbox{ where
$x\in H^*B^{\zeta}$ and $y\in H^*E$, $\cup$ denoting the generalized cup product}.$$
The rest follows by setting $y=1$, and noting that $t_{\pi}^*(1)=\chi(F)$ as in the proof of \cite[Theorem 5.5]{BG}.
\end{proof}
\begin{exm}\label{splitMGtwisted}
Let $G$ be a compact Lie group, $K\subset G$ its closed subgroup. Suppose $V$ is a (virtual) representation of $G$. Then
$BG^V$ splits off $BK^{V|{_K}}$ if $p\nmid \chi (G/K)$. {In particular, if $G$ is any compact Lie group and $T$ is its maximal torus, then for the normaliser of $T$ in $G$, $N_G(T)$, one has $\chi(G/N_G(T))=1$ \cite[Section 6]{BG} which implies that $BG^V$ splits off $BN_G(T)^{V|_{N_G(T)}}$.}
\end{exm}
\subsection{Umkehr maps: Factorising transfer maps and Gysin homomorphism}\label{umkehr}
The material here ought to be standard and well known; we include a discussion for future reference. We begin with umkehr maps.
Suppose $f:E\to B$ is an embedding of compact closed manifolds. An application of Pontrjagin-Thom construction yields a map
$f_!:B_+\to E^{\nu_f}$ with $\nu_f$ being the normal bundle of $f$ that we call the umkehr map associated to $f$. Moreover, if
$\zeta\to B$ is
some (virtual) {vector} bundle, then the above construction might be twisted to provide an umkehr map \cite{CohenKlein},
\cite[(4.4)]{BeckerSchultz1}
$$f_!^\zeta:B^\zeta\lra E^{\nu_f+\zeta|_E}$$
with $\zeta|_E=f^*\zeta$ being the restriction of $\zeta$ over $E$ through $f$.\\
Second, suppose $\pi:E\to B$ is a fibre bundle between closed compact finite dimensional manifolds, with $B$ a finite complex, whose
fibre $F$ is also a closed compact manifold. Since $E$ is compact, by Whitney's embedding theorem, we may choose an embedding
$E\to\R^k$, which allows to extend $\pi$ to an
embedding $j:E\to\R^k\times B$. The umkehr map for such an embedding is a map
$$t:(B\times\R^k)_+=B^{\R^k}\to E^{\nu_j}$$
whose at least stable homotopy class does not depend on a particular choice of an embedding $E\to\R^k$ for some $k$. By the
discussion of \cite[Section 4]{BG} (see also \cite[Section 2]{BM}) the composition
$$\Sigma^kB_+=(B\times\R^k)_+=B^{\R^k}\to E^{\nu_j}\to E^{j^*(B\times\R^k)}=(E\times\R^k)_+=\Sigma^kE_+$$
where the right map is induced by the section $\nu_j\to j^*(B\times \R^k)$, lives in the same stable homotopy class of maps
$E_+\to B_+$ as the Becker-Gottlieb transfer $E_+\stackrel{t_\pi}{\to} B_+$. Moreover, for a (virtual) bundle $\zeta\to B$, using the
embedding of bundles $\R^k\to\R^k+\zeta$ of bundles over $B$, provided by the embedding of the first coordinate, the
Pontrjagin-Thom construction yields a (stable) map
$$t^{{\zeta}}:B^{\R^k+\zeta}\to E^{\pi^*\zeta+\nu_j}.$$
This is the umkehr map associated to $\pi$, twisted by $\zeta$ (also known as the transfer map of Boardman \cite{Boardmanthesis}.) Similarly, the inclusion of bundles $\nu_j\to j^*(\R^k\times B)$ allows us to consider the composition
$$\Sigma^k B^\zeta=B^{\R^k+\zeta}\to E^{\pi^*\zeta+\nu_j}\to E^{j^*(B\times\R^k)+\pi^*\zeta}=\Sigma^k E^{\pi^*\zeta}$$
which agrees with the twisted Becker-Gottlieb transfer $B^\zeta\to E^{\pi^*\zeta}$; this latter being a mere generalisation of the first
factorisation which follows from the construction (see also Section \ref{BGconstruction}). We record this for future reference.
\begin{prop}\label{BGfactorisation}
Suppose $\pi:E\to B$ is a fibre bundle whose fibre $F$ is a compact closed manifold, where $B$
is a space that admits a filtration by compact closed manifolds. Moreover, suppose $\zeta\to B$ is a (virtual) vector bundle. Then the (twisted) Becker-Gottlieb transfer $t_\pi^\zeta$ factors through a suitable umkehr map.
\end{prop}
As an immediate application, the above formula allows to relate cohomology of transfer maps to the well known Gysin homomorhpism (also known as the integration along fibers). Assuming that $F$ is $n$-dimensional,
$\nu_j$ is
$(k-n)$-dimensional.
If $\pi$ is $R$-orientable for a ring spectrum $R$, that is, if the fibre-wise tangent bundle $T_\pi E$ is $R$-orientable in the usual sence,
then thanks to the Thom isomorphism $Th:R^*E^{\nu_j}\to R^{*-k+n}E_+$, the umkehr map $t:(B\times\R^k)_+=B^{\R^k}\to E^{\nu_j}$ induces in cohomology a homomorphism known as the Gysin homomorphism which
we denote by $\pi_!$ given by the composition
$$\pi_!= Th\circ R^{*}(t):R^{*-k+n}E_+\to R^{*+k}B_+$$
(see also \cite[Section 4]{ABG}). Let $e:=e(T_\pi E)\in R^nE_+$ be the Euler class of $T_\pi E$. We then have the following.
\begin{thm}\label{pushforward}
\cite[Theorem 4.3]{BG}
\begin{enumerate}
\item
For the Becker-Gottlieb transfer $t_\pi$ we have $t_\pi^*(x)=\pi_!(x\cup e)$.
\item Suppose $\zeta\to B$ is a vector bundle for which Thom isomorphism in $R$-homology holds. Then, for the twisted
Becker-Gottlieb transfer $t_\pi^\zeta:B^\zeta\to E^{\pi^*\zeta}$ we have
$$t_\pi^\zeta(x)=\pi_!^\zeta(x\cup e^\zeta)$$
{where $\pi^\zeta_!= Th^\zeta\circ R^{*}(t^\zeta):R^{*-k+n}E^{\pi^*\zeta}\to R^{*+k}B^\zeta$ is the twisted Gysin
homomorphism. Here, $Th^\zeta:R^*E^{\nu_j+\pi^*\zeta}\to R^{*-k+n}E^{\pi^*\zeta}$ is the twisted Thom isomorphism, and
$e^\zeta\in R^{n+\dim\zeta}E^{\pi^*\zeta}$ is the image of the Euler class under the Thom isomorphism $R^nE_+\to
R^{n+\dim\zeta}E^\zeta$.}\end{enumerate}
\end{thm}
{Part (ii) of the above theorem, like part (i), follows from the above decomposition of the twisted Becker-Gottlieb transfer $t_\pi^\zeta$ through the umkehr map $t^\zeta$ together with an application of the Thom isomorphism, which we refer to the reader to fill in the details in the same manner as \cite{BG} (by twisting when necessary). Note that choosing $\zeta=0$ yields part (i).}
{Finally, }suppose $\xi\to E$ and $\zeta\to B$ are (virtual) {vector} bundles together with a choice of a
(relative) trivialisation/framing $\phi:\xi+\R^k\cong\pi^*\zeta+\nu_j$, then appealing to $\phi$ the above twisted umkehr map provides
us with a (stable) map
$$t:B^\zeta\lra E^\xi$$
referred to as the transfer map associated to the data $(\xi,\zeta,\pi,\phi)$ \cite[(1.5)]{Milequi}, \cite[(2.1)]{Mil2}.
{
\begin{rem}\label{BGinfinitecomplex1}
Let's conclude by noting that the compactness assumption above allows to choose $k<+\infty$ and in fact obtain an unstable map
whose stable homotopy class depends on $\pi$ and the twisting bundle $\zeta$. In general, if $E$ and $B$ admit a filtration by finite
subcomplexes or compact submanifolds then inductively by restricting to each filtration, one obtains a collection of maps which
determine a map of Thom spectra whose stable homotopy class depends on $\pi$ and the twisting bundle $\zeta$.
\end{rem}}
\subsection{Transfer for Lie groups}
We are interested in the cases that our fibrations arise from Lie groups. {For a compact Lie group} $G$ and $K$ a closed subgroup, we have a fibre bundle
$$G/K\lra BK\lra BG.$$
{The classifying spaces $BK$ and $BG$ are not finite dimensional, but admit filtration by finite compact submanifolds.
By the discussion in Subsection \ref{BGtransfer} we may speak of the associated Becker-Gottlieb transfer map $BG_+\to BK_+$
which enjoys main properties of transfer such as \cite[Theorem 5.5]{BG} which shows that if $\chi (G/K)$ is not divisible by $p$, then
$BG_+$ stably spits off $BK_+$ (or splits when localised at $p$)}. Such phenomenon is well known, and in the case where $G$ is
finite, has been used extensively to study the stable homotopy type of the classifying space $BG$ (e.\,g.\,\cite{SplitLecture}). The
case when $G$ is not finite, is also well-known, and for example, it has been shown \cite[Lemma 1]{Yan} that $BSO(2n+1)_+$ splits
off $BO(2n)_+$ (this splitting occurs without localisation) and $BSU(n+1)_+$ splits off $BU(n)_+$ unless $p$ divides $n$.
\subsubsection{Becker-Schultz-Mann-Miller-Miller transfer}
Suppose $G$ is a compact Lie group, $M$ a smooth compact manifold on which $G$ acts freely. Consider
$\mathfrak{g}$, the Lie algebra of $G$, with an action of $G$ through the adjoint representation. Let
$\mu_G=M\times_G\mathfrak{g}\to M/G$ be the adjoint bundle associated to the fibre bundle $M\to M/G$; if $M$
is contractible with a free $G$-action, i.e. $M=EG$, we write $\ad_G=\mu_G$. By compactness of $M$, we may
assume that $M$ has a Riemannian metric. Note that $G$ acts on the tangent bundle $TM$. By the existence of
Riemannian metric on $M$, it appears that there is a decomposition \cite[(3.1)]{BeckerSchultz1}, \cite[Lemma 2.1]{Milequi}
$$TM/G\cong \mu_G+T(M/G).$$
Now, suppose $K<G$ is a closed subgroup and consider the fibre bundle $\pi:M/K\to M/G$. By the umkehr map
construction, for some embedding $j:M/K\to\R^k\times M/G$, and a (virtual) vector bundle $\zeta\to M/G$, we
have a transfer map
$$(M/G)^{\R^k+\zeta}\lra (M/K)^{\nu_j+\pi^*\zeta}.$$
Note that $T(M/K)+\nu_j=\pi^*T(M/G\times\R^k)=\pi^*(T(M/G)+\R^k)$. Now, by plugging in the above
decomposition for $TM/G$ as well as $TM/K$, this yields
$$\pi^*\mu_G+\nu_j=\mu_K+\R^k,$$
that is a relative framing. Hence, replacing $\zeta$ with $\mu_G+\alpha$ for {an} arbitrary virtual bundle
$\alpha\to M/G$, together with the above relative framing, we obtain a transfer map
$$(M/G)^{\mu_G+\alpha}\lra (M/K)^{\mu_K+\pi^*\alpha}$$
as in \cite[(3.7)]{BeckerSchultz1}, \cite[Section 2]{Milequi} which we call Becker-Schultz-Mann-Miller-Miller transfer
associated to $\pi$ and twisted with $\alpha$. If we choose $M$ to be a contractible space with a $G$ action, then
by approximating $M$ with compact submanifolds, as discussed in Remark \ref{BGinfinitecomplex1} {and Remark \ref{BGinfinitecomplex}}, we may
consider a transfer map
$$BG^{\ad_G+\alpha}\lra BK^{\ad_K+\alpha|_K}$$
where $\alpha|_K=\pi^*\alpha$, the restriction of $\alpha$ over $BK$, is the pull-back of $\alpha$ by the obvious
map $\pi:BK\lra BG$.
We note that if $\alpha$ corresponds to a representation $\phi $ of $G$, then $\alpha|_K$ corresponds to the restriction $\phi|_K$, and
that the adjoint bundle corresponds to the adjoint representation.
We notes that for a fibre bundle $E\to B$ and some twisting bundle $\alpha\to B$ the twisted Becker-Gottlieb transfer, admits a
factorisation through a suitable umkehr map. This is also the case when we work with compact Lie groups; the Becker-Gottlieb transfer
admits a factorisation through Becker-Schultz-Mann-Miller-Miller transfer. The following has to be well known, but we don't know of any
published account.
\begin{prop}\label{transferfactor}
Suppose $G$ and $K$ are as above. Then, choosing $\alpha=-\ad_G$, the Becker-Gottlieb transfer $BG_+\to BK_+$ admits a factorisation throughout the Becker-Schultz-Mann-Miller-Miller transfer as
$$BG_+\lra BK^{\ad_K-\ad_G|_K}\to BK_+.$$
Similarly, for arbitrary $\alpha\to BG$, the twisted Becker-Gottlieb admits a factorisation as
$$BG^{\alpha}\to BK^{\ad_K-\ad_G|_K+\alpha|_K}\lra BK^{\alpha|_K}.$$
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
First, note that for $K<G$, $\pi:BK\to BG$, and $\alpha\to BG$, the twisted Becker-Gottlieb transfer $t_\pi^\alpha:BG^\alpha\to
BK^{\pi^*\alpha}$, agrees with the Becker-Gottlieb transfer if we choose $\alpha=0$, i.e. choose $\alpha$ to be some trivial bundle.
Second, recall that the twisted Becker-Gottlieb transfer admits a factorisation as
$$\Sigma^k B^\zeta=B^{\R^k+\zeta}\to E^{\pi^*\zeta+\nu_j}\to E^{\R^k+\pi^*\zeta}=\Sigma^k E^{\pi^*\zeta}$$
for any fibre bundle $\pi:E\to B$ over some $B$ admitting a filtration by compact subspaces, where $\zeta\to B$ is some virtual bundle. Hence, in this case, we have a factorisation
$$\Sigma^k BG^\zeta=BG^{\R^k+\zeta}\to BK^{\pi^*\zeta+\nu_j}\to BK^{\R^k+\pi^*\zeta}=\Sigma^k BK^{\pi^*\zeta}.$$
If we choose $\zeta=\ad_G+\alpha$, then together with a relative framing $\ad_K+\R^k\cong\nu_j+\pi^*\ad_G$ we obtain a factorisation of the twisted Becker-Gottlieb transfer as
$$BG^{\R^k+\ad_G+\alpha}\to BK^{\R^k+\ad_K+\alpha|_K}\to BK^{\R^k+\ad_G|K+\alpha|_K}$$
which upon choosing $\alpha=-\ad_G$ yields the first factorisation. For the the second factorisation, it follows if we simply replace $\alpha$ by $-\ad_G+\alpha$.
\end{proof}
The above proposition, has the following immediate corollary.
\begin{prop}\label{transfersplit}
Let $G$ be a compact Lie group, $K$ its closed subgroup, such that $\chi (G/K)$ is not divisible by $p$. Then, localised at the prime $p$,
$BG_+$ splits off $BK^{(\ad_K-\ad_G|_K)}$.
\end{prop}
\subsection{Cofibre of transfer maps}
Suppose we have a fibration $F\to E\to B$ such that the associated Becker-Gottlieb transfer $t:B_+\to
E_+$ provides a ($p$-local) splitting of $B_+$ off $E_+$. Then, the cofibre of the transfer map is the other stable piece in $E_+$
(which itself may split into smaller pieces), i.e. writing $C_t$ for the cofibre of $t$ there is a homotopy equivalence $E_+\to B_+\vee
C_t$. Similar statement holds, if we replace the Becker-Gottlieb transfer with a twisted Mann-Miller-Miller transfer. In some cases, there
are tools to identify this cofibre, and the one we are interested in is cofibration sequence of Thom spectra due to Morisugi which we describe next.
Let $K,G,\alpha$ be as above, and consider the Mann-Miller-Miller transfer $t_K^G:BG^{\ad_G+ \alpha}\lra BK^{\ad_K+ \alpha|_K}$.
{
\begin{thm}\label{Mori}
(\cite[Theorem 1.3]{Morisugi}) Suppose $G/K=S(U)$ as $G$-spaces for some $G$-representation $U$, where $S(U)$ is the sphere in $U$ with a certain metric. Let $\lambda= EG\times_G U\to BG$. Then, there exists a cofibration of spectra as
$$BG^{\ad_G+\alpha-\lambda}\lra BG^{\ad_G+\alpha}\stackrel{t_K^G}{\lra}BK^{\ad_K+\alpha|_K}\lra BG^{\ad_G+\alpha-\lambda+\R}$$
\end{thm}
Let's note that Morisugi's theorem considers a more general case, by taking $E/G$ instead of $BG$ with $E$ being any principal $G$-manifold without boundary, i.e. with a free $G$-action. Taking $E$ to be contractible, then his theorem reads as above. The following lemma provides an application of the above theorem.}
\begin{lmm}\label{cofibreoftransfer}
Let ${\mathbf G}=O,SO,Spin,U,SU$, or $Sp$. Then there is a cofibration sequence of spectra
$$MT{\mathbf G}(n+1)\stackrel{\omega}{\lra} B{\mathbf G}(n+1)_+
\stackrel{t}{\lra} \Sigma^{1-d}MT{\mathbf G}(n)\stackrel{j}{\lra} \Sigma MT{\mathbf G}(n+1)$$
where $d=1$ if ${\mathbf G}=O,SO$ or $Spin$, $d=2$ if ${\mathbf G}=U$ or $SU$, and $d=4$ if ${\mathbf G}=Sp$.
\end{lmm}
\begin{proof}
{We do the case ${\mathbf G}=O,U$ and the other ones are similar. First, consider usual embedding of $K=O(n)<{ G}=O(n+1)$ with
$G/K=S^n=S(\R^{n+1})$ as $G$-spaces. This shows that $\lambda=\gamma_{n+1}^\R$. Choose $\alpha=-\ad_G$ as the twisting
bundle and note that $\ad_G|_K=\ad_K+\gamma_n$. Then result then follows from Morisugi's cofibration.\\
Second, consider the usual embedding of $K=U(n)<{\mathbf G}=U(n+1)$ with $G/K=S^{2n+1}=S(\C^{n+1})$ as $U(n+1)$-space which yields $\lambda=\gamma_{n+1}^\C$. Choose $\alpha=-\ad_G=-\ad_{U(n+1)}$ and note that $\ad_G|_K=\ad_K+\gamma_n^\C+\R^2$. This, then gives the desired cofibre sequence as
$$MTU(n+1)\lra BU(n+1)_+\lra \Sigma^{-1}MTU(n)\lra\Sigma MTU(n+1).$$
}
We note that when ${\mathbf G}=SO,Spin$ or $SU$ and $n=0$, our definition of $B{\mathbf G}(0)$ makes the sequence
$S^d\rightarrow B{\mathbf G}(n)\rightarrow B{\mathbf G}(n+1)$ a fibration. Thus we can modify the proof of \cite[Theorem 1.3]{Morisugi}
to fit our case.
\end{proof}
\begin{rem}
{We note that the cofibre sequences for the cases ${\mathbf G}=O$ and $SO$ in the above theorem coincides with the cofbre sequences of
\cite[Proposition 3.1]{GMTW}. Also, the cofibre sequence in the case ${\mathbf G}=Spin$ and $n=1$ of the above theorem, gives rise to the fibration of infinite loop spaces as in \cite[(1.3)]{Gspin}.
To verify these claims, let's note that the cofibrations of \cite{GMTW} as well as Morisugi's cofibration, are obtained by appealing to
James' cofibration. Recall that, for a vector bundle $p:V\to B$ and a (virtual) vector bundle $W\to B$ over a finite complex $B$, there is
a cofibre sequence of spectra, due to James, as
$$S(V)^{p^*W}\lra B^W\lra B^{V+W}\lra \Sigma S(V)^{p^*W}$$
where $S(V)\to B$ is the sphere bundle of $V$. Here, the map $B^W\to B^{V+W}$ is just a usual section induced by the embedding
$V\to V+W$. Hence, it is standard to see that, the map $MTO(n)\to BO(n)_+$ in \cite[Proposition 3.1]{GMTW} and
$BG^{\ad_G+\alpha-\lambda}\to BG^{\ad_G+\alpha}$ in \cite[Theorem 1.3]{Morisugi} are both Thomification of a usual section. If,
as the above theorem, we have ${\mathbf G}=O(n)$, $\alpha=-\ad_G$, and $\lambda=-\gamma_n^\R$, then Morisugi's map is
precisely the zero section considered by Galatius, Madsen, Tillmann and Weiss in \cite{GMTW}. It it then easy application of five lemma
that the two cofibre sequences are isomorphic. Other case, follow by similar considerations.}
\end{rem}
As a non-example, where Morisugi's result does not apply, at least integrally, consider embedding of $K=O(n)$ in ${\mathbf
G}=SO(n+1)$ by $X\mapsto (\det X)(X\oplus 1)$. We have $G/K=\R P^n$ which cannot be identified as a sphere in some vector space
as $\pi_1\R P^n\simeq\Z/2$.
\subsection{Cohomology of Madsen-Tillmann spectra}
Let ${\mathbf G}=SU,U$ or $Sp$ and $k$ be an arbitrary {field}, or ${\mathbf G}=O$ and $k$ a field of characteristic $2$, and
$d$ be as in Lemma \ref{cofibreoftransfer}. Then we have the following.
\begin{lmm}\label{cohomologymt}
The cofibration $\Sigma ^{-d}MT{\mathbf G}(n-1)\rightarrow MT{\mathbf G}(n)\rightarrow \Sigma ^{\infty} B{\mathbf G}(n)_+$ gives rise to a short exact sequence in cohomology
$$H^*(\Sigma ^{\infty} B{\mathbf G}(n)_+;k)\rightarrow H^*(MT{\mathbf G}(n);k)\rightarrow H^*(\Sigma ^{-d}MT{\mathbf G}(n-1);k),$$
and dually to a short exact sequence in homology
$$H_*(\Sigma ^{-d}MT{\mathbf G}(n-1);k)\rightarrow H_*(MT{\mathbf G}(n);k)\rightarrow H_*(\Sigma ^{\infty}B{\mathbf G}(n)_+;k).$$
Therefore, as graded $k$-vector spaces, we have isomorphisms
$$H_*(MT{\mathbf G}(n);k)\cong \oplus _{j=0}^n \Sigma ^{-dj}H_*(B{\mathbf G}(j);k),H^*(MT{\mathbf G}(n);k)\cong \oplus _{j=0}^n \Sigma ^{-dj}H^*(B{\mathbf G}(j);k).$$
\end{lmm}
\begin{proof}
We have $H^*(B{\mathbf G}(n);k)\cong k[z_i,\cdots ,z_n]$ where $i=2$ if ${\mathbf G}=SU$ and $i=1$ otherwise, with
degree of polynomial generators $z_m$ beign equal to $dm$.
By the Thom isomorphism, we have
$H^*(MT{\mathbf G}(n);k)\cong z_n^{-1}k[z_1,\cdots ,z_n].$ Here the notation means the free $k[z_1,\cdots ,z_n]$ module
generated by one element $z_n^{-1}$, and we can consider that this is included in an appropriate localisation ring of
$H^*(B{\mathbf G}(n); k)$. Similarly we have $H^*(MT{\mathbf G}(n-1);k)\cong z_{n-1}^{-1}k[z_1,\cdots ,z_{n-1}].$ Since the canonical
representation $\gamma _n$ of ${\mathbf G}(n)$ pulls back to $\gamma _{n-1}\oplus \R$ over ${\mathbf G}(n-1)$, the map
$ H^*(MT{\mathbf G}(n);k)\rightarrow H^*(\Sigma ^{-1}MT{\mathbf G}(n-1);k)$ is given by $z_n^{-1}f(z_1\cdots z_{n-1},z_n)\rightarrow
\sigma ^{-1}z_{n-1}^{-1}f(z_1\cdots z_{n-1},0)$ where $\sigma $ denotes the suspension isomorphism, which is surjective,
and the kernel is clearly isomorphic to $k[z_1,\cdots ,z_n]$ which is isomorphic to $H^*(B{\mathbf G}(n);k)$. Thus we have the exactness
in the cohomology, and by dualising we get the result in homology. The last statement follows by induction on $n$.
\end{proof}
\section{{Proof of main results}}\label{transfersplitsection}
This section is devoted to the proof of Theorem \ref{thsplitmain}. The proof is an application of Proposition \ref{transfersplit}; in the
case of existence of split cofibrations the proof is complete once we identify the cofibre of the appropriate transfer map which was
carried out in Lemma \ref{cofibreoftransfer}.
First, note that through the usual embeddings $O(2n)\to O(2n+1)$ and $SO(2n)\to SO(2n+1)$ we have diffeomorphisms
$O(2n+1)/O(2n)\cong SO(2n+1)/SO(2n)\cong S^{2n}$. Moreover, by passing to the $\Z/2$-central extension, we see
that $Spin(2n+1)/Spin(2n)\cong S^{2n}$. Since $\chi(S^{2n})=2$, then by Proposition \ref{transfersplit} the transfer map $BG_+\to
BK^{(\ad_K-\ad_G|_K)}$ is split, localised at an odd prime. We have identified the cofibre of this transfer in Lemma
\ref{cofibreoftransfer}. This proves Theorem \ref{thsplitmainoddp} except for the last statement, which will be proved in the
next section. {Alternatively, this can be shown using Example \ref{splitMGtwisted}.}
Now, consider the embeddings $j:O(2n)\lra SO(2n+1)$ defined by $j(X)=(\det X)(X\oplus 1)$. One sees that the fibre of $Bj$ is
$SO(2n+1)/O(2n)\cong \R P^{2n}$ with $\chi (\R P^{2n})=1$ (with any coefficient). Furthermore,
we have
$$
\left(
\begin{array}{rr}
X & \\
& W
\end{array}
\right)
\left(
\begin{array}{rr}
A & B \\
B^{\ast } & D
\end{array}
\right)
\left(
\begin{array}{rr}
X ^{-1}& \\
& W^{-1}
\end{array}
\right)=
\left(
\begin{array}{rr}
XAX^{-1}
& W^{-1}XB \\
(W^{-1}XB)^{\ast } & D
\end{array}
\right) ,$$
where $X, A$ are $m\times m$ matrices and $W,D$ are $1\times 1$ matrices.
Replacing $X$ and $W$ with $det(X)\cdot X$ and $det(X)$ respectively, we see that
$$j^*ad_{SO(2n+1)}=ad_{O(2n)}\oplus \gamma _{2n}.$$ Thus one can apply Proposition
\ref{transfersplit} to the pair $(G,K)=(SO(2n+1),O(2n))$ considering $O(2n)$ as a subgroup of
$SO(2n+1)$ via $j$. This proves the first case of Theorem \ref{thsplitmainallp}.
To prove the other cases, we will need
\begin{lmm}\label{swpullback}
Let $j:O(2n)\rightarrow SO(2n+1)$ be as above. Then we have
$$Bj^*(w_2)=w_2+nw_1^2$$
in mod 2 cohomology.
\end{lmm}
\begin{proof}
{Consider} the following {commutative} diagram
where all unnamed arrows are the obvious inclusions, and $\varphi$ is given by $\phi (a_1,\ldots ,a_n)=(aa_1,\ldots ,aa_n, a)$ with $a=\Pi _{i=1}^na_i$.
$$
\begin{diagram}
\node{O(1)^{2n}}\arrow{s}\arrow[2]{e,t}{\varphi}\node[2]{O(1)^{2n+1}}\arrow{s}\\
\node{O(2n)}\arrow{e,t}{j}\node{SO(2n+1)}\arrow{e}\node{O(2n+1)}
\end{diagram}
$$
Thus to determine $Bj^*(w_2)$, it suffices to compute $B\varphi ^*(\sigma _2(t_1,\ldots ,t_{2n+1}))$ by Theorems \ref{cohoclassic}
and \ref{cohoclassicdetect}. However, we have
$$
\begin{array}{lll}
B\varphi ^*(\sigma _2(t_1,\ldots ,t_{2n+1}))& = & B\varphi ^*(\sigma _2(t_1,\ldots ,t_{2n})+t_{2n+1}\Sigma _{i=1}^{2n}t_i)\\
& =&\sigma _2(B\varphi ^*(t_1),\ldots ,B\varphi ^*(t_{2n}))+B\varphi ^*(t_{2n+1})\Sigma _{i=1}^{2n}(B\varphi ^*(t_i)) \\
& = & \sigma _2 ( t +t_1, \ldots , t+t_{2n})+ t \cdot \Sigma _{i=1}^{2n}(t+t_i)\\
&=& \Sigma _{1\leq i<k\leq 2n}(t^2+(t_i+t_k)+t_it_k) + (2n+1)t^2 \\
& = & n(2n-1)t^2+ t\Sigma _{1\leq i<k\leq 2n}(t_i+t_k) +\sigma _2(t_1,\ldots ,t_{2n})+ t^2\\
& = & n(2n-1)t^2+ t\cdot (2n-1)t +\sigma _2(t_1,\ldots ,t_{2n})+t^2\\
& = & nt^2 +\sigma _2(t_1,\ldots ,t_{2n}) \\
& = & n\sigma _1(t_1,\ldots ,t_{2n})^2+\sigma _2(t_1,\ldots ,t_{2n})
\end{array}
$$
as required, where we denoted $t=\Sigma _{i=1}^{2n}t_i =\sigma _1(t_1,\ldots ,t_{2n})$.
\end{proof}
Now Corollary \ref{pullbackext} implies that $j$ induces a map of double covers
$Pin^{\pm}(2n)\rightarrow Spin (2n+1)$, where the sign $\pm$ is $+$ if $n$ is even, $-$ if $n$ is odd.
Thus with the choice of appropriate sign, we get the following commutative square
$$\begin{diagram}
\node{Pin^{\pm}(2n)}\arrow{e,t}{\tilde{j}}\arrow{s} \node{Spin(2n+1)}\arrow{s}\\
\node{O(2n)}\arrow{e,t}{j}\node{SO(2n+1)}
\end{diagram}
$$
where the vertical arrows are the canonical projection. Thus we get a diffeomorphism
$$Spin(2n+1)/\tilde{j}(Pin^{\pm}(2n))\cong SO(2n+1)/j(O(2n))\cong \R P^{2n+1}$$
where the sign is $+$ if $n$ is even, $-$ if $n$ is odd. On the other hand, by definition
the canonical representations of $Pin^{\pm}(2n)$ and $Spin(2n+1)$ are the pull-back
of the canonical representations of $O(2n)$ and $SO(2n+1)$ by the canonical projection.
Furthermore, the adjoint representations of $Pin^{\pm}(2n)$ and $Spin(2n+1)$ are the pull-back
of the adjoint representations of $O(2n)$ and $SO(2n+1)$ by the canonical projection, since
the kernel of the canonical projection is the center. Thus we can apply Proposition
\ref{transfersplit} to prove the cases ii) and iii) of Theorem \ref{thsplitmainallp}.
Finally, consider the embedding $U(n)\lra SU(n+1)$, defined by
$X\mapsto X\oplus (\det X)^{-1}$. The fibre of the map of classifying spaces $BU(n)\lra BSU(n+1)$ is given by
the diffeomorphism and $SU(n+1)/U(n)\cong \C P^n$. As in the above,
$$
\left(
\begin{array}{rr}
X & \\
& W
\end{array}
\right)
\left(
\begin{array}{rr}
A & B \\
B^{\ast } & D
\end{array}
\right)
\left(
\begin{array}{rr}
X ^{-1}& \\
& W^{-1}
\end{array}
\right)=
\left(
\begin{array}{rr}
XAX^{-1}
& W^{-1}XB \\
(W^{-1}XB)^{\ast } & D
\end{array}
\right) ,$$
where $X, A$ are $m\times m$ matrices and $W,D$ are $1\times 1$ matrices. By setting $W=det(X)^{-1}$ we see that the
representation $\ad_G|_K-\ad_K$ is isomorphic to the tensor product (over $\C$) of the canonical representation with the
the determinant representation. The following lemma completes {the identification of $\ad_G|_K-\ad_K$ in this case and hence}
completes the proof of Theorem \ref{thsplitmainusu}
\begin{lmm}
Let $p\nmid n+1$. Then the homomorphism $\varphi: A\mapsto \det (A)^{-1}A$ induces a self homotopy equivalence of $BU(n)$.
\end{lmm}
\begin{proof}
It suffices to show that it induces an automorphism on $H^*(BU(n);\Z/p)$, as $BU(n)$ is of finite type. Consider the following commutative diagram
$$
\begin{diagram}
\node{U(1)^n} \arrow{s} \arrow{e,t}{\overline{\varphi}} \node{U(1)^n} \arrow{s} \\
\node{U(n)}\arrow{e,t}{\varphi} \node{U(n)}
\end{diagram}
$$
where the vertical arrows are the inclusions of the diagonal matrices with entries in $U(1)$, $\overline{\varphi}$
is given by $$\overline{\varphi}(e^{i\theta _1},\cdots ,e^{i\theta _n})=(e^{i(\theta _1+\theta)},\cdots
e^{i(\theta _n+\theta)})\mbox{ where }\theta =\theta _1+\cdots +\theta _n.$$
Now we see that $H^*(B\overline{\varphi})$ on $H^*(BU(1)^n;\Z/p)\cong \Z _{(p)}[x_1,\cdots ,x_n]$ is given by
$H^*(B\overline{\varphi})(x_i)=x_i+c_1$ with $c_1=x_1+\cdots +x_n$. Thus by restricting to
$H^*(BU(n);\Z _{(p)})\cong \Z _{(p)}[c_1,\cdots ,c_n]$, we see that
$$H^*(B\varphi)(c_1)=(1+n)c_1,H^*(B\varphi)(c_i)\equiv c_i \bmod (c_1)\mbox{ for $i>1$.}$$
Thus $H^*(B\varphi)$ is an automorphism if and only if $p$ doesn't divide $n+1$. Now, we note that the pull-back by $\varphi $ of the canonical representation $\gamma _n$ is just $\det \otimes \gamma _n$, so using the same notation for the bundle and representation, we get a bundle map
$\det \otimes \gamma _n\lra \gamma _n$ over the map $\varphi$, and thus $-\det \otimes \gamma _n\lra -\gamma _n$ as well. Since $\varphi$ is a homotopy equivalence, we see that the map between the Thom spectra $BU(n)^{-\det \otimes \gamma _n}\lra BU(n)^{-\gamma _n}=MTU(n)$
is also a homotopy equivalence.
\end{proof}
{We conclude the section with }the proof of Theorem \ref{splitbyMTW}. First suppose that $M$ is a manifold with reduction of the structure
bundle to $G$. Denote by $TM$ its tangent bundle, $f:M\lra BG$ its classifying map. Thus $f^*(\gamma)=TM$ where $\gamma $ is the
universal vector bundle over $BG$. So, the stable normal bundle $-TM$ is a pull-back of $-\gamma$ by $f$. Thus one can consider the
Thomified map $M^{-TM} \lra MTG$. Now, choose an embedding of the $m$-dimensional manifold
$M$ in an Euclidean space $\R^{m+k}$, say $i:M\lra\R^{m+k}$. Then denoting $\nu_i$ the
normal bundle of the embedding $i$ which we identify with the tubular neighbourhood of $M$ in $\R^{m+k}$,
the Thom-Pontrjagin construction provides a map
$$S^{m+k}\lra M^{\nu_i}=M^{\R^{m+k}-TM}.$$
The Pontrjagin-Thom construction for the composition of the embedding $M\to\R^{m+k}$ with the standard inclusion
$\R^{m+k}\to\R^{m+k+1}$ yields a map $S^{m+k+1}\lra M^{\R^{m+k+1}-TM}$ which is the suspension of the previous map.
We then, by stabilising, obtain a stable map
$$S^0\lra M^{-TM}.$$
The composition $S^0\lra M^{-TM} \lra MTG$ is the Madsen-Tillmann-Weiss map associated to the fibre bundle $M\times pt\lra pt$ with
$TM$ having a $G$-structure.
It is then a consequence of Hopf's vector filed theorem \cite[Theorem 4]{BG} that the composition
$$S^0\lra M^{-TM}\lra MTG\lra BG_+\lra S^0$$
where $MTG\lra BG_+$ is the zero section and $BG_+\lra S^0$ the collapse map, is a map of degree $\chi(M)$.
Therefore, if $\chi (M)$ is not a multiple of $p$, we obtain a splitting of $S^0$ off $MTG$ using the Madsen-Tillmann-Weiss map.
{Noting that $\R P^{2n}$ has the tangent bundle with structure group $O(2n)$, that can be lifted to
$Pin^{\pm}(2n)$ according to the parity of $n$ and $\chi (\R P^{2n})=1$ , we get (i). Noting that
$S^{2n})$ has the tangent bundle with structure group $SO(2n)$ and $\chi (SO(2n))=2$, we get (ii).
Finally, noting that $\R P^n$, $\C P^n$ and $\Hp P^n$ have the tangent bundle with structure group $O(n)$, $U(n)$ and
$Sp(n)$ respectively,and $\chi (\C P^n)=\chi (\Hp P^n)=n+1$, we get the (ii).}
\section{{$MTO(n)$ at odd primes}}
Let $p$ be an odd prime, and let all spectra be localised at $p$. The following might be well-known, but we don't know of any
published account except for the cases of $MTO(1)$ and $MTO(2)$, c.\ f.\ \cite[subsection 5.1]{Ra}, and we record a proof of it.
\begin{lmm}\label{MTO(n)-p-odd}
Localise at $p$, for all $n\geqslant 0$, there are homotopy equivalences
$$MTO(2n)\simeq BO(2n)_+\simeq BSO(2n+1)_+\simeq BSp(n)_+,\ MTO(2n+1)\simeq *.$$
\end{lmm}
The above lemma will complete the proof of Theorem \ref{thsplitmain}.
\begin{proof}
The proof is by strong induction based on the following ingredients: (1) the Becker-Gottlieb transfer map $BO(2n+1)_+\to BO(2n)_+$ is an equivalence localised at $p$, so its homotopy fibre is equivalent to a point; (2) the Becker-Gottlieb transfer $BO(2n+1)_+\to BO(2n)_+$ factors as $BO(2n+1)_+\to MTO(2n)\to BO(2n)_+$ which we discussed in the proof Proposition \ref{transfersplit}. Note that the induction starts since
$$MTO(0)\simeq S^0\simeq BO(0) _+.$$
Suppose now we have $MTO(2n)\simeq BO(2n)_+$ and consider the commutative diagram
$$
\begin{diagram}
\node{MTO(2n+1)} \arrow{s} \arrow{e} \node{BO(2n+1)_+} \arrow{s,t}{}\arrow{e} \node{MTO(2n)}\arrow{s} \\
\node{*} \arrow{e} \node{BO(2n+1)_+} \arrow{e} \node{BO(2n)_+}
\end{diagram}
$$
where rows are cofibrations, and the two downward arrows are equivalences. Since the inclusion $O(2n)\rightarrow
O(2n+1)$ induces $p$-local equivalence $BO(2n)\simeq BO(2n+1)$ by {\cite[Theorem 1.6]{Thomas}}, and the composition
$BO(2n+1)_+\to BO(2n)_+\to BO(2n+1)_+$ is the multiplication by $\chi (S^{2n})=2$, we see that the right horizontal
arrow is a homotopy equivalence. It then follows that the third arrow $MTO(2n+1)\to *$ is also a homotopy equivalence.
Next, the cofibration $MTO(2(n+1))\to BO(2(n+1))_+\to MTO(2n+1)$ together with $MTO(2n+1)\simeq *$ will show that $MTO(2(n+1))\to BO(2(n+1))_+$ is an equivalence at $p$. This finishes the induction.
{The standard maps $BO(2n+1)\to BSO(2n+1)$ and $BSp(n)\to BO(2n)$ are well-known to be $p$-local homotopy equivalences.} This complete the proof.
\end{proof}
\section{Polynomial families in $H^*(\Omega^\infty MT{G};\Z/p)$}\label{sec:pf}
In this section we prove Theorems \ref{charclass1} and \ref{charclass2}.
\begin{proof}[of Theorem \ref{charclass1}]
{ Consider the composition
$$\Omega ^{\infty }MTG \lra QBG_+\stackrel{Qc}{\lra} QS^0 \lra \Z\times BO.$$
We first show that this composition {induces} an injection in
cohomology. By Lemma \ref{QS-BO} the map $H_*(QS^0;\Z/2)\to H_*(\Z\times BO;\Z/2)$ is surjective in homology.
By the hypothesis and Corollary \ref{cor.Szero}
the map
$\Omega ^{\infty }MTG \lra QBG_+\stackrel{Qc}{\lra} QS^0$ splits, so it is also surjective in homology. Thus by composing and
dualizing, we see that $H^*(BO;\Z/2)\cong \Z/2[w_1,\ldots , w_k ,\ldots]$ injects to $H^*(MTG;\Z/2)$. Noting that the image of
$w_k$ is $\xi _k$, we get the desired result.}
\end{proof}
In the special case ${G}=O(2)$, the family discussed above agrees with the one defined in \cite[Section 6]{Ra} up to conjugation, and generates the same subalgebra. Theorem \ref{charclass1} is specialised to the $2$-primary case. However, we have an analogous definition to Randal-Williams' definition for odd prime which we have stated as Theorem \ref{charclass2}. Below we sketch its proof.
\begin{proof}[of Theorem \ref{charclass2}] Note that the unit map of $KU$ localised at $p$ factors through $j_E$, as
for degree reasons, $\pi _0(\Sigma ^{2i}E(1))=0$ if $0\leq i\leq p-2$. Thus the result follows by Lemma \ref{cohe1}, Proposition
\ref{splitkono} and Corollary \ref{cor.Szero} as in the proof of Theorem \ref{charclass1}.
\end{proof}
\section{The universally defined characteristic classes { in modulo $p$ cohomology}}\label{sec:ucc}
In this section we discuss how our splitting results can be used to analyze the universally defined characteristic classes
{in modulo $p$ cohomology}. We
will restrict ourselves to the case of $H^*(\Omega ^{\infty}_0 MTO({m});\Z/2)$ for the sake of concreteness.
Dualizing Lemma \ref{suspensiononto0}, $\sigma ^{\infty *}:H^*(BSO({m}+1) ;\Z/2)\lra H^*(Q_0BSO({m}+1)_+ ;\Z/2)
$ is injective, and by Corollary \ref{infsplit}, $ H^*(Q_0BSO({m}+1)_+ ;\Z/2) \lra H^*(\Omega ^{\infty }_0MTO({m}) ;\Z/2)$ is injective.
Thus the composition $H^*(BSO({m}+1) ;\Z/2)\lra H^*(\Omega ^{\infty }_0MTO({m}) ;\Z/2)$ is injective. Of course, it is not a ring map
as $\sigma ^{\infty *}$ is not, its natural
right inverse is. Thus the universally defined characteristic classes that are images of the standard polynomial generators of
$H^*(BSO({m}+1) ;\Z/2)$ are algebraically independent. But of course the standard polynomial generators of $H^*(BSO({m}+1)
;\Z/2)$ do not map to polynomial generators of $H^*(BO({m}) ;\Z/2)$, which makes things a little bit complicated.
For example, let's take the case of $\Omega ^{\infty}_0MTO(2)$, $p=2$. Then we have
$H^*(BSO(3) ;\Z/2)\cong \Z/2[w_2,w_3]$, $H^*(BO(2) ;\Z/2)\cong \Z/2[w_1,w_2]$, and the map $BO(2)\lra BSO(3)$
induces a map $w_2\mapsto w_2+w_1^2$ by Lemma \ref{swpullback}, and by similar arguments we get $w_3\mapsto w_1w_2$. One
can derive from this the classes $\mu _{1,1}$ and $\mu _{0,1}+ \mu _{1,0}^2$ as defined in \cite{Ra} are algebraically
independent. So far, we haven't done a detailed analysis of the homology
suspension map. We will examine the homology suspension more carefully to prove Theorem \ref{univ}.
\begin{proof}[ of Theorem \ref{univ}]
By naturality of the suspension map, the composition $H^*(BSO({m}+1);\Z/2)\to H^*(BO({m});\Z/2)\to H^*(Q_0 BO({m});\Z/2)$
factors through $H^*(Q_0BSO({m}+1);\Z/2)$. As $H^*(Q_0BSO({m}+1);\Z/2)$ splits off $H^*(\Omega ^{\infty}_0MTO({m});\Z/2),$
it suffices to show the corresponding results, with $\nu _{{i_2},\ldots i_{m+1}}$ replaced with
$\sigma ^{\infty *}(w_2^{i_2}\cdots w_{m+1}^{i_{m+1}})$ in $H^*(Q_0BSO({m}+1);\Z/2)$. Now, let $X$ be any space. The map
$H^*(X;\Z/2)\to H^*(Q_0X;\Z/2)$ commutes with squaring, and the map $H^*(Q_0X;\Z/2)\to H^*(X;\Z/2)$ commutes with any
product, {\it a fortiori} squaring, and the composition $H^*(X;\Z/2)\to H^*(Q_0X;\Z/2)\to H^*(X;\Z/2)$ is the identity. Therefore
an element of $H^*(X;\Z/2)$ is a square if and only if its image in $H^*(Q_0X;\Z/2)$ is a square. Furthermore,
the map $H^*(X;\Z/2)\to H^*(Q_0X;\Z/2)$ factors through $PH^*(Q_0X;\Z/2)$, and by \cite[Proposition 4.21]{MM}, the only elements in the kernel of the map $PH^*(Q_0X;\Z/2)\to QH^*(Q_0X;\Z/2)$ are squares. Thus the kernel of the map
$Sym(H^*(X;\Z/2))\to H^*(Q_0X;\Z/2)$ extending the map $H^*(X;\Z/2)\to H^*(Q_0X;\Z/2)$ is the ideal generated by the elements
$[x^2]-[x]^2$ where $x\in H^*(X;\Z/2)$, $[x]$ is the corresponding element in $Sym(H^*(X;\Z/2))$.
Combining these with the fact that $H^*(BSO({m}+1);\Z /2)$ is polynomial, and so is $H^*(Q_0BSO({m}+1);\Z /2)$, we get the desired result.
\end{proof}
\begin{rem}
{\begin{enumerate}
\item It is easy to see that once we express $\nu $'s in terms of $\mu $'s, the relations
$\nu _{{i_2},\cdots ,i_{m+1}}^2=\nu _{2{i_2},\cdots ,2i_{m+1}}$ follow from the ones $\mu _{{i_2},\cdots ,i_{m+1}}^2=\mu _{2{i_2},\cdots ,2i_{m+1}}$,
and the latter relations were essentially found in \cite{Ra}.
\item The arguments above also apply to other pairs $G,K$ and at any prime, as long as $H^*(BK;\Z /p)$ is polynomial.
The proof is completely similar at prime 2, and at odd primes, we just have to remark that we only have to work with the subalgebras
of $H^*(QBK_+;\Z/p)$ generated by the elements dual to that of $H^*(BK;\Z/p)$, which is polynomial by \cite[Theorem 3.11]{W}.
\end{enumerate}
}
\end{rem}
\begin{exm}
Let's consider the case $n=1$. As the map induced by $BO(2)\rightarrow BSO(3)$ in cohomology is a ring homomorphism,
we have $(w_2)^i\mapsto (w_2+w_1^2)^i$, $w_3^j\mapsto
w_1^jw_2^j$. Thus in low degrees, we have following
algebraically independent elements in degrees less than or equal to 9.
\begin{displaymath}
\begin{array}{|r|l|l|}\hline
degree & \mbox{elements in terms of $\nu$ }& \mbox{elements in terms of $\mu$}\\ \hline
2 & \nu _{1,0} & \mu _{0,1}+\mu _{1,0}^2 \\ \hline
3 & \nu _{0,1}&\mu _{1,1} \\ \hline
4 & N.A. & N.A. \\ \hline
5 & \nu _{1,1} &\mu _{1,2}+\mu _{3,1} \\ \hline
6 & \nu _{3,0} &\mu _{0,3}+\mu _{1,1}^2+\mu _{4,1}+\mu _{3,0}^2 \\ \hline
7 & \nu _{1,2}& \mu _{2,3}+\mu _{2,1}^2 \\ \hline
8 & \nu _{2,1} & \mu _{2,3}+\mu _{2,1}^2 \\ \hline
9 &\nu _{3,1},\ \nu _{0,3} &\mu _{1,4}+\mu _{3,3}+\mu _{5,2} +\mu _{7,1},\ \mu _{3,3}\ (resp.) \\ \hline
\end{array}
\end{displaymath}
\end{exm}
\section{Cohomology with integer coefficients}
In this section, we discuss the impication of our splitting theorems to the cohomology of $MTK$ spectra with $p$-local integer coefficients.
Let $(K,G)$ be a pair satisfying hypotheses of Theorems \ref{thsplitmainallp}, \ref{thsplitmainoddp} or \ref{thsplitmainusu}, and
choose $p$ accordingly. Then $p$-locally $BG_+$ splits off $MTK$, therefore $H^*(QBG_+;\Z_{(p)})$ is a direct summand
of $H^*(\Omega ^{\infty }MTK;\Z_{(p)})$. Since $H^*(QBG_+;\Z_{(p)})$ can be described completely in terms of
$H^*(BG_+;\Z_{(p)})$, which is completely known in all cases ($H^*(BSpin(n);\Z)$ which we didn't discuss in
Section \ref{sec:rec} is known by \cite{KSpin}) {we have a complete knowledge of this summand}. Unfortunately because of the presence of torsion, we don't have K\"{u}nneth isomorphism,
$H^*(QBG_+;\Z_{(p)})$ as well as $H^*(\Omega ^{\infty }MTK;\Z_{(p)})$ only have the structure of algebras, and not coalgebras,
which makes it rather difficult to work with them concretely. However, we still can get some information on them. For example, it
follows immediately from \cite[Theorem 4.13]{Maybook} that they contain a summand of order $p^i$ for any $i$.
Without localisation, even less can be said: we can still say, under the hypotheses of Theorem \ref{thsplitmainallp}, we have
$H^*(BG;\Z)$ that splits off $H^*(\Omega ^{\infty }MTK;\Z)$. As a matter of fact a similar statement holds for any generalized
cohomology. We show that in the case of ordinary cohomology with integer coefficients,
this implies that the non-divisibility of generalised
Wahl classes, Theorem \ref{wahlc}.
Let's start from a definition.
\begin{defn}
$\zeta _{i_1,\ldots i_m}\in H^*(MTO(2m);\Z)$ is the universally defined characteristic class associated to the monomial in
the Pontryagin class $p_1^{i_1}\cdots p_m^{i_m}$. In other words, $\zeta _{i_1,\ldots i_m}=\omega ^*(\sigma ^{\infty ^*}(p_1^{i_1}\cdots p_m^{i_m}))$.
\end{defn}
Thus given a $2m$-dimensional bundle $E\rightarrow B$ classified by Madsen-Tillmann-Weiss map $f:B\rightarrow \Omega ^{\infty}_0MTO(2m)$,
one can define $\zeta _{i_1,\ldots i_m}(E)=f^*(\zeta _{i_1,\ldots i_m})\in H^*(B;\Z)$.
When $m=1$, we recover Wahl's classes $\zeta _i$. Given a surface bundle $E\rightarrow B$, Wahl defines
$\zeta _i(E)\in H^{4i}(E;\Z)$ to be the image by the transfer $H^{4i}(E;\Z)\rightarrow H^{4i}(B;\Z)$.
Although our definition differs from hers, as in
\cite[Theorem 2.4]{Ra} one can prove that the both definitions agree (\cite[Example 2.5]{Ra}).
Now we proceed to prove Theorem \ref{wahlc}. By the naturality of the cohomology suspension, the following square commutes.
$$
\begin{diagram}
\node{H^*(BSO(2m+1);\Z)}\arrow{s}\arrow{e} \node{H^*(BO(2m);\Z)}\arrow{e}
\node{H^*(MTO(2m);\Z)}\arrow{s}\\
\node{H^*(QBSO(2m+1);\Z)}\arrow[2]{e} \node{}\node{H^*(\Omega ^{\infty}MTO(2m);\Z)}
\end{diagram}
$$
Note that by Theorem \ref{thsplitmainallp},
$BSO(2m+1)_+$ splits off $MTO(2m)$, thus $QBSO(2m+1)_+$ splits off $\Omega ^{\infty}MTO(2m)$. By Proposition \ref{suspensiononto} $\Sigma ^{\infty }BSO(2m+1)_+$ splits off $\Sigma ^{\infty }QBSO(2m+1)_+$. Combining these
we see that $\Sigma ^{\infty }BSO(2m+1)_+$ splits off $\Sigma ^{\infty }\Omega ^{\infty}MTO(2m)$. Thus the composition
$H^*(BSO(2m+1);\Z)\to H^*(\Omega ^{\infty}MTO(2m);\Z)$ is a split monomorphism of abelian groups.
On the other hand, $H^*(BSO(2m+1);\Z)$ is also a direct summand of $H^*(BO(2m);\Z)$, with the quotient group consisting
only of torsion elements. Thus we have a sequence of maps
$$\Z[p_1,\ldots p_m]\subset H^*(BSO(2m+1);\Z) \to H^*(BO(2m);\Z) \cong \Z[p'_1,\ldots p'_m]\oplus T \to \Z[p'_1,\ldots p'_m]$$
where the composition is an isomorphism. In other words,
a monomial in $p'$'s is, up to torsion elements, the image of a non-divisible element in $H^*(BSO(2m+1);\Z)$.
But by definition the $\zeta$-classes are the images of monomials in $p'$'s, thus up to torsion elements, they are images of
non-divisible element in $H^*(BSO(2m+1);\Z)$. Since $H^*(BSO(2m+1);\Z)\to H^*(\Omega ^{\infty}MTO(2m);\Z)$ is a
split mono, a non-divisible element in the former maps to a non-divisible element in the latter.
Now, as in the proof of \ref{suspensiononto}, we can replace $ \Omega ^{\infty}MTO(2m)$ with $ \Omega ^{\infty}_0MTO(2m)$ which completes the proof.
We remark that in general, there is no reason to expect that a monomial in $p'$'s in $H^*(BO(2m);\Z)$
is actually the image of an element in $H^*(BSO(2m+1);\Z)$. As a matter of fact, Chern classes in $H^*(BSO(2m+1);\Z)$
map to Chern classes in $H^*(BO(2m);\Z)$, but $c_2i$ can pull back to a polynomial involving $c_{2j+1}$ with $j<i$.
{We also note that in the above, we started with non-divisible elements in $H^*(BG;\Z)$. In some cases,
it may happen that the characterstic class is already divisible in $H^*(BG;\Z)$, in which case its image in
$H^*(\Omega ^{\infty}MTK;\Z)$ will have the same divisibility. Thus
if we take the pair $(K,G)$ to be $(Pin^{-}(2), Spin(3))$, we get the first part of \cite[Proposition 5.3]{Rpin}, modulo
the homological stability \cite[Theorem 4.19]{Rpin}.}
To conclude the section, let's remark that as is noted in \cite{Wa}, if the fiber of the surface bundle $E\rightarrow B$
is orientable, $\zeta _i(E)$ agrees with $\kappa _{2i}(E)$, where $\kappa _{2i}$ is the well-known $2i$-th
Mumford-Miller-Morita class. As a matter of fact $p'_1\in H^*(BO(2);\Z)$ restricts to $p_1\in H^*(BSO(2);\Z)$, and
if we denote $c_1$ the first Chern class of the standard representation of $SO(2)$ considered as $1$-dimensional
complex representation, then
we have $c_1=\chi \in H^*(BSO(2);\Z)$, thus we have $p_1=c_1^2\in H^*(BSO(2);\Z)$. Therefore
$\overline{\nu} _{p_1^{'i}}=\overline{\nu} _{c_1^{2i}}$. In other words, $\zeta _i(E)$ is the transfer of $c_1^{2i}\in H^*(E;\Z)$ to $H^*(B;\Z)$.
Usually the classes the classes $\kappa _i$'s are defined to be the push-forward of $c_1^{2i+1}\in H^*(E;\Z)$ to $H^*(B;\Z)$,
but as is mentioned in \cite[Section 3]{EOGen}, by Theorem \ref{pushforward}, the push-forward of $c_1^{2i+1}$ agrees with the transfer
of $c_1^{2i}$. Thus we have $\zeta _i(E)=\kappa _{2i}(E)$.
\section{Non-exactness results}
We devote this section to the proof of Proposition \ref{nonexact}.
We will prove it by considering the behaviour of the homology suspension map, applying our splitting results.
\begin{proof}[of Proposition \ref{nonexact}]
Let ${\bf K}$, $m$, $G$ and $p$ be as in hypothesis of Proposition \ref{nonexact}.
We show that the sequence of Hopf algebras induced by the cofibre sequence $MT{\mathbf K}(m+1)\to \Sigma ^{\infty}B{\mathbf K}(m)_+\to MT{\mathbf K}(m)$
$$H_*(\Omega^\infty _0MT{\mathbf K}(m+1);\Z /p)\lra H_*(Q_0B{\mathbf K}(m+1)_+;\Z /p)\lra H_*(\Omega^\infty _0MT{\mathbf K}(m);\Z /p)$$
is not short exact. More precisely, we will show that the map $H_*(Q_0B{\mathbf K}(m+1)_+;\Z /p)\lra H_*(\Omega^\infty _0MT{\mathbf K}(m);\Z /p)$
is not surjective.
By the naturality of the homology suspension, the following square is commutative.
$$
\begin{diagram}
\node{H_*(Q_0B{\mathbf K}(m+1)_+;\Z /p)} \arrow{e}\arrow{s,t}{\sigma_*^\infty} \node{H_*(\Omega^\infty _0MT{\mathbf K}(m);\Z /p)} \arrow{s,t}{\sigma_*^\infty} \\
\node{H_*(\Sigma ^{\infty}B{\mathbf K}(m+1)_+;\Z /p)} \arrow{e} \node{H_*(MT{\mathbf K}(m);\Z /p).}
\end{diagram}
$$
Suppose that the top horizontal map
$H_*(Q_0B{\mathbf K}(m+1)_+;\Z /p)\to H_*(\Omega _0^\infty MT{\mathbf K}(m);\Z /p)$
is onto. By Lemma \ref{suspensiononto0}. the left vertical map is onto. On the other hand,
Lemma \ref{cohomologymt} implies that the bottom horizontal map is trivial. Combining these,
we see that the the right vertical map, the homology suspension $H_*(\Omega _0^\infty MT{\mathbf K}(m);\Z /p)\to
H_*(MT{\mathbf K}(m);\Z /p)$ is trivial. However, our splitting results imply that $H_*(\Omega _0^\infty MT{\mathbf K}(m);\Z /p))$
contains a tensor factor isomorphic to $H_*(Q_0BG_+;\Z /p)$, on which the homology suspension is nontrivial again by
Lemma \ref{suspensiononto0}, which is a contradiction. Thus the map $H_*(Q_0B{\mathbf K}(m+1)_+;\Z /p)\lra H_*(\Omega^\infty _0MT{\mathbf K}(m);\Z /p)$
is not surjective.
\end{proof}
|
\section{Background}\label{sec:backgr}
In this section, we briefly discuss some history remarks on
scientific computing development, particularly for eScience. Next,
we focus our review on the grid based scientific computing, and
introduce the background for cloud computing.
\subsection{History Remarks}
\begin{table}
\centering
\caption{Development stages of the scientific computing.\label{tb:stage}}{
\begin{tabular}{ | p{1.5cm} | p{2cm} | c | c |}
\hline
Stage & Data Generated & Research Period & Infor. Tech. \\ \hline
Manual & By hand & Ad-hoc & Paper and pencil \\ \hline
(Semi-) Automated & With the help of machinery & Short-term & Computer assisted \\ \hline
Large-scale Sensing & From satellites and sensors around the world & Real-time & Cluster and grid \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
}\vspace{-2ex}
\end{table}
Due to intensive computational and data requirements from
scientific computing, computer infrastructures have been adopted to
host scientific data sets and computations. eScience is a new
science paradigm that uses distributed computing infrastructures for
computation, simulation and analysis. In addition, the scientists
can make use of high speed network to access huge distributed and
shared data collected by sensors or stored in database. This
distributed HPC and data environment allows scientists around the
world to share knowledge and resources, and build close scientific
collaborations.
The term \emph{eScience} was first proposed in 1999 and was further interpreted by more researchers since
then~\cite{defineescience}. During the development of eScience, we
believe it has gone through several stages to evolve from
traditional science to the eScience today. Table~\ref{tb:stage}
shows the major development stages the scientific computing has gone
through. We review the history in the following dimensions.
\emph{Dimension 1: the evolution of science.} We observed that
technology (particularly information technology) is one of the main
driving factors in pushing science forward. From the perspective of
experimental methods, eScience first used~\emph{manual} measurements:
meaning the measurements were taken by hand, not using machinery or
electronics to fulfill the function. Then with the development of
technology, machinery such as computers and metering instruments are
used to help in the measurements, but with manual operations still
involved. This stage is called the~\emph{semi-automated} stage.
After this stage, machinery took a greater part in the measurements
and eScience has evolved to the~\emph{automated} stage where
machines took almost all the work with the least of human
involvement. To recent years, new technologies such as high
performance computers, sensor networks and various experimental
softwares make the eScience measurements evolve to
the~\emph{large-scale sensing} stage~\cite{Globalmodelling}. Take
the research in Meteorology for example, in the early stage
(classified to manual stage), researchers use thermometer,
barometer, hygrometer and etc to measure the meteorological
variables such as temperature, air pressure, water vapor and write
down the records. They archive those meteorological data for drawing
climatic maps and studying the climate of local area.
In the 19th century (classified to semi-automated stage),
breakthroughs occur in meteorology after observing the development
of networks. The meteorological data collected in local
meteorological observatories are transmitted through networks and
then are gathered together by different spatial scales to study the
various meteorological phenomena.
Since the 20th century (classified to automated stage), with the
adoption of radars, lasers, remote sensors and satellites into the
meteorological research, collecting data of a large area is no
longer a challenging problem and special instruments together with
the automation of computers can automatically fulfill the measuring
tasks. During this time, computers are used for doing data analysis
and transmitting results for sharing. At the end of the 20th century
(classified to large-scale sensing stage), large scale observation
experiments are performed. Such as during December 1977 to November
1979, back then a large scale atmospheric measurement experiment
took place involving more than 100 countries around the world. This
experiment was relied on satellites, meteorological rockets,
meteorological observatories on the ground around the world,
automatic meteorological stations, airplanes, ships, buoy stations
and constant level balloons. These instruments were combined to form
a complete observing system to automatically measure the
meteorological variables world-wide.
\emph{Dimension 2: the length of research period.} eScience has gone
through \emph{ad--hoc} stage when research was done just for a
specific problem or task, and not for other general
purposes later; \emph{short-term plan}
stage when researchers made plans in priori for their problems about
what to do in what time, so that a project of a short term could be
kept on schedule; and \emph{real-time} stage when the research is
subject to real-time constraints, such as the experimental data are
collected in real-time and the system needs to give out results also
in real-time. This evolution on research period also require the
experimental methods to be more efficient, and the support of high
technology as we will discuss next.
\emph{Dimension 3: the technology.} eScience has gone through
\emph{paper and pencil} stage when no machinery was involved in our
research and human work with paper and pencil was the only tool for
science; then computers appeared and eScience was thus able to move
to the \emph{computer assisted} stage when computers played a great
role in helping with complex calculations and solving logical
problems; with the scientific problems getting more complicated and
traditional computers not sufficient for the computing power
required, \emph{cluster and grid} are coming to scientists' vision
and help them solving many data-intensive or compute-intensive
problems within reasonable time which is not possible on traditional
computers.
We summarize our findings in the three dimensions. Scientists only
deal with specific problems using manual methods such as doing
theoretical calculation using paper and pencil at early days. As
problems getting more complicated, more planning is needed for the
research and semi-automated and automated methods are also required in
the research during this time. Computers are used and when problem
scale gets larger, new technologies such as clusters and grids are
applied for solving the problems faster. What's the next step? When
problem scales get even larger and the big data coming into sight,
also with the real-time constraints on the problems, even clusters
and grids are not enough to tackle such problems. Recently, many
eScience projects are leveraging the technology of cloud
computing~\cite{A-brain-Antoniu,Matsunaga:2008:CCM:1488725.1488913,Newman:2008:SSS:1488725.1488885,Watson08cloudcomputing}.
With its high performance, scalable and easy accessible
characteristics, it will offer new opportunities for the new
problems.
\subsection{Grid-based eScience}
Current major eScience projects are mostly hosted in the grid or \amelie{HPC}
cluster environment. With aggregated computational power and storage
capacity, grids have been considered the ideal candidate for
scientific computing. There are many labs around the world working
on grid based projects, such as GridPP in UK, TeraGrid in US, CNGrid
in China, France Grilles in France, D-Grid in Germany, Kidney-Grid
in Australia, etc.
In UK, particle physicists and computer scientists have been collaboratively working
on the GridPP project. They manage and maintain a distributed computing grid across the UK with the primary aim of providing resources to particle physicists working on the Large Hadron Collider experiments at CERN~\cite{GridPP:2006}. The collaboration incorporates computing facilities at the Rutherford Appleton Laboratory along with four other grid organizations of ScotGrid, NorthGrid, SouthGrid and LondonGrid.
These organizations include all of the UK universities and institutions that are working as members of this project. At the end of 2011, the project has contributed a large number of resources (29,000 CPUs and 25 Petabytes of storage) to the worldwide grid infrastructure.
The Grid Infrastructure Group (GIG) along with eleven
resource provider sites in the United States have initiated
an eScience grid computing project called TeraGrid.
TeraGrid provides high-performance computation
resources, data resources and tools, and high-end experimental facilities to users all around the USA through high-performance network connections.
For example, in 2007, the resources TeraGrid provided included more than 250 Teraflops
of computation resources and more than 30 Petabytes of data storage resources. Researchers could access
more than 100 databases of different disciplines. In late 2009,
TeraGrid resources had grown to 2 Petaflops of computing capability
and more than 60 Petabytes storage. In mid-2009, US National Science
Foundation (NSF) extended the operation of TeraGrid to 2011.
China National Grid (CNGrid) has quickly grown to serve more than
1400 users including both research institutes and commercial companies,
providing more than 380 Teraflops of computation resources and more than 2 Petabytes of
shared data storage resources.
Since 2009, this project has built three Petaflop-level supercomputers, in which
Tianhe-1 was ranked the fastest supercomputer in the top 500 supercomputers in 2010~\cite{top500:2010}.
With the built of the three supercomputers, CNGrid resources has grown to 8
Petaflops of computation capability and supports computation services for
more than 700 national research and engineering projects in the areas of
meteorology, medicine and pharmacology, aircraft engineering and
aerospace engineering, etc.
Another example is the Worldwide LHC Computing Grid, which involves international
collaborations of more than 150 computing centers in nearly 40 countries around the world.
The European Grid Infrastructure (EGI)~\cite{egi},
the Open Science Grid and the Nordic Data Grid Facility, etc, are all participants of this project.
It consists of a grid-based computer network infrastructure to utilize the global computation
resources for storing, distributing and processing the large volume of data (around 25 Petabytes per year) produced by
the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) experiments. At the end of 2010, the Grid consisted of
200 thousand processing cores and 150 Petabytes of disk space, distributed across 34 countries.
\amelie{Besides the collaborations between major research centers,
volunteer computing projects are taken place to build grid platforms with public donation of computing resources. SETI@home~\cite{seti:website} is such a volunteer computing project employing the BOINC software platform to search for
extraterrestrial signals with the spare capacity on home and office computers.}
The strength of grid computing has attract many scientific applications to work on grids.
\begin{itemize}
\item
First, since governments are very concerned about the research on
grid and frontier scientific research, most of the grid-based
projects are funded by national fundings. Such as the GridPP project
is funded by the UK's Science and Technology Facilities Council with
a total amount of 47 million pounds till 2011; the TeraGrid project
received 98 million dollars from NSF by 2004, 150 million dollars
extended support in 2005 and another 121 million in 2011; the CNGrid
project received around 94 billion Chinese yuan from 2006 to 2010. Sufficient
amount of money offers good chances for institutes to hire highly
qualified domain experts to do research and equip powerful computers
and other resources.
\item
Second, single research institute can enjoy the vast computational
and storage resources from grids by donating their own idle
resources. Such institutes may not have enough budget for them to
buy powerful computers or build their own data centers.
\item
Third, the tools and softwares developed on grid can benefit more
research groups besides the developers themselves. This strength can
save a lot of development time for the projects developed on the
grids.
\end{itemize}
While Grid is the dominant infrastructure for eScience, it faces a
number of limitations. First, due to the development of sensors and
storage techniques, many data-intensive eScience applications are
emerging. Even with the powerful supercomputers, grid may no longer
satisfy the need of capacity. Second, due to the limitation of its
structure, grid is not able to provide the elasticity required by
most scientific projects which are pursuing cost efficiency. Third,
it's not easy to get access to grid resources for everyone because a
program getting access to grid resources needs to be authorized on
the project's behalf and resources would then be distributed to this
project as a whole. Since grids are mostly national-wide
initiatives, getting the authorization is very hard for most
small-scale projects. Finally, while Grid offers access to many
heterogeneous resources, many applications need very specific and
consistent environments. Due to these reasons, many of the eScience
applications are shitting to the Cloud which has elastic storage and
computing power.
\subsection{Cloud Computing}
According to the definition of the National Institute of Science and Technology (NIST), cloud computing is\\
\emph{``The delivery of computing as a service rather than a product, whereby shared resources, software, and information are provided to computers and other devices as a utility (like the electricity grid) over a network (typically the Internet)''~\cite{clouddefinition}.\\}
Cloud computing hasn't come into popularity until early 2000's, when a lot of research efforts on the cloud were emerging.
Officially launched in 2006, Amazon Web Service (AWS) is the first utility computing platform that provides computation resources as services to external customers. Many other cloud service providers, including Microsoft (Microsoft's Azure), Google (Google's Cloud Platform) and OpenStack, have come into the market since then.
Open-source systems and research projects are developed to facilitate the use of cloud. Initially released in early 2008, Eucalyptus is an open-source system for deploying AWS-compatible private and hybrid cloud computing environments. In the same year, the OpenNebula toolkit was released, which is also designed for building private and hybrid clouds but with different design principles from Eucalyptus.
Cloud computing bares many similarities and differences with grid
computing. In the year 2008, Foster et al.~\cite{CloudGrid360} has
compared clouds and grids mainly from a technological perspective.
Five years have passed, and we should take a revisit on those
differences to catch up the recent rapid development of cloud
computing and highlight its relevance to the requirement of
eScience.
Compared to the grid, cloud has better scalability and elasticity.
\begin{itemize}
\item When developing applications on the grid infrastructure, it's not easy to scale up or down according to the change of data scale. But in cloud, with the use of virtualization, clients can scale up or down as they need and pay only for the resources they used.
\item Virtualization techniques also increase the computation efficiency as multiple applications can be run on the same server, increase application availability since virtualization allows quick recovery from unplanned outages with no interruption in service and improves responsiveness using automated resource provisioning, monitoring and maintenance.
\item Also, cloud has easier accessibility compared to grid. Users can access to commercial cloud resources through log in and use the resources as they need as long as they could pay with a credit card. In this case, even small businesses which could not afford purchasing high performance computers can also have the chance to use powerful clusters or supercomputers on their compute-intensive or data-intensive projects.
\end{itemize}
eScience applications are beginning to shift from grid to cloud
platforms. The Berkeley Water Center is undertaking a series of
eScience projects collaborating with
Microsoft~\cite{li:escience,li:fault,humphrey:assessing}. They
utilized the Windows Azure cloud to enable rapid scientific data
browsing for availability and applicability and enable environmental
science via data synthesis from multiple sources. Their BWC Data
Server project is developing an advanced data synthesis server.
Through close interaction between computer scientists and
environmental scientists, they are building new tools and approaches
to benefit regional and global scale data analysis
efforts~\cite{li:escience,li:fault}. Another one, the California
Water CyberInfrastructure project, is developing a Water
Cyberinfrastructure prototype that can be used to investigate and
eventually manage water resources. In Europe, GRNET is initiating an
eScience cloud in Greece~\cite{grnet:greek}. GRNET is a state-owned
company operating under the supervision of the Ministry of Education
(General Secretariat of Research \& Technology). Its main mission is
to provide high-quality electronic infrastructure services to the
Greek academic and research institutions. The vision of its eScience
cloud is to provide virtualization and storage services for the
Greek scientific community. This project starts with offering online
storage of 50Gbytes for all Greek academic and research community
(Pithos), then moves to provide VMs on demand and finally provide
software as a service. We are also working on a eScience project
based on cloud computing in Singapore~\cite{water:pdcc}. The
objective of our project is to leverage cloud computing techniques
and sensor networks to provide real-time and large-scale monitoring
and analysis for water quality. The project is aiming at providing
real-time monitoring for the reservoirs based in Singapore, but the
methods and models proposed could be utilized to benefit all water
resources around the world. This project is funded by NRF Singapore
and we are currently working on the first phase.
Since the cloud is an emerging field, many of the cloud based
eScience projects are still in their early stage. This is partially
because cloud computing has come to popularity only for several
years and researchers haven't realized its strengths thoroughly.
That motivates us to review the existing efforts on adopting cloud
computing technologies to eScience, and to explore the research
challenges and opportunities in that direction. Moreover, a taxonomy
is useful in guiding the design and implementation of cloud-based
eScience project.
Compared with the general cloud computing surveys (such as by
Armbrust et al.~\cite{Armbrust:2010:VCC:1721654.1721672}), this
survey focuses on the review on the current status of eScience in
the cloud, and therefore identifies the new opportunities and
challenges on pushing the state-of-the-art. Our survey also goes
beyond some perspective report on science cloud (for example, by Lee
~\cite{Lee:2010:PSC:1851476.1851542} and by
Keahey~\cite{keahey:cloud} and Oliveira~\cite{Oliveira2010} in three
major aspects. First, we define a taxonomy for eScience services in
the cloud. To the best of our knowledge, our definition is the first
taxonomy for eScience services. Second, we perform the detailed and
comparative study on the existing efforts including tools, systems
and projects. Second, based on the review on the existing efforts,
we point out the challenges and opportunities that are close and
practical as a guide for the intermediate next steps.
\section{Conclusions}\label{sec:concl}
eScience as a service is an emerging and promising service for
scientific computing. In this survey, we develop a taxonomy and
conduct a review on the current status of eScience services in the
cloud with four kinds of sciences. Compared with the relatively
mature grid infrastructure, the eScience tools and systems are in
their early stage. We believe that eScience services will be boosted
with more support from the cloud community and more investment and
efforts from the science community. We call for the combined effort
from both communities.
\section{Challenges and Opportunities}\label{sec:discussion}
Previous sections have reviewed the status and the observations in
building eScience applications and systems in the cloud. Despite the
fruitful results along this research direction, we clearly see that
there are still many open problems to be addressed in order to fully
unleash the power of cloud computing for eScience. In this section,
we discuss several open problems, followed by the opportunities for
addressing those open problems.
\vspace{-1.5ex}
\subsection{Open Problems}
We present the open problems for developing the next-generation
eScience applications and systems in the cloud. Those open problems
are rooted at the interplay between eScience requirements and cloud
computing features.
\emph{ Data Lock-In:} So far, there are no eScience applications and
systems that have been deployed on multiple cloud providers. There's
no standardization between different cloud platforms, such as
different clouds use different data storage formats. For example,
data stored in Amazon S3 cannot be easily used by the jobs running
on the Windows Azure platform due to different APIs, data storage
techniques such as encryption technique and security protocols. On
the other hand, due to the eScience projects usually involve a large
amount of data for scientific research, such as the genome sequence
data and seismographic data, data transfer cost between different
cloud platforms is substantial. This also makes the data lock-in
problem significant to e-Scientists.
\emph{Performance Unpredictability:} Some eScience applications
have rather rigid performance requirements. Performance
unpredictability is a critical problem for running those
applications in the cloud, due to the interference among concurrent
applications running in the same cloud. This problem is particularly
severe for disk I/O and network traffic. For eScience applications,
this problem is especially prominent since there are a lot of read
tasks needed to get input data and parameters from local disks to do
data analysis and also a lot of write tasks to save the intermediate
analysis results to local disks. The other factor of performance
unpredictability is VM failures or unreliability.
In~\cite{li:fault}, the authors issued a total of 10032 VM unique
instance start events on Windows Azure cloud and only 8568 instances
started once during their lifetimes while the others had encountered
various unknown problems during their run and were restarted by the
Azure infrastructure for many times.
\emph{ Data Confidentiality and Auditability:} Current commercial
clouds are essentially open to public and are consequently exposing
themselves to more attacks. Safety is the biggest concern that
prevents customers from storing their sensitive corporate data in
the cloud. Especially for eScience applications, the data involved
could be relevant to the homeland security of a country, such as the
geographical data of the country, or even the security of human
beings, such as the human genome data. So protecting these sensitive
data from unauthorized or even malicious access is an important
ongoing research topic.
\emph{Debugging:} Bugs in Large Distributed
Systems cannot be reproduced in smaller configurations. Although
many eScience programs have been tested and evaluated in the grid
and cluster environments, program debugging and testing are still
challenging in the cloud.
\emph{Lacking of eScience Common System Infrastructure.} As we
discussed in the previous section, the efforts of implementing
eScience projects on the cloud are quite ad-hoc. The effort for one
project is usually not reusable for other projects. For example, the
data processing softwares and interface APIs used in different
scientific areas are quite different. In physical sciences, the
Montage workflow, an astronomy toolkit, is commonly used to discuss
the pros and cons of using cloud computing for scientific
applications~\cite{Deelman:2008:CDS:1413370.1413421,Hoffa:2008:UCC:1488725.1488955}
and such physical science systems built in the cloud are
specifically designed to better fit the cloud for scientific
workflow applications. Thus, such developmental experiences may not
be useful to scientific applications in other areas, such as social
sciences and humanities in which resource sharing is much more the
concern and social network APIs are needed to build the social
science systems. Since current eScience systems are specifically
designed for each project, new projects coming into the cloud have
to build their systems from top down. In order to save the
development cycle and better exploit the experiences of current
systems, we need a holistic platform which applications from various
research fields can build their systems upon and offers
opportunities for application specific optimizations.
\vspace{-1.5ex}
\subsection{Opportunities}
We also see some opportunities in addressing those open problems.
Many of those opportunities are driven by different communities
outside scientists, including open-source software developers,
system researchers and governments.
\emph{Open-source Cloud Software Stacks:} With the popularity of
cloud computing, there are a lot of cloud platforms with various
architectures open to the public. Public clouds such as Amazon EC2,
Windows Azure and Google App Engine own and operate cloud
infrastructure and offer access to the public via Internet. Private
clouds implemented using software platforms such as Eucalyptus and
Nimbus on computer clusters provide hosted services to a limited
number of users behind a firewall. Private cloud is operated
for a single organization only, whether hosted and managed internally
or externally. Hybrid cloud is the composition of two or more clouds,
either private or public, to capture
the best of both worlds: ability to immediately deliver services that
users demand independent of Internet connectivity as well as the scalability to
handle cloudbursting, an instant spike in demand. Examples of hybrid
cloud include Intel Hybrid Cloud Program~\cite{intel:hybrid} and
GoGrid Cloud Hosting~\cite{gogrid}. Given an application, how to
choose the most appropriate cloud platform from the various kinds of
cloud platforms is a very challenging issue. To solve this problem,
one has to consider the characters of the application itself, such
as whether it's data-intensive or compute-intensive, whether fault
tolerance is important to this application, etc; consider the demand
of this system, such as whether the computation demand is stable or
may have instant spike of workload; also consider the aim of
sharing, for example, if the aim is to share data and resources
between limited users or the general public.
\emph{Towards Common System Infrastructure Support for eScience: }
Researchers from database community are building scientific database
which can better fit the requirements of scientific applications.
SciDB is such an example. In March 2008, the first SciDB workshop
was held in Asilomar and representatives from both scientific
community and database research community participated in this
workshop. One major result of this workshop was a set of
requirements that a database management system should meet in order
to support the storage and analysis of several fields of
data-intensive science over the next decade~\cite{BeclaLim2008}.
According to these requirements, the SciDB should provide several
new features such as direct support for arrays as a first-class
column type because all sciences need to work with non-scalar values
like vectors and arrays, association of data element with ``error
bar'' because all sciences must deal with observations and derived
data that have inherent uncertainties, etc. The SciDB developers
meeting and Open SciDB community meeting were held between 2008 to
2011 when SciDB was eventually built up and tested. The overview of
SciDB was presented at SIGMOD
2010~\cite{Brown:2010:OSL:1807167.1807271} and caught a lot of
attention from both scientific community and database community.
There have been several use cases from various sciences for SciDB
including Optical astronomy, Radio astronomy, Earth Remote Sensing,
Environmental Observation \& Modeling, Seismology and ARM Climate
Research. The aim of SciDB is to benefit all scientific applications
dealing with large-scale complex scientific analysis and provide a
way for scientists to understand data in far deeper and more natural
ways.
We have also observed many works from distributed system community
devoting to the adoption of cloud computing in scientific
environments. Youseff et al.~\cite{citeulike:5770192} establish a detailed
ontology of the cloud, dissecting the cloud into five main layers:
application layer, software environment layer, software
infrastructure layer, software kernel layer and firmware/hardware
layer. This ontology enables the scientific community to better
understand the cloud technologies and design more efficient portals and
gateways for the cloud. The Montage
Comparison example~\cite{Deelman:2008:CDS:1413370.1413421} provides
a detailed comparison between scientific workflow running in a local
environment and running in a virtual environment. The experience
shown in this paper gives the scientific community an idea what
kinds of workflows are suitable to run on the cloud and what might
be the cost if do so.~\cite{Iosup_anearly} compared the performance
of cloud to other platforms that are accessible to scientists. It
also presented two main research directions in improving the cloud
computing services for scientific computing, that is to tune
applications for virtualized resources and to optimize the
application execution considering the cost-performance-security trade-off.
To ease the pressure of scientific community, people from
distributed system community are working on simplifying the
development process of scientific applications on the cloud. Aneka
is a software platform for developing distributed
applications on private and public clouds proposed
in~\cite{Vecchiola:2009:HCC:1726593.1728946}. When implemented on
the cloud, many scientific applications need to modify their
original serial programs written in various programming models to
parallel pattern. Since Aneka supports an extensible set of
programming models, it can address a variety of different
applications and thus offers a good opportunity for scientific
applications to develop on the cloud with less effort.
\emph{National and Governmental Investment:} Another opportunity
lies in the construction of national cloud initiatives and the large
amount of funding provided by major stakeholders, such as large user
groups, vendors and governments, for cloud computing to achieve
scientific and national objectives. With the utilization of commercially
available technologies such as server virtualization,
cloud computing is able to introduce capital cost savings
to Information Technology (IT) infrastructure. Many nations have realized the
importance of cloud computing to the modernization of IT. Cloud
computing is a major feature of the US President's initiative to
modernize IT and it's also taken as an important technology for the
boost of Japan's economy by Japanese Government. Several national
cloud initiatives have been announced, including the US Cloud
Storefront, the UK G-Cloud and the Japanese Kasumigaseki.
The General Services Administration (GSA) of the US government
is an agency that focuses on implementing projects that increase
efficiencies and reduce operational cost by
optimizing common services and solutions across enterprise and
utilizing market innovations such as cloud computing services.
In September 2009, the GSA's cloud storefront Apps.gov
is launched by the Obama Administration. This online storefront
enables federal agencies to efficiently and effectively acquire
and purchase cloud computing services. Applications from desktop productivity toolsets to
document management software are now available to buy through the
online portal, which uses the software-as-a-service model to cut
government IT purchasing costs.
The G-Cloud is an iterative programme of work to achieve
government's commission to the adoption of cloud computing and
delivering computing resources, which will deliver fundamental
changes in the way the public sector procures and operates
Information and Communication Technology (ICT). At present, still in
its startup phase, the programme is resourced by existing
departmental funding allocation whilst the dedicated business case
(for 4.93 million pounds), to cover the ongoing staffing cost and
development of the CloudStore is being developed, agreed and
approved through the appropriate ministerial channels. The initial
focus of G-Cloud is on introducing cloud ICT services into
government departments, local authorities and the wider public
sector. These services can then be reviewed and purchased through
the CloudStore. At present there are 4 categories of services
provided: Infrastructure, Software, Platform and Specialist
Services. The project savings in adopting cloud computing and
re-using applications through the CloudStore can be broken down to
G-Cloud \& CloudStore and Data Centre Consolidation. It is estimated
the savings of two kinds by year 2013, 2014 and 2015 will be
\textsterling20$m$, \textsterling40$m$, \textsterling120$m$ and
\textsterling20$m$, \textsterling60$m$, \textsterling80$m$
separately.
The Kasumigaseki Cloud initiated by the Japanese Government
aims to establish a large cloud computing infrastructure to meet the
resource requirements of the Government's IT systems and enable
sharing to increase the utilization and efficiency of resources.
A National Digital Archive will also be constructed to digitize
government documents and recorded information and to improve the public access.
The concept of Green Cloud Data Centers is used to
construct the Kasumigaseki Cloud Data Center to reduce data center
energy consumption by locating them in cold regions and
increase the usage of green energy by utilizing wind
and solar power.
\section{Introduction}\label{sec:intro}
The development of computer science and technology widens our view
to the world. As a result, the amount of data observed from the
world to be stored and processed has also become larger. Analysis of
such large-scale data with traditional technologies would be too time
consuming to hinder the development of scientific discoveries and theories.
eScience is the kind of science specifically proposed to address
large-scale data problems. It is the tool that offers scientists the
scope to store, interpret, analyze and distribute their data to other
research groups. eScience will play a significant role in every aspect of
scientific research, starting from the initial theory-based research though
simulations, systematical testing and verification to
the organized collecting, processing and interpretation of scientific data.
Recently, cloud
computing has been considered as the computing infrastructure for
eScience. This survey paper reviews the status of cloud-based
eScience and further identifies the challenges and opportunities
along this line of research.
Although the term of eScience has only been used for about a
decade, the study of eScience problems started much earlier. In the
early days, scientists from various fields couldn't really capture,
organize and analyze the large-scale scientific data, hindering the development of science. Technological advances
such as the computer and Internet have brought eScience study to
a new stage. eScience projects in various fields such as biology,
chemistry, physics and sociology are
emerging~\cite{A-brain-Antoniu,Hu:2010:BLS:1931470.1931831,Ekanayake:2008:MDI:1488725.1488926,Matsunaga:2008:CCM:1488725.1488913}, benefiting from the platforms and toolkits in computer science and
development experience shared by other research groups in domain
fields. Grid computing has greatly advanced the development of
eScience. Currently, almost all major eScience projects are hosted
in the grid or cluster environments~\cite{GridPP:2006}. With
aggregated computational power and storage capacity, grids are able
to host the vast amount of data generated by eScience applications
and efficiently conduct data analysis. This has enabled
researchers to collaboratively work with other professionals around
the world and to handle data enormously larger in size than before.
Many countries have devoted much investment to
build their own grid platform, such as GridPP~\cite{GridPP:2006} in
the UK and TeraGrid in US, CNGrid in China, and so on.
In the last few years, the emergence of cloud computing has brought
the development of eScience to another new stage. Cloud computing
has the advantages of scalability, high capacity and easy
accessibility compared to grids. Recently, many eScience projects
from various research areas have been shifting to cloud
platforms~\cite{li:escience,li:fault,humphrey:assessing}. eScience
as a service becomes an emerging and promising direction for science
computing. This survey focuses on the cloud services and techniques
adopted in current eScience projects from the infrastructure,
ownership, application, processing tools, storage, security, service
models and collaboration aspects.
The service model and well-developed tools in the cloud platform
have offered great opportunities for eScience research. The service
model of the cloud relieves the users from the low-level
infrastructure problems. Cloud resources are easy accessible, which
makes it possible for researchers in small organizations to deal
with large-scale data. The well-developed tools in the cloud,
including workflow systems such as DAGMan~\cite{dagman} and new
cloud oriented programming models such as MapReduce and DryadLINQ
greatly reduce the development cycle of the eScience projects and
the risk of development faults as well. People from database
community are building scientific databases such as SciDB to better
fit the requirements of eScience. Various experiments with eScience
projects conducted on both the cloud and clusters are revealing the
benefits of doing science on the cloud, helping researchers to make
their choices.
While offering new development opportunities for eScience, the cloud
platform also introduces new challenges for developing eScience
services. Due to the pay-as-you-go pricing model, users of the cloud
need to properly plan their execution, as it is not trivial to
minimize the cost. Furthermore, the easy accessibility and resource
sharing mechanism of cloud computing introduces security issues
around storing sensitive data in the cloud. In order to ensure the
confidentiality of their data from other cloud users, they need to
design their own security mechanism and implement them on the cloud.
A cloud platform also has the problem of data lock-in, because the
current cloud providers do not have standardization on the services
they provide. Thus, moving data from one cloud to another is not
trivial. All these challenges require hard work and close
collaboration between domain experts in computer science and
eScience.
Although previous work has surveyed eScience and cloud computing
separately, few of them have provided a review from the point of
view of eScience in the
cloud~\cite{Rimal:2009:TSC:1683301.1684085,escience:survey:web}.
Both eScience and cloud computing are rapidly developing and
becoming more mature. It is timely to examine the efforts and future
work for scientific computing in the cloud. This article focuses
especially on eScience projects in the cloud and comparing the
advantages and weaknesses with eScience in the grid to discuss the
obstacles and opportunities of eScience services in the cloud.
The rest of the article is structured as follows.
Section~\ref{sec:backgr} introduces the background information of
eScience history, grid-based eScience and cloud-based eScience.
Section~\ref{sec:taxo} gives the taxonomy of eScience in the cloud.
Section~\ref{sec:class} presents some eScience example projects
on the cloud from four different scientific
areas. Section~\ref{sec:discussion} discusses about the obstacles
and opportunities for eScience projects on the cloud. Finally,
Section~\ref{sec:concl} draws conclusions from the article.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.9\linewidth]{intentionofpaper.eps}\vspace{-2ex}
\caption{Setting of the eScience problems discussed in this article} \label{fig:intention}\vspace{-2ex}
\end{figure}
\section{Current Status}\label{sec:class}
We review the current status of eScience services in the cloud, and
present the key observations from our survey.
\vspace{-1.5ex}
\subsection{An Overview}
The example systems surveyed in this section may not be exhaustive,
but cover many areas of eScience researches currently going on. The
table below summarized the systems from their platform, scientific
operations and development and classified them by their areas from
life sciences, social sciences and humanities, physical sciences and
climate and earth sciences. Table~\ref{tb:status} is a
categorization of the surveyed example systems using the taxonomies
introduced above. In the rest of this section, we present the major
observations we have found from the example systems.
\begin{sidewaystable*}\footnotesize
\centering
\caption{Taxonomy mapping to the surveyed example systems. ``-'' means that aspect is not specified in the project paper.\label{tb:status}}{
\tabcolsep=0.11cm
\begin{tabular}{ | l | p{1.5cm} | l | l | p{3cm} | p{1.5cm} | l | l | p{2cm} |}
\hline
Project&Infrastructure&Ownership&Application&Processing Tools&Storage&Security&Service Model&Collaboration\\ \hline
CloudBLAST&Grid with virtualization&Private&LS&MR Programming Model&File System&Authorization&IaaS&Computation\\ \hline
RDF&Cluster&Private&LS&MR Programming Model&Database&-&-&Computation\\ \hline
CARMEN&Cloud&Public&LS&Workflow System&File System / Database&Authorization&SaaS&Storage / computation\\ \hline
MFA&Cloud&Public&LS&Workflow System / MR Programming Model&File System&Authorization&IaaS&Computation\\ \hline
MassMatrix&Cloud&Public&LS&Workflow System&Database&-&IaaS with tools&Computation \\ \hline
LS Gateway&Cloud&Private&LS&Workflow System / MR Programming Model&File System&Gateway&SaaS&Storage / computation\\ \hline
CloudDRN&Cloud&Public&LS&Business Software Tools&Database&Authentication / Authorization&IaaS / PaaS & Storage \\ \hline
SciHmm&Cloud&Public&LS&Workflow System&Database&Authorization&IaaS&Computation\\ \hline
SciDim&Cloud&Public&LS&Workflow System&File System&-&IaaS&Computation\\ \hline
Montage Example&Cloud&Public&PS&Workflow System&File System&-&IaaS&Computation\\ \hline
Montage Comparison&Cloud&Private&PS&Workflow System&File System&-&IaaS with tools&Computation\\ \hline
CGL-MapReduce&Cluster&Private&PS&MR Programming Model&File System&-&-&Computation\\ \hline
Kepler&Grid / Cloud&Private / Public&PS&Workflow System&File System&-&IaaS&Computation\\ \hline
Inversion&Cloud&Public&PS&Programming Model&File System&Authorization&IaaS&Computation\\ \hline
CAOCM&Cloud&Public&CES&MPI Programming Model&File System&Authorization&IaaS&Computation\\ \hline
MODISAzure&Cloud&Public&CES&Workflow System&File System&Authorization&PaaS&Storage / computation\\ \hline
RPSS&Cloud&Public&CES&Multi-threading Programming Model&File System&-&PaaS&Storage / computation\\ \hline
NG-TEPHRA&Grid / Cloud&Private / Public&CES&Workflow System&File System&-&IaaS&Computation \\ \hline
Cloudbrusting&Grid / Cloud&Private / Public&CES&Workflow System&File System&-&PaaS&Computation\\ \hline
SLOSH&Cloud&Public&CES&Workflow System&File System&-&PaaS&Computation\\ \hline
FMVE&Cloud&Private&SSH&Programming Model&File System&Authorization&IaaS&Storage\\ \hline
IAS&Cloud&Public&SSH&-&File System&Gateway&SaaS&Storage / computation\\ \hline
BetterLife2.0&Cloud&Public&SSH&MR Programming Model&File System&Authorization&IaaS&Computation\\ \hline
SoCC&Cloud&Public&SSH&-&File System&Authorization&PaaS&Computation\\ \hline
SCC&Cloud&Public&SSH&-&File System&Authorization&SaaS&Storage / computation\\ \hline
\end{tabular}
}
\end{sidewaystable*}
\vspace{-1.5ex}
\subsection{Observation 1: Ad Hoc Project Developments}
The development of eScience projects is ad hoc. Some applications
are developed on Amazon EC2
cloud~\cite{Dalman:2010:MFA:1932688.1933004}, some are deployed on
Windows Azure~\cite{humphrey:assessing} while some others are
developed on both cloud platforms to verify their
design~\cite{conf/eScience/MudgeCHT11}. However, it is not clearly
explained why certain cloud platforms should be chosen over others in
those projects.
For example, MFA~\cite{Dalman:2010:MFA:1932688.1933004} is a Life Science project developed with the cloud services provided by Amazon. Its aim is to investigate whether utilizing MapReduce framework is beneficial to perform simulation tasks in the area of Systems Biology.
The Monte Carlo bootstrap (MCB) method, an important building block of this application, is parallelized and implemented with Amazon Elastic MapReduce (EMR). Because of the long-running characteristic of MCB simulation, the MapReduce version of MCB is wrapped with a WSRF service which is specifically designed to support long-running operations. The experiments on a 64 node Amazon MapReduce cluster and a single node
implementation have shown up to 14 times performance gain, with a total cost of on-demand resources of \$11.
MODISAzure~\cite{li:escience} is a Climate and Earth science application deployed on Windows Azure to process large scale satellite data. The system is implemented with the Azure blob storage for data repository and Azure queue services for task scheduling.
However, neither of the two projects has technically explained their choice of cloud platforms. The MapReduce framework is supported by many cloud providers other than Amazon, such as Cloudera's Distribution of Hadoop (CDH), Azure HDInsight, etc. The storage and queue services are also supported by many cloud providers besides Azure. For example, Amazon provides S3 and EBS for storage and Simple Queue Service (SQS) correspondingly.
To compare the performance on different cloud platforms, an Physical science project Inversion ~\cite{conf/eScience/MudgeCHT11} deployed its application on both Amazon EC2 and Windows Azure with symmetry structures.
All these examples indicate that, current eScience application
owners are not quite clear how to choose cloud platforms. The only
way for them to distinguish the cloud performance differences is
through redundant implementation. Due to the diverse requirements of
projects in different areas, the lessons learned during the
implementation of one project may be useless to projects in other
research areas.
\vspace{-1.5ex}
\subsection{Observation 2: Common Development Softwares and Tools}
Many eScience projects, especially those in the same application
class, share common development softwares and tools. For example,
a workflow system such as Pegasus is widely used by Physics science
applications~\cite{Deelman:2008:CDS:1413370.1413421,Hoffa:2008:UCC:1488725.1488955}
where the jobs involve a number of analysis steps. Many works are proposing new
techniques in the cloud for scientific applications based on the workflow model~\cite{Malawski:2012:CDP:2388996.2389026,DBLP:journals/pvldb/OgasawaraOVDPM11}. However, current
commercial clouds do not include such scientific tools by default.
Different applications owners have to redundantly deploy and
In the Life science project MassMatrix~\cite{eScience.2011.15}, the authors used the Pegasus Workflow Management System (WMS) to create parallel workflows for a database program which searches proteins and peptides from tandem mass spectrometry data. DAGMan is used to manage the data dependencies in the workflow and Condor is used to schedule the workflow. Similarly, the Physical science projects Montage Comparison~\cite{Hoffa:2008:UCC:1488725.1488955} and Kepler~\cite{Vockler:2011:EUC:1996109.1996114} also utilized Pegasus-WMS, DAGMan and Condor to manage the execution of astronomy workflows. In all three applications, the authors have to separately deploy and configure all the required softwares such as Pegasus and Condor on the cloud platforms to make their applications run. Such re-implementation and re-design work requires good effort from the application owners and should be avoided.
\vspace{-1.5ex}
\subsection{Observation 3: Static Data Storage}
Data is the centric of eScience applications. Although the data size
of most eScience applications is enormous, we have observed that many
of the eScience data are statically stored. For example, the
SciHmm~\cite{10.1109/eScience.2011.17} project is making
optimizations on time and money for the phylogenetic analysis problem.
The data involved in this application are genetic data, which do not
require frequent update and can be viewed as statically stored.
Similarly, the bioinformatics data in the
CloudBLAST~\cite{Matsunaga:2008:CCM:1488725.1488913} project and the
astronomy data in the Montage
Example~\cite{Deelman:2008:CDS:1413370.1413421}, although may be
updated from time to time, are seldomly modified once obtained. Once
such data are uploaded to the cloud, not much networking is required
to modify them. This characteristic of scientific applications makes
them appropriate to be implemented on the cloud since networking
usually causes the most monetary cost and overhead.
\vspace{-1.5ex}
\subsection{Observation 4: Privacy vs. Sharing}
Data privacy and security is a big issue to scientific applications.
Traditional storage at Grid and private clusters provides a high
security level to scientific data through authorization and
authentication. However, there is an increasing need of eScience
applications to collaborate and share. Such need forces them to move
their applications from traditional computing platforms to the
public cloud, which in turn makes the privacy issue more serious.
One example is the Life science project CloudDRN~\cite{clouddrn:escience2013}. CloudDRN moves medical research data to the cloud to enable secure collaboration and sharing of distributed data sets. It relies on authentication and authorization to ensure security. Also, many applications in Social Science and Humanities have shown such a trend. The SoCC~\cite{Thaufeeg:2011:CES:2116259.2116588} project leverages social network platform for the sharing of resources in scientific communities. They provide a PaaS social cloud framework for users to share resources and support creating virtual organizations and virtual clusters for collaborating users. The SCC~\cite{10.1109/TSC.2011.39} project is also leveraging social network and cloud computing to enable sharing between social network users. But different from previous works, it argues that since online relationships in social networks are often based on the real world relationships, it can be used to infer the trust levels between users. The benefit is users can thus share data and applications with lower privacy concerns and security overheads. In both examples, the social network information is utilized to lower the privacy and security level of the applications. Different from the authorization and authentication in Grid, this is a new privacy ensurance method enabled by sharing in the cloud.
\vspace{-1.5ex}
\subsection{Observation 5: Performance vs. Scalability}
Comparison between the implementation on HPC with implementation on the cloud is always a hot topic for scientific applications.
The NG-TEPHRA~\cite{Nunez:2010:NMP:1932688.1933014} project performed a volcanic ash dispersion simulation on both grid and cloud, using the East Cluster at Monash University and the Amazon EC2 computing resources separately. Experiments show efficient results on both platforms and the EC2 results have shown very small differences in their standard deviation, indicating the consistent QoS of the cloud. The MODISAzure~\cite{li:escience} project implemented its application on both Windows Azure cloud and a local high-end desktop machine. Evaluation on a single computational instance in Windows Azure compared with that in the desktop machine shows the task execution time of the Azure instance is always longer than that of the desktop machine while the communication time is not as stable as the computation time and does not show consistent results during the experiments. When using multiple Azure instances to compare with desktop machines, the performance of the pipeline scales almost lineally with the number of Azure instances. Cloudbursting~\cite{humphrey:assessing} implemented its satellite image processing application with three different versions: an all-cloud design on Windows Azure, a version that runs in-house on Windows HPC clusters and a hybrid cloudbursting version that utilizes both in-house and cloud resources. The hybrid version achieves the best of the previous two versions, namely the development environment of a local machine and the scalability of the cloud. Their experimental results showed that the application is benefiting from the hybrid design, both on execution time and cost.
The common observation from the above examples is that the
performance comparison between cloud and HPC is application
dependent. Due to the scheduling and communication overhead, the
applications involving large and frequent data transfer over
multiple computation nodes usually perform worse on the cloud than
on HPC clusters which are equipped with high bandwidth network. But
the advantage of cloud is its high scalability. Users can easily and
quickly scale up and down their applications as needed, without
wasting too much money. Applications such as
Cloudbursting~\cite{humphrey:assessing} can benefit from this
characteristic of the cloud.
\vspace{-1.5ex}
\subsection{Observation 6: Utilizing vs. Advancing Cloud Computing}
Many projects in various research areas are trying to benefit from
the advanced cloud computing techniques. However, most of the
eScience projects in the cloud are simply using cloud computing
techniques to improve their applications.
For example, the Climate and Earth science project SLOSH~\cite{Chandrasekar:2012:MAS:2287036.2287040}
studies the efficiency of several middleware alternatives for storm surge predictions in Windows Azure. The Life science project
CloudBLAST~\cite{Matsunaga:2008:CCM:1488725.1488913} uses MapReduce
programming model to parallelize and speedup its programs, in order
to provide distributed services for bioinformatics applications.
Another Life science project
RDF~\cite{Newman:2008:SSS:1488725.1488885} is also using MapReduce
model and Hadoop implementation to speed up the querying and
reasoning over large scale resource description framework. Many
projects in Social Sciences and Humanities are utilizing science
gateways and social networks to enable collaboration.
FMVE~\cite{Curry:2008:FMV:1437901.1438789} proposes an IT model
based on several existing technologies to enable accessing and
hosting applications on social network for enterprises.
BetterLife2.0~\cite{Hu:2010:BLS:1931470.1931831} provides
intelligent reasoning for online and mobile users through social
network interfaces. LS Gateway~\cite{10.1109/eScience.2011.16}
builds a science gateway to facilitate the sharing between life
scientists. It adopts the OAuth2.0 protocol to support authorization
for users to share data or computation resources. Many other
softwares and tools, such as the Pegasus-WMS mentioned above, are
also utilized to parallelize eScience applications and to facilitate
their execution.
A few projects dig deeper and improve the cloud computing techniques to better fit their specific applications. For example, the CGL-MapReduce project~\cite{Ekanayake:2008:MDI:1488725.1488926} proposes a new MapReduce implementation for data intensive scientific data analysis to compare with Hadoop. CGL-MapReduce uses streaming for all communications, thus eliminates the overheads in communicating via a file system.
\vspace{-1.5ex}
\subsection{Observation 7: Monetary Cost is a Concern}
Many applications have reported their implementation on the cloud
platform from the performance perspective. However, another
important consideration of eScience in the cloud, the monetary cost,
is only studied by a few example systems.
MFA~\cite{Dalman:2010:MFA:1932688.1933004} reported a 14 times
speedup for their metabolic flux analysis on Amazon cloud with a
\$11 cost, which includes the EC2 cost, EMR cost and S3 storage
cost. SciHmm~\cite{10.1109/eScience.2011.17} aims to reduce monetary
cost for scientists via deciding the most adequate scientific
analysis method for the scientists a priori. It reported the cost
for the parallel execution of SciHmm on the Amazon EC2 cloud and
showed it's acceptable for most scientists (US \$47.79). Another
project SciDim~\cite{deOliveira:2013:DVC:2465848.2465852} aims to
optimize the total execution time of scientific workflows with
budget constraints through finding the best initial configuration of
the cloud. Cloud users have to pay for all the resources they have
used on the cloud, including computation, network and storage
resources, etc. Due to the large scale of data and long running
jobs, eScience applications have to carefully plan their use of
cloud to optimize their monetary cost. However, this planning is not
trivial and requires both domain expertise and knowledge on cloud
computing.
\vspace{-1.5ex}
\subsection{Summary}
Although the current eScience system designs are far from mature,
some common trends in all of the above eScience areas have shed
light on the importance of cloud to eScience: data are easier to get
and data size is increasing tremendously; the need of sharing data
and computation and collaboration between scientists are also
increasing. Cloud computing fits in the trends perfectly. The
scalability of the cloud could offer seemingly infinite storage and
computing resources for eScience applications along with the
increase of scientific data. Also, the easy access to the cloud
resources offers great opportunity for scientists in different
locations to work on the same project.
In spite of the silver lining of developing eScience applications in
the cloud, there are still problems to solve, challenges to
overcome. The easy access to the cloud brings the security issue,
the pricing model of the cloud brings the cost-efficiency problem
and the different design between different cloud platforms also
brings us the lock-in problem. All in all, for the development of
eScience applications in the cloud, we still have a long way to go.
\section{Taxonomy of eScience Services in the Cloud}\label{sec:taxo}
The taxonomy in this section gives clear classification of cloud
computing techniques used in eScience services from various
perspectives, including the computation \emph{infrastructure} for
eScience applications, the \emph{ownership} of cloud
infrastructures, the eScience \emph{application} types, the
\emph{processing tools} used for eScience applications, the
\emph{storage} model, the \emph{security} insurance method,
\emph{service models} of the cloud and the \emph{collaboration} goal
between different research groups. Figure~\ref{fig:taxonomy} gives a
clear structure of the taxonomy. This taxonomy reflects the
interplay between eScience and cloud computing. Some are mainly from
eScience's perspective, and some are mainly from cloud computing's
perspective. We introduce them one by one.
\begin{figure}
\centering{
\includegraphics[width=0.9\linewidth]{Taxonomy.eps}
\caption{Taxonomy of eScience in the Cloud} \label{fig:taxonomy}}\vspace{-2ex}
\end{figure}
\vspace{-1.5ex}
\subsection{Infrastructure}
The infrastructure of cloud provides access to compute and storage
resources for eScience applications in an on-demand fashion. Cloud
shares some similarities with Grid while at the same time is
modified to overcome the limitations of Grid.
Grid computing technologies are leveraged by cloud computing to
serve as its backbone and infrastructure support. Compared with
grids infrastructures, cloud has pricing and monitoring services.
Before 2007, most of eScience applications were implemented on Grid,
where scientific organizations share their spare resources.
One characteristic of Grid is that it assigns resources to users in
the unit of organizations and each individual organization holds
full control of the resources assigned to it. However, this kind of
resource assignment is not efficient. There are efforts in Grid to
use virtualization to change this situation. Nimbus scientific cloud
is one such effort that provides a virtual workspace for dynamic and
secure deployment in the Grid.~\cite{Hoffa:2008:UCC:1488725.1488955}
is an astronomy application implemented using Nimbus. Virtualization
hides from users the underlying infrastructures which are usually
heterogeneous hardware and software resources, and provides the
users with homogeneous and isolated virtual cloud environment.
In contrast to science clouds, several national cloud initiatives have
also been announced to provide on-demand resources for governmental
purposes~\cite{Lee:2010:PSC:1851476.1851542}, such as the US Cloud
Storefront~\cite{us:store}, the UK G-Cloud~\cite{uk:gcloud}, and the
Japanese Kasumigaseki~\cite{Kasumigaseki} cloud initiatives. Many
industry players also dive in the cloud business and provide users
with seemingly infinite public cloud resources. With the popularity
of cloud, many eScience applications are right now transferring to
the general public cloud infrastructures such as Amazon EC2, Windows
Azure to benefit from its high performance, scalability and
easy-access~\cite{li:escience,li:fault,humphrey:assessing,Subramanian:2010:RPS:1931470.1931899,citeulike:3523379,Nunez:2010:NMP:1932688.1933014}.
\vspace{-1.5ex}
\subsection{Ownership}
The ownership of cloud infrastructures can be classified as the following types: private, public, hybrid and federated.
Private clouds are infrastructures operated only for one single
organization, no matter who the infrastructures are managed by or
where they're located. The security level of private clouds is the
highest among the four types. eScience applications which have high
security requirements or posses highly sensitive data can be
deployed on private clouds. OpenNebula is the first open-source
software supporting private clouds deployment and is widely used by
industry and research users right now~\cite{opennebula}. But on the
other hand, such infrastructures do not benefit from the economic
models provided by the cloud since the application owners have to
``buy, build and manage'' the infrastructures to run their jobs.
In contrary, public clouds are more open, with their application,
storage and other resources available to the public on the
pay-as-you-go basis. There are quite a few commercial companies
providing public cloud services, such as Amazon, Windows and Google.
Many eScience applications have been deployed on this kind of cloud
platforms (e.g.,~\cite{citeulike:3523379,li:escience,li:fault})
because users can easily access to the public cloud resources with a
credit card.
\amelie{A federated cloud, also known as community cloud, is a
combination of two or more clouds from either
private, public or federated clouds.} In this combination,
the two or more clouds often have
common goals in security, compliance, jurisdiction, etc. Many
countries have built federated clouds to support the research and
education purpose of their own country. The EGI Federated Cloud Task
Force~\cite{federatedtf} is a federation of academic private clouds
to provide services for the scientific community. It has been used
by a wide areas of eScience applications, including Gaia which is a
global space astrometry mission~\cite{gaiaspace}, the Catania
Science Gateway Framework (CSGF)~\cite{catania} which provides
science gateway for scientific application users, etc.
\amelie{A hybrid cloud utilizes cloud resources from both private and public clouds. }
The benefit of hybrid clouds
captures the best of both worlds. When the resources of the private
cloud are enough to support current workload, the users will only
use the private cloud to benefit from its security and stability.
While the workload is bursting and the private cloud can no longer
support users' requirements, users can then request resources from
the public cloud to benefit from its scalability.
\vspace{-1.5ex}
\subsection{Application}
Cloud computing techniques have been applied to various eScience
applications. We have surveyed a lot of eScience papers and
summarized them in the following four categories based on their
areas of expertise: Life
sciences~\cite{Matsunaga:2008:CCM:1488725.1488913,Newman:2008:SSS:1488725.1488885},
Physical
sciences~\cite{Deelman:2008:CDS:1413370.1413421,Hoffa:2008:UCC:1488725.1488955},
Climate and Earth sciences~\cite{citeulike:3523379,li:escience} as
well as Social sciences and
Humanities~\cite{Curry:2008:FMV:1437901.1438789,Markatchev:2009:CIA:1723206.1724809}.
The life sciences comprise the scientific research on
living organisms, such as plants, animals, and
human beings. Specifically, it includes the fields of Biochemistry,
Biology, Ecology, Neuroscience, Psycology, etc. Physical sciences
encompass the fields of natural science and science that study
non-living systems, in contrast to the life sciences. Climate and
Earth science is the study of climate and the planet Earth. The climate
science is a sub-field under the atmospheric sciences which studies the
average weather conditions in a period of time while the earth science
includes the study of the atmosphere, hydrosphere, oceans and biosphere,
as well as the solid earth. Social sciences and Humanities is the field of study
concerned with society and human behaviors. It includes the scientific studies
on anthropology, archeology, criminology, economics, education, linguistics,
political science and international relations, sociology, geography,
history, law, and psychology.
We note that those application categories can have overlaps with
each other. There is no absolute boundary between each pair of
categories. Still, different categories have their own requirements
on the cloud. The first three categories, life sciences, physical
sciences and climate and earth sciences, are more focusing on
extending their works to large-scale datasets and thus require the
cloud platform to deal with large-scale data analysis efficiently.
The fourth category, social science and humanities, is more focusing
on collaboration and thus
requires the cloud platform to be easy for sharing.
\vspace{-1.5ex}
\subsection{Processing tools}
From the perspective of processing tools, we have witnessed deployment of classic workflow systems in the cloud, new cloud oriented programming models such as MapReduce and DryadLINQ, and hybrid of such newly proposed tools and models.
Scientific workflows have been proposed and developed to assist
scientists to track the evolution of their data and results. Many
scientific applications use workflow systems to enable the
composition and execution of complex analysis on distributed
resources~\cite{Deelman08workflowsand}. Montage is the example of a
widely used workflow for making large-scale, science-grade images
for astronomical research~\cite{Hoffa:2008:UCC:1488725.1488955}.
\amelie{Workflow management systems (WMSes) such as Pegasus~\cite{Vockler:2011:EUC:1996109.1996114} and Kepler~\cite{Wang20121630} are developed to manage and schedule the
execution of scientific workflows. WMSes rely on tools such as Directed Acyclic Graph Manager (DAGMan)~\cite{dagman} and Condor~\cite{condor} to manage the task dependencies within scientific
workflows, and to manage the resource acquisition from the cloud and
schedule the tasks of scientific workflows to cloud resources for execution.}
The appearance of cloud oriented programming models has great
promotion for the development of cloud computing. MapReduce is a
framework proposed by Google in 2004~\cite{Dean:2008:MSD:1327452.1327492}
for processing highly distributable problems using a large number of computers.
The framework is inspired
by the map and reduce functional language where the map function
takes in the input, partitions it into smaller sub-problems and
distributes them to multiple worker machines while the reduce
function collects the processing results to all the sub-problems and combines
them in some way to form the output. Users who need to parallel
their codes in order to run in distributed environment only need to
define their own map and reduce functions using the MapReduce
framework. This makes this framework especially suitable for
eScience application users who may not be experts in parallel
programming. We have observed the emergence of eScience applications
adopting MapReduce framework for data-intensive scientific
analyses~\cite{Ekanayake:2008:MDI:1488725.1488926}.
\vspace{-1.5ex}
\subsection{Storage}
Data is centric to eScience applications and data processing is
closely related to data storage. With the development of science,
the hypothesis to data has evolved from empirical description stage,
theoretical modelling stage, computational simulation stage to the
fourth paradigm today, the data-intensive scientific discovery
stage. Due to the vast data size, knowledge on the storage format of
scientific data in the cloud is very important. Normally, there are
two ways for data storage: data can be stored as files in file
systems or in databases.
Many distributed file systems have been proposed to provide
efficient and reliable access to large-scale data using
clusters of commodity
hardware~\cite{Ghemawat:2003:GFS:945445.945450,Shvachko:2010:HDF:1913798.1914427}.
For example, Hadoop Distributed File System (HDFS) is the primary
storage system used by Hadoop applications which utilize the
MapReduce model for large dataset processing. It creates multiple
replicas of data blocks and distributes them on compute nodes
throughout a cluster to enable reliable and rapid data access. When
well-designed, features of the HDFS system such as data locality and
data replication can further benefit the applications running on
Hadoop via locating computation close to the
data~\cite{Ramakrishnan:2010:DFP:1807128.1807145}.
\amelie{OpenStack Swift~\cite{swift} is a distributed storage system for unstructured data at large scale. It currently serves the largest object storage clouds, such as Rackspace Cloud Files and IBM Sftlayer Cloud.} The scalable and
highly efficient distributed file system models provide a promising
data storage approach for data intensive eScience applications.
Although in cloud, data storage usually relies on file systems,
using databases as storage has its advantages. First, it's easier to
do query in a database than in file systems since the files have to
be opened and closed in order to get the data stored in. Also,
database as storage can ensure data integrity. Till now, the
parallel capabilities and the extensibility of relational database
systems (RDBMS) were successfully used in a number of
computationally-intensive analytical applications. When facing
eScience applications, RDBMS have shown limitations. For one thing,
not all data in eScience is relational. Several classes of ``NoSQL"
databases have been proposed as alternatives to RDBMS to satisfy the
efficiency requirement of scientific data. For example, Amazon's
Dynamo~\cite{DeCandia:2007:DAH:1294261.1294281} is a key-value store
which supports storing and retrieving data by primary key. Its
key-value interface makes it especially simple and cost-effective to
the cloud users. Google's
Bigtable~\cite{Chang:2006:BDS:1267308.1267323} is a column-oriented
NoSQL database which provides column-wise as well as row-wise index
for data manipulation. This distributed storage system is designed
to managing large-scale structured data: ``petabytes of data across thousands of commodity
servers''~(\cite{Chang:2006:BDS:1267308.1267323}).
\amelie{Cassandra~\cite{Lakshman:2010:CDS:1773912.1773922} is another column-oriented distributed NoSQL database which provides highly available service to large amounts of structured data. }
HBase, a Hadoop
project modeled on Bigtable, has been applied to many eScience
applications such as bioinformatics
domains~\cite{citeulike:8467579}. Some array-based databases such as
SciDB~\cite{Brown:2010:OSL:1807167.1807271} have also been proposed
to satisfy the special requirement of array-based eScience
applications. SciDB is a scientific database system built from
ground up and has been applied to many scientific application areas,
including astronomy, earth remote sensing, environmental studies and
etc~\cite{scidb:usecase}.
\vspace{-1.5ex}
\subsection{Security}
Security is a big issue to eScience applications, especially for
those with sensitive data. On the one hand, scientists need to make
sure that the sensitive data is not stolen by people with vicious intension;
on the other hand, they also need to share data between scientific
groups working on the same project. Thus, how to find a balance
point between the two aims is a challenging problem. Currently, the
security level in the cloud is not very high compared to the Grid
computing platform and the common way to make sure of security in
the cloud is through logging in. Many eScience applications deployed
on the cloud have designed their own way of authentication and
authorization to ensure security. Such as
in~\cite{10.1109/eScience.2011.16}, Group Authorization Manager is
used to grant access permission based on user-defined access control
policy. The emerging Open Authorization (OAuth2.0) protocol is used
to support authorization for users to share datasets or computing
resources. In~\cite{Watson08cloudcomputing}, the Gold security
infrastructure is utilized to deal with the authentication and
authorization of users to keep sensitive data secure. Data owners
could specify their security preferences for the security
infrastructure to control role and task based access.
Unlike in Grid computing, where the authentication and authorization
mechanisms are mainly based on the public key infrastructure (PKI)
protocol~\cite{Alfieri05fromgridmap-file}, many Cloud vendors support
multiple security protocols such as OAuth2.0.
The adoption of the new security protocols opens up a new design space
for users to define rules of accessing secured resources and sharing data.
Via the authorization delegation in the security protocols,
users can define rules to allow easy collaborations between geographically
distributed parties without the involvement of administrators.
\vspace{-1.5ex}
\subsection{Service Models}
There are different levels of computing services offered by the cloud (i.e., IaaS, IaaS with tools, PaaS and SaaS). The IaaS model is the most basic cloud service model, where cloud providers only offer physical infrastructures to users, in the form of virtual machines, raw storage, and so on. Amazon EC2 is such an example~\cite{citeulike:3523379,Nunez:2010:NMP:1932688.1933014,eScience.2011.15}.
When deploying in an IaaS cloud, users have only to install operating system and application softwares as they need. In order to save users' effort of installation, platforms providing IaaS level services but with additional tools and softwares, have been proposed. Nimbus~\cite{Hoffa:2008:UCC:1488725.1488955} and Eucalyptus are examples of this kind. Nimbus is an open-source toolkit that aims to deliver IaaS
capabilities to the scientific community. It allows users to rapidly develop custom community-specific solutions.
In the PaaS model, cloud providers provide a computing platform typically equipped with operating system, programming language execution environment, database, and web server. Users of PaaS cloud can simply develop their applications on the platform without the effort and cost of buying and managing the underlying hardware and software layers. Typical examples of this type include Windows Azure, Google's App Engine.
In the SaaS model, cloud providers provide a computing platform installed with application softwares. Cloud
providers are in charge of the software maintenance and support. Cloud users are eased from the trouble of managing the cloud platform and can put more of their effort on application design. Notable service providers in this class include online storage services such as Dropbox and Google Drive, online education services such as Coursera.
\vspace{-1.5ex}
\subsection{Collaboration}
Another important usage of cloud for eScience applications is to
realize collaboration. In eScience, there are more and more projects
involving multiple groups closely working together on the same
project and those groups are sometimes spread worldwide. The
collaboration between the groups includes two different focuses. First
is on sharing storage, that is the sharing of scientific data and
analysis results between different research groups working on the
same project. Except sharing data for collaborative works, many
eScience applications open their data to the public for educational
purposes. Second is on sharing of computation, that is to share the
idle computing resources of one group to the others such that the
resource utilization rate of all the collaborating groups can be
highly improved. Collaboration between these groups is very
important to the success of the projects. With the development of
Internet and the popularity of social networks, many works are
leveraging cloud computing techniques and social network APIs to
provide a collaboration platform for eScience
researchers~\cite{Thaufeeg:2011:CES:2116259.2116588,10.1109/TSC.2011.39}.
|
\section{Introduction}
A good thermoelectric machine must be efficient at converting heat into electricity and also must provide a substantial electric output
power for practical applications. In the linear response regime, this requires optimizing simultaneously the figure of merit
$ZT=S^2GT/(K^e+K^{ph})$ and the power factor $\mathcal{Q}=S^2G$, $T$ being the operating temperature, $S$ the device thermopower,
$G$ its electrical conductance, and $K^e$ and $K^{ph}$ its electronic and phononic thermal conductances.
In the quest for high performance thermoelectrics, semiconductor nanowires (NWs) are playing a front
role,\cite{Hicks1993,Curtin2012,Blanc2013,Brovman2013,Stranz2013,Karg2013} apparently offering the best of three worlds.
First, an enhanced $S$ due to strongly broken and gate-tunable particle-hole symmetry.\cite{Brovman2013,Roddaro2013,Moon2013,Tian2012}
Second, a suppressed $K^{ph}$ by virtue of reduced dimensionality.\cite{Curtin2012,Blanc2013} Finally, a high power output thanks to
scalability, i.e. parallel stacking.\cite{Hochbaum2008,Curtin2012,Stranz2013,Atashbar2004,Yerushalmi2007,Wang2009,Zhang2010,Davila2011,Farrell2012,Pregl2013}\\
\indent
The perspective of developing competitive thermoelectric devices with the standard building blocks of the semiconductor industry has raised a great interest
in the scientific community over the last decade. On a technological standpoint, much effort has been put into the synthesis of dense NWs arrays with controlled
NW diameter, length, doping, and crystal orientation.\cite{Atashbar2004,Yerushalmi2007,Wang2009,Persson2009,Zhang2010,Farrell2012,Pregl2013}
Arrays made out of various semiconductor materials including e.g. Silicon, Silicon Germanium, Indium Arsenide, or Bismuth Telluride have thus been investigated.
Versatile measurement platforms have been developed to access the set of thermoelectric coefficients and the feasibility of NW-based thermoelectric modules
have been assessed.\cite{Abramson2004,Keyani2006,Hochbaum2008,Davila2011,Curtin2012,Stranz2013}
On the theory side, numerous calculations of $S$, $G$, $K^e$ and $K^{ph}$ of various single NWs have been carried out in the ballistic regime of electronic
transport~\cite{ODwyer2006,Markussen2009,Liang2010,Gumbs2010,Neophytou2010,Wang2014} or in the diffusive regime~\cite{Markussen2009} where a
semi-classical Boltzmann approach can be used.
\cite{Lin2000,Humphrey2005,Bejenari2008,Vo2008,Shi2009,Bejenari2010,Neophytou2012,Ramaya2012,Neophytou2014,Bejenari2014,Curtin2014,Davoody2014}
In two recent works,\cite{Bosisio20141,Bosisio20142} we took a different approach by considering the presence of electronic localized states randomly
distributed along the NWs and making up an impurity band in the semiconductor band gap. Such states are known to play a leading role in thin nanowires,
where localization effects are enhanced by low dimensionality and the system size rapidly exceeds the electron localization length. After a first study devoted
to the low temperature coherent regime,\cite{Bosisio20141} we investigated the phonon-assisted hopping regime~\cite{Bosisio20142} taking place at higher
temperatures and usually referred to as Mott activated regime. For a long time, thermoelectric transport in this regime has been somewhat overlooked in the
theoretical literature (with the exception of a few older works on bulk semiconductors\,\cite{Zvyagin1973,Zvyagin1991,Movaghar1981,Wysokinski1985}). In fact,
the problem of thermally-activated thermoelectric transport in NWs has been revisited only recently by Jiang \textit{et al.} in Refs.~\cite{Jiang2012,Jiang2013}.
However the case of gated NWs where band edges are approached has not been considered though band-edge transport, where particle-hole asymmetry is maximal,
is acknowledged to be the critical one for thermoelectric conversion~\cite{Mahan1989,Shakouri2011}. In our previous paper,\cite{Bosisio20142} we studied
the behavior of the thermopower $S$ and of the electrical conductance $G$ of single disordered and gated NWs in the activated regime. We obtained near
the band edges a substantial enhancement of the typical thermopower $S_0$ but also, unsurprisingly, a decrease of the typical conductance $G_0$ and large
sample-to-sample fluctuations of both $G$ and $S$. This is unsatisfactory if a reliable and efficient thermoelectric device is to be realized.\\
\indent In the present paper, we circumvent the latter shortcomings by considering a large set of NWs stacked in parallel in the field effect transistor (FET)
device configuration. Besides assessing the opportunities offered by band edge activated transport for energy harvesting, we show that activated transport through such a device
can be used for an electrostatic control of the heat exhange between the phonons and the electrons at sub-micron scales: Injecting the carriers through
the NWs gives rise to a local cooling [heating] effect near the source [drain] electrode when the chemical potential of the device probes the lower NWs band edge (and conversely when it probes the upper edge). This opens promising perspectives for a local management of heat and for cooling hot-spots in microelectronics.\\
\indent Hereafter, we study arrays of doped semiconductor NWs, arranged in parallel and attached to two electrodes. The NWs can be either
suspended or deposited onto an electrically and thermally insulating substrate. A metallic gate beneath the sample is used to
vary the carrier density inside the NWs. This corresponds to a setup in the FET configuration, as sketched in Fig.~\ref{fig:sys}. If the thermopower
or the thermal conductances are to be investigated, a heater (not shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:sys}) is added on one side of the sample to induce a temperature
gradient between the electrodes. We focus on a temperature range where the activated regime
proposed by Mott [Variable Range Hopping (VRH) regime] takes place, assuming \textit{(i)} that phonon-assisted transport occurs between localized
states of the NWs impurity band only and \textit{(ii)} that the substrate, or the NWs themselves if they are suspended, act as a phonon bath to which
NWs charge carriers are well coupled. We thus consider intermediate temperatures, where the thermal energy $k_BT$ is high enough to allow inelastic
hopping between Anderson localized states of different energies (typically a few Kelvin degrees), yet low enough to keep localization effects.
Such VRH regime is observed up to room temperatures in three-dimensional amorphous semiconductors~\cite{Shklovskii1984} and very likely up to
higher temperatures in the one-dimensional limit. Following Refs.~\cite{Jiang2012,Jiang2013,Bosisio20142}, we solve numerically the Miller-Abrahams
Random Resistor Network problem~\cite{Miller1960} for obtaining $S$, $G$, and $K^e$. This allows us to identify also the regions where heat exchanges
between the electrons and the phonons dominantly take place in the activated regime, notably when the chemical potential probes the edges of the
NWs impurity band.\\
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[clip,keepaspectratio,width=\columnwidth]{fig_parallel_sys.pdf}
\caption{(Color online) Array of suspended (a) and deposited (b) parallel NWs in the FET configuration. The NWs are drawn in green,
the two metallic electrodes in yellow, the substrate in grey and the back gate in dark grey. The blue [red] strip in (b) indicates the
substrate region that is cooled down [heated up] in the phonon-assisted activated regime, when a charge current flows from the left to the
right electrode and the gate voltage is tuned so as to probe the lower edge of the NWs impurity band.}
\label{fig:sys}
\end{figure}
\indent The model used throughout the paper is presented in Sec.~\ref{sec_method}, together with a summary of the method. We find in
Sec.~\ref{sec_scaling} that once a large set of NWs is stacked in parallel, the strong $G$, $S$ and $K^e$ fluctuations are suppressed.
Denoting by $G_0$, $S_0$ and $K^e_0$ the {\it typical} values for a single NW, we observe more precisely that the thermopower of a large
NW array self-averages ($S\to {S_0}$) while its electrical and electronic thermal conductances $G\to M {G_0}$, $K^e\to M {K^e_0}$ as the
number $M$ of wires in parallel increases (see Fig.~\ref{fig:fluctuations}). Taking full advantage of the gate, we move close to the impurity band
edges, where we recently obtained a drastic ${S_0}$ enhancement.\cite{Bosisio20142} We show in Sec.~\ref{sec_QZT} that in this regime a large
$S_0$ partly compensates an exponentially small $G_0$, so that substantial values of the power factor ${\mathcal Q}\approx MS_0^2G_0$ can be reached
upon stacking plenty of NWs in parallel [see Fig.~\ref{fig:QZT}(a)]. Remarkably, the electronic figure of merit $Z_eT=S^2GT/K^e$ is also found to
reach promising values $Z_eT\approx 3$ when ${\mathcal Q}$ is maximal [see Fig.~\ref{fig:QZT}(b)]. Furthermore, we discuss how the phononic thermal
conductance $K^{ph}$ will inevitably reduce the full figure of merit $ZT$ and argue that, even if record high $ZT$ is probably not to be sought in
such setups, the latter have the great advantage of offering at once high output power and reasonable efficiency with standard nanotechnology building
blocks.
The most important result of this paper is given in Sec.~\ref{sec_hotspots}.
We study how deposited NWs in the FET configuration can be used to manage heat in the substrate, generating hot/cold spots ``on demand''. The idea is
simple to grasp and relies on the calculation of the local heat exchanges between the NWs electrons and the substrate phonons: When the gate voltage is
adjusted such that the equilibrium electrochemical potential $\mu$ (defined in the electronic reservoirs) roughly coincides with one (say the lower)
impurity band edge, basically all energy states in the NWs lie above $\mu$. Therefore, if charge carriers injected into the system around $\mu$ are
to gain the other end, they need to (on the average) absorb phonons at the entrance so as to jump to available states, and then to release phonons
when tunneling out (again at $\mu$). This generates in the nearby substrate regions cold strips near the injecting electrode and hot strips near the
drain electrode [see Figs.~\ref{fig:sys}(b) and~\ref{fig:hotspots}]. These strips get scrambled along the nanowires if $\mu$ does not probe the edges of the NWs impurity band.
Such reliable and tunable cold spots may be exploited in devising thermal management tools for high-density circuitry, where ever increasing power densities
have become a critical issue.\cite{Vassighi2006} Moreover, the creation/annihilation of the cold/hot strips can be controlled by the back gate voltage.
Note that the underlying mechanism governing the physics of VRH transport at the NWs band edges is somewhat reminiscent of the mechanism of "cooling by
heating" put forward in Refs.~\cite{Pekola2007,Rutten2009,Levy2012,Marl2012,Cleuren2012}, which also exploits the presence of a third bosonic bath in
addition to the two electronic reservoirs. In our case, bosons are phonons provided mainly by the substrate; in other setups, bosons are photons provided
by laser illumination (or more simply by the sun for a photovoltaic cell). All those studies fall into the growing category of works dealing with
boson-assisted electronic transport that have been shown to open promising perspectives for heat management.
\section{Model and method}
\label{sec_method}
Architecture and/or material specific predictions, though very important for practical engineering purposes, are however {\it not} our concern at present.
On the contrary, our goal is to reach conclusions which are as general as possible, relying on a bare-bone but widely applicable Anderson model devised to
capture the essentials of the physics we are interested in. We consider a set of $M$ NWs in parallel. Each NW is modeled as a chain of length $L$ described
by a one-dimensional (1D) Anderson tight-binding Hamiltonian with on-site disorder~\cite{Bosisio20142}:
\begin{equation}
\label{eq_modelAnderson1D}
\mathcal{H}=-t\sum_{i=1}^{N-1}\left(c_i^{\dagger}c_{i+1}+\text{h.c.}\right)+\sum_{i=1}^{N}(\epsilon_i+V_g) c_i^{\dagger}c_i\,.
\end{equation}
Here $N$ is the number of sites in the chain ($L=Na$ with $a$ lattice spacing), $c^{\dagger}_i$ and $c_i$ are the electron creation and
annihilation operators on site $i$ and $t$ is the hopping energy ({\it inter}-wire hopping is neglected). We assume that no site can be doubly
occupied due to Coulomb repulsion, but otherwise neglect interactions.\cite{Ambegaokar1971} The site energies $\epsilon_i$ are uncorrelated
random numbers uniformly distributed in the interval $[-W/2,W/2]$, while $V_g$ is a constant (tunable) potential due to the back gate.
The electronic states are localized at certain positions $x_i$ with localization lengths $\xi_i$ and eigenenergies $E_i$. The $E_i$'s lie within
the NW impurity band whose center can be shifted with the gate voltage $V_g$. For simplicity's sake, we generate randomly the positions
$x_i$ along the chain (with a uniform distribution) and assume $\xi_i=\xi(E_i)$, where $\xi(E)$ characterizes the exponential decay of the
\textit{typical} conductance $G_0\sim\exp(-2L/\xi)$ of the 1D Anderson model at zero temperature and energy $E$. Analytical expressions giving $\xi(E)$
in the weak disorder limit of the Anderson model are given in Ref.~\cite{Bosisio20141}.
\indent The NWs are attached to two electronic reservoirs $L$ and $R$, and to a phonon bath, i.e. the system is in a three-terminal configuration.
Particles and heat(energy) can be exchanged with the electrodes, but only heat(energy) with the phonon bath. At equilibrium the whole system is
thermalized at a temperature $T$ and both $L$ and $R$ are at electrochemical potential $\mu$ (set to $\mu\equiv 0$, at the band center
when $V_g=0$). A voltage and/or temperature bias between the electrodes drives an electron current through the NWs. Hereafter we consider the
linear response regime, valid when small biases $\delta\mu\equiv\mu_L-\mu_R$ and $\delta T\equiv T_L-T_R$ are applied.
\indent We study the inelastic activated regime. Following ref.\cite{Jiang2013}, we assume that the charge carriers (say electrons of
charge $e$) tunnel elastically from reservoir $\alpha=L,R$ into some localized states $i$ whose energies $E_i$ are located in a window of
order $k_BT_\alpha$ around $\mu_\alpha$. They then proceed via phonon-assisted hops to the other end, finally tunneling out. The maximal
carriers hop along the NWs is of the order of Mott length $L_M$ in space (or Mott energy $\Delta$ in energy)~\cite{Bosisio20142}. At the
lowest temperatures considered in this work, $\xi(\mu)\ll L_M\ll L$ and transport is of Variable Range Hopping (VRH) type. An increasing
temperature shortens $L_M$ until $L_M\approx\xi(\mu)$, when the Nearest Neighbors Hopping (NNH) regime is reached. The crossover
VRH$\rightarrow$NNH takes place roughly at Mott temperature $T_M$, whose dependence on $V_g$ can be found in Ref.~\cite{Bosisio20142}.
\indent The \textit{total} electron and heat currents flowing through the \textit{whole} array are calculated by solving the Random Resistor
Network problem.\cite{Miller1960,Ambegaokar1971} The method is summarized in Appendix \ref{app_rrn}. It takes as input parameters the rate
$\gamma_e$ quantifying the coupling between the NWs (localized) and the reservoirs (extended) states, and the rate $\gamma_{ep}$ measuring the
coupling to the NWs and/or substrate phonons. We point out that we go beyond the usual approximation~\cite{Miller1960,Ambegaokar1971,Jiang2013}
neglecting the $\xi_i$'s variations from state to state [$\xi_i\approx\xi(\mu)$], the latter being inappropriate close to the band edges, where
$\xi_i$ varies strongly with the energy. Following Ref.~\cite{Bosisio20142} the random resistor network is then solved for $\xi_i\neq\xi_j$.
The particle and heat currents thus obtained are related to the small imposed biases $\delta\mu, \delta T$ via the Onsager matrix,\cite{Callen1985}
which gives access to $G$, $K^e$ and $S$.
\section{Scaling of the thermoelectric coefficients with the number of nanowires}
\label{sec_scaling}
The typical conductance $G_0$ and thermopower $S_0$ of a single NW were studied in Ref.~\cite{Bosisio20142}. They are defined as the {\it median} of
the distribution of $\ln G$ and $S$, obtained when considering a large statistical ensemble of disorder configurations. In Fig.~\ref{fig:fluctuations}
we show that, if the system is made of a sufficiently large number $M$ of parallel NWs, the \emph{overall} electrical conductance scales as the number
of wires times the typical NW value ($G\approx M\, G_0$), while the thermopower averages out to the typical value of a single wire ($S\approx S_0$).
For completeness the {\it mean} values are also shown and seen to be a less accurate estimate. As expected, convergence is faster at higher temperatures.
Identical results have been obtained for the electronic thermal conductance $K^e\approx MK^e_0$ (not shown).
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[keepaspectratio,width=\columnwidth]{G_S_fluctuations.pdf}
\caption{Convergence of $G/M$ (left, in units of $e^2/\hbar$) and $S$ (right) with the number $M$ of parallel NWs. Symbols correspond to
$V_g=1.9\,t$ ({\large$\circ$}), $2.1\,t$ ({\scriptsize{\color{red}$\square$}}) and $2.3\,t$ ({\large{\color{blue}$\diamond$}}) at $k_BT=0.1\,t$, and
$V_g=1.9\,t$ at $k_BT=0.5\,t$ ({\scriptsize{\color{green}$\triangle$}}). The horizontal lines indicate the corresponding mean values (dashed lines)
and typical values (solid lines) of $\ln G$ and $S$ of a single wire ($M=1$). Parameters: $W=t$, $\gamma_e=\gamma_{ep}=t/\hbar$ and $L=450a$.}
\label{fig:fluctuations}
\end{figure}
\section{Power factor and figure of merit}
\label{sec_QZT}
By stacking a large number $M$ of NWs in parallel, the device power factor can be enhanced
$\mathcal{Q}\approx MS_0^2G_0$ {\it without} affecting its electronic figure of merit $Z_eT\approx S_0^2G_0T/K_0^e$. Fig.~\ref{fig:QZT} shows
how the asymptotical $\mathcal{Q}/M$ and $Z_eT$ values (reached when $M\gtrsim 100$) depend on the gate voltage $V_g$ and on the temperature $T$.
We observe in panel~(a) that the power factor is maximum for $\mu$ close to the impurity band edge (black solid line) and for VRH temperatures.
This parameter range represents the best compromise between two opposite requirements: maximizing the thermopower (hence favoring low $T$
and large $V_g$) while keeping a reasonable electrical conductance (favoring instead higher $T$ and $V_g\approx 0$). Formulas previously
reported,\cite{Bosisio20142} giving the $T$- and $V_g$-dependence of $G_0$ and $S_0$, let us predict that $\mathcal{Q}$ is maximal when
$|S_0|=2k_B/|e|\approx 0.2\,\mathrm{mV}\,\mathrm{K}^{-1}$ (black dashed line). A comparison between panels (a) and (b) of Fig.~\ref{fig:QZT}
reveals that, in the parameter range corresponding to the best power factor ($V_g\sim2.5t, k_BT\sim0.6t$), $Z_eT\simeq 3$, a remarkably large value.
Much larger values of $Z_eT$ could be obtained at lower temperatures or far outside the band, but they are not of interest for practical
purposes since in those regions $\mathcal{Q}$ is vanishing.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[keepaspectratio,width=0.9\columnwidth]{QZT.pdf}
\caption{(Color online) $\mathcal{Q}/M$ in units of $k_B^2/\hbar$ (a) and $Z_eT$~(b) as a function of $T$ and $V_g$. Data are shown in the
large~$M$ limit ($M=150$) where there is self-averaging. The horizontal lines give $V_g$'s value at which the band edge is probed at
$\mu$ (below [above] it, one probes the inside [outside] of the impurity band). The red dashed lines $T=T_M$ separate the VRH ($T\lesssim T_M$)
and the NNH ($T\gtrsim T_M$) regimes. The black dashed line in (a) is the contour along which $S_0=2k_B/e$. Parameters:
$W=t$, $\gamma_e=\gamma_{ep}=t/\hbar$ and $L=450a$.}%
\label{fig:QZT}
\end{figure}
In Appendix \ref{app_size}, $\mathcal{Q}$ and $Z_eT$ are shown to be roughly independent of the NWs length $L$ (for $L\gtrsim L_M$) in the
temperature and gate voltage ranges explored in Fig.~\ref{fig:QZT}. Moreover $\mathcal{Q}/\gamma_e$ and $Z_eT$ are almost independent
of the choice of the parameters $\gamma_e$ and $\gamma_{ep}$, provided $\gamma_{ep}\gtrsim\gamma_e$ (see Appendix~\ref{app:depgammaeep}).
When $\gamma_{ep}<\gamma_e$, both quantities are found to be (slightly) reduced.\\
\indent Let us now estimate the order-of-magnitude of the device performance. The substrate (or the NWs themselves if they are suspended)
is assumed to supply enough phonons to the NWs charge carriers for the condition $\gamma_{ep}\gtrsim\gamma_e$ to hold. Besides, we keep explicit
the $\gamma_e$-linear dependence of $\mathcal{Q}$ (and of $K^e_0$ that will soon be needed). $\gamma_e$ depends on the quality of the metal/NW contact.
We estimate it to be within the range $0.01-1$ in units of $t/\hbar$, where $t/k_B\approx 150\,\mathrm{K}$ throughout
\footnote{We estimated $t$ by comparing the band width $4t+W$ in our model to the typical width of the impurity band in highly doped Silicon NWs
(see for instance Ref.~\cite{Salleh2011}). Note that the NWs are then depleted by field effect.}.
This yields $\gamma_e\approx 0.02-2\times 10^{13}\,\mathrm{s}^{-1}$. For the sake of brevity, we introduce the dimensionless number
$\tilde{\gamma}_e=\gamma_e\hbar/t$. Focusing on the region of Fig.~\ref{fig:QZT}(a) where the power factor is maximal, we evaluate the typical
output power and figure of merit than can be expected. We first notice that power factor $\mathcal{Q}/M\approx4k_B^2/h$ maximum values in
Fig.~\ref{fig:QZT}(a), obtained with $\tilde{\gamma}_e=1$, would yield $\mathcal{Q}\approx 7\tilde{\gamma}_e\times 10^{-7}\,\mathrm{W}.\mathrm{K}^{-2}$
for a chip with $M\approx 10^5$ parallel NWs. Since $\mathcal{Q}$ controls the maximal output power $P_{max}$ that can be extracted from
the setup as $P_{max}=\mathcal{Q}(\delta T)^2/4$,\cite{Benenti2013} one expects $P_{max}\approx 20\tilde{\gamma}_e\,\mu\mathrm{W}$ for a small temperature
bias $\delta T\approx 10\,\mathrm{K}$. In this region a large value $Z_eT\approx 3$ is obtained, but to estimate the full figure of merit
$ZT=Z_eT/(1+K^{ph}/K^{e})$, the phononic part $K^{ph}$ of the thermal conductance must also be taken into account. To limit the reduction of $ZT$
by phonons, the setup configuration with suspended nanowires is preferable [Fig.~\ref{fig:sys}(a)]. In this case $K^{ph}\approx MK_0^{nw}$, $K_0^{nw}$
being the typical phononic thermal conductance of a single NW, and has to be compared to $K^{e}\approx MK_0^{e}$. Introducing the corresponding
conductivities $\kappa$'s, the ratio $K^{ph}/K^{e}\approx \kappa_0^{nw}/\kappa_0^{e}$ is to be estimated. Our numerical results obtained for 1D NWs
show $K_0^{e}\approx 1.5\tilde{\gamma}_e k_Bt/\hbar$ in the range of interest where $\mathcal{Q}$ is maximal and $Z_eT\approx 3$ (at $V_g=2.5t$ and
$k_BT=0.6t$, keeping other parameters in Fig.~\ref{fig:QZT} unchanged). To deduce the corresponding conductivity $\kappa_0^{e}$, the NW aspect ratio must
be specified. We consider for instance the case of $1\,\mu\mathrm{m}$-long NWs with a diameter of $20\,\mathrm{nm}$, for which our pure 1D model is
expected to hold\footnote{The use of the 1D model is justified at a semi-quantitative level if the nanowire diameter is smaller than the Mott hopping
length $L_M$ (the typical length of an electron hop along the nanowire).}, at least semi-quantitatively. Thereby we get
$\kappa_0^{e}\approx 1\tilde{\gamma}_e\,\mathrm{W}/(\mathrm{K.m})$, while the measured thermal conductivity of Si NWs of similar
geometry is $\kappa_0^{nw}\approx 2\,\mathrm{W}/(\mathrm{K.m})$ at $T\approx 100\,\mathrm{K}$.\cite{Li2003} We thus evaluate for suspended NWs
$ZT\approx Z_eT/(1+2/\tilde{\gamma}_e)$, i.e. $ZT\approx 0.01-1$ for $Z_eT\approx 3$ and $\tilde{\gamma}_e=0.01-1$. Those estimations though rough
are extremely encouraging as they show us that such a simple and Si-based device shall generate high electrical power from wasted heat (scalable
with $M$, for $M$ large enough) with a fair efficiency (independent of $M$, for $M$ large enough).\\
\indent Let us note that maximizing $\gamma_e$ is important for achieving high $\mathcal{Q}$ and $ZT$. However at the same time
$\gamma_{ep}\gtrsim\gamma_e$ should preferably hold. If the NWs themselves do not ensure a large enough $\gamma_{ep}$, the use of a
substrate providing phonons is to be envisaged. Yet, this will add a detrimental contribution $K^{sub}$ to $K^{ph}$. In general the
substrate cross-section ($\Sigma^{sub}$) will be substantially larger than the NWs one ($M\Sigma^{nw}$). Thus, even for a good thermal
insulator such as SiO$_2$, with thermal conductivity $\kappa^{sub}\approx 0.7\,\mathrm{W}/(\mathrm{K.m})$ at
$T\approx 100\,\mathrm{K}$,\cite{Hung2012} $Z/Z_e=[1+(\kappa^{sub}\Sigma^{sub}+M\kappa_0^{nw}\Sigma^{nw})/M\kappa_0^{e}\Sigma^{nw}]^{-1}\ll1$.
Better ratios $Z/Z_e$ could be obtained for substrates with lower $K^{sub}$ (Silica aerogels,\cite{Hopkins2011} porous silica,\cite{Scheuerpflug1992}
very thin substrate layer) but they will not necessarily guarantee a good value of $\gamma_{ep}$ (and hence of $Z_e$). Clearly, finding a balance between
a large $\gamma_{ep}$ and a low $K^{ph}$ is a material engineering optimization problem. Though the presence of a substrate appears detrimental for
efficiently harvesting electrical energy from the wasted heat, we shall now see how it could be used for heat management at the nanoscale.
\begin{figure*}
\includegraphics[keepaspectratio,width=0.9\textwidth]{HotSpots.pdf}
\caption{(Color online) Map of the local heat exchanges $\mathcal{I}^Q_{x,y}$ between the NWs and the phonon bath (substrate), in units of $10^{-3}t^2/\hbar$,
at the band center ($V_g=0$, left) and near the lower band edge ($V_g=2.25t$, right), for $k_BT=0.25t$ (top) and $k_BT=0.5t$ (bottom). When phonons are
absorbed by NWs charge carriers in the small area of size $\Lambda_{ph}^2$ around $(x,y)$, $\mathcal{I}^Q_{x,y}>0$ and the substrate below is locally cooled
down (blue). When phonons are released, $\mathcal{I}^Q_{x,y}<0$ and the substrate is locally heated up (red). As explained in the text, we took
$\Lambda_{ph}=75a$ for $k_BT=0.5t$ and $\Lambda_{ph}=150a$ for $k_BT=0.25t$. Note that the formation of hot and cold spots at the boundaries of the NWs is
clearly visible for both temperatures when $V_g$ is tuned in order to probe their band edges (right), while no net effect is evident in absence of any
gate voltage (left). In all panels, data have been plotted for $M=150$ NWs of length $L=1500a$ with interspacing $15a$. Other parameters are $W=t$,
$\gamma_{e}=\gamma_{ep}=t/\hbar$ and $\delta\mu=10^{-3}t$.}%
\label{fig:hotspots}
\end{figure*}
\section{Gate-controlled creation/annihilation of cold/hot strips}
\label{sec_hotspots}
Hereafter, we consider the deposited setup sketched in Fig.~\ref{fig:sys}(b) and assume a constant temperature
$T$ everywhere. An intriguing feature of this three-terminal setup is the possibility to generate/control hot/cold strips close to the substrate
boundaries by applying a bias $\delta\mu/e$, if one tunes $V_g$ for probing the NWS band edges. This effect is a direct consequence of the heat
exchange mechanism between electrons in the NWs and phonons in the substrate. Indeed, given a pair of localized states $i$ and $j$ inside a NW,
with energies $E_i$ and $E_j$ respectively, the heat current absorbed from (or released to) the phonon bath by an electron in the transition
$i\to j$ is $I_{ij}^{Q}=\left(E_j-E_i\right)I^N_{ij}$, $I^N_{ij}$ being the hopping particle current between $i$ and $j$.\cite{Bosisio20142}
The overall hopping heat current through each localized state $i$ is then found by summing over all but the $i$-th states:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:IQ_i}
I_{i}^{Q}=\sum_j I_{ij}^Q = \sum_{j} \left(E_j-E_i\right)I^N_{ij}
\end{equation}
with the convention that $I^Q_{i}$ is positive (negative) when it enters (leaves) the NWs at site $i$.
Since the energy levels $E_i$ are randomly distributed, the $I^Q_i$'s (and in particular their sign) fluctuate from site to site
(see Fig.~\ref{fig:HotSpots_Vg2.25_kT0.05} in Appendix~\ref{app_lambdaph} for an illustration). The physically relevant quantities are
however not the $I^Q_i$'s, rather their sum within an area $\Lambda_{ph}\times\Lambda_{ph}$, where $\Lambda_{ph}$ is the phonon thermalization
length in the substrate (i.e. the length over which a {\it local} substrate temperature can be defined, see Appendix~\ref{app_lambdaph} for an estimation).
Given a point $(x,y)$ and a $\Lambda_{ph}\times\Lambda_{ph}$ area centered around it, such sum is denoted $\mathcal{I}^Q_{x,y}$.
If $\mathcal{I}^Q_{x,y}>0$ $[<0]$, a volume $\Lambda_{ph}^3$ of the substrate beneath $(x,y)$ is cooled [heated] \footnote{Practically, we map the 2D
parallel NW array onto a square grid, and for each square of size $\Lambda_{ph}^2$ we calculate the net heat current entering the NWs. For better
visibility, data are then smoothed (with a standard Gaussian interpolation) to produce the heat map shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:hotspots}.}. Deeper
than $\Lambda_{ph}$ away from the surface, the equilibrium temperature $T$ is reached.\\
\indent Fig.~\ref{fig:hotspots} shows how $\mathcal{I}^Q_{x,y}$ depends on the coordinates $x, y$ in the two-dimensional parallel NW array.
Left and right panels show respectively the situation in the absence of a gate voltage, when charge carriers tunnel into/out of NWs at
the impurity band \textit{center}, and the opposite situation when a large gate voltage is applied in order to inject/extract carriers at
the band \textit{bottom}. In both cases, two values of the temperature are considered (top/bottom panels). All other parameters are fixed.
Note that data are plotted for the model introduced in Sec.~\ref{sec_method}, having estimated $a\approx 3.2\,\mathrm{nm}$,
$t/k_B\approx 150\,\mathrm{K}$, and $\Lambda_{ph}\approx 480[240]\,\mathrm{nm}\approx 150[75]a$ for SiO$_2$ substrate at the temperatures considered,
$T=0.25[0.5]t/k_B\approx37.5[75]\,\mathrm{K}$. Those estimates are discussed in Appendix \ref{app_lambdaph}. In the left panels of Fig.~\ref{fig:hotspots},
the heat maps show puddles of positive and negative $\mathcal{I}^Q_{x,y}$, corresponding respectively to cooled and heated regions in the substrate below
the NW array. They are the signature of random absorption and emission of substrate phonons by the charge carriers, all along their propagation through
the NWs around the band center. In the right panels, the regions of positive and negative $\mathcal{I}^Q_{x,y}$ are respectively confined to the NWs
entrance and exit. This is due to the fact that charge carriers entering the NWs at $\mu$ around the band bottom find available states to jump to
(at a maximal distance $L_M$ in space or $\Delta$ in energy~\footnote{Here $L_M\approx 10.6a$ and $\Delta\approx 2.4t$ for $k_BT=0.25t$, while
$L_M\approx 7.5a$ and $\Delta\approx 3.3t$ for $k_BT=0.5t$.}) only \textit{above} $\mu$. Therefore, they need to absorb phonons to reach higher energies
states (blue region). After a few hops, having climbed at higher energies, they continue propagating with equal probabilities of having upward/downward
energy hops (white region). On reaching the other end they progressively climb down, i.e. release heat to the substrate (red region), until they reach $\mu$
and tunnel out into the right reservoir. As a consequence, the substrate regions below the NWs extremities are cooled on the source side and heated
on the drain side [see Fig.~\ref{fig:sys}(b)]. A comparison between top and bottom panels of Fig.~\ref{fig:hotspots} shows us that the heat maps are not
much modified when the temperature is doubled [from $k_BT=0.25t$ (top) to $k_BT=0.5t$ (bottom)]. The fact that the surface $\Lambda_{ph}\times\Lambda_{ph}$
inside which the heat currents are summed up is smaller at larger temperature ($\Lambda_{ph}=75a$ at $k_BT=0.5t$ instead of $\Lambda_{ph}=150a$ at $k_BT=0.25t$)
is compensated by a smoothing of the $I^Q_i$'s fluctuations. This makes the hot and cold strips still clearly visible and well-defined in the bottom right
panel of Fig.~\ref{fig:hotspots}.\\
\indent We point out that the maximum values of $\mathcal{I}^Q_{x,y}$ are roughly of the same order of magnitude with or without the gate (see scale
bars in Fig.~\ref{fig:hotspots}). The advantage of using a gate is the ability to split the positive and negative $\mathcal{I}^Q_{x,y}$ regions
into two well separated strips in the vicinity of the injection and drain electrodes. One can then imagine to exploit the cold strip in the substrate
to cool down a hot part of an electronic circuit put in close proximity. Let us also stress that the assumption of elastic tunneling processes between
the electrodes and the NWs is not necessary to observe the gate-induced hot/cold strips. The latter arise from the ``climbing'' up/down in energy that
charge carriers, at $\mu$ far into the electrodes, must undergo in order to hop through the NWs (hopping transport being favored around the impurity
band center in the NWs). Though in our model heat exchanges take place only inside the NWs, phonon emission/absorption will actually take place also at
the electrodes extremities, roughly within an inelastic relaxation length from the contacts. This has clearly no qualitative impact, as it only amounts
to a slight shift/smearing of the hot/cold strips. \\
\indent Finally, let us estimate the cooling powers associated to the data shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:hotspots}. Assuming again $t/k_B\approx 150\,\mathrm{K}$
and $a\approx 3.2\,\mathrm{nm}$, we find that a value of $\mathcal{I}^Q_{x,y}=10^{-3}(t^2/\hbar)$ in Fig.~\ref{fig:hotspots}(bottom) corresponds to a cooling
power density of the order of $8.10^{-10}\,\mathrm{W}.\mu\mathrm{m}^{-2}$ at the temperature considered $T=0.5t/k_B\approx 77\,\mathrm{K}$ (the boiling
temperature of liquid nitrogen at atmospheric pressure), for which $\Lambda_{ph}\approx 240\,\mathrm{nm}$ in SiO$_2$. We underline that this order of magnitude
is obtained for a given set of parameters, in particular for an infinitesimal bias $\delta\mu=10^{-3}t \approx 13\, \mu V$ that guarantees to remain in the
linear response regime. It should not be taken in the strict sense but only as a benchmark value to fix ideas. For instance, according to this estimation, one
should be able to reach cooling power densities $\approx 6.10^{-8}\,\mathrm{W}.\mu\mathrm{m}^{-2}$ by applying a larger bias
$\delta\mu/e \approx 1\,\mathrm{mV}$. To be more specific, we note that the geometry considered in Fig.~\ref{fig:hotspots} is realized\footnote{Data shown
in Fig.~\ref{fig:hotspots} result from numerical simulations run for a set of 150 1D NWs (of length $1500a$) separated from each other by a distance $15a$.
They are expected to describe the physics of realistic arrays made of 150 NWs covering an area of width $150\times 15a\approx 7.2\mu\mathrm{m}$ and length
$1500a\approx 5\mu\mathrm{m}$, taking again $a\approx 3.2\,\mathrm{nm}$. For instance, 150 NWs with $10\,\mathrm{nm}$ diameter and $20\%$ packing density.
Other configurations could be considered as well, as long as the NW diameter is small enough for the 1D model to make sense and the packing density does
not exceed the typical values reachable experimentally.} with a bidimensional array of 150, $5\,\mu$m-long NWs, covered by two $7.2\,\mu$m-long (or longer)
metallic electrodes. For this geometry and at $T\approx 77\,\mathrm{K}$, the areas of the cooled and heated regions are approximately $7.2 \times 0.25 \approx 2
\mu\mathrm{m}^{2}$ (see the lower right panel of Fig.~\ref{fig:hotspots}) but if one considered $1\,\mathrm{cm}$ electrodes covering $2.10^{5}$ NWs, those areas
would naturally extend. Thus, for a bias $\delta\mu/e \approx 1\,\mathrm{mV}$ and a temperature $T \approx 77 \,\mathrm{K}$, our setup would allow to take
$\approx 0.15\,\mathrm{mW}$ in a strip of $1\,\mathrm{cm}\times 0.25\,\mu\mathrm{m}$ area and $0.25\,\mu\mathrm{m}$ thickness located in the SiO$_2$ substrate
below the source electrode and to transfer it in another strip of similar size located at $5\,\mu\mathrm{m}$ away below the drain electrode. Obviously, the
longer the NWs, the longer would be the scale of the heat transfer. The larger the bias and the number of used NWs, the larger would be the heat transfer.
\section{Conclusion}
The low carrier density of a doped semiconductor can be varied by applying a voltage on a (back, side or front) metallic gate. This led us
to study thin and weakly doped semiconductor NWs, where electron transport is activated, instead of thick metallic NWs (with much larger electrical and
thermal conductances) where the field effects are negligible. Considering arrays of these NWs in the FET configuration, we have focused our attention
on the activated regime which characterizes a very broad temperature domain in amorphous semiconductors.\cite{Ambegaokar1971} When charge transport between localized states
is thermally assisted by phonons, we have shown that the absorption or the emission of phonons in strips located near the source and drain electrodes
can be controlled with a back gate. This opens new perspectives for managing heat at submicron scales. By tuning the electrochemical potential $\mu$ near
the band edges of the NWs impurity band, we have studied how to take advantage of electron-phonon coupling for energy harvesting and hot spot cooling.
Our estimates indicate that large power factors are reachable in these arrays, with good thermoelectric figures of merit.
\acknowledgments
This work was supported by CEA within the DSM-Energy Program (project E112-7-Meso-Therm-DSM). We thank O. Bourgeois, Y. Imry and F. Ladieu for stimulating
discussions.
|
\section{Introduction}
The Riemann Mapping theorem states that any simply connected, open, proper
subset of $\mathbb{C}$ can be conformally mapped to $\mathbb{D}$, and that
this map is unique up to Mobius transformations that fix the disk. Thurston
formulated a way to approximate the mapping guaranteed by the theorem (for
precompact domains in $\mathbb{C}$), and his formulation was proven to
converge to that mapping by Rodin and Sullivan \cite{RS}. Thurston's discrete
conformal mappings are based on mappings of circle packings, and central to
the argument is a theorem that a circle packing of a simply connected, bounded
domain can be deformed to a circle packing of $\mathbb{D}$ while maintaining
the tangency pattern but allowing the circle radii to change. We call such
theorems \emph{discrete uniformization theorems}. The original proofs of this
theorem and some of its generalizations come from analogous statements on the
sphere and other surfaces (\cite{Koebe} \cite{Andr} \cite{Andr2} \cite{Thurs}
\cite{MR}).
Thurston also suggested an algorithm to construct the circle packing of
$\mathbb{D}$ that did not rely on the aforementioned theorems, and in this
spirit, Beardon and Stephenson \cite{BeaSte} (see also \cite{Ste}) were able
to reprove the circle packing theorem via a variant of the Perron method. The
Perron method is a method of solving a partial differential equation on the
interior of the disk (the equation is that the curvature is zero) subject to
the condition that the boundary circles are internally tangent to the boundary
of the disk. The method relies on transferring the problem to a problem of
packing hyperbolic circles. This idea is especially elegant because it turns
the boundary condition to the condition that the boundary circles are
horocycles, i.e., circles of infinite radius. Another advantage to the
formulation of the problem as a problem in hyperbolic geometry is that the
nonuniqueness of the Riemann Mapping Theorem falls out because Mobius
transformations are isometries in hyperbolic space. Bowers and Stephenson were
later able to extend the argument to other boundary conditions by considering
curves of constant curvature \cite{BowSte1}.
The goal of the present work is to reformulate the problem of discrete
uniformization theorems of disks in terms of Euclidean discrete conformal
structures. In light of the facts that the hyperbolic formulation is
especially elegant and that there has been recent progress on understanding
hyperbolic discrete conformal structures in great generality (e.g., \cite{Guo}
\cite{BPS} \cite{GT} \cite{ZGZLYG}), one may question the advantage of
reformulating in terms of Euclidean structures. There are several reasons why
having a comprehensive Euclidean treatment could be useful. The primary
advantage is that the Euclidean case can treat the multiplicative discrete
conformal structures studied in \cite{Luo1} and \cite{SSP} with the boundary
condition that the triangulation is internally tangent to the unit circle
(note that \cite{BPS} treats this boundary condition in a different way by
using the half-space model instead of the disk model). The multiplicative
structure is well motivative, and has close connections with the finite
element Laplacian (see, e.g., \cite{G3}). Another advantage of the Euclidean
background structure is that it is more intuitive, making it more accessible
for applications than hyperbolic formulations. Finally, this formulation of a
discrete uniformization theorem motivates the definitions at the end of this
paper on manifolds with multiplicity, giving a notion of how one might try to
use geometric flows on the interior of two disks glued together to find
uniform structures such as the Riemann mapping transformation (note that
Brendle has a slightly different formulation of a geometric flow to this end
in \cite{Bren}).
\begin{acknowledgement}
The author would like to thank Ken Stephenson and Joseph Fu for helpful conversations.
\end{acknowledgement}
\section{Discrete conformal structures and M-weighted points}
Discrete conformal structures are generalizations of circle packings, circles
with fixed intersection angle, circles with fixed inversive distance, and
multiplicative structures studied in papers such as \cite{Thurs}, \cite{MR},
\cite{CL}, \cite{BowSte}, \cite{Guo}, \cite{Luo1}, \cite{SSP}. Discrete
conformal structures were described from an axiomatic framework in \cite{G5}.
In \cite{GT} it is shown that discrete conformal structures have the form
$C_{\alpha,\eta},$ where the length of an edge $\ell_{ij}=\ell\left(
v_{i},v_{j}\right) $ is given by
\[
\ell_{ij}^{2}=\alpha_{i}e^{2f_{i}}+\alpha_{j}e^{2f_{j}}+2\eta_{ij
e^{f_{i}+f_{j}
\]
where the $\alpha$ and $\eta$ are part of the conformal structure and the $f$
choose the particular metric in the conformal class. Technically the conformal
structure $C_{\alpha,\eta}$ is a map from a label $f$ to a discrete metric.
However, we will abuse the notation by using $f\in C_{\alpha,\eta}$ to mean
that $f$ is a label that determines geometry using the conformal structure
$C_{\alpha,\eta}.$
Discrete conformal structures are associated to triangulated surfaces, but we
will need to compare these geometric structures with triangulations of points
in the plane that have certain decorations or weights. This is quite common in
the literature on weighted Delaunay triangulations (e.g., \cite{AK},
\cite{ES}, \cite{G3}). We will define a generalization of weighted points in
order to more carefully describe the setting for discrete conformal
uniformization of Euclidean disks.
\begin{definition}
\label{def: weighted point}A weighted point $\left( p,W\right) $ in the
plane is a point $p\in\mathbb{R}^{2}$ together with a weight $W\in\mathbb{R}$.
If $W\geq0,$ we denote the disk $D\left( p,W\right) =\left\{ x\in
\mathbb{R}^{2}:\left\vert p-x\right\vert ^{2}\leq W\right\} $ and the circle
$C\left( p,W\right) =\left\{ x\in\mathbb{R}^{2}:\left\vert p-x\right\vert
^{2}=W\right\} .$
\end{definition}
If $W>0,$ then we can think of the weighted point as a disk centered at $p$
with radius $\sqrt{W}.$ If $W=0,$ we think of the weighted point simply as a
point. When $W>0,$ there are several notions of \textquotedblleft
distance\textquotedblright\ between two weighted points $\left( p_{1
,W_{1}\right) $ and $\left( p_{2},W_{2}\right) ,$ including the distance
between the points $\left\vert p_{1}-p_{2}\right\vert $ and the Laguerre
(power) distance $\left\vert p_{1}-p_{2}\right\vert ^{2}-W_{1}-W_{2}.$ There
are also notions of angle between two intersecting weighted points (circle
intersection angles), inversive distance between nonintersecting weighted
points, and other notions. In order to make these more precise and to
generalize to when $W<0,$ we will expand the notion of a weighted point to an
M-weighted point. The M-weighted points correspond to the caps in \cite{Wil}.
\begin{definition}
Given $\xi=\left( a,b,c,d\right) $ and $\zeta=\left( x,y,z,w\right) $ in
$\mathbb{R}^{4},$ the Minkowski product is
\[
\xi\ast\zeta=ax+by+cz-dw.
\]
\end{definition}
We now define M-weighted points, which is short for Minkowski-weighted points.
\begin{definition}
Given a point $\xi=\left( \xi^{1},\xi^{2},\xi^{3},\xi^{4}\right)
\in\mathbb{R}^{4}\setminus\left\{ 0\right\} $ with $\xi^{3}<\xi^{4},$ we may
define the map $p\left( \xi\right) =\left( \frac{\xi^{1}}{\xi^{4}-\xi^{3
},\frac{\xi^{2}}{\xi^{4}-\xi^{3}}\right) $ and $W\left( \xi\right)
=\frac{\xi\ast\xi}{\left( \xi^{4}-\xi^{3}\right) ^{2}}.$ We call $\xi$ an
\emph{M-weighted point}. An M-weighted point $\xi$ has a corresponding
weighted point $\left( p\left( \xi\right) ,W\left( \xi\right) \right) $.
We use $\mathbb{R}_{\bot}^{4}$ to denote the points $\xi\in\mathbb{R}^{4}$
satisfying $\xi^{3}<\xi^{4},$ the set of possible $M$-weighted points.
\end{definition}
\begin{remark}
We may extend this map to a map $\mathbb{R}^{4}\setminus\left\{ 0\right\}
\rightarrow S^{2}\times S^{1}$ using the one point compactification
formulations of $S^{2}$ and $S^{1}.$ The first component is essentially the
Hopf map (if we restrict to unit vectors in $\mathbb{R}^{4}$).
\end{remark}
The preimage of a weighted point $\left( p,W\right) $ is a line of points in
$\mathbb{R}^{4}\setminus\left\{ 0\right\} .$ Often we will choose the
preimage that makes $\xi^{4}-\xi^{3}=1,$ so that for $\left( \left(
x,y\right) ,W\right) $ we choose
\[
\xi=\left( x,y,\frac{1}{2}\left( x^{2}+y^{2}-W-1\right) ,\frac{1}{2}\left(
x^{2}+y^{2}-W+1\right) \right) .
\]
Note that if we pull back the Minkowski product via rescaling to so that
$\xi^{4}-\xi^{3}=1$ we get the Klein model for hyperbolic 3-space, and we can
consider (1-point compactified) Euclidean 2-space as the boundary at infinity
of hyperbolic 3-space.
An M-weighted point can sometimes be interpreted as a disk or point, and this
leads to geometric interpretations for the product *. The following
proposition is easily verified, and described well in the work of Wilker
\cite{Wil}. Recall $C\left( p,W\right) $ and $D\left( p,W\right) $ as in
Definition \ref{def: weighted point}.
\begin{proposition}
Let $\xi,\zeta\in\mathbb{R}_{\bot}^{4}.$ The following are immediate
consequences of Theorem 8 in \cite{Wil}.
\begin{itemize}
\item The unit disk corresponds to the point $\left( 0,0,1,0\right) $ (or
any point $\left( 0,0,t,0\right) $). We denote $U=\left( 0,0,1,0\right) .$
\item We always have
\[
\left\vert p\left( \xi\right) -p\left( \zeta\right) \right\vert
^{2}=\left( \frac{\xi}{\xi^{4}-\xi^{3}}-\frac{\zeta}{\zeta^{4}-\zeta^{3
}\right) \ast\left( \frac{\xi}{\xi^{4}-\xi^{3}}-\frac{\zeta}{\zeta^{4
-\zeta^{3}}\right)
\]
\item If $\xi\ast\xi>0$ and $\zeta\ast\zeta>0$ and $\xi\ast\zeta\leq1$ then
the circles $C\left( p\left( \xi\right) ,W\left( \xi\right) \right) $
and $C\left( p\left( \zeta\right) ,W\left( \zeta\right) \right) $
intersect with angle $\theta$ satisfying
\[
\cos\theta=\frac{\xi\ast\zeta}{\sqrt{\xi\ast\xi}\sqrt{\zeta\ast\zeta}}.
\]
\item If $\xi\ast\xi>0$ and $\zeta\ast\zeta>0$ and $\xi\ast\zeta>1$ then the
disks $D\left( p\left( \xi\right) ,W\left( \xi\right) \right) $ and
$D\left( p\left( \zeta\right) ,W\left( \zeta\right) \right) $ are
disjoint and have inversive distance $\delta$ satisfyin
\[
\cosh\delta=\frac{\xi\ast\zeta}{\sqrt{\xi\ast\xi}\sqrt{\zeta\ast\zeta}}.
\]
\item If $\xi\ast\xi=0$ and $\zeta\ast\zeta>0$ then the circle $C=C\left(
p\left( \zeta\right) ,W\left( \zeta\right) \right) $ and the point
$p=p\left( \xi\right) $ satisfy
\[
P_{C}\left( p\right) =\left\vert p-p\left( \zeta\right) \right\vert
^{2}-W\left( \zeta\right) =\frac{\xi\ast\zeta}{\sqrt{\zeta\ast\zeta}}.
\]
where $P_{C}$ is the power (see, e.g., \cite{AK}) In particular, $p\in C$ if
and only if $\xi\ast\zeta=0.$
\item If $\xi\ast\xi=0$ and $\zeta\ast\zeta=0$ then
\[
\left\vert p\left( \xi\right) -p\left( \zeta\right) \right\vert ^{2
=\frac{\xi\ast\zeta}{\left( \xi^{4}-\xi^{3}\right) \left( \zeta^{4
-\zeta^{3}\right)
\]
\end{itemize}
\end{proposition}
We can also consider triangulations in the plane by M-weighted points.
\begin{definition}
A \emph{M-weighted triangulation} $\left( T,\xi\right) $ of a planar region
$D$ is a triangulation $T$, together with a map
\[
\xi:V\left( T\right) \rightarrow\mathbb{R}_{\bot}^{4},
\]
where we will use $V\left( T\right) ,$ $E\left( T\right) ,$ and $F\left(
T\right) $ to denote the vertices, edges, and faces of $T,$ respectively.
\end{definition}
The Mobius group acts naturally on an M-weighted triangulation (see \cite{Wil}).
\begin{proposition}
\label{prop: groups}The Mobius group acts on $\left( T,\xi\right) $ by a
linear map $L$ on $\xi_{v}$ for each $v$ such that $\left( L\xi_{v}\right)
\ast\left( L\xi_{w}\right) =\xi_{v}\ast\xi_{w}.$ There is a subgroup of the
Mobius group corresponding the the Euclidean transformations of $p\left(
\xi\right) $ that preserve the weights $W\left( \xi\right) .$
\end{proposition}
The M-weighted points with the connectivity of the triangulation induce a
discrete conformal structure. Note that throughout this paper, we will assume
triangulations are proper, in the sense that each edge has two distinct
vertices and that there is at most one edge connecting two vertices. Thus we
can refer to an edge $vw$ between vertices $v$ and $w$ without confusion. Much
of the work is independent of this restriction, but the statements are much
clearer in this form.
\begin{proposition}
\label{Prop:conf and mweighted}Let $T$ be a triangulation of a plane region
with vertex points $\left\{ p_{v}\right\} _{v\in V\left( T\right) }$ in
the plane. For each $v\in V\left( T\right) $ and $vw\in E\left( T\right) $
fix $\alpha_{v}$ and $\eta_{vw}.$ There is a bijection between M-weighted
triangulations $\left( T,\xi\right) $ such that
\begin{align*}
\alpha_{v} & =\xi_{v}\ast\xi_{v},\\
\eta_{vw} & =-\xi_{v}\ast\xi_{w},\text{ and }\\
p\left( \xi_{v}\right) & =p_{v
\end{align*}
and conformal structures $C_{\alpha,\eta}$ on $T$ such that $\ell
_{vw}=\left\vert p_{v}-p_{w}\right\vert .$
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
Given $\xi$, we recall that
\begin{align*}
\left\vert p_{v}-p_{w}\right\vert ^{2} & =\left( \frac{\xi_{v}}{\left(
\xi_{v}^{4}-\xi_{v}^{3}\right) }-\frac{\xi_{w}}{\left( \xi_{w}^{4}-\xi
_{w}^{3}\right) }\right) \ast\left( \frac{\xi_{v}}{\left( \xi_{v}^{4
-\xi_{v}^{3}\right) }-\frac{\xi_{w}}{\left( \xi_{w}^{4}-\xi_{w}^{3}\right)
}\right) \\
& =\alpha_{v}\left( \xi_{v}^{4}-\xi_{v}^{3}\right) ^{-2}+\alpha_{w}\left(
\xi_{w}^{4}-\xi_{w}^{3}\right) ^{-2}+2\eta_{vw}\left( \xi_{v}^{4}-\xi
_{v}^{3}\right) ^{-1}\left( \xi_{w}^{4}-\xi_{w}^{3}\right) ^{-1
\end{align*}
and so we find that $\xi$ corresponds to $f_{v}=-\log\left( \xi_{v}^{4
-\xi_{v}^{3}\right) .$ Conversely, given $f\in C_{\alpha,\eta},$ we can take
\[
\xi_{v}=\left( e^{f_{v}}p_{v},\frac{e^{f_{v}}}{2}\left( \left\vert
p_{v}\right\vert ^{2}-\alpha_{v}e^{2f_{v}}-1\right) ,\frac{e^{f_{v}}
{2}\left( \left\vert p_{v}\right\vert ^{2}-\alpha_{v}e^{2f_{v}}+1\right)
\right) .
\]
\end{proof}
\section{Conformal uniformization of the Euclidean disk}
We will follow the notation in Stephenson's book \cite{Ste}. Recall the
following definition.
\begin{definition}
A combinatorial closed disk $S$ is a simplicial $2$-complex that triangulates
a topological closed disk, i.e., $S$ is finite, simply connected, and has
nonempty boundary. We use $\mathring{S}$ to denote the interior of the disk
and $\partial S$ to denote the boundary.
\end{definition}
We know that any geometric realization of the boundary of $S$ must be
homeomorphic to the circle. The notation is such that the vertices of $S$ are
partitioned into $V\left( \mathring{S}\right) $ and $V\left( \partial
S\right) .$
We can now state the problem of discrete conformal uniformization of a
Euclidean disk.
\begin{problem}
\label{packing problem 1}Let $U\in\mathbb{R}^{4}$ denote the representation of
the unit disk as an M-weighted point. Let $S$ be a combinatorial closed disk
and let $C_{\alpha,\eta}$ be a conformal structure and $\mu:V\left( \partial
S\right) \rightarrow\mathbb{R}$. Then find $\xi:V\left( S\right)
\rightarrow\mathbb{R}_{\bot}^{4}$ such that
\begin{align*}
\xi_{v}\ast\xi_{v} & =\alpha_{v}\\
\xi_{v}\ast\xi_{w} & =\eta_{vw
\end{align*}
for all $v\in V\left( S\right) $ and all $vw\in E\left( S\right) ,$ and
\[
\xi_{v}\ast U=\left( \xi_{v}^{4}-\xi_{v}^{3}\right) \mu_{v
\]
for all $v\in V\left( \partial S\right) .$
\end{problem}
While this formulation looks a bit mysterious, consider the following cases:
\begin{itemize}
\item If we choose a conformal structure such that $\alpha_{v}=1$ for all
vertices $v\in V\left( S\right) $, $\eta_{e}=1$ for all $e\in E\left(
S\right) ,$ and $\mu_{v}=-1$ for all $v\in$ $V\left( \partial S\right) ,$
this corresponds to circle packings with boundary circles internally tangent
to the disk (see \cite{Ste} for a fairly comprehensive coverage of this
well-studied case).
\item If we choose a conformal structure such that $\alpha_{v}=1$ for all
vertices $v\in V\left( S\right) $, $\eta_{e}=1$ for all $e\in E\left(
S\right) ,$ and $\mu_{v}=0$ for all $v\in$ $V\left( \partial S\right) ,$
this corresponds to circle packings with boundary circles orthogonal to the
unit disk.
\item If we choose a conformal structure such that $\alpha_{v}=0$ for all
vertices $v\in V\left( S\right) $, $\eta_{e}>0$ for all $e\in E\left(
S\right) ,$ and $\mu_{v}=0$ for all $v\in$ $V\left( \partial S\right) $,
this corresponds to triangulations with boundary points on the unit circle
with the multiplicative conformal structure.
\end{itemize}
We return to the case of an abstract triangulated surface with a discrete
conformal structure. Recall we can define curvature at an interior vertex as follows.
\begin{definition}
The curvature $K_{v}$ at an interior vertex $v$ is defined to be
\[
K_{v}=2\pi-\sum_{f}\theta\left( v<f\right)
\]
where $f$ runs over all faces and $\theta\left( v<f\right) $ is the angle at
vertex $v$ in face $f$ (understood to be zero if the face $f$ does not contain
$v$).
\end{definition}
We may use a monodromy theorem to see how triangulations labels giving zero
curvature correspond to M-weighted points in the plane.
\begin{theorem}
[Monodromy]\label{monodromy theorem 1}If $f\in C_{\alpha,\eta}$ is a label
such that $K_{v}=0$ for all $v\in V\left( \mathring{S}\right) $ there exist
points $p:V\left( S\right) \rightarrow\mathbb{R}^{2}$ such that
$\ell_{vv^{\prime}}=\left\vert p\left( v\right) -p\left( v^{\prime}\right)
\right\vert $ for any edge $e=vv^{\prime}.$ The map $P$ is unique up to
Euclidean isometry. In fact, there exist $\xi:V\left( S\right)
\rightarrow\mathbb{R}_{\bot}^{4}$ such that $p\left( \xi\right) =p$ and
$\xi_{v}\ast\xi_{v}=\alpha_{v}$ and $\xi_{v}\ast\xi_{w}=\eta_{vw}$ for edges
all $vw\in E\left( S\right) .$
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
[Proof (sketch)]We first place a face. This is unique up to Euclidean motion.
We can now successively place neighboring faces in a uniquely determined
place. We know that each vertex is placed since $S$ is connected. One can now
develop along chains (as in \cite[Theorem 5.4]{Ste}), and use the curvature is
zero condition to show it is independent of the chain. The placement is unique
once the first triangle is placed, and so is unique up to Euclidean isometry.
The last statement follows from Proposition \ref{Prop:conf and mweighted}.
\end{proof}
\begin{definition}
If $f\in C_{\alpha,\eta}$ is a label such that $K_{v}=0$ for all $v\in
V\left( \mathring{S}\right) $ we call $f$ a \emph{flat label}.
\end{definition}
Using the monodromy theorem, we can associate flat labels with triangulations
of points in the plane. Together with Proposition
\ref{Prop:conf and mweighted}, we get the following.
\begin{corollary}
There is a one-to-one correspondence between the set of flat labels in
$C_{\alpha,\eta}$ for a combinatorial closed disk $S$ and the equivalence
class of M-weighted triangulations $\left( S,\xi\right) $ where $\xi$ is
considered up to Euclidean transformations (c.f., Proposition
\ref{prop: groups}).
\end{corollary}
It follows that Problem 1 can almost be reformulated into a problem of finding
a flat label in a conformal class. However, we do not yet know how to describe
the boundary condition. The most natural boundary condition for such a problem
is to specify the weights $f$ on the boundary (Dirichlet type condition) or
specify the angle sum at the boundary (Neumann type boundary condition) as
described in \cite{BPS}. One might think that by considering the disk $U$ as
an additional weighted point, one can consider this more like an equation on a
closed manifold, and this is essentially what we will do. We will need to
describe how to add the additional point as an augmentation.
\begin{definition}
An \emph{augmented conformal combinatorial closed disk} $\hat{S}$ is a
simplicial complex determined by the following properties:
\begin{itemize}
\item There is a conformal combinatorially closed disk $S\subset\hat{S}.$
\item There is a vertex $\hat{v}\in\hat{S}\setminus S$ such that $V\left(
\hat{S}\right) =V\left( S\right) \cup\left\{ \hat{v}\right\} .$
\item For each $v\in\partial S,$ there is an edge $\hat{e}=v\hat{v};$
furthermore, we have $E\left( \hat{S}\right) =E\left( S\right)
\cup\left\{ \hat{e}=v\hat{v}:v\in\partial S\right\} .$
\item $\hat{S}$ has a discrete conformal structure and a label in that
conformal structure.
\end{itemize}
\end{definition}
Note the following.
\begin{proposition}
The vertices $V\left( \hat{S}\right) $ are partitioned into $V\left(
\mathring{S}\right) ,$ $V\left( \partial S\right) ,$ and $\left\{ \hat
{v}\right\} .$ The faces $F\left( \hat{S}\right) $ are partitioned into
$F\left( S\right) $ and $F\left( \hat{S}\setminus\mathring{S}\right) .$
\end{proposition}
In general, we will consider the augmentation of a conformal combinatorial
closed disk to an augmented conformal combinatorially closed disk in order to
impose boundary conditions on the determination of a conformal combinatorial
closed disk with certain properties.
Note that $\hat{S}$ is topologically a sphere, but we will not be considering
it in this way, since geometrically it will be far from a sphere. In
particular, the curvature of an augmented conformal combinatorial closed disk
$\hat{S}$ is slightly different than it would be for a sphere:
\begin{definition}
Let $\hat{S}$ be an augmented conformal combinatorial closed disk. The
curvatures $K:V\left( \hat{S}\right) \rightarrow\mathbb{R}$ are defined to
be
\[
K\left( v\right) =\left\{
\begin{array}
[c]{cl
2\pi-\sum_{f\in F\left( S\right) }\theta\left( v<f\right) & \text{if
}v\in V\left( \mathring{S}\right) ,\\
\sum_{f\in F\left( \hat{S}\setminus\mathring{S}\right) }\theta\left(
v<f\right) -\sum_{f\in F\left( S\right) }\theta\left( v<f\right) &
\text{if }v\in V\left( \partial S\right) ,\\
\sum_{f\in F\left( \hat{S}\right) }\theta\left( v<f\right) -2\pi &
\text{if }v=\hat{v}.
\end{array}
\right.
\]
We say that $\hat{S}$ is flat if $K\left( v\right) =0$ for all $v\in
V\left( \hat{S}\right) .$ If the geometry comes from a label in a conformal
class, we call such a label a flat label.
\end{definition}
The motivation for this definition, is that we want to consider $\hat{S}$ as
one disk folded on the other (see Section \ref{sect: curvature measures}).
Note that zero curvature around the boundary means that the complex folds over
on itself perfectly. We may prove a restriction on the curvatures.
\begin{proposition}
The curvatures satisfy
\[
\sum_{v\in V\left( \hat{S}\right) }K\left( v\right) =0.
\]
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
This follows from the fact that the sum is equal to
\begin{align*}
\sum_{v\in V\left( \hat{S}\right) }K\left( v\right) & =2\pi\left\vert
V\left( \mathring{S}\right) \right\vert -\pi\left\vert F\left( S\right)
\right\vert +\pi\left\vert F\left( \hat{S}\setminus\mathring{S}\right)
\right\vert -2\pi\\
& =2\pi\left\vert V\left( \mathring{S}\right) \right\vert -\pi\left\vert
F\left( S\right) \right\vert +\pi\left\vert V\left( \partial S\right)
\right\vert -2\pi\\
& =2\pi\left\vert V\left( S\right) \right\vert -\pi\left\vert F\left(
S\right) \right\vert -\pi\left\vert E\left( \partial S\right) \right\vert
-2\pi\\
& =2\pi\chi\left( S\right) +2\pi\left\vert E\left( S\right) \right\vert
-3\pi\left\vert F\left( S\right) \right\vert -\pi\left\vert E\left(
\partial S\right) \right\vert -2\pi\\
& =0,
\end{align*}
since $3F\left( S\right) =2E\left( S\right) -E\left( \partial S\right) $
and $\chi\left( S\right) =1$.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}
If instead of this definition, one only used the usual curvature as angle
deficit (first part of the curvature definition above) for every vertex, one
would get $\sum_{v\in V\left( \hat{S}\right) }K\left( v\right) =4\pi,$
following from the Euler characteristic of the sphere.
\end{remark}
We will give some basic examples:
\begin{example}
[Circle packing with internally tangent boundary]Circle packing with
internally tangent boundary. A circle packing arises from $\alpha_{v}=1$ and
$\eta_{e}=1$ for vertices and edges in the disk. In order to get boundary
circles to be internally tangent to a circle, we specify that $\alpha_{\hat
{v}}=1$ for the augmented vertex and $\eta_{e}=-1$ for any augmented edges.
This assures that $\ell_{v\hat{v}}=e^{f_{\hat{v}}}-e^{f_{v}}$ as long as
$f_{\hat{v}}\geq f_{v}.$
\end{example}
\begin{example}
[Circle packing orthogonal to boundary]In this case, we keep the circle
packing for the disk, but must specify that $\alpha_{\hat{v}}=1$ and $\eta
_{e}=0$ for any augmented edges.
\end{example}
\begin{example}
[Inscribed triangulation with multiplicative weights]Multiplicative weights
arise when $\alpha_{v}=0$ (and $\eta_{e}$ are all fixed to positive numbers).
If we specify this for all vertices of the disk, we can set $\alpha_{\hat{v
}=1$ (or any other positive number) and specify that $\eta_{e}=0$ for all
augmented edges. This assures that for all augmented edges, $\ell_{e}=1,$ and
so the boundary vertices lie on the unit circle. This is particularly nice
since if one can find a zero curvature solution, the triangulated disk is
inscribed in the unit circle. In this setting, one needs to make sure that the
triangle inequality is satisfied for any given choice of $\eta$'s and $f$'s.
\end{example}
We may now extend the monodromy theorem (Theorem \ref{monodromy theorem 1}) to
augmented disks.
\begin{theorem}
[Monodromy]\label{Monodromy Theorem 2}If $\vec{f}$ is a flat label, there
exist points $P:V\left( \hat{S}\right) \rightarrow\mathbb{R}^{2}$ such that
$\ell_{vv^{\prime}}=\left\vert P\left( v\right) -P\left( v^{\prime}\right)
\right\vert $ for any edge $e=vv^{\prime}.$ The map $P$ is unique up to
Euclidean isometry.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
[Proof (sketch)]In our setting, we first place $\hat{v}$ at the origin, i.e.,
$P\left( \hat{v}\right) =0.$. Then place a face incident on $\hat{v},$
giving placement for the other two vertices. This is unique up to rotation.
Now one can place the other faces around the vertex $P\left( \hat{v}\right)
=0.$ Since the complex looks like a disk around $\hat{v}$ and since the
curvature at $\hat{v}$ is zero, this will give a consistent choice of
$P\left( v\right) $ for all $v\in V\left( \partial S\right) .$ Now, given
an edge in $\partial S,$ we can now place the triangles with these edges, and
we do this so that the triangles are folded back toward the center of the
disk. We can place triangles in order around the vertex $v\in V\left(
\partial S\right) ,$ and since the curvature $K\left( v\right) =0,$ we must
have that the faces placed around the vertex give a consistent value for $P.$
Now we can continue to place triangles inside, this time not folding back.
We know that each vertex is placed since $S$ is connected. One can now develop
along chains (as in \cite[Theorem 5.4]{Ste}), and use the curvature is zero
condition to show it is independent of the chain. The placement is unique up
to the placement of $\hat{v}$ and rotation, which is clearly the same thing as
being unique up to Euclidean isometry.
\end{proof}
This allows us to reformulate Problem \ref{packing problem 1} into the
following equivalent problem.
\begin{problem}
\label{packing problem 2}Let $S$ be a combinatorial closed disk and let
$C_{\alpha,\eta}$ be a conformal structure and $\mu:V\left( \partial
S\right) \rightarrow\mathbb{R}$. Let $\hat{\alpha}_{v}=\alpha_{v}$ if $v\in
V\left( S\right) $ and $\hat{\alpha}_{\hat{v}}=1.$ Let $\hat{\eta}_{e
=\eta_{e}$ if $e\in E\left( S\right) $ and $\hat{\eta}_{\hat{v}v}=\mu_{v}$
for all $v\in\partial S.$ Then find a flat label $f\in C_{\hat{\alpha
,\hat{\eta}}\left( \hat{S}\right) $.
\end{problem}
We have shown the following.
\begin{theorem}
Problem \ref{packing problem 1} and Problem \ref{packing problem 2} are equivalent.
\end{theorem}
Problems \ref{packing problem 1} and \ref{packing problem 2} are the direct
generalizations of the problems described in \cite{BowSte1}. In the latter,
the formulation is done in hyperbolic geometry instead of Euclidean, which has
the advantage of allowing the assignment of curvatures (generalizing radii) of
generalized circles (called cycles there) and formulating the problem as a
boundary value problem where the boundary data is specified (a Dirichlet type
problem). However, the case of $\alpha_{v}=0$ does not appear to exist in that
context. In addition, this formulation gives an alternative that uses
primarily Euclidean instead of hyperbolic geometry. The formulation in
\cite{BowSte1} with the restrictions there allow one to prove existence and
uniqueness (see also \cite{MR} and \cite{RHD}), whereas the more general case
of Problems \ref{packing problem 1} and \ref{packing problem 2} remain open.
\section{The action of the Mobius group}
Recall that Mobius transformations act on $\left( \hat{S},\xi\right) ,$ a
M-weighted triangulation of the augmented disk. Since, by Proposition
\ref{Prop:conf and mweighted} there is a correspondence with flat labels $f\in
C_{\hat{\alpha},\hat{\eta}},$ we see that Mobius transformations must act on
the flat labels. In particular, taking a one parameter family of Mobius
transformations through the identity, we get a deformation of $f$ through flat
labels, so it is not possible that the solution to Problems
\ref{packing problem 1} and \ref{packing problem 2} is unique. However, we
wish to show that these are the only deformations.
A first question is what are the possible deformations through flat labels.
\begin{proposition}
\label{prop: mobius invariance}The infinitesimal Mobius transformations induce
the following variations of flat labels: Suppose $p_{i}$ are the points
representing the vertices. Then the variations are all of the for
\[
\delta f_{i}=2\left( a,b\right) \cdot p_{i}+c,
\]
where $\left( a,b\right) \in\mathbb{R}^{2}$ and $c\in\mathbb{R}$.
\end{proposition}
The proof is left for the Appendix. Note that by the work in \cite{G4}, the
derivative of the curvature map $f\rightarrow K$ takes the form
\[
\frac{dK_{v}}{dt}=\triangle\frac{df_{v}}{dt}=\sum_{vw\in E\left( T\right)
}\frac{\ell_{vw}^{\ast}}{\ell_{vw}}\left( \frac{df_{w}}{dt}-\frac{df_{v}
{dt}\right)
\]
where $\ell_{vw}^{\ast}$ is the dual length of the edge $vw$ as determined by
the discrete conformal structure. Thus the Mobius transformations induce a
kernel of the Laplacian operator $\triangle$. It is interesting to observe
that the kernel appears to correspond to linear functions analogously to the
kernel of the smooth Euclidean Laplacian. We can see this directly as follows.
Consider a vertex $p_{0},$ with edges $p_{1},\ldots,p_{k}$ adjacent to it. For
each edge $p_{0}p_{i},$ there is a dual edge induced by the conformal
structure, and all the edges around the vertex correspond to a cycle. Notice
that if $R$ denotes rotation by $\pi/2$, $\frac{\ell_{p_{i}p_{0}}^{\ast}
{\ell_{p_{i}p_{0}}}R\left( p_{i}-p_{0}\right) $ is a vector of length
$\ell_{p_{i}p_{0}}^{\ast}$ in the direction of the dual edge. This sum is then
zero because of it is the sum of vectors on a cycle. Thus,
\[
0=\triangle Rp_{i}=R\triangle p_{i}.
\]
\section{Curvature measures of polyhedral manifolds with
multiplicities\label{sect: curvature measures}}
The curvatures we used on the boundary of the disk in the augmented disk seem
to be designed specifically for our purposes. In this section, we show how
these are related to natural curvature measures; a good reference is
\cite{Mor}. An important property of curvature measures is the valuation property.
\begin{definition}
A measure $\mu$ satisfies the \emph{valuation} property if for measurable sets
$A$ and $B,$ we have
\[
\mu\left( A\cup B\right) =\mu\left( A\right) +\mu\left( B\right)
-\mu\left( A\cap B\right) .
\]
\end{definition}
The valuation property allows one to compute the measure from constituent
parts. In particular, we can compute curvature measures of polyhedral surfaces
that are not embedded, but that are made up of pieces that are each embedded.
An alternative to having the need for the negative sign is to construct unions
that have the correct multiplicity. In particular, if we assume $A\cup B$ is
constructed by first gluing $A$ and $B$. Since gluing $A$ and $B$ gives
multiplicity $2$ on $A\cap B,$ we need to pull out a copy of $A\cap B,$ or
glue in a copy of $A\cap B$ with multiplicity $-1.$ Thus, the computation of
the measure with the valuation property (in this case, curvature) is simply
the sum of the gluings considered with multiplicities.
\begin{example}
\label{surface example}A flower of a vertex is defined to be the set of faces
containing that vertex, which is said to be the center of the flower. We can
compute the curvature at the center vertex in a flower by gluing together each
constituent triangle around the flower. In order to keep multiplicity equal to
one at all points we specify that the vertex has multiplicity $1$, the
(closed) edges have multiplicity $-1,$ and the triangles have multiplicity
$1.$ In each triangle $f_{i}$ with edges $e_{j},$ we can specify the
curvature in terms of $K\left( v,v\right) =2\pi,$ $K\left( v,e_{j}\right)
=-\pi$, $K\left( v,f_{i}\right) =\pi-\alpha_{i},$ where $\alpha_{i}$ is the
interior angle at the vertex $v$ of triangle $f_{i}.$ These formulas arise
from the tube formulas computing the change in area or volume of small balls
around the triangle (isometrically embedded into Euclidean space of any
dimension); see \cite{Mor}. We can now sum to get the curvature at $v$ to b
\begin{align*}
K\left( v\right) & =K\left( v,v\right) +\sum_{e_{i}>v}K\left(
v,e_{i}\right) +\sum_{f_{j}>v}K\left( v,f_{j}\right) \\
& =2\pi-\sum_{f_{j}>v}\alpha_{j},
\end{align*}
which is the usual definition for curvature at a vertex.
\end{example}
In our setting, we have taken a triangulated disk, which can be given
multiplicities as above in the interior, and attached another disk in the
augmentation. The multiplicities of each of the simplices in the augmented
disk should be as follows to allow for a total multiplicity of zero when the
disks fit on top of each other (curvatures are all zero)
\
\begin{tabular}
[c]{|l|l|l|}\hline
\textbf{Location} & \textbf{Simplex type} & \textbf{Multiplicity
\\\hline\hline
interior & vertex & $1$\\\hline
boundary & vertex & $0$\\\hline
augmented & vertex & $-1$\\\hline
interior & edge & $-1$\\\hline
boundary & edge & $0$\\\hline
augmented & edge & $1$\\\hline
interior & face & $1$\\\hline
augmented & face & $-1.$\\\hline
\end{tabular}
\
\]
Using these multiplicities and the usual definition of curvature measure at a
vertex of a polyhedral manifold, one gets precisely the definitions given
above for curvatures.
The advantage to this definition is the relation to tube formulas (see
\cite{Mor}). The valuation property allows one to extend such tube formulas to
more general types of surfaces as the one we consider here: a folder over
disk. Here is a formulation of polyhedral manifold with multiplicities that
allows for the proper generalization of tube formulas.
\begin{definition}
A \emph{polyhedral manifold with multiplicities} is a polyhedral manifold $M$
together with a multiplicity function $\mu:\Sigma\rightarrow\mathbb{Z}$, where
$\Sigma$ is the collection of all simplices in $M.$ If the dimension of $M$ is
two, we call $M$ a surface.
\end{definition}
\begin{definition}
If $x\in M,$ the \emph{multiplicity} at $x$ is defined as
\[
\mu\left( x\right) =\sum_{\sigma>x}\mu\left( \sigma\right)
\]
where the sum is over all simplices containing $x.$ If there exists $m$ such
that $\mu\left( x\right) =m$ for all $x\in M,$ we say the multiplicity of
$M$ is equal to $m.$
\end{definition}
We note that a polyhedral surface as described in Example
\ref{surface example} is a polyhedral manifold with multiplicity $1.$ We can
now define curvature for a polyhedral surface with multiplicities.
\begin{definition}
The \emph{curvature} $K_{v}$ at a vertex $v\in V\left( M\right) $ of a
polyhedral surface with multiplicities $\left( M,\mu\right) $ is equal to
\[
K_{v}=2\pi\mu\left( v\right) +\sum_{e>v}\pi~\mu\left( e\right) +\sum
_{f>v}\left( \pi-\theta_{v<f}\right) \mu\left( f\right) .
\]
\end{definition}
Example \ref{surface example} describes the relationship to the usual
definition of curvature on a polyhedral manifold. These manifolds seem to be
related to the theory of currents in geometric measure theory (see, e.g.,
\cite{Morg}). In the case of zero curvature, it is clear that there is a map
from the flat polyhedral manifold with multiplicities to a current (in
$\mathbb{R}^{2}$ or $\mathbb{R}^{3},$ for instance). In the case of augmented
domain, the goal is to find a polyhedral manifold with multiplicities that
maps to a current that is equivalent to the zero current (since multiplicities
are such that the top and bottom parts of the domain sum to zero everywhere).
In general, the existence of a current occurs on each hinge (a pair of
simplices sharing a codimension 1 simplex, see \cite{AK}, \cite{ES}). Hinges
have bistellar flips, and certain geometric invariants do not change with
bistellar flips (volume, the induced distance function, the curvature) while
others do (conformal variations, Laplacians). The current associated to a
hinge is a generalization of volume, and does not change with a bistellar flip.
\begin{proposition}
Any hinge can be mapped to a current. Note that the image of a hinge and its
bistellar flip are the same.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
For a hinge, if the two faces have the same multiplicity, we simply mapped to
the unfolded hinge with that multiplicity. If the two have different
multiplicities, we fold the hinge over and add the multiplicities on the overlap.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}
The curvature measures here and their generalizations to higher dimensions
have various names including Gauss-Bonnet curvatures and Lipschitz-Killing
curvatures. These curvatures appear in essentially three places: tube
formulas, kinematic formulas, and heat trace formulas. See, e.g., \cite{CMS}.
It would be interesting to better understand the relationship of these on
polyhedral manifolds with multiplicities.
\end{remark}
\begin{remark}
Marden and Rodin used a similar construction in \cite{MR} to prove the
Andreev-Thurston theorem on the sphere. If one makes the triangle have
multiplicity -1 then one can replace their formulation of having a point
$\left( 2\pi/3,2\pi/3,2\pi/3,0,\ldots,0\right) $ in the image of $f$ with
the existence of a flat label using our definition of curvature.
\end{remark}
\section{Open problems}
\subsection{Uniqueness}
We have already shown that the solutions to Problems \ref{packing problem 1}
and \ref{packing problem 2} are invariant under Mobius transformations. We
conjecture that these are the only such invariant deformations.
\begin{conjecture}
Let $f\in C_{\hat{\alpha},\hat{\eta}}$ be a flat label. Then the only
deformations of $f$ through flat labels correspond to Mobius transformations.
\end{conjecture}
We already know that the Mobius transformations form a three-dimensional
family of deformations through flat labels, so we could try to use the
implicit function theorem to show that there are no more. Instead of
formulating the problem on labels, we can use M-weighted points, since there
is a correspondence between M-weighted points and flat labels. Thus it will be
sufficient to show that Mobius transformations are the only deformations of
M-weighted points $\left( \hat{S},\xi\right) $ that fix $\xi_{v}\ast\xi
_{v}=\alpha_{v}$ for all $v\in V\left( \hat{S}\right) $ and $\xi_{v}\ast
\xi_{w}=\eta_{vw}$ for $vw\in E\left( \hat{S}\right) .$
Before reformulating the problem using the implicit function theorem, we count
the dimensions. The number of constraints is $V\left( \hat{S}\right)
+E\left( \hat{S}\right) .$ The number of variables is $4V\left( \hat
{S}\right) $ since there is a $\xi_{v}\in\mathbb{R}^{4}$ for each vertex.
Since $\hat{S}$ is topologically a triangulation of the sphere, we have
$3F\left( \hat{S}\right) =2E\left( \hat{S}\right) $ and Euler's formula
$V\left( \hat{S}\right) -E\left( \hat{S}\right) +F\left( \hat{S}\right)
=2.$ It thus follows that
\[
V\left( \hat{S}\right) +E\left( \hat{S}\right) =4V\left( \hat{S}\right)
-6.
\]
Since the Mobius transformations form a six dimensional set of deformations,
if we can show that the differential of the map of the variables to the
constraints is injective, then we are done by the implicit function theorem.
We can label the constraints first by the equations determined by vertices and
then by the equations determined by edges. For the differential of the map, we
can arrange the matrix to have the schematics as follows:
\[
\left[
\begin{array}
[c]{cccc
\xi_{v_{1}}^{T} & 0 & \cdots & 0\\
0 & \xi_{v_{2}}^{T} & \cdots & 0\\
0 & 0 & \ddots & 0\\
0 & 0 & \cdots & \xi_{v_{N}}^{T}\\
\xi_{v_{2}}^{T} & \xi_{v_{1}}^{T} & \cdots & 0\\
0 & 0 & \cdots & \\
\vdots & \xi_{v_{k}}^{T} & \cdots & \\
\xi_{v_{j}}^{T} & 0 & \cdots & \\
\vdots & \vdots & \vdots &
\end{array}
\right]
\]
where the first $N=V\left( \hat{S}\right) $ rows correspond to the vertices
and the remaining rows correspond to the edges. In the first $N$ rows, each
row has one block of four potentially nonzero entries given by the row vector
$\xi_{v}^{T},$ the transpose of the M-weighted point corresponding to vertex
$v.$ Below $\xi_{v}^{T}$ are all the $\xi_{w}^{T}$ such that $vw\in E\left(
\hat{S}\right) .$ In the schematic above, it is assumed that $v_{1}v_{2}\in
E\left( \hat{S}\right) .$ The conjecture is now equivalent to showing that
this matrix has full rank.
Another natural question is what happens when the curvatures are not zero.
Brief numerical study suggests that the labels are rigid in this case.
\begin{conjecture}
Under an appropriate assumption on the conformal structure, if the curvatures
are all nonzero then the only deformations of the label that preserve the
curvature scale all of the labels equally.
\end{conjecture}
\subsection{Existence}
The existence of circle packings of a disk was proven by Koebe \cite{Koebe},
Andreev \cite{Andr} \cite{Andr2}, and a new proof was given by Marden-Rodin
\cite{MR} in the spirit of work of Thurston \cite{Thurs}. A different proof
was given by Beardon and Stephenson \cite{BeaSte} (see also \cite{BowSte},
\cite{Bow}, and \cite{Ste}) that uses a method similar to the Perron method in
proving existence of solutions to elliptic PDE by considering the hyperbolic
circle packing. This has the advantage to having a unique label (since
Euclidean labels can be changed by elements of the Mobius group) and is
possible partly because internally tangent circles are horocycles. In
\cite{BowSte} it was shown that other boundary conditions (such as orthogonal
intersection with the unit circle) can be realized in the hyperbolic
background by considering constant curvature curves instead of just circles.
The main obstacles to using this method in our setting is that we do not have
strict monotonicity of the curvatures due to the effect of the unusual
boundary curvature definitions, and the space of solutions (satisfying
triangle inequality) is not convex. One may be able to deal with the latter
issue using the methods in \cite{BPS} and \cite{Luo2}.
\subsection{Computation}
One way of finding solutions is suggested by the work of Chow and Luo in the
setting of triangulated surfaces without boundary \cite{CL}. They propose a
geometric flow of radii that is essentially a gradient flow of a convex
functional. This idea was later improved by X. Gu, who suggested using
Newton's method to do the computation (see \cite{DGL}). In our setting, one
can also try Newton's method to find solutions. Although we have not yet shown
that the Jacobian matrix is nonsingular if the label is not flat, one can
still apply Newton's method using a pseudoinverse instead of inverse as in
\cite{Gay}. This may be necessary, since we know that solutions do, in fact,
have singular Jacobians due to Proposition \ref{prop: mobius invariance}.
The gradient flow idea does not work with this functional, which is clearly
not convex. However, one could try other flows that do not arise as gradient
flows. One particular choice is to take the following:
\begin{align*}
\frac{df_{v}}{dt} & =-K_{v}~~\text{if }v\neq\hat{v},\\
\frac{df_{\hat{v}}}{dt} & =K_{\hat{v}}.
\end{align*}
This flow has the advantage of locally looking like a heat flow on the
curvature at the interior vertices and the augmented vertex, so that it is
infinitesimally trying to make both flat. However, it is unclear what this is
doing to the boundary vertices. Preliminary study of this flow numerically is promising.
\section{Appendix:\ Mobius transformation computations}
We consider small perturbations of the identity by Mobius transformations. A
general perturbation of the identity is of the form
\[
I+\varepsilon M
\]
for small $\varepsilon,$ where $I$ is the identity matrix and
\[
M=\left(
\begin{array}
[c]{cccc
a & d & \ell & g\\
b & e & m & h\\
q & p & n & s\\
c & f & r & k
\end{array}
\right) .
\]
For $\left( I+\varepsilon M\right) $ to be a Mobius transformation, we must
have
\[
\left( I+\varepsilon M\right) ^{T}\left(
\begin{array}
[c]{cccc
1 & 0 & 0 & 0\\
0 & 1 & 0 & 0\\
0 & 0 & 1 & 0\\
0 & 0 & 0 & -1
\end{array}
\right) \left( I+\varepsilon M\right) =\left(
\begin{array}
[c]{cccc
1 & 0 & 0 & 0\\
0 & 1 & 0 & 0\\
0 & 0 & 1 & 0\\
0 & 0 & 0 & -1
\end{array}
\right) .
\]
Looking at this up to $O\left( \varepsilon^{2}\right) ,$ we find that the
family takes the form
\[
\left(
\begin{array}
[c]{cccc
1 & \varepsilon r & -\varepsilon b & -\varepsilon a\\
-\varepsilon r & 1 & -\varepsilon d & -\varepsilon c\\
\varepsilon b & +\varepsilon d & 1 & \varepsilon t\\
-\varepsilon a & -\varepsilon c & \varepsilon t & 1
\end{array}
\right)
\]
for real numbers $a,b,c,d,t,r.$ To compute the derivative of the action of
such a family of Mobius transformations, we comput
\[
\xi=\left(
\begin{array}
[c]{cccc
1 & \varepsilon r & -\varepsilon b & -\varepsilon a\\
-\varepsilon r & 1 & -\varepsilon d & -\varepsilon c\\
\varepsilon b & +\varepsilon d & 1 & \varepsilon t\\
-\varepsilon a & -\varepsilon c & \varepsilon t & 1
\end{array}
\right) \left(
\begin{array}
[c]{c
x\\
y\\
\frac{1}{2}\left( x^{2}+y^{2}-W-1\right) \\
\frac{1}{2}\left( x^{2}+y^{2}-W+1\right)
\end{array}
\right)
\]
and we ge
\[
\xi^{4}-\xi^{3}=1-\varepsilon\left( \left( a+b\right) x+\left( c+d\right)
y+t\right) +O\left( \varepsilon^{2}\right) .
\]
Since
\[
\xi^{4}-\xi^{3}=e^{-f
\]
we must have that
\[
\delta f=\left( a+b,c+d\right) \cdot\left( x,y\right) +t.
\]
|
\section{Introduction}
Recently, deep Color-Magnitude Diagrams (CMDs) from images taken with the
Advanced Camera for Survey (ACS) aboard the Hubble Space Telescope (HST)
revealed that several massive intermediate-age ($\sim$\,1\,--\,2 Gyr old) star
clusters in the Magellanic Clouds host extended and/or multiple main sequence
turn-offs (MSTOs) regions (\citealt{mack+08a,glat+08,milo+09,goud+09};
\citealt{goud+11a}, hereafter G11a; \citealt{piat13}), in some cases
accompanied by composite red clumps (\citealt{gira+09,rube+11}). A popular
interpretation of these extended MSTOs (herafter eMSTOs) is that they are due to
stars that formed at different times within the parent cluster, with an age
spread of 150\,--\,500 Myr (\citealt{milo+09,gira+09,rube+10,rube+11}; G11a).
Other potential causes of eMSTOs mentioned in the recent literature include
spreads in rotation velocity among turn-off stars (\citealt{basdem09,yang+13},
but see \citealt{gira+11}), a photometric feature of interacting binary stars
(\citealt{yang+11}), or a combination of both (\citealt{li+12}).
A relevant aspect of the nature of the eMSTO phenomenon among intermediate-age
star clusters is that it is \emph{not} shared by all such clusters (e.g.,
\citealt{milo+09}, G11a). In this context, two scenarios have been proposed in
the recent literature to predict the existence of eMSTOs in intermediate-age
clusters. \citet[][hereafter K11]{kell+11} noted that the eMSTOs known at the
time were all hosted by intermediate-age clusters that have a large core radius
($r_c \ga 3.7$ pc), and suggested that such a large core radius is a
prerequisite for hosting an eMSTO. Their argument is based on simulations of
star cluster formation indicating that the mass loss due to stellar evolution in
a primordially mass-segregated cluster can lead to a significant cluster core
expansion and low central density \citep{mack+08b}. Since mass segregation is
also expected to be a function of the cluster mass \citep[e.g.,][]{bonbat06},
K11 suggested that the clusters with the largest core radii represent the
initially most mass-segregated (and hence likely most massive) clusters to have
formed. In a similar but not identical argument, \citet[][hereafter
G11b]{goud+11b} suggest that the key factor to explain the presence of
intermediate-age clusters hosting an eMSTO is the cluster's ability to retain
the material ejected by first-generation stars that are thought to be
responsible for the formation of a second generation (often called
``polluters''). Following the arguments of G11b, eMSTOs can be formed only if
the cluster escape velocity was higher than the wind velocity of such polluter
stars when the latter existed.
Currently, the most popular candidates for first-generation ``polluters'' are
{\it (i)\/} intermediate-mass AGB stars ($4 \la {\cal{M}}/M_{\odot} \la 8$,
hereafter IM-AGB; e.g., \citealt{danven07}, and references therein), {\it
(ii)\/} rapidly rotating massive stars (often referred to as ``FRMS''; e.g.
\citealt{decr+07}) and {\it (iii)\/} massive binary stars \citep{demink+09}.
Wind velocities of these stars must be compared with the cluster escape velocity
derived at the same time these stars were present in the cluster (i.e. at ages
of $\sim$ 5\,--\,30 Myr for massive stars and $\sim$ 50\,--\,200 Myr for IM-AGB
stars).
We note that massive ($\ga 10^5\;M_{\odot}$) intermediate-age star clusters do
not provide very strong constraints to the cause of the presence of eMSTOs. This
is due to the fact that most of them contain large core radii which renders
both scenarios to predict the presence of eMSTOs in those clusters. On the other
hand, \emph{low-mass} (i.e. $\approx 10^4\; M_{\odot}$) star clusters
\emph{can} provide important insights into the nature of eMSTOs, especially when
selecting such clusters with a variety of core radii. With this in mind, we
present the analysis of new two-color HST Wide Field Camera 3 (WFC3) photometry
of two intermediate-age star clusters in the Large Magellanic Cloud (LMC) of
relatively low mass and significantly different radii, namely NGC~2209 and
NGC~2249. \cite{kell+12} used ground-based Gemini/GMOS photometry to study
NGC~2209; the authors identified an eMSTO, but the limited spatial resolution
prevented them from a detailed analysis of the MSTO morphology in the inner
regions of the cluster. For comparison purposes, we also re-analyzed archival
HST/ACS images of two other relatively low mass star clusters, namely NGC~1795
and IC~2146, for which \cite{milo+09} already showed that they do not exhibit an
eMSTO. We conduct a detailed investigation of the MSTO morphology of the four
clusters, comparing the observed CMDs with Monte Carlo simulations in order to
quantify the widths of MSTO regions and verify whether they can be reproduced by
a simple stellar population (SSP). Moreover, we study the evolution of the
clusters' masses and escape velocities from an age of 10 Myr to their current
age. This analysis allows us to reveal new findings relevant to the causes for
the formation and retention of second-generation stars in these intermediate-age
star clusters.
The remainder of this paper is organized as follows: Section~2 presents the
clusters' observations and data reduction. In Section~3 we present CMDs of the
four clusters and the comparison with Monte Carlo simulations. In Section~4 we
derive the evolution of the clusters' masses and escape velocities as a function
of age, using models with and without initial mass segregation. Finally, in
Section~5 we present and discuss our main results.
\section{Observations and Data Reduction}
\label{s:obs}
NGC~2209 and NGC~2249 were observed with HST on 2013 May 23 and 2013 November
11, respectively, using the UVIS channel of the WFC3 as part of HST program
12908 (PI: P.\ Goudfrooij). The clusters were centered on one of the two CCD
chips of the WFC3 UVIS camera, so that the observations cover enough radial
extent to study variations with cluster radius and to avoid the loss of the
central region of the clusters due to the CCD chip gap. Two long exposures were
taken in each of the F438W and F814W filters: for NGC~2209, their exposure times
were 850 s (F438W filter) and 485 s (F814W filter). For NGC~2249, they were 825
s and 425 s, respectively. In addition, we took one short 60 s exposure in F814W
for each cluster in order to avoid saturation of the brightest RGB and AGB
stars. The two long exposures in each filter were spatially offset from each
other by 2\farcs401 in a direction +85\fdg76 with respect to the positive
X-axis of the CCD array. This was done to move across the gap between the two
WFC3/UVIS CCD chips, as well to simplify the identification and removal of hot
pixels and cosmic rays. In addition to the WFC3/UVIS observations, we used the
Wide Field Camera (WFC) of ACS in parallel to obtain images $\approx 6'$ from
the cluster centers. These images have been taken in the same filters used for
the prime observations of the cluster (i.e., F435W and F814W). The ACS exposure
times were adjusted in order to hide the parallel buffer dumps without
sacrificing the target S/N of the WFC3 images. These ACS images provide valuable
information of the stellar content and Star Formation History (SFH) in the
underlying LMC field, permitting us to establish in detail the field star
contamination fraction in each region of the CMDs. They also allow a valuable
measurement of the ``background'' stellar surface density in the context of our
King model fits (see Section~\ref{s:dynamics}). For NGC~1795 and IC~2146, we
retrieved the STScI MAST archive images collected with ACS/WFC as part of the
HST program GO-9891 (PI: G.\ F.\ Gilmore). Descriptions of those observations
and datasets is reported in Table~1 of \cite{milo+09}.
The reduction of the images of NGC~2209 and NGC~2249 was performed following the
method described in \citet{kali+12}. Briefly, we started from the {\it flt}
files provided by the HST pipeline. The {\it flt} files constitute the
bias-corrected, dark-subtracted and flat-fielded images. We then corrected all
the {\it flt} files for charge transfer inefficiency, using the CTE correction
software\footnote{http://www.stsci.edu/hst/wfc3/tools/cte\_tools}. We generated
distortion-free images using MultiDrizzle \citep{fruchook97} and we calculated
the transformations between the individually drizzled images to link them to a
reference frame (i.e.:\ the first exposure) in each filter. The transformations
were based on Gaussian-fitted centroids of hundreds of stars on each image and
the solution was refined through successive matches. The final transformations
provide alignment of the individual images to better than 0.02 pixels. These
offsets were then supplied to a final run of MultiDrizzle as a ``shift'' file
and added to the WCS header information. Finally, bad pixels and cosmic rays are
flagged and rejected from the input images, and a final image is created for
each filter, combining the input undistorted and aligned frames. The final
stacked images were generated at the native resolution of the WFC3/UVIS and
ACS/WFC (i.e.: 0\farcs040 pixel$^{-1}$ and 0\farcs049 pixel$^{-1}$,
respectively). For NGC~1795 and IC~2146, we used the {\it drc} files produced by
the HST/ACS pipeline.
Stellar photometry was performed on the stacked images, using the stand-alone
versions of the DAOPHOT-II and ALLSTAR point spread function (PSF) fitting
programs \citep{stet87,stet94}. The final catalog is based on first performing
aperture photometry on all the sources that are at least 3$\sigma$ above the
local sky, then deriving a PSF from $\sim 1000$ bright isolated stars in the
field, and finally applying the PSF to all the sources detected in the aperture
photometry list. The final catalogs contain sources that were iteratively
matched between the two images, and have been cleaned by eliminating background
galaxies and spurious detections by means of $\chi^2$ and sharpness cuts from
the PSF fitting.
To perform the photometric calibration, we used a sample of bright isolated
stars to transform the instrumental PSF-fitted magnitudes to a fixed aperture of
10 pixels (0\farcs40 for WFC3/UVIS, 0\farcs49 for ACS/WFC). The magnitudes were
then transformed into the VEGAMAG system by adopting the relevant synthetic zero
points for the WFC3/UVIS and ACS/WFC bands.
To quantify incompleteness, we used the standard technique of adding artificial
stars to the images and running them through the photometric pipeline. A total
of nearly 120000 artificial stars were added to each image. In order to leave
the crowding conditions unaltered, only $\sim 5\%$ of the total number of stars
in the final catalogs were added per run; the overall distribution of the
inserted artificial stars followed that of the stars in the image. The
artificial stars were distributed in magnitude according to a luminosity
function similar to the observed one and with a color distribution covering the
full color ranges found in the CMDs. After inserting the artificial stars, the
photometry procedures described above were applied again to the image. An
inserted star was considered recovered if the input and output magnitudes agreed
to within 0.75 mag in both filters. Completeness fractions were assigned to
every individual star in a given CMD by fitting the completeness fractions as a
function of the magnitude and distance from the cluster center.
\section{Color-Magnitude Diagrams and Monte Carlo Simulations}
\label{s:photometry}
CMDs for the four star clusters are presented in the left panels of
Fig.~\ref{f:cmd}. We plot the stars within a core radius (except for NGC~2249,
for which we plot stars within the effective radius $r_e$), based on the King
(1962) model fits (derived as described in Sect.~\ref{s:dynamics} below).
Best-fit isochrones from \cite{mari+08} are superposed onto the clusters' CMDs,
along with the derived age, distance modulus and visual extinction $A_V$. Isochrone fitting has been performed using the methods described in
\citep[][G11a]{goud+09}. Briefly, we used the observed difference in magnitude
between the MSTO and the red clump (RC); we selected all the isochrones for
which the value of this parameter lies within $2\sigma$ of the measured
uncertainty of that parameter in the CMDs. For the set of isochrones that
satisfy our selection criteria (on average 5\,--\,10 isochrones), we found the
best-fit values for distance modulus and reddening, by means of a least square
fitting program to the magnitudes and colors of the MSTO and RC. Finally, we
overplotted the isochrones onto the CMDs and through a visual examination we
selected the best-fitting one. To assess the level of contamination of the
underlying LMC field population, we selected regions near the corners of the
image, with the same surface area as that adopted for the cluster stars. Stars
located in these regions have been superposed on the clusters' CMDs (shown as
green dots in the left panels of Fig~\ref{f:cmd}). The contamination in NGC~2209
and NGC~2249 is very low, while it is more pronounced in NGC~1795 and IC~2146,
but for all the four clusters is mainly confined to the lower (faint) part of
the clusters' MS.
Fig.~\ref{f:cmd} shows that the MSTO regions of NGC~2209 and NGC~2249 are fairly
wide, whereas the MS of single stars fainter than the turnoff is well defined
and much narrower. This difference is even more evident if we compare the MSTO
regions of these clusters with that of NGC~1795 and IC~2146. These two clusters
have a quite compact MSTO, for which the morphology seems consistent with that
of a single stellar population. Magnitude and color errors are shown in
the left panels of Fig.~\ref{f:cmd}: photometric errors at the MSTO magnitude
level are between 0.02 and 0.04 mag in color (F438W\,--\,F814W or
F555W\,--\,F814W, ), far too small to account for the broadening of the MSTO
region seen in NGC~2209 and NGC~2249. Moreover, reddening values are quite small
and the narrow morphology of the RC features shows that
differential reddening effects are negligible. Hence, the width of the MSTO in
these two clusters seems to strongly exclude a simple stellar population, and in
the context of the scenario described in the introduction, indicate the presence
of multiple stellar generations.
\begin{figure*}[pt]
\includegraphics[scale=0.29]{fig1a.eps}
\includegraphics[scale=0.29]{fig1b.eps}
\includegraphics[scale=0.29]{fig1c.eps}
\includegraphics[scale=0.29]{fig1d.eps}
\includegraphics[scale=0.29]{fig1e.eps}
\includegraphics[scale=0.29]{fig1f.eps}
\includegraphics[scale=0.29]{fig1g.eps}
\includegraphics[scale=0.29]{fig1h.eps}
\includegraphics[scale=0.29]{fig1i.eps}
\includegraphics[scale=0.29]{fig1j.eps}
\hspace{0.8mm}
\includegraphics[scale=0.29]{fig1k.eps}
\hspace{0.3mm}
\includegraphics[scale=0.29]{fig1l.eps}
\caption{Left panels: {$m_{\rm F438W}$} versus {$m_{\rm F438W} - m_{\rm F814W}$} or {$m_{\rm F555W}$} versus {$m_{\rm F555W} - m_{\rm F814W}$} CMDs for the four
star clusters. Best-fit isochrones from \cite{mari+08} are superposed to the
clusters' CMDs, along with the derived age, distance modulus $(m-M)_0$ and
visual extinction $A_V$. Contamination from the underlying LMC field population
has been derived from a region near the corner of the image, with the same
surface area adopted for the cluster stars, and superposed on the clusters' CMDs
(green dots). Parallelogram boxes used to select MSTOs stars to derive the
Pseudo-age distribution are also indicated. For each CMD we also show
magnitude and color errors, derived using the photometric distribution of our
artificial stars test. Center panels: comparison between observed (black dots)
and simulated (red dots) CMDs. For each simulated cluster we reported also the
adopted binary stars fraction. Right panels: Pseudo-age distributions, derived
as described in G11a, for the MSTO regions of the observed (black line) and
simulated (red line) CMDs.}
\label{f:cmd}
\end{figure*}
To constrain this picture further in terms of whether or not a single population
can reproduce the observed CMDs and to quantify the width of the eMSTO, we
conducted Monte Carlo simulations of synthetic clusters with the properties
implied by the isochrones fitting.
We simulated a SSP with a given age and chemical composition by populating an
isochrone with stars randomly drawn from a Salpeter mass function and normalized
to the observed number of stars according to the completeness. To a fraction of
these sample stars, we added a component of unresolved binary stars drawn from
the same mass function, using a flat distribution of primary-to-secondary mass
ratios. To estimate the binary fraction in each cluster, we used the width of
the upper MS, i.e. the part between the MSTO region and the TO of the background
stellar population. We estimated that the internal systematic uncertainty
in the binary fraction is of the order of 5\%; for the purpose of this work, the
results do not change significantly within $\sim$ 10\% of the binary fraction.
Finally, we added photometric errors, derived using the photometric error
distribution of our artificial stars test.
The comparison between the observed and simulated CMDs is shown in the middle
panels of Fig.~\ref{f:cmd}. The adopted binary star fraction is also reported
for each cluster. Overall, the SSP simulations reproduce several CMDs features
quite well in the four clusters, such as for example the MS and the RC. However,
the middle panels of Fig.~\ref{f:cmd} clearly show that the MSTO regions in
NGC~2209 and NGC~2249 are significantly wider than that of their respective SSP
simulations. Conversely, the MSTO regions of NGC~1795 and IC~2146 are very well
reproduced by their SSP simulation.
In order to compare in detail the observed and simulated MSTO regions, we
created their ``pseudo-age'' distributions (see G11a for a detailed
description). Briefly, pseudo-age distributions are derived by constructing
parallelograms across the MSTOs with one axis approximately parallel to the
isochrones and the other approximately perpendicular to them (parallelograms for
each clusters are illustrated in left panels of Fig.~\ref{f:cmd}). The ({$m_{\rm F438W} - m_{\rm F814W}$},
{$m_{\rm F438W}$}) and ({$m_{\rm F555W} - m_{\rm F814W}$}, {$m_{\rm F555W}$}) coordinates of the stars within the parallelogram are
then transformed into the reference coordinate frame defined by the two axes of
the parallelogram. The same procedure is then applied to the isochrone tables
to set the age scale along this vector. A polynomial least-square fit between
age and the coordinate in the direction perpendicular to the isochrones then
yields the pseudo-age distributions. This procedure is applied both to the
observed and simulated CMDs.
The derived pseudo-age distributions are shown in
the right panels of Fig.~\ref{f:cmd}. These were calculated using the
non-parametric Epanechnikov-kernel probability density function \citep{silv86},
in order to avoid biases that can arise if fixed bin widths are used. As
expected, for NGC~1795 and IC~2146 the observed pseudo-age distributions are
very well reproduced by the simulated ones. Conversely, the observed pseudo-age
distributions for NGC~2209 and NGC~2249 are significantly wider than the
simulated ones: the stellar age distributions peak near the location of the
best-fit isochrone and then decline slower than the prediction of the single
stellar generation distributions. They do so slower towards older ages than
towards younger ages. The pseudo-age distributions of the observed clusters are
quite smooth, suggesting that the morphologies of the MSTO regions can be
better explained with a spread in age rather than by two discrete bursts of
star formation. This is similar to the findings of G11a for their 7 clusters.
Our detection of an eMSTO in NGC~2209 confirms the finding by \citet{kell+12}
who used $g$ and $i$-band imaging taken at Gemini-South. Due to the crowding in
the inner regions at ground-based spatial resolution, \citet{kell+12} only used
stars in an annulus with radii $40'' < r < 80''$ from the cluster center, which
is outside the cluster's half-light radius. Our results show that the eMSTO
feature in NGC~2209 extends all the way into the core, where the relative
contamination by field stars is much smaller.
As to the non-detection of an eMSTO in NGC~1795 and IC~2146, it was shown by
\citet{kell+11} and G11a that the width of pseudo-age distributions of
simulated SSPs scales approximately with the logarithm of the cluster age. This
renders the ability to detect a given age spread to be age dependent, becoming
harder for older clusters. However, at the age of the oldest cluster in our
sample (IC~2146, 1.9 Gyr), an age spread $\Delta \tau$ = 200 Myr yields
$\Delta\tau/\tau$ = 0.105, which is well above the detection limit for the data
(see G11a). This confirms the simple stellar population nature of NGC~1795 and
IC~2146.
\section{Insights From Histories of Cluster Mass Loss and Escape Velocity}
\label{s:dynamics}
As stated in the Introduction, the photometric evidence available to date led to
two main types of scenarios to explain the eMSTO phenomenon:\ scenarios that
involve the formation of a second generation of stars, and scenarios that do
not. The former type of scenarios consists of two subtypes: \emph{(i)} the
scenario of K11 who suggested that eMSTO can only be hosted by intermediate-age
star clusters with current core radii larger than a certain threshold value
(i.e.. $r_c \ga$ 3.7 pc). We refer to this scenario as the ``core radius
threshold'' scenario hereinafter; and \emph{(ii)} the ``escape velocity
threshold'' scenario of G11b who proposed that eMSTO can only be hosted by
clusters for which the escape velocity of the cluster was higher than the wind
velocities of the stars thought to provide the material used by the second
generations of stars, at the time such stars were present in the cluster. The
scenarios that do not involve extended star formation consist of \emph{(i)} the
``stellar rotation'' scenario first suggested by \citet{basdem09} and
\emph{(ii)} the ``interactive binaries'' scenario of \citet{yang+11}. Noting
that these different scenarios imply different predictions on the dependence of
eMSTO properties on the clusters' dynamical properties, we proceed to determine
structural parameters and masses of our sample clusters.
\subsection{Structural Parameters of the Clusters}
\label{s:kingmodels}
We first determine completeness-corrected radial number density distributions of
stars for the four clusters in our sample following \citet{goud+09}. We
determine the clusters' center creating a two dimensional histogram of the pixel
coordinates using a bin size of $50 \times 50$ pixels, and then calculating the
center using a two-dimensional Gaussian fit to an image constructed from the
surface number density values in the two-dimensional histogram. This method
avoids biases related to the presence of bright stars near the center. The
cluster's ellipticity $\epsilon$ is derived by running the task {\it ellipse}
within IRAF/STSDAS\footnote{STSDAS is a product of the Space Telescope Science
Institute, which is operated by AURA for NASA.} on the surface number density
images mentioned above. The area sampled by the images is then divided in a
series of concentric elliptical annuli, centered on the clusters center. The
spatial completeness of each annulus is divided out in the process. For NGC~2209
and NGC~2249 the outermost data point is derived from the ACS parallel
observations, in a field located $\simeq$\,5\farcm5 from the cluster center. We
fit the radial surface number density profile using a King (1962) model combined
with a constant background level, described by the following equation:
\begin{equation}
n(r) = n_0 \: \left( \frac{1}{\sqrt{1 + (r/r_c)^2}} - \frac{1}{\sqrt{1+c^2}}
\right)^2 \; + \; {\rm bkg}
\label{eq:King}
\end{equation}
where $n_0$ is the central surface number density, $r_c$ is the core radius, $c
\equiv r_t/r_c$ is the King concentration index ($r_t$ being the tidal radius),
and $r$ is the geometric mean radius of the ellipse ($r = a\,\sqrt{1-\epsilon}$,
where a is the semi-major axis of the ellipse). The best-fit King models for
the four clusters, selected using a $\chi^2$ minimization routine, are shown in
Fig.~\ref{f:king}, along with the derived surface number density values and
other relevant parameters.
\begin{figure*}[thp]
\centerline{
\includegraphics[height=8.2cm,angle=270]{fig2a.eps}
\hspace*{1mm}
\includegraphics[height=8.2cm,angle=270]{fig2b.eps}
}
\centerline{
\includegraphics[height=8.2cm,angle=270]{fig2c.eps}
\hspace*{1.0mm}
\includegraphics[height=8.2cm,angle=270]{fig2d.eps}
}
\caption{Radial surface number density profiles of the four star clusters in our
sample. The points represent observed values. The dashed lines represent the
best-fit King models (cf. Equation~\ref{eq:King}) whose parameters are shown in
the legend. Names, ellipticities and effective radii of the clusters are also
shown in the legend. The radius values have been converted to parsec adopting the appropriate distance modulus.}
\label{f:king}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure}[tbh]
\includegraphics[width=1\columnwidth]{fig3.eps}
\caption{The parameter $W_{20}$, that is the width at the 20\% of the maximum
value of the clusters' pseudo age distributions, after deconvolving out the
values for the SSP simulations and represents a measure of the broadening of the
MSTO, is plotted against the escape velocity at an age of $10^7$ Myr (the
derived $W_{20}$ value for NGC~1795 and IC~2147 is an upper limit). Black (red)
points represent clusters exhibiting (not exhibiting) an eMSTO; currently
extended (compact) clusters are shown with circles (squares). Finally, open
(filled) symbols represent data using a model without (with) initial mass
segregation. The blue open circles represent the most ``plausible'' escape
velocities values. The grey region depicts the range of escape velocities within
which the distinction between clusters with and without eMSTOs seems to occur
(see discussion in Section~\ref{s:dynevol}).}
\label{f:escvel}
\end{figure}
Fig.~\ref{f:king} shows some interesting results. First of all, the two clusters
hosting an eMSTO, NGC~2209 and NGC~2249, have a very different core radius.
While NGC~2209 is currently extended (i.e.: $r_c = 6.64$ pc), NGC~2249 is
currently compact (i.e.: $r_c = 2.46$ pc). Second, the core radii of the two
clusters in our sample that do not exhibit an eMSTO, NGC~1795 and IC~2146, are
also interesting in the context of constraining different scenarios. While
NGC~1795 has a moderately large core radius ($r_c = 4.13$ pc), IC~2146 is
\emph{very} extended ($r_c = 8.89$ pc, the most extended in our sample). Taking
these results at face value, it seems that the ``core radius threshold''
scenario can not fully account for the presence of eMSTOs in intermediate-age
star clusters. Specifically, under the hyphothesis that a cluster can host an
eMSTO only if it has a radius larger than a certain value ($r_c \ga$ 3.7 pc), we
would have expected to detect eMSTOs in NGC~1795, NGC~2209, and IC~2146, and
\emph{not} in NGC~2249 for which the derived core radius is significantly
smaller than the threshold value. Instead, eMSTOs are \emph{not} detected in
NGC~1795 and IC~2146, while an eMSTO \emph{is} detected in NGC~2249.
\subsection{Present-Day Masses and Dynamical Evolution}
\label{s:dynevol}
To verify whether the ``escape velocity threshold'' scenario \emph{can} provide
a valid explanation on the formation of eMSTO, we estimate cluster masses and
escape velocities as a function of time, going back to an age of 10 Myr, after
the cluster has survived the era of violent relaxation and when the most massive
stars of the first generation, proposed to be candidate polluters in the
literature (i.e., FRMS and massive binary stars), are expected to start losing
significant amounts of mass through slow winds.
Current cluster masses are determined from integrated-light $V$-band magnitudes
listed in Table~\ref{t:parameters}. Aperture corrections for these magnitudes
are determined from the best-fit King model for each cluster by calculating the
fraction of total cluster light encompassed by the measurement aperture. After
aperture correction, cluster masses are calculated from the values of $A_V,
(m\!-\!M)_0, \mbox{[Z/H]}$, and age listed in Table~\ref{t:parameters}. This is
done by interpolation between the ${\cal{M}}/L_V$ values in the SSP model tables
of \citet{bc03}, assuming a \citet{salp55} initial mass function.
\begin{table*}[thb]
\begin{center}
\caption{Physical properties of the star clusters}
\begin{tabular}{ccccccccc}
\hline
\hline
Cluster & V & Aper. & Aper. corr. & [Z/H] & $A_V$ & Age & $r_c$ & $r_e$ \\
(1) & (2) & (3) & (4) & (5) & (6) & (7) & (8) & (9) \\
\hline
NGC~2209 & 13.15 $\pm$ 0.15 & 31 & 1.00 & -0.30 & 0.23 & 1.15 & 6.64 $\pm$ 0.34 & 9.02 $\pm$ 0.46 \\
NGC~2249 & 12.23 $\pm$ 0.15 & 31 & 0.26 & -0.46 & 0.07 & 1.00 & 2.46 $\pm$ 0.04 & 4.77 $\pm$ 0.08 \\
NGC~1795 & 12.67 $\pm$ 0.15 & 31 & 0.63 & -0.30 & 0.20 & 1.40 & 4.13 $\pm$ 0.61 & 7.47 $\pm$ 1.23 \\
IC~2146 & 13.10 $\pm$ 0.15 & 50 & 0.76 & -0.30 & 0.08 & 1.90 & 8.89 $\pm$ 1.36 & 12.53 $\pm$ 1.92 \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\tablecomments{Columns (1): Name of the clusters. (2): Integrated $V$ magnitude. (3): Adopted radius in arcsec for the measure of the integrated magnitude. (4): Aperture correction in magnitude. (5): Metallicity (dex). (6): Visual extinction $A_V$ in magnitude. (7): Age in Gyr. (8): Core radius $r_c$ in pc. (9): Effective radius $r_e$ in pc.}
\label{t:parameters}
\end{center}
\end{table*}
Dynamical evolution calculations of the star clusters is done following the
prescriptions of G11b. Briefly, we evaluated the evolution of cluster mass and
effective radius for model clusters with and without initial mass segregation.
The latter property plays a fundamental role in terms of cluster mass loss and
the early evolution of cluster core radii \citep[e.g.,][]{mack+08b,vesp+09}.
The dynamical evolution calculations cover an age range between 10 Myr and 13
Gyr and take into account the effects of stellar evolution mass loss and
internal two-body relaxation. For each cluster, we listed in
Table~\ref{t:dynamics} the results obtained with a level of initial mass
segregation of $r_e / r_{e,1} = 1.5$ (where $r_{e,1}$ is the effective radius of
stars with $M > 1$ {M$_{\odot}$}) versus those without initial mass segregation.
Escape velocities listed in Table~\ref{t:dynamics} are determined for every
cluster by assuming a single-mass King model with a radius-independent
${\cal{M}}/L$ ratio\footnote{We acknowledge that this will underestimate
somewhat the $V_{\rm esc}$ values for clusters with significant mass
segregation.} as calculated above from the clusters' best-fit age and [$Z$/H]
values. Escape velocities are calculated from the reduced gravitational
potential, $V_{\rm esc} (r,t) = (2\Phi_{\rm tid} (t) - 2\Phi (r,t))^{1/2}$, at
the core radius. Here $\Phi_{\rm tid}$ is the potential at the tidal
(truncation) radius of the cluster. For convenience, we define $V_{\rm esc, 7}
(r) \equiv V_{\rm esc}\,(r, t = 10^7 {\rm yr})$, and refer to it as ``early escape velocity''.
\begin{table*}
\begin{center}
\caption{Dynamical properties of the star clusters}
\begin{tabular}{c|ccc|cccc}
\hline
\colhead{} & \multicolumn{3}{|c|}{log (${\cal{M}}_{\rm cl}/M_{\odot}$)} &
\multicolumn{4}{|c}{$\vartheta_{\rm esc} \ $(\kms)}\\
Cluster & Current & 10$^7$ yr w/o m.s. & 10$^7$ yr with m.s. & Current &
10$^7$ yr w/o m.s. & 10$^7$ yr with m.s. & 10$^7$ yr ``plausible''\\
(1) & (2) & (3) & (4) & (5) & (6) & (7) & (8)\\
\hline
NGC~2209 & 4.40 $\pm$ 0.07 & 4.53 $\pm$ 0.07 & 4.94 $\pm$ 0.07 & 6.1 $\pm$ 0.5 & 7.97 $\pm$ 0.5 & 15.56 $\pm$ 0.5 & 15.56 $\pm$ 0.5 \\
NGC~2249 & 4.48 $\pm$ 0.07 & 4.64 $\pm$ 0.07 & 5.04 $\pm$ 0.07 & 9.4 $\pm$ 0.8 &
12.87 $\pm$ 0.8 & 24.52 $\pm$ 0.8 & 15.66 $\pm$ 0.8 \\
NGC~1795 & 4.50 $\pm$ 0.07 & 4.66 $\pm$ 0.07 & 4.84 $\pm$ 0.07 & 7.7 $\pm$ 0.9 & 10.43 $\pm$ 0.9 & 14.44 $\pm$ 0.9 & 11.90 $\pm$ 0.9 \\
IC~2146 & 4.49 $\pm$ 0.07 & 4.63 $\pm$ 0.07 & 4.82 $\pm$ 0.07 & 5.9 $\pm$ 0.7 &
7.69 $\pm$ 0.7 & 10.81 $\pm$ 0.7 & 9.25 $\pm$ 0.7 \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\tablecomments{Columns (1): Name of the clusters. (2): Logarithm of the adopted current cluster mass. (3-4): Logarithm of the adopted cluster mass at an age of 10$^7$ yr without(with) the inclusion of initial mass segregation. (5): Current cluster escape velocity at the core radius. (6-7): Cluster escape velocity at the core radius at an age of 10$^7$ yr without(with) the inclusion of initial mass segregation. (9) ``Plausible'' cluster escape velocity at an age of 10$^7$ yr.}
\label{t:dynamics}
\end{center}
\end{table*}
Early escape velocities for the four clusters, at an age of 10 Myr, are plotted
versus the $W_{20}$ parameter in Fig.~\ref{f:escvel}. $W_{20}$ represents the
width at the 20\% level with respect to the maximum value of the clusters pseudo
age distributions, after deconvolving out the values for the SSP simulations.
Currently extended and currently compact clusters are shown with different
symbols in Fig.~\ref{f:escvel}:\ the former as circle and the latter as square.
Furthermore, different colors are used to identify clusters hosting or not
hosting an eMSTO (black versus red, respectively). Finally, for each clusters,
we show the values for $V_{\rm esc,\,7}$ calculated without and with the
inclusion of initial mass segregation in the dynamical evolution model (open
versus filled symbols, respectively). To estimate ``plausible'' values for
$V_{\rm esc,\,7}$ for the different clusters we used a procedure that take into account the various results from the compilation of Magellanic Cloud star cluster properties and N-body simulations by \citet{mack+08b}. Briefly, they showed that the maximum core radius seen among a large sample of Magellanic Cloud star clusters increase approximately linearly with log(age) up to an age of $\sim$ 1.5 Gyr, namely from $\simeq$ 2.0 pc at $\simeq$ 10 Myr to $\simeq$ 5.5 pc at $\simeq$ 1.5 Gyr. Conversely, the {\it minimum} core radius is $\sim$ 1.5 pc throughout the age range 10 Myr\,--\,2 Gyr. Using N-body modeling \citet{mack+08b} showed that this behavior is consistent with adiabatic expansion of the cluster core in clusters with different levels of initial mass segregation, that is the cluster with the highest level of mass segregation experience the strongest core expansion. Finally, in our estimate we also considered the impact of the retention of stellar black holes (BHs) to the evolution of the clusters core radii (for a detailed description of the procedure, we refer the reader to a companion paper, Goudfrooij et al. 2014, submitted to ApJ).
Fig.~\ref{f:escvel} suggests that the differences among the clusters
can be explained by dynamical evolution arguments if the currently extended
clusters experienced stronger initial mass segregation than the currently
compact ones (to guide the reader, we highlighted with a blue circle the most
``plausible'' escape velocities values to be considered in the context of the
assumption mentioned above).
\subsection{Implications on the nature of the eMSTOs}
\label{s:causes}
Under the assumption mentioned above, NGC~2209 and NGC~2249 have an early escape
velocity $V_{\rm esc} >$ 15 \kms, whereas the ones derived for NGC~1795 and
IC~2146 are at $\sim$\,9 and 12 \kms. Taking these results at face value, the
``critical'' escape velocity above which the cluster is able to retain material
ejected by the slow winds of first generation polluters seems to be in the
approximate range of 12\,--\,15 \kms\ (i.e., the grey area depicted in
Fig.~\ref{f:escvel}). This is in agreement with the results obtained by
G11b\footnote{Note however that G11b calculated their velocities using the
effective radius $r_e$ instead of the core radius $r_c$, preventing a direct
comparison.} and Goudfrooij et al. (2014).
In this context, it is important to verify that the clusters escape velocity is
above the derived threshold at the time the candidate polluters are present in
the clusters (i.e. at ages of $\sim$ \,5--\,30 Myr for massive stars and $\sim$
\,50--\,200 Myr for IM-AGB stars) and ejecting the material necessary for the
formation of the second generation. Fig.~\ref{f:vel_time} shows escape velocity
as a function of age, in a time range between 0 and 1 Gyr and with the
assumption on the level of initial mass segregation presented above. The
critical escape velocity range of \,12--\,15 \kms\ is depicted as the light grey
region in Fig.~\ref{f:vel_time}, while the region below 12 \kms, representing
the velocity range in which we do not observe eMSTOs in intermediate-age star
clusters, is shown in dark grey. Note that NGC~2249 escape velocity remains
above 12 \kms\ for more than 250 Myr, while the escape velocity of NGC~2209
declines more rapidly and becomes lower than the threshold value after
$\approx$\,100 Myr. This is long enough for stars with ${\cal{M}} \ga 4 \;
M_{\odot}$ (i.e., all IM-AGB stars, see \citealt{vendan09}) to have lost all
their outer stellar envelope mass. Note also that given the very extended nature
of NGC~2209, the level of initial mass segregation experienced by the cluster
could be higher than the value we adopted in our analysis
(\citealt{mack+08b,goud+14}). In that case, NGC~2209's escape velocity would
remain above 12 \kms\ for an even longer time. Conversely, NGC~1795 and
IC~2146, as expected, have an escape velocity below the threshold value at all
times. Hence, these results suggest that for clusters exhibiting an eMSTO, the
escape velocity remains above 12 \kms\ for a period of time long enough to
permit the retention of the material ejected by all the possible candidate
polluters, including the IM-AGB stars, which are the last in order of time to
start their slow winds. Thus, it is worth to compare clusters escape velocities
with the wind speeds of the first generation candidate polluters: wind speeds
for FRMS range between ten to a few hundreds of \kms
\citep{port96,porriv03,wuns+08}, massive binary stars have wind velocities in
the range 15\,--\,50 \kms\ (see e.g., \citealt{smit+02,smit+07}) and observed
wind velocities for IM-AGB stars in our Galaxy and the Magellanic Clouds are in
the range 12\,--\,18 \kms\ \citep{vaswoo93,zijl+96}. The latter range of wind
velocities is very similar to the ``critical'' escape velocity derived from our
dynamical analysis, suggesting that IM-AGB stars can be an important source of
the material needed for the formation of the second generation.
For what concerns scenarios that do not involve extended star formation, the
most popular is the ``stellar rotation'' scenario \citep{basdem09}. Using
theoretical arguments, the authors suggested that a distribution of rotation
velocities for stars between 1.2\,--\,1.7 $M_{\odot}$ can mimic the observed
morphology of the eMSTOs, shifting fast rotators stars to redder color in the
CMDs. However, \citet{gira+11}, using newly calculated evolutionary tracks for
non-rotating and rotating stars, reached opposite conclusions, that is stellar
models with rotation actually produce a modest blueshift in the CMD. Observations are needed to test these model predictions. To date, the only star cluster for which colors {\it and} rotation velocities have been determined for MSTO stars is the open cluster Trumpler~20 \citep{plat+12}. They showed that the distribution velocities of stars in Trumpler~20 includes the full range between
0\,--\,180 \kms (which is similar to the range considered in the last models by \citealt{yang+13}), with a rather flat distribution, and that the fastest rotators are slightly \emph{blueshifted} (by $\Delta(V-I) = -0.01$) with respect to the slowest rotators. This is consistent with the prediction of \citet{gira+11}, and it suggests that the effect of stellar rotation on the morphology of MSTOs is significantly less pronounced that that advocated by \citet{basdem09}.
Taking this into account, the results presented here suggest that the ``escape
velocity threshold scenario'' provides a valid explanation for the presence of
broadened MSTO region in intermediate-age star clusters and, in turn, that the
eMSTO phenomenon can be better explained by a range of stellar ages rather than
a range of stellar rotation velocities or interacting binaries.
\begin{figure}[tbh]
\centerline{\includegraphics[width=0.7\columnwidth]{fig4.eps}}
\caption{Escape velocities as a function of time for the four clusters in our
sample (identified in the legend at the top right). Light grey region represents
the critical escape velocity range, between \,12--\,15 \kms. The region below 12
\kms, in which cluster escape velocity is too low to permit the retention of the
material shed by the first generation and the presence of the eMSTO phenomenon,
is reported in dark grey.}
\label{f:vel_time}
\end{figure}
\section{Summary and Conclusions}
We studied CMDs of two relatively low mass intermediate-age star clusters in the
LMC, namely NGC~2209 and NGC~2249, using new HST/WFC3 images. For comparison
purposes, we also re-analyzed archival HST/ACS images of NGC~1795 and IC~2146,
two other relatively low mass star clusters, for which the photometry was
already presented in \cite{milo+09}. We compared the CMDs of the clusters with
Monte Carlo simulations of SSPs in order to investigate the MSTO morphology and
quantify the intrinsic widths of the clusters MSTO regions. To study the
physical and dynamical properties of the clusters, we derived their radial
surface number density distributions and we determined the evolution of the
clusters masses and escape velocities from an age of 10 Myr to the current
age, considering models with and without initial mass segregation. The main
results of this paper can be summarized as follows:
\begin{itemize}
\item NGC~2209 and NGC~2249 show a broadening of the MSTO region that can not be
explained by photometric uncertainties, LMC field star contamination, or
differential reddening effects. Comparison with Monte Carlo simulations of a
SSP (including the effects of unresolved binary stars), show that the observed
MSTOs are significantly wider than that of a single-age cluster with the same
mass, [Z/H], and (average) age. On the other hand, NGC~1795 and IC~2146 show
quite compact MSTOs, which are very well reproduced by their respective SSP
simulations.
\item NGC~2209 and NGC~2249 pseudo-age distribution are peaked towards younger
ages and decline smoothly towards older ages. The lack of obvious secondary
peaks in these distributions suggests that the morphology of the MSTO region
of these clusters can be better explained by a spread in age than by two
discrete SSPs.
\item The physical properties of NGC~2209 and NGC~2249 are very different, even
though their ages are almost identical: NGC~2209 is a very extended cluster
(core radius $r_c = 6.64$ pc), while NGC~2249 is quite compact ($r_c = 2.46$
pc). The presence of an eMSTO in both of these clusters suggests that the
scenario proposed by K11, in which a cluster hosts an eMSTO only if it has a
core radius larger than a certain value ($r_c \ga 3.7$ pc), can not fully
explain the eMSTO phenomenon. On the other hand, we find that the differences
in MSTO properties among all four clusters of our sample \emph{can} be
explained by dynamical evolution arguments under the plausible assumption
that the currently extended clusters experienced stronger initial mass
segregation than the currently compact ones. With this assumption, the derived
early escape velocities for NGC~2209 and NGC~2249 are consistent with observed
wind speeds for intermediate-mass AGB stars in our Galaxy and the Magellanic
Clouds, which are considered to be one of the most probable candidate
``polluter'' stars of the first generation (the others being FRMS and massive
binary stars).
\item The non-ubiquity of eMSTOs among intermediate-age star clusters in the
Magellanic Clouds along with the apparent dependence of the presence of eMSTOs
on the initial dynamical properties of the clusters in the age range of
10\,--\,100 Myr seems to indicate that age effects, rather than a range of
stellar rotation velocities or interacting binaries, are responsible for the
broadening of the MSTO region.
\end{itemize}
\acknowledgments
Support for this project was provided by NASA through grant HST-GO-12908 from
the Space Telescope Science Institute, which is operated by the Association of
Universities for Research in Astronomy, Inc., under NASA contract NAS5--26555.
We made significant use of the SAO/NASA Astrophysics Data System during this
project.
|
\section*{Informational Fifth Page}
|
\section{Concluding remarks}
\label{sec:conc}
We have discussed a number of ways in which the ``lazy subscription'' optimization for
Transactional Lock Elision (TLE)---in which lock subscription is
delayed until the end of transactional critical section execution in
order to reduce the transaction's window of vulnerability to
abort---is not safe in general with existing hardware transactional memory (HTM)
features. A transaction may observe inconsistent data
if it does not subscribe to the lock early, and as a result may fail
to correctly subscribe to the lock before committing.
Dalessandro et al. \cite{Dalessandro:Hybrid-NOrec-ASPLOS-2011} first
proposed lazy subscription and pointed out that a hardware transaction
must ensure its reads are consistent before executing any instructions
that may be dangerous if executed based on inconsistent reads. The
Reduced NOrec algorithm of Matveev and Shavit
\cite{Matveev:Reduced-NOrec-SPAA-2013} recognizes the same issue, and
explicitly separates out cases that are not compatible with lazy subscription
in order to allow lazy subscription for the other (hopefully common) cases.
Specifically, it
introduces a ``slow path'' that applies the effects of software
transactions using HTM, allowing ``fast-path'' transactions to use
lazy subscription with respect to these transactions. Nonetheless, in
order to avoid pitfalls such as those described in our paper, fast-path
transactions must subscribe early to a global lock used to protect
``slow-slow-path'' transactions that cannot be committed using HTM;
such transactions are executed in software, and
thus may expose partial effects to hardware transactions that have not subscribed to the lock.
Compiler support suggested recently \cite{irina-transact2014} for avoiding
such issues in SGL-based transaction systems
is not sufficient to ensure
correctness. We argue that the complexity required to address
these issues via static analysis is unlikely to be worthwhile. Precise analysis of when
subscription can be deferred is complex and is likely to result in
relatively early subscription in most cases; conservative analysis
to mitigate such complexity will only exacerbate the
problem, largely eliminating any benefit from lazy subscription.
Without detailed analysis of the compiled code for benchmarks used to
evaluate the benefits of lazy subscription, it is difficult to assess
how meaningful their results are. However, in our ongoing work, we
are experimenting with lazy subscription in carefully controlled
benchmarks for which we are confident lazy subscription does not
compromise correctness. Our preliminary results convince us that lazy
subscription is worth pursuing further, as it does yield significant
performance benefits without compromising correctness in at least some
cases. However, as we have argued, there are numerous pitfalls
associated with lazy subscription, so manual confirmation of its
safety in specific cases is likely to be error prone.
In this paper, we have also described hardware extensions that
eliminate these issues entirely in hardware, allowing lazy
subscription to be safely used with TLE and SGL-based transaction
systems with no special compiler support or manual analysis. While we
believe these changes are likely to add only modest cost and
complexity to an HTM design, such extensions undoubtedly have a cost.
Thus, it remains to be seen whether this cost will be justified by the
benefits of enabling the use of lazy subscription.
\section{Pitfalls of lazy subscription}
\label{sec:causes}
Lazy subscription can cause a transaction to deviate from behavior
allowed by the original program in a variety of ways. Some of these
behaviors are benign, because the transaction aborts and therefore its
effects are not observed by other threads. In particular, most HTM
implementations ensure that, if a transaction executes code---such as
divide-by-zero---that would ordinarily cause the program to crash, it
simply aborts. However, below we explain a number of ways in which
a transactions that deviate from the original program's behavior
can commit successfully, resulting in observably
incorrect behavior\vspace{.1in}.
\noindent\textbf{Observing inconsistent state} If a thread executes a
critical section without acquiring or subscribing to the lock, this
can result in the thread's registers containing values that could
never occur in an execution of the original program. This is
illustrated by the example in
Figure~\ref{fig:indirect-branch-example}, in which a shared variable
\texttt{next\_method} indicates the method to perform next time
\texttt{apply\_next} is invoked. If the critical section is
executed in a transaction with lazy subscription, at
line~\ref{getnextmethod} it may observe the value of
\texttt{next\_method} as 2 because another thread that is executing
the critical section while holding the lock is just about to reset
\texttt{next\_method} to zero (at line~\ref{resettozero}). The use of
the lock in the original program ensures that no thread ever reads 2
from \texttt{next\_method}\vspace{.1in}.
Below we describe a number of ways in which such inconsistent state
can lead to observably incorrect behavior\vspace{.1in}.
\noindent\textbf{Indirect branch}
Continuing the example above, after a transaction reads 2 from
\texttt{next\_method}, it reads the value stored immediately
\emph{after} the \texttt{method\_table} array and treats it as a
function pointer, invoking the ``code'' at that address. Because this
address may point to any code or data, the result of executing code
stored at the address is unpredictable. In particular, it
might
commit the
transaction, without ever subscribing to the lock\vspace{.1in}.
\input{fig-indirect-branch-example}
This example shows that a thread executing a critical section in a
transaction that has not yet subscribed to the lock can observe values
in memory that it could never observe in any execution of the original
program and that it can commit nonetheless, resulting in observably incorrect
behavior. While this is sufficient to conclude that lazy subscription
cannot be blindly used for TLE with unmodified critical section code,
it is important to understand that there are many other ways in which
reading inconsistent values from memory can indirectly result in
incorrect behavior, as described below\vspace{.1in}.
\noindent\textbf{Propagating inconsistent state} Once a thread's
registers are in a state not allowed in the original program, this
inconsistency can propagate through the thread's state in numerous
ways, resulting in differences from behavior that could be observed in
an execution of the original program:
\begin{itemize}
\item Inconsistent values may propagate between registers via
arithmetic operations, register moves, etc.
\item Inconsistent values in registers may propagate to memory written
by the transaction explicitly or implicitly (e.g., arguments to
method calls, register spills).
\item Inconsistent register values may be used as addresses for stores
to memory, resulting in locations being written that would not be
written by the transaction in an execution of the original program.
\item Inconsistent values written to memory or to inconsistent
locations may propagate back to registers via loads, either
explicitly or implicitly.
\item Conditional control flow may differ.
\end{itemize}
\noindent These effects are benign if the transaction aborts, but they can lead
to the transaction committing without subscribing to the lock in a
number of ways, some of which are discussed below\vspace{.1in}.
\noindent\textbf{Conditional code that commits the transaction} If a
condition in a transaction executing before subscribing to the lock
evaluates differently because of an inconsistent value in a register,
then a code path may be executed that would not be executed by the
original program. Because we assume arbitrary, unmodified critical
section code, we cannot rule out the possibility that this code could
commit the transaction without subscribing to the lock\vspace{.1in}.
\noindent\textbf{Lock scribbling} A memory write that uses an
inconsistent register for its target address may overwrite the lock
protecting the critical section with a value that makes it appear to
be available. In this scenario, even if the correct lock subscription
code is executed and subscribes to the correct lock, it may
incorrectly conclude that the lock is available and commit the
transaction\vspace{.1in}.
\noindent\textbf{Subscribing to the wrong ``lock''} If the address of
the lock protecting the critical section is stored in a register or
memory location that is inconsistent, then even if the correct
subscription code is executed, the transaction may incorrectly
conclude that the lock is available and commit\vspace{.1in}.
\noindent\textbf{Self modifying code} Similar to lock scribbling, if a
transaction that has observed inconsistent state writes incorrect
values to memory, or writes to an incorrect address, the transaction
could execute code that it has itself incorrectly written. Again,
this could result in committing the transaction without subscribing to
the lock\vspace{.1in}.
\noindent\textbf{Corrupted return address} Finally, we present
one more concrete example showing how an inconsistent value read from
memory can propagate to cause the transaction to commit without
subscribing to the lock. In this example, similar to the indirect
branch example above, a transaction using late subscription reads a
value from memory that it could never read in the original program.
This time, it uses this value as an index into a
\emph{stack-allocated} array and writes to memory at the indexed
location. In this case, if the inconsistent value is not a valid
index into the array, the target location may happen
to be the stack location containing the function's return address, and
the value written may happen to be the address of the instruction that
commits the transaction. When the function returns, it will execute
the instruction to commit the transaction without attempting to
subscribe to the lock.
\subsection{Avoiding the pitfalls via compiler support}
TLE is the most promising way to exploit HTM in the short term because
it can be applied to unmodified critical sections, with no special
compiler support. (Note that modifying critical sections may be
required in order to achieve the best performance, but not to ensure
correctness.) As explained above, lazy subscription cannot be applied
to TLE without sacrificing this important property.
For the context of SGL-based transactional systems, compiler support
for analyzing code to be executed in transactions is typically
required anyway, so there is an opportunity for the compiler to
analyze and modify such code in order to make lazy subscription safe.
Indeed, Calciu et al. \cite{irina-transact2014} proposed that the
compiler ensure that transactions subscribe to the lock before
executing an indirect branch in order to avoid the indirect branch
pitfall described above. (We note, however, that they suggested this
only for the case in which the transaction had already written to
memory; the indirect branch example above shows that this is not
sufficient, as it does not write to memory
before executing the indirect branch.)
Presumably they also assumed that the compiler would conservatively
disallow the use of instructions that would commit the transaction
within any code that could \emph{potentially} be executed within a
transaction. This would avoid the ``conditional code that commits the
transaction'' pitfall.
However, Calciu et al. did not identify
the remaining pitfalls described above, nor did they propose
any mechanisms that would avoid them. Given the diverse range of
ways in which a transaction may commit incorrectly, we would argue
that any static analysis that is sufficient to ensure correctness
would entail significantly more complexity than is suggested in
\cite{irina-transact2014}.
The complexity required by such static analysis may be mitigated to
some degree by conservatively subscribing to the lock to avoid the
need to precisely determine whether the transaction may violate
correctness in various cases. However, this reduces the effectiveness of
the lazy subscription optimization.
Given the numerous ways in which inconsistency can propagate and
manifest, even maximally precise analysis will likely often require
relatively early subscription. For example, the corrupted return
address pitfall suggests that subscription is necessary before the
first time a transaction returns from a function call after reading a
potentially-inconsistent value from memory and subsequently performing
a write, even to its own stack. Applying this rule precisely
requires analysis that ensures any record of whether the transaction
has previously read from memory is accurate.
Similarly, avoiding the ``subscribing to the wrong lock'' pitfall
requires the transaction to ensure that its notion of which lock it is
eliding is not corrupted by propagating inconsistent data. Avoiding
``lock scribbling'' requires not only a reliable record of the lock's
address, but also knowledge of the structure of the lock, unless the
compiler is so conservative that it does not allow \emph{any} writes to
memory based on a potentially-inconsistent address register.
Clearly at least some safe deferral of lock subscription is
\emph{possible} with sufficiently precise or conservative analysis.
However, we believe the complexity required to make lazy
subscription safe using software techniques alone is unlikely to be
worthwhile for the degree to which subscription can be deferred in
practice.
Finally, we note that hardware extensions briefly described in
\cite{irina-transact2014} are not sufficient to avoid all of the
pitfalls described above. In particular, although the proposed
extensions ensure that the correct lock is subscribed to before a
transaction commits, there is no mechanism proposed to avoid the
``lock scribbling'' pitfall.
\section{Making lazy subscription safe and effective}
\label{sec:proposals}
The essence of all of the hardware approaches we describe for supporting lazy
subscription is to ensure that the lock and the method for subscribing
to it are identified \emph{before} beginning transactional execution
of a critical section, and to ensure that the transaction correctly
subscribes to the identified lock using the identified method before
committing, regardless of what code the transaction executes.
(For generality, we note that in fact this and other
information discussed below only needs to be recorded before any actions that
could potentially corrupt the information being recorded. However, because recording
this information does not make the transaction more vulnerable to abort, it is unlikely
to be worthwhile to complicate an implementation in order to delay this reording.)
We begin with a simple approach and then present more complex approaches
that address its limitations.
\subsection{A simple but inflexible approach}
First, it is preferable that transactions are limited to execute only
for a bounded number of instructions or cycles. This avoids the
possibility that a critical section that is executed with lazy
subscription goes into an infinite loop due to observing transient
data. Without this restriction, another solution would be needed to
avoid this possibility, such as requiring transactions to subscribe to
a special variable that is periodically modified. Most
or all existing HTM implementations already limit transaction length.
In our simple approach, we next add a special register,
called the \emph{lock address register} (LAR), which is set to the
address of the lock before beginning transactional execution of a
critical section. Any attempt to modify the contents of the LAR
during transactional execution causes the transaction to abort. Any
attempt to commit an outermost hardware transaction (i.e., one that is
not nested within another hardware transaction) causes the location
identified by the LAR to be read transactionally and compared to zero;
if the comparison fails, then the transaction is aborted.
Furthermore, any attempt by the
thread executing the transaction to write to
the memory location whose address is stored in the LAR causes the
transaction to abort. This approach is simple to implement, but
suffers from several severe limitations.
\subsection{Limitations of the simple approach}
The simple approach desribed above supports only locks that represent
the ``available'' state by storing zero at the address used to
identify the lock. Some other locks could be supported by the
addition of another register that is similarly set before the
transaction and not modifiable during it, which would store a bitmask
to use to check lock availability; for example, this would support
seqlocks \cite{linux-seqlock,lameter-seqlock-2005},
which use only a single bit to represent lock
availability, while storing additional information in other bits (the
sequence number in the case of seqlocks).
Nonetheless, many other important lock types are not supported so
easily. For example, ticket locks
\cite{Dice:partitioned-ticket-lock,MCS:91} require two values to
be compared to test lock availability, local-spin locks such as CLH
\cite{Craig-lock,MLH-lock} require a pointer to be dereferenced and
the pointed-to value tested for availability, etc.
Although a conservative approximation of lock availability suffices to
preserve correctness, it may reduce or eliminate the benefit of TLE.
For example, some lock types \cite{Agesen-metalocks,Bacon-thinlocks} represent the ``available''
state as zero until the lock experiences contention, at which point it
is ``inflated''\negthinspace, requiring a pointer to be dereferenced
to accurately determine lock availability. Simple schemes like the
one described above would thereafter always determine that the lock is
not available, thus permanently eliminating the benefit of TLE.
In principle, arbitrarily complex subscription methods could be baked
into hardware, so that they could not be modified by critical section
code that has observed transient data. However, it is clearly
preferable to be able to express subscription methods in software, as
discussed further below.
The simple approach is also limited in that it does not fully support
lazy subscription for nested critical sections: if the LAR has
already been set to ensure lazy subscription of the lock for one
critical section, then it would not be possible to achieve lazy
subscription of a nested critical section protected by a different
lock. It is not difficult to extend the ideas described above to
support a fixed number of nesting levels by allowing multiple LARs
and, if applicable, associated bitmasks and/or subscription methods.
Alternatively, protected memory area(s)---specified by base and size
registers that are protected as described above---could allow a set of addresses
and associated bitmasks and/or subscription methods to be stored; any
attempt to reduce the size of the protected memory area, or to modify
locations in it or locations identified by it would cause transaction
abort.
We note that it is possible that, due to observing transient data, a
nested critical section may be configured to use the wrong lock
subscription method or the wrong lock. This is not a problem,
however, because this can happen only as a result of observing
transient data protected by the lock associated with an enclosing
critical section. This implies that at least one enclosing critical
section was correctly configured to subscribe to the correct lock
before the transient data was observed. The nested transaction is
allowed to commit only if \emph{all} of the nested critical sections
successfully subscribe to their locks before committing, and this is
guaranteed not to be the case for the (at least one) lock that is
correctly subscribed.
\subsection{More flexible approaches}
To support arbitrary lock types, we add anther register, which is
managed and protected against corruption similarly to the LAR
discussed above; this \emph{subscription code address
register} (SCAR) identifies the code for subscribing to the lock
identified by the LAR. (If nesting of different lock types that
require different subscription code is desired, similar techniques as
described above for managing nested locks can be used to record their
addresses.)
To ensure correct subscription, we must ensure that the critical
section cannot overwrite the subscription code and that it cannot
modify data that the subscription code reads; the latter is necessary to avoid the lock
scribbling pitfall. On the surface, this seems challenging because the
hardware cannot predict which code will be executed when the function
identifued by the SCAR is invoked, nor what data it will access.
An important insight into these issues is that it is not necessary to
abort a transaction as soon as it \emph{writes to} the lock contents
or the subscription code. We must ensure only that it does not commit
successfully without correctly subscribing to the lock. Thus,
attempts to overwrite lock data or subscription code need not be
detected until the subscription method attempts to \emph{execute} the
modified code or to \emph{read} the modified lock data.
Therefore, a central aspect of our approach to supporting flexible,
software-defined lock subscription is to enter a mode immediately
before starting to execute the subscription code in which, if the
transaction attempts to execute code or to read data that is in the
transaction's write set, the transaction aborts and does not take
effect. Because HTM implementations must generally detect cases in
which a transaction reads data it has written, supporting this
behavior does not add significant additional complexity to an HTM
design.
As a side note, while transactions could conceivably be used to
simplify techniques based on self-modifying code by ensuring sets of
changes take effect atomically, we believe that the benefits (if any)
of being able to modify and execute code within the same transaction
are outweighed by the likelihood of such questionable practices
resulting in incorrect behavior. Therefore, it may make sense to
prevent transactions from executing code they have modified,
independent of the lazy subscription technique. In contrast,
aborting a transaction because it reads data that it has written
clearly does not make sense in general, so this behavior should be
limited to the execution of lazy subscription code.
We note a potential disadvantage, namely that a transaction might be
caused to abort unnecessarily if it modifies data that is near the
lock, but not actually part of the lock. This could happen, for
example, if the lock is co-located with data it protects, for example
in the same cache line (if this is the granularity at which a
transaction's write set is tracked).
This does not compromise correctness; it is only a performance issue,
albeit a potentially significant one. The issue could be mitigated,
at the expense of additional hardware cost and complexity, by
maintaining state for each cache line modified by a transaction that
records at finer granularity---per word, for example---which parts of
the cache line have been modified by the transaction. Doing so would
allow the subscription method to avoid aborting a transaction that has
modified data in the same cache line as some data read by the
subscription method, even though it has not modified any data actually
read by the subscription method.
A similar approach was suggested by Tabba et
al. \cite{tabba-transact-2009-value-prediction} for the purpose of
avoiding unnecessary transaction aborts due to false sharing.
\subsection{Further extensions}
The purpose of the lazy subscription technique is to reduce the
window in which a transactionally-executed critical section is
vulnerable to abort due to the lock being held or acquired. We
observe that, if a transaction determines that the lock is held when
it performs this subscription, it is immediately doomed to abort and
retry. This could be mitigated by techniques that allow a transaction
to wait for a variable to change value, without aborting.
For example, if the HTM supports nontransactional loads, then in some cases it is
possible to use them to wait for the lock to become available before
subscribing to the lock. Such waiting does not compromise the
correctness of the subscription, because the lock would ultimately be
subscribed to transactionally before committing the transaction. As a
simple example, if the lock is a single word representing
``available'' and ``locked'' states, the subscription method would
repeatedly read the word using nontransactional loads until the lock
state is ``available''\negthinspace, and would then load the lock word
transactionally, and confirm that it is available before committing
the transaction.
The effectiveness of such approaches of course depends on the
availability of hardware features on the relevant platform to support
waiting until a variable's value changes without aborting a
transaction. We recommend that designers of future HTM features
consider whether their design would effectively support such
techniques.
Independent of the lazy subscription technique, our discussions of
the use of nontransactional memory operations within hardware
transactions raise an important observation. If an HTM feature
supports nontransactional \emph{stores} (or any kind of side effect
that may affect program semantics when executed in a transaction that
aborts), then care must be taken not to use such instructions within
critical sections to be used with TLE. The reason is that, if an
attempt to execute such a critical section in a hardware transaction
via TLE fails, then the store may take effect even though the critical
section has not been executed yet. This could result in program
behavior that would not be possible if critical sections were always
executed while holding the lock, breaking the TLE technique.
While it may seem that such nontransactional store instructions would
generally be used only in code that is intended to be explicitly used
in transactions, it is not beyond the realm of possibility that some
code intended for use in hardware transactions might also be called in
critical sections protected by a lock, in which case using TLE to
elide such critical sections would change program semantics.
This observation may motivate support for a transaction execution mode
that insists that all store instructions---even nontransactional ones---are
executed transactionally; this mode would be used for TLE. In the
absence of such protection, any nontransactional store feature needs
to be used with care to ensure this scenario does not occur.
\section{Introduction}
Hardware Transactional Memory \cite{HM:93,rock-micro-2009,Intel-SC13} provides
hardware support for atomically executing a section of code, without
requiring programmers to determine how this atomicity is achieved.
Numerous techniques for exploiting HTM to improve the performance and
scalability of concurrent programs have been described in the
literature \cite{rlsapps,SLE,ASPLOS-tech-report-2009,Dragojevic-HTMDynamicCollect:2011,Dice-SimplifyingHTM:SPAA2010}.
The simplest and most readily exploitable of these techniques is
Transactional Lock Elision (TLE) \cite{rlsapps,SLE}, which targets
existing lock-based applications without requiring them to be
restructured and without modifying critical section code. TLE uses a
hardware transaction to atomically apply the effects of a critical
section without acquiring the lock, thereby allowing other critical
sections protected by the same lock to be similarly executed in
parallel, provided their data accesses do not conflict.
Because hardware transactions may fail due to conflicts or to
limitations of the HTM implementation, some critical sections must
still be executed in the traditional manner (i.e., not in a hardware
transaction) after acquiring the lock. To ensure that a critical
section executed in a hardware transaction does not observe partial
effects of a critical section executed by another thread that
acquires the lock, the transaction ``subscribes'' to the lock, i.e.,
it reads the lock and confirms that it is available.
Similar techniques can be used to implement a transactional memory
system in which all transactional data is protected by a single global
lock (SGL), and transactions are executed either by acquiring the
lock, or within a hardware transaction that subscribes to the lock.
Subscribing to the lock makes hardware transactions vulnerable to
abort if another thread acquires the lock. Typically, transactions
subscribe to the lock at the beginning of the critical section and are
thus vulnerable to such abort during the entire execution of the
critical section. It is therefore tempting to use a \emph{lazy
subscription} optimization
\cite{Dalessandro:Hybrid-NOrec-ASPLOS-2011}, which delays lock
subscription, in order to reduce the duration of this vulnerability.
Calciu et al. \cite{irina-transact2014} recently proposed to use this
technique for SGL-based transactional systems.
A simple (but incorrect) way to implement lazy subscription for TLE is
to delay subscription until immediately before committing the
transaction. This way the implementation affects only library code
and does not require analysis or modification of critical section
code, retaining the key advantage of TLE that makes it the most
promising way to exploit HTM in the near future.
One might reason that this ``lazy subscription'' technique is safe for
TLE on the grounds that the hardware transaction ensures that all of
the memory accesses performed by the critical section, together with
the check that the lock is not held, are performed atomically, and
therefore the effects of committing the transaction are identical from
the perspective of other threads. Unfortunately, as we show, there
are subtle problems with this reasoning. In fact, TLE with lazy
subscription is subject to a number of pitfalls that can violate
correctness by changing the application's semantics.
Because SGL-based transaction systems generally entail static analysis
of all code potentially executed within transactions, there is an
opportunity for the compiler to recognize situations in which
transactions will potentially behave incorrectly, and to ensure they
subscribe to the lock before allowing this possibility. However, the
analysis proposed by Calciu et al. \cite{irina-transact2014} is not
sufficient to avoid all of the pitfalls we identify. Furthermore, we
argue that it is unlikely to be practical to enhance the static
analysis to make lazy subscription safe while retaining its benefits
because subscription will be required relatively early in all but very
simple cases.
Hardware extensions are briefly described in \cite{irina-transact2014}
that the authors claim would allow these issues to be avoided
entirely. However, their extensions are not sufficient to avoid all
of the pitfalls we describe. In this paper, we describe
ways in which HTM implementations could be enhanced to make lazy
subscription safe for both TLE and SGL-based transaction
implementations, without special compiler analysis. We also explain
how the technique can be even more effective if the extended HTM
implementation supports nontransactional loads.
While we believe that the hardware enhancements we describe
are practical and implementable, they
will entail nontrivial cost and complexity. In ongoing work, we are
exploring the value of the lazy subscription optimization to help
assess whether such hardware extensions are likely to be justified;
preliminary results suggest that it provides significant performance
benefit in at least some cases.
Collectively, our work in this area contributes to
understanding of the problem and potential solutions, and to
consideration of whether the benefits of such optimizations justify
the cost and complexity required by hardware extensions to make them
safe.
\section{TLE and lazy subscription}
\label{sec:lazy}
\input{fig-tle}
TLE is typically implemented by modifying lock library code so that the lock
acquire method begins a transaction, checks that the lock is
available, and if so allows the critical section to execute
without acquiring the lock. This lock ``subscription'' adds the
lock to the transaction's read set, so that the transaction will
abort if the lock is subsequently acquired before it
commits. If the lock is not available, the transaction is aborted and
the critical section execution attempt is retried, either in another
hardware transaction or by acquiring the lock and executing the
critical section as usual. The lock release method commits the
transaction if the critical section was executed in a transaction and
releases the lock otherwise.
This arrangement is illustrated in pseudocode on the left side of
Figure~\ref{fig:tle}, where \texttt{use\_TLE} and
\texttt{using\_TLE} abstract away practical details such as whether
and how long to back off before retrying, whether to wait for the lock
to be available before retrying, how many attempts to make using HTM
before giving up and acquiring the lock, supporting nesting, and how
the \texttt{release} method determines whether the \texttt{acquire}
method chose to use TLE. These issues are not relevant to
correctness, which is our focus here; some of them are
explored in detail in \cite{ALE-SPAA2014}.
A TLE transaction executed using the simple technique illustrated on
the left of Figure~\ref{fig:tle} has the lock in its read set
throughout the execution of the critical section. Thus, \emph{any}
critical section that acquires the lock in this entire duration will
cause the transaction to abort. One might consider it an
advantage to abort such transactions earlier, given that they may
waste less work in this case. However, this reasoning overlooks the
fact that in many cases the abort is not necessary (for example
because the critical sections executing in the transaction and with
the lock held do not conflict), so avoiding it is preferable.
Simple lazy subscription, illustrated on the right side of
Figure~\ref{fig:tle}, moves subscription from the \texttt{acquire}
method to the \texttt{release} method, allowing the transaction to
execute the entire (unmodified) critical section without subscribing,
with the understanding that it would do so before committing.
Unfortunately, if a critical section executed in a transaction
observes values in memory that it could not observe if all critical
sections were executed while holding the lock, then it may behave
differently than is intended by the programmer who wrote the critical
section code.
One might argue that this is not a problem, as follows:
The transaction will try to commit only after subscribing to the lock
and observing that the lock is available, implying that its read set
has a consistent view of memory. Therefore, if the transaction saw an
inconsistent view of memory, then the normal HTM mechanisms will cause
it to abort.
This is the essence of the ``intuititive'' correctness
argument in \cite{irina-transact2014}. But this incorrectly assumes
that the transaction will eventually execute the correct subscription
code and observe the correct lock state before attempting to commit.
If this is not the case, then the transaction may erroneously commit,
with unpredictable effects. We discuss a
number of ways in which the transaction may fail to correctly
subscribe to the lock in the next section.
|
\section{Supplemental Material }
We provide here further details of the three terms of the functional developed in the main paper as well as other quantities for implementation in molecular dynamics simulations. These include the free energy and potential terms as well as the response function, stress tensor and pressure. Forces on the ions only depend on the Coulomb interaction with the electron density and the ions themselves, and are not detailed here.
In general, for below, the response functions are given in the uniform electron gas limit according to Eq. (\ref{eq:linresp}).
Also note that here, $\beta$ shown without any dependency is $1/k_BT$, while with dependence it is the kernel.
\subsection{Thomas-Fermi}
First for the Thomas-Fermi term
\begin{equation}
F_{TF}[n] = \int f_{TF}(n(\mathbf{r})) \;d{\mathbf r} \;,
\end{equation}
we provide the free energy density
\begin{align}
f_{TF}(n(\mathbf{r}),T) = &\left(\frac{m_e}{\hbar^2}\right)^{3/2} \frac{\sqrt{2}}{\pi^2 \beta^{5/2}} \times
\nonumber \\
&\left[ -\frac{2}{3} I_{3/2}(\beta \mu_0) + \beta\mu_0I_{1/2}(\beta \mu_0)\right]
\end{align}
with the electron density given by
\begin{align}
n(\mathbf{r}) &= \left(\frac{m_e}{\hbar^2}\right)^{3/2}\frac{\sqrt{2}}{\pi^2 \beta^{3/2}} I_{1/2}(\beta \mu_0)\;,
\end{align}
where the $I_{\nu}$ are Fermi integrals.
The Thomas-Fermi potential is given by the functional derivative, this is just the non-interacting chemical potential
\begin{equation}
\frac{\delta F_{TF}[n,T]}{\delta n} = \mu_0(n(\mathbf{r})) = \frac{\partial f_{TF}(n,T)}{\partial n}\;.
\end{equation}
The response function is given by
\begin{align}
\tilde{\chi}_{TF}(T) &= -\left(\frac{m_e}{\hbar^2}\right)^{3/2}
\frac{1}{2\pi^2}\left(\frac{2}{\beta}\right)^{1/2} I_{-1/2}(\beta\mu_0) \label{eq:chitf} \;. \\
\end{align}
The stress tensor is then
\begin{align}
\sigma_{TF}^{\mu,\nu} = \frac{\delta_{\mu,\nu}}{V} \int f_{TF}(n,T)-n \frac{\partial f_{TF}(n,T)}{\partial n} \;d{\mathbf r}\;.
\end{align}
The pressure is given then by the general expression $P=-\Tr {\sigma}/3$, as
\begin{align}
P_{TF}=-\frac{1}{V}\int f_{TF}(n,T)-n \frac{\partial f_{TF}(n,T)}{\partial n} \;d{\mathbf r}\;.
\end{align}
\subsection{Nonlocal von Weizs\"acker}
For the von Weizs\"acker term we make use of the root of the density $\phi^2({\mathbf r})=n({\mathbf r})$, noting for use in the chain rule $\delta \phi/\delta n = 1/(2\phi)$. The free energy and potential are
\begin{align}
{}_{\beta}F_{vW}[n] = \frac{\hbar^2}{2m_e} \iint& [\nabla \phi(\mathbf{r}))\cdot(\nabla \phi(\mathbf{r}^{\prime})] \times \nonumber \\
& [\delta({\mathbf r}-{\mathbf r}^{\prime})+\beta(|{\mathbf r}-{\mathbf r}^{\prime}|)]\; d{\mathbf r}^{\prime}d{\mathbf r}\;.
\end{align}
\begin{align}
\frac{\delta {}_{\beta}F_{vW}[n]}{\delta n} =
-\frac{\hbar^2}{m_e}\frac{1}{2 \phi(\mathbf{r})} \int &[\delta({\mathbf r}-{\mathbf r}^{\prime})+\beta(|{\mathbf r}-{\mathbf r}^{\prime}|)]\times
\nonumber \\
& \nabla^2 \phi(\mathbf{r}^{\prime})\;d{\mathbf r}^{\prime}\;.
\end{align}
In reciprocal space we have for the free energy
\begin{align}
{}_{\beta}F_{vW}[n] &= \frac{\hbar^2}{2m_e V}\sum_{\mathbf k} (1+\tilde{\beta}(k)) \times \nonumber \\
& \iint [\nabla \phi(\mathbf{r}))\cdot(\nabla \phi(\mathbf{r}^{\prime})]
e^{-i{\mathbf k}\cdot({\mathbf r}-{\mathbf r}^{\prime})}\; d{\mathbf r}^{\prime}d{\mathbf r}\;. \nonumber \\
&=\frac{\hbar^2}{2m_e V}\sum_{\mathbf k} (1+\tilde{\beta}(k)) (i {\mathbf k}) \tilde{\phi}(-{\mathbf k}) (-i {\mathbf k}) \tilde{\phi}({\mathbf k}) \nonumber \\
&=\frac{\hbar^2}{2m_e V}\sum_{\mathbf k} k^2 (1+\tilde{\beta}(k))\tilde{\phi}(-{\mathbf k}) \tilde{\phi}({\mathbf k})
\label{eq:fvwk}
\end{align}
and the potential
\begin{align}
\frac{\delta {}_{\beta}F_{vW}[n]}{\delta n} = -\frac{\hbar^2}{m_e}\frac{1}{2 \phi(\mathbf{r})}
\hat{\mathrm{F}}^{-1} \left[ k^2 \tilde{\phi}({\mathbf k}) (1+\tilde{\beta}(k)) \right] \;.
\end{align}
The response function is then
\begin{align}
{}_{\beta}\tilde{\chi}_{vW}(\mathbf{q},T) &= -\frac{m_e}{\hbar^2}\frac{4 k_F^3 }{ 3\pi^2k^2}
\left(\frac{1}{1+\tilde{\beta}(k)}\right) \;. \\
\end{align}
For the stress tensor it is important to note that $\beta(k)$ is actually a function of $q=k/k_F$ only, so that
\begin{align}
{}_{\beta}\sigma_{vW}^{\mu,\nu} &=-\frac{\hbar^2}{m_e}\frac{1}{2 V^2}
\sum_{\mathbf k \ne 0} \tilde{\phi}(-{\mathbf k}) \tilde{\phi}({\mathbf k}) \times
\nonumber \\
& \left\{ k_{\mu}k_{\nu} 2 (1+\tilde{\beta}(q)) + k^2 \frac{\partial (1+\tilde{\beta}(q))}{\partial q} \frac{\partial q}{\partial \epsilon_{\mu,\nu}}\bigg|_{\epsilon=0}\; \right\}.
\end{align}
This then yields for the pressure
\begin{align}
{}_{\beta}P_{vW} &=\frac{\hbar^2}{m_e}\frac{1}{2 V^2}
\sum_{\mathbf k \ne 0} \tilde{\phi}(-{\mathbf k}) \tilde{\phi}({\mathbf k}) \frac{2}{3} k^2 (1+\tilde{\beta}(q)) \nonumber \\
&= \frac{2}{3V} {}_{\beta}F_{vW}
\end{align}
The simplification comes from the use of the dimensionless $q$ since
\begin{align}
\frac{\partial q}{\partial \epsilon_{\mu,\nu}}\bigg|_{\epsilon=0}&= \left( \frac{\partial q}{\partial k}\frac{\partial k}{\partial \epsilon_{\mu,\nu}}\bigg|_{\epsilon=0} + \frac{\partial q}{\partial k_F} \frac{\partial k_F}{\partial \epsilon_{\mu,\nu}}\bigg|_{\epsilon=0}\right) \nonumber \\
&=\left( -\frac{k_{\mu}k_{\nu}}{k k_F} + \frac{k}{3 k_F}\delta_{\mu,\nu} \right) \;,
\label{eq:dqde}
\end{align}
where the terms in the parentheses will give zero contribution to the pressure in the trace.
\subsection{Nonlocal density term}
Finally for $F_{a,b}$
\begin{equation}
F_{a,b}[n] = \iint n^{a}(\mathbf{r}) w(\mathbf{r}-\mathbf{r^{\prime}},T) n^{b}(\mathbf{r}^{\prime}) \;d\mathbf{r}\;d\mathbf{r}^{\prime} \;.
\end{equation}
the functional derivative may be immediately taken to find
\begin{align}
\frac{\delta F_{a,b}[n]}{\delta n} =& an^{a-1}(\mathbf{r}) \int w(\mathbf{r}-\mathbf{r^{\prime}},T) n^{b}(\mathbf{r}^{\prime}) \;d\mathbf{r}^{\prime} \nonumber \\
&+ bn^{b-1}(\mathbf{r}) \int w(\mathbf{r}-\mathbf{r^{\prime}},T) n^{a}(\mathbf{r}^{\prime}) \;d\mathbf{r^{\prime}} \;.
\end{align}
It is convenient for implementation to have the stress tensor in reciprocal space, so first we rewrite the free energy component as
\begin{align}
F_{a,b}[n]= \frac{1}{V} \sum_{\mathbf k} \tilde{w}(k) \tilde{n}_a(-\mathbf{k}) \tilde{n}_b({\mathbf k})
\end{align}
or
\begin{equation}
F_{a,b}[n] = \int n^a(\mathbf{r},T) \hat{\mathrm{F}}^{-1} \left[
\tilde{w}(k) \tilde{n}_b(\mathbf{k}) \right] \; d\mathbf{r} \;.
\end{equation}
where $\tilde{w}(k)$, $\tilde{n}_a(\mathbf{k})$, $\tilde{n}_b({\mathbf k})$ are the respective Fourier transforms of $w(\mathbf{r}-\mathbf{r^\prime})$, $n^a(\mathbf{r})$, $n^b(\mathbf{r})$. The potential is similarly
\begin{align}
\frac{\delta F_{a,b}[n]}{\delta n} =&
an^{a-1}(\mathbf{r}) \hat{\mathrm F}^{-1} \left[ \tilde{w}(k) \tilde{n}_b({\mathbf k})\right] \nonumber \\
& + bn^{b-1}(\mathbf{r}) \hat{\mathrm F}^{-1} \left[ \tilde{w}(k) \tilde{n}_a({\mathbf k})\right]
\end{align}
Here for the stress tensor we note $\tilde{w}$ is a separable function of $q$ and $n_0$ with the $n_0$ dependence just coming from the coefficient as
\begin{gather}
\tilde{w}(k) = u(q) W(n_0) \nonumber \\
W(n_0)=\frac{1}{2 a b n_0^{(a+b+1/3-2)}} \frac{\hbar^2 \pi^2}{(3\pi^2)m_e}\;.
\label{eq:uq}
\end{gather}
The stress tensor is then
\begin{align}
\sigma_{a,b}^{\mu,\nu} = &\frac{1-(a+b)}{V}F_{a,b}\delta_{\mu,\nu} \nonumber \\
&+ \frac{1}{V^2} \sum_{\mathbf{k}\ne 0} \tilde{n}_a(\mathbf{k}) \tilde{n}_b(-\mathbf{k})
\times \nonumber \\
&\bigg[(a+b+\frac{1}{3}-2)\frac{u(q)}{W(n_0)} \delta_{\mu,\nu} \nonumber \\
&+\frac{1}{W(n_0)}\frac{\partial u(q)}{\partial q}\frac{\partial q}{\partial \epsilon_{\mu,\nu}}\bigg|_{\epsilon=0}
\bigg]\;.
\end{align}
The pressure follows as
\begin{align}
P_{a,b} =& \frac{2}{3V} F_{a,b} \;.
\end{align}
And the response is
\begin{align}
\tilde{\chi}_{a,b}(\mathbf{k})^{-1}
&= -\left( 2 a b n_0^{(a + b - 2)} \tilde{w}(k) \right)
\label{eq:chilr}
\end{align}
with $\tilde{w}(k)$ found through Eq. (\ref{eq:w}). This result requires $\tilde{w}(k=0)=0$, which we enforced in Eq. (\ref{eq:w}) by taking $f(k)$ as finite.
\end{document}
|
\section{Introduction}
The combination of Minkowski addition and volume leads to the rich and powerful classical Brunn-Minkowski theory for compact convex sets, which constitutes the core of modern convex geometry. Important results such as the Brunn-Minkowski inequality and Minkowski's first inequality play fundamental roles in attacking problems in analysis, geometry, quantum information theory, random matrices, and many other fields. Readers are referred to the excellent treatise by Schneider \cite{Sch93} for more information and references.
In the same spirit, the combination of radial addition and volume produces a corresponding theory for star sets called the dual Brunn-Minkowski theory. (See Section~\ref{prelim} for definitions.) This was initiated by Lutwak \cite{L1}, who also took a further major step in \cite{L5}, where several important concepts and fundamental results in the classical Brunn-Minkowski theory were provided with dual counterparts. For instance, the dual Minkowski inequality for the dual mixed volume is analogous to Minkowski's first inequality for the mixed volume, and plays a key role in the solution of the Busemann-Petty problem (see \cite{G3, GKS, Z1}), as do intersection bodies, the notion dual to projection bodies. The dual Brunn-Minkowski theory has connections and applications to integral geometry, Minkowski geometry, the local theory of Banach spaces, geometric tomography, and stereology; see \cite{Gar06} and the references given there. The literature is large and continues to grow. See, for example, \cite{Bernig2014, GardnerDP2014, FNRZ, Gardner2007, GHW, GZ, KPZ, Milman2006}.
One way to extend the classical Brunn-Minkowski theory and its dual is to replace the linear function $\varphi(t)=t$ (note that both Minkowski and radial addition are linear) by $\varphi(t)=t^p$. When $p\ge 1$, Minkowski addition of convex bodies becomes $L_p$ addition, introduced by Firey \cite{Firey1961, Firey1962} and when $p\neq 0$, radial addition of star sets becomes $p$th radial addition. The combination of these additions with volume leads to the $L_p$-Brunn-Minkowski theory for convex bodies and its dual. However, the $L_p$-Brunn-Minkowski theory only began in earnest with the ground-breaking paper of Lutwak \cite{L3}, after which it has had an enormous impact, providing stronger affine isoperimetric inequalities than the classical Brunn-Minkowski theory and strengthening links with information theory. We refer the reader to the introductions in \cite{GHW, GHW2} and to \cite[Chapter~9]{Sch93} for more information and references.
The most recent extension of the classical Brunn-Minkowski theory is the new Orlicz-Brunn-Minkowski theory, with the homogeneous function $t^p$ replaced by a generally nonhomogeneous function $\varphi(t)$. The Orlicz-Brunn-Minkowski theory for convex bodies was launched by Lutwak, Yang, and Zhang \cite{LYZ7, LYZ8} with affine isoperimetric inequalities for Orlicz centroid and projection bodies. The lack of homogeneity of the function $\varphi(t)$ meant that the problem of defining a corresponding Orlicz addition of convex bodies remained, but this obstacle was overcome by Gardner, Hug, and Weil \cite{GHW2}. (It turns out, mainly as a consequence of results obtained in \cite{GHW}, that Orlicz addition is not associative unless it is already $L_p$ addition.) These authors also provide a general framework for the Orlicz-Brunn-Minkowski theory, derive formulas for the Orlicz mixed volume of two convex bodies, and prove Orlicz-Brunn-Minkowski and Orlicz-Minkowski inequalities, whose classical counterparts (the Brunn-Minkowski inequality and Minkowski's first inequality) have numerous applications in many fields. (Some of these results were obtained independently by Xi, Jin, and Leng \cite{XJL}.) The new theory has already attracted considerable interest; see, for example, \cite{bor2013, BLYZ, bor2013-2, Chen2011, HLYZ, HabP, Li2011, Ludwig2009, Ye2012, Ye2013, Ye2014, Zhu2012}.
This paper aims to provide the basic setting for the dual Orlicz-Brunn-Minkowski theory for star sets. In some respects, this is more delicate than the Orlicz-Brunn-Minkowski theory for convex bodies, partly due to the various flavors of star sets that have to be considered. In Section~\ref{Onorms}, radial Orlicz addition for two or more star sets is introduced and its basic properties are established. Like Orlicz addition, the new radial Orlicz addition, defined by (\ref{Orldef}) below and denoted by $\widetilde{+}_{\varphi}$, enjoys several useful properties such as continuity and $GL(n)$ convariance, but it is associative only when it is $p$th radial addition; see Corollary~\ref{nonassoc}. In Section~\ref{DBMI}, we prove a dual Orlicz-Brunn-Minkowski inequality, a special case of which is as follows.
{\em If $\varphi\in \Phi_2$ and ${\varphi_0}(x_1, x_2)=\varphi(x_1^{1/n}, x_2^{1/n})$ is concave, then for star sets $K$ and $L$ in $\R^n$ with $V_n(K)+V_n(L)>0$,
$$\varphi\left(\left(\frac{V_n(K)}{V_n(K\widetilde{+}_{\varphi}L)}\right)^{1/n},
\left(\frac{V_n(L)}{V_n(K\widetilde{+}_{\varphi}L)}\right)^{1/n}\right)\ge 1,$$
while if $\varphi_0$ is convex, the inequality is reversed. If $\varphi_0$ is strictly concave (or convex, as appropriate) and $K$ and $L$ are star bodies with positive radial functions, then equality holds if and only if $K$ and $L$ are dilatates.}
Here $V_n$ denotes $n$-dimensional Hausdorff measure and $\Phi_m$, $m\in \N$, is the class of continuous functions $\varphi:[0,\infty)^m\to [0,\infty)$ that are strictly increasing in each component and such that $\varphi(o)=0$ and $\lim_{t\to \infty} \varphi(tx) =\infty$, for each $x\in [0,\infty)^m\setminus\{o\}$. A similar result holds for $\varphi$ in a certain class $\Psi_2$ of functions that decrease in each component.
In Section~\ref{radOlc}, we develop a formula for the dual Orlicz mixed volume of star sets $K$ and $L$, denoted by $\widetilde{V}_\varphi (K,L)$, based on a definition of radial Orlicz linear combination. This appears in the following dual Orlicz-Minkowski inequality proved in Theorem~\ref{maindom}.
{\em Let $\varphi:(0,\infty)\to \R$ be such that $\varphi_0(t)=\varphi(t^{1/n})$, $t>0$, is concave. Suppose that $K$ and $L$ are star bodies in $\R^n$ with positive radial functions. Then
$$
\widetilde{V}_\varphi (K,L)\le V_n(K)\,\varphi\left(\left( \frac{V_n(L)}{V_n(K)} \right)^{1/n}\right),
$$
while if $\varphi_0$ is convex, the inequality is reversed. If $\varphi_0$ is strictly concave (or convex, as appropriate), then equality holds if and only if $K$ and $L$ are dilatates.}
This dual Orlicz-Minkowski inequality is fundamental in establishing Orlicz affine isoperimetric inequalities for the dual Orlicz affine and geominimal surface areas; see \cite{Ye2014b}.
The point of the Orlicz-Brunn-Minkowski theory and its dual is, of course, that they extend the $L_p$-Brunn-Minkowski theory and its dual, in a nontrivial and productive fashion. Thus when $\varphi(x_1,x_2)=x_1^p+x_2^p$ and $\varphi(t)=t^p$, the two inequalities stated above become the corresponding dual $L_p$-Brunn-Minkowski and dual $L_p$-Minkowski inequality, respectively. Other choices are possible, however. It is particularly interesting to note that when $\varphi(t)=\log t$, the dual Orlicz-Minkowski inequality becomes the precise dual of the conjectured (and so far proved only for $n=2$) $\log$-Minkowski inequality (see \cite[p.~1976]{BLYZ} and Theorem~\ref{starlog} below and the remarks thereafter). Moreover, a suitable choice for $\varphi(x_1,x_2)$ in the dual Orlicz Brunn-Minkowski inequality yields the precise dual of the $\log$-Brunn-Minkowski inequality, proved in \cite{BLYZ} to be equivalent to the $\log$-Minkowski inequality (see \cite[Problem~1.1]{BLYZ} and Section~\ref{DBMI} below).
Section~\ref{radialMadd} is dedicated to a new addition of star sets that we call radial $M$-addition. Once again this is dual to a concept in the classical Brunn-Minkowski theory, called $M$-addition. Briefly, the $M$-sum (or radial $M$-sum) of two sets is a very natural generalization of Minkowski addition (or radial addition, respectively) in which coefficients for linear combinations (or radial linear combinations, respectively) are taken from the coordinates of vectors in a set $M\subset\R^2$. Introduced in a special situation by Protasov \cite{Pro97, Pro99}, $M$-addition was rediscovered, generalized, and systematically investigated in \cite{GHW}, where it was shown that any continuous and $GL(n)$-covariant operation between origin-symmetric compact convex sets must be an $M$-addition for some compact convex $M$ symmetric with respect to the coordinate axes. The significance of $M$-addition was heightened when in \cite{GHW2} it was proved that in this context (addition of origin-symmetric compact convex sets), $M$-addition and Orlicz addition are essentially equivalent. In Theorem~\ref{orlmadd}, we prove that this is also true for radial $M$-addition and radial Orlicz addition if $\varphi\in \Phi_m$ is a convex function, but otherwise examples show that there is generally not such a close relationship between the two additions.
Special cases of some of the results in this paper were obtained independently in \cite[Chapter~5]{ZZ} (see also \cite{ZZX}). A brief description of the genesis of our paper and how it compares to \cite{ZZ} may be found in the Appendix.
\section{Definitions and preliminaries}\label{prelim}
Mostly we follow \cite[Section 2]{GHW2} and in an effort to keep this paper short we refer the reader there for all unexplained notation and terminology, which in any case is rather standard for convex geometry. In this section we therefore focus on new ingredients, i.e., those not used in \cite{GHW2}, and the few notations we adopt in the present paper different from those in \cite{GHW2}.
We denote by $o$ the origin in $\R^n$ and by $\{e_1,\dots,e_n\}$ its standard basis. The closed unit ball in $\R^n$ is denoted by $B^n$.
We write $V_k$ for $k$-dimensional Hausdorff measure in $\R^n$, where $k\in \{1,\dots,n\}$. The notation $dz$ means $dV_k(z)$ for the appropriate $k=1,\dots,n$, unless stated otherwise.
A set $K$ in $\R^n$ is {\it star-shaped at $o$} if $o\in K$ and for each $x\in\R^n\setminus\{o\}$, the intersection $K\cap\{cx:c\ge 0\}$ is a (possibly degenerate) compact line segment. If $K$ is star-shaped at $o$, we define its {\it radial
function} $\rho_K$ for $x\in \R^n\setminus\{o\}$ by
$$
\rho_{K}(x)= \max\{c\ge 0:cx\in K\}.
$$
This definition is a slight modification of \cite[(0.28)]{Gar06};
as defined here, the domain of $\rho_K$ is always $\R^n\setminus\{o\}$. Radial functions are {\em homogeneous of degree $-$1}, that is,
$$\rho_K(rx)=r^{-1}\rho_K(x),$$
for all $x\in \R^n\setminus\{o\}$ and $r>0$, and are therefore often regarded as functions on the unit sphere $S^{n-1}$. Conversely, any nonnegative and homogeneous of degree $-1$ function on $\R^n\setminus\{o\}$ is the radial function of a unique subset of $\R^n$ that is star-shaped at $o$.
In this paper, a {\it star set} in $\R^n$ is a bounded Borel set that is star-shaped at $o$. We denote the class of star sets in
$\R^n$ by ${\mathcal S}^n$. Note that ${\mathcal S}^n$ is closed under finite unions, countable intersections, and intersections with subspaces. Also, if a set $K$ in $\R^n$ is star-shaped at $o$, then $K\in {\cS}^n$ if and only if $\rho_K$, restricted to $S^{n-1}$, is a bounded Borel-measurable function. Let $\mathcal{S}^n_c$ denote the class of {\em star bodies} in $\R^n$, i.e., star sets with a continuous radial function. We write ${\mathcal S}^n_+$ and ${\mathcal S}^n_{c+}$ for the subclasses of ${\mathcal S}^n$ and ${\mathcal S}^n_c$, respectively, whose members have radial functions that are positive on $S^{n-1}$. Then ${\mathcal S}^n_{c+}$ consists of star bodies that contain the origin in their interiors. An extra subscript $s$ stands for origin-symmetric sets. Our definitions and notation differ from those used elsewhere, such as \cite[Section~0.7]{Gar06}, \cite{GHW}, and \cite{GV}.
Define the {\em radial sum} $x\widetilde{+}y$ of $x,y\in \R^n$ by
$$
x\widetilde{+}y=\left\{\begin{array}{ll} x+y &
\mbox{if $x$, $y$, and $o$ are collinear,}\\
o & \mbox{otherwise.}
\end{array}\right.
$$
Then the radial linear combination $\alpha K\widetilde{+}\beta L$, where $K, L\in {\cS}^n$ and $\alpha, \beta\ge 0$, can be defined either by
$$
\alpha K\widetilde{+}\beta L=\{\alpha x\widetilde{+}\beta y: x\in K, y\in L\},
$$
or by
\begin{equation}\label{radials2}
\rho_{\alpha K\widetilde{+}\beta L}=\alpha\rho_K+\beta\rho_L.
\end{equation}
More generally, for $p\in \R$, $p\neq 0$, the {\em $p$th radial linear combination} $\alpha K\widetilde{+}_p\,\beta L$, where $K, L\in {\cS}^n$ and $\alpha, \beta\ge 0$, can be defined by
\begin{equation}\label{radialslp}
\rho_{\alpha K\widetilde{+}_p\,\beta L}^p=\alpha\rho_K^p+\beta\rho_L^p.
\end{equation}
Here (\ref{radialslp}) is interpreted to mean that if $p<0$ and $\rho_K(x)\rho_L(x)=0$, then $\rho_{\alpha K\widetilde{+}_p\,\beta L}(x)=0$. See \cite[Section~5.4]{GHW}. Clearly, $\alpha K\widetilde{+}_p\,\beta L\in {\cS}^n$. The operations of {\em radial addition} and {\em $p$th radial addition} are the special cases of (\ref{radials2}) and (\ref{radialslp}), respectively, when $\alpha=\beta=1$.
The {\em radial metric} $\widetilde{\delta}$ defines the distance between star sets $K,L\in {\mathcal S}^n$ by
$$\widetilde{\delta}(K,L)=\|\rho_K-\rho_L\|_{\infty}=\sup_{u\in S^{n-1}}|\rho_K(u)-\rho_L(u)|.$$
The radial metric differs considerably from the Hausdorff metric; for example, the radial distance between any two different origin-symmetric line segments containing the origin and of length two is one. Unless specified otherwise, all statements involving a topology on $({\mathcal S}^n)^m$, $m\in \N$, refer to that generated by $\widetilde{\delta}$.
The {\em dual cone measure} of a star set $K$ in $\R^n$ such that $V_n(K)>0$ is the Borel probability measure $\widetilde{V}_K$ in $S^{n-1}$ defined by
\begin{equation}\label{dualcone}
d\widetilde{V}_K(u)=\frac{\rho_{K}(u)^n}{nV_n(K)}\,du.
\end{equation}
Let $I$ be a possibly infinite interval in $\R$. The {\em left derivative} and {\em right derivative} of a function $f:I\to\R$ are denoted by $f'_l$ and $f'_r$, respectively.
Let $\Phi_m$, $m\in \N$, be the set of all continuous functions
$\varphi:[0,\infty)^m\to [0,\infty)$ that are strictly increasing in each component and such that $\varphi(o)= 0$ and $\lim_{t\to \infty} \varphi(tx) =\infty$, for each $x\in [0,\infty)^m\setminus\{o\}$. Let $\Psi_m$, $m\in \N$, be the set of all continuous functions $\varphi:(0,\infty)^m\to(0,\infty)$ that are strictly decreasing in each component and such that $\lim_{t\to 0} \varphi(tx) =\infty$ and $\lim_{t\to \infty} \varphi(tx) =0$, for each $x\in (0,\infty)^m$. We also denote by $\Phi_m^{(1)}$ and $\Psi_1^{(1)}$ the classes of functions in $\Phi_m$ and $\Psi_1$, respectively, such that $\varphi(e_j)=1$ for $j=1,\dots,m$. We caution the reader that similar notation was used in \cite{GHW2} for different classes of functions.
The prototype function is $\varphi(x_1,\dots,x_m)=x_1^p+\cdots+x_m^p$, which belongs to $\Phi_m^{(1)}$ if $p>0$ and to $\Psi_m$ if $p<0$.
\begin{rem}\label{rem1}
{\em These classes of functions are chosen for convenience. Several of the results below hold for more general classes of functions; for example, everything in Sections~\ref{Onorms} and~\ref{DBMI} holds when the limits 0 and $\infty$ in the definitions of $\Phi_m$ and $\Psi_m$ are replaced by limits contained in $[0,1)$ and $(1,\infty]$, respectively, provided the measure $\mu$ there is a probability measure. The same applies, with appropriate modifications, when $\Phi_m$ is replaced by the class $\Phi_m'$ of all continuous functions $\varphi:(0,\infty)^m\to(0,\infty)$ that are strictly increasing in each component and such that $\lim_{t\to 0} \varphi(tx) <1$ and $\lim_{t \to \infty} \varphi(tx)>1$, for each $x\in (0,\infty)^m$, but in this case the star sets involved should have positive radial functions. Note that if $\varphi(x_1,\dots,x_m)=x_1\cdots x_m$, for example, then $\varphi$ is in $\Phi_m'$ if $\varphi$ is restricted to $(0,\infty)^m$, but $\varphi$ is not
in $\Phi_m$ as a function on $[0,\infty)^m$.}
\end{rem}
Jensen's inequality has many versions; see, for example, \cite[Lemma~1, p.~76 and Exercise~9, p.~80]{Fer}. For the reader's convenience, we state the precise form we need and supply a brief proof.
\begin{prp}\label{prpJ}
{\rm{(Jensen's inequality.)}} Let $\mu$ be a probability measure in a space $X$, let $U$ be an open convex set in $\R^n$, and let $\varphi$ be a convex real-valued function on $U$. Assume that $g:X\to U$ is measurable and component-wise $\mu$-integrable, and that $\varphi\circ g$ is $\mu$-integrable.
Let $z_0=\int_X g(x)\,d\mu(x)$. Then $z_0\in U$ and
\begin{equation}\label{JenIneq}
\int_X\varphi(g(x))\,d\mu(x)\ge \varphi\left(\int_Xg(x)\,d\mu(x)\right).
\end{equation}
If $\varphi$ is strictly convex, then equality holds if and only if $g(x)=z_0$ for $\mu$-almost all $x\in X$.
If $\varphi$ is concave, then the inequality in \eqref{JenIneq} is reversed, with the same equality condition if $\varphi$ is strictly concave.
\end{prp}
\begin{proof}
Suppose that $\varphi$ is convex. The fact that $z_0\in U$ follows from a separation argument. If $v$ belongs to the subgradient at $z_0$, which is nonempty since $U$ is open and $z_0\in U$, then
$$
\varphi(z)\ge \varphi(z_0)+\langle v,z-z_0\rangle,
$$
for all $z\in U$. If $x\in X$ and $g(x)=z$, we get
$$
\varphi(g(x))\ge \varphi(z_0)+\langle v,g(x)-z_0\rangle.
$$
Integration with respect to $\mu$, using the integrability assumptions and the definition of $z_0$, yields
$$
\int_X\varphi(g(x))\,d\mu(x)\ge \varphi(z_0)+\int_X\langle v,g(x)-z_0\rangle\,d\mu(x)= \varphi(z_0)+\langle v,o\rangle=\varphi(z_0).
$$
This proves (\ref{JenIneq}). If equality holds in (\ref{JenIneq}) and $\varphi$ is strictly convex, then the previous display shows that we must have
$$
\varphi(g(x))=\varphi(z_0)+\langle v,g(x)-z_0\rangle,
$$
for $\mu$-almost all $x\in X$. Hence $g(x)=z_0$ for $\mu$-almost all $x\in X$.
If $\varphi$ is concave on $U$, the result follows from the above argument applied to the convex function $-\varphi$.
\end{proof}
\section{Radial Orlicz addition and Orlicz intersection bodies}\label{Onorms}
Let $m,n\ge 2$ and let $\mu$ be a nonzero finite Borel measure in $({\mathcal{S}}^n)^m$ with support contained in a bounded separable subset $C\subset({\mathcal{S}}^n)^m$ (with respect to the product radial metric). Note that $({\mathcal{S}}^n_c)^m$ is a separable subset, while $({\mathcal{S}}^n)^m$ itself is not separable. For each $\varphi\in \Phi_m$, we define
\begin{equation}
\label{newdeff1}
\rho_{\Spm}(x)
=\inf\left\{\lambda>0: \int_{\left({\cS}^n\right)^m}\varphi\left(\frac{\rho_{K_1}(x)}{\lambda}
,\dots,\frac{\rho_{K_m}(x)}{\lambda}\right)\, d\mu(K_1,\dots,K_m)\le 1\right\},
\end{equation}
for all $x\in \R^n\setminus\{o\}$. If $\varphi\in \Psi_m$, we assume in addition that the support of $\mu$ is contained in $(\mathcal{S}^n_+)^m$, and for $x\in \R^n\setminus\{o\}$, define $\rho_{\Spm}(x)$ by (\ref{newdeff1}), but with $\ge 1$ instead of $\le 1$.
This definition requires some discussion. By our assumptions, there is an $M>0$ such that if $(K_1,\dots,K_m)\in C$, then $\rho_{K_j}(u)\le M$, for all $u\in S^{n-1}$ and $j=1,\dots,m$ (all sets are contained in $MB^n$). Let $u\in S^{n-1}$ and let $\lambda>0$. There is a unique $\tau>0$ such that $\varphi(\tau,\dots,\tau)=1/\mu(C)$. Then for $\varphi\in \Phi_m$, we have
\begin{equation}\label{incinc}
\int_C\varphi\left(\frac{\rho_{K_1}(u)}{\lambda}
,\dots,\frac{\rho_{K_m}(u)}{\lambda}\right)\, d\mu(K_1,\dots,K_m)
\le \mu(C)\varphi(M/\lambda,\dots,M/\lambda)\le 1
\end{equation}
provided $\lambda\ge M/\tau$. Therefore $\rho_{\Spm}(u)\le M/\tau$ and hence $\rho_{\Spm}$ is bounded. For $\varphi\in \Psi_m$, the inequalities in (\ref{incinc}) are reversed, but in view of the reversed inequality in (\ref{newdeff1}) and the fact that $\varphi$ is decreasing in each component, the conclusion is the same. Since the function $\rho_{\Spm}$ on $\R^n\setminus\{o\}$ just defined is nonnegative and homogeneous of degree $-1$, it is the radial function of a set that is star-shaped at $o$. Next, observe that the function on $C\times S^{n-1}$ that maps $(K_1,\dots,K_m,u)$ to the integrand in (\ref{newdeff1}) is continuous in each of the first $m$ variables and Borel measurable in $u$. It follows that it is jointly Borel measurable. Here we use the fact that $C$ is separable and \cite[Exercise~11.3]{Kec}, which can be solved by adjusting the argument in \cite[Theorem~1]{Rud}. Therefore $\rho_{\Spm}$ is Borel measurable and thus $S_{\varphi,\mu}\in \mathcal{S}^n$.
In particular, in the very special but important case when $\mu$ is defined by (\ref{mugood}) below, $S_{\varphi,\mu}$ is always a star set.
An alternative description of $\rho_{\Spm}(x)$, $x\in\R^n\setminus\{o\}$, is as follows. We first consider the case $\varphi\in\Phi_m$. If $\rho_{\Spm}(x)>0$, then by Lebesgue's dominated convergence theorem, $\rho_{\Spm}(x)$ is the unique $\lambda=\lambda(x)>0$ such that
\begin{equation}\label{eqeq1}
\int_{\left({\cS}^n\right)^m}\varphi\left(\frac{\rho_{K_1}(x)}{\lambda}
,\dots,\frac{\rho_{K_m}(x)}{\lambda}\right)\, d\mu(K_1,\dots,K_m)= 1.
\end{equation}
If $\rho_{\Spm}(x)=0$, then $\mu$ is concentrated on the set of all $(K_1,\ldots,K_m)\in (\mathcal{S}^n)^m$ satisfying $\rho_{K_j}(x)=0$, for $j=1,\ldots,m$.
If also $C\subset (\mathcal{S}^n_c)^m$, then the function on $C\times S^{n-1}$ that maps $(K_1,\dots,K_m,u)$ to the integrand in (\ref{newdeff1}) is continuous in $u$. Lebesgue's dominated convergence theorem then yields the continuity of $\rho_{\Spm}$ so that in this case, we have $S_{\varphi,\mu}\in \mathcal{S}^n_c$. Next we consider the case $\varphi\in\Psi_m$. In order to obtain \eqref{eqeq1} again, we make the additional assumption that there is some fixed
$L\in \mathcal{S}^n_+$ such that $L\subset K_j$, for $j=1,\ldots,m$, whenever $(K_1,\ldots,K_m)\in C$. Then, for each $u\in S^{n-1}$ and $\lambda>0$,
\begin{equation}\label{incinc2}
\int_C\varphi\left(\frac{\rho_{K_1}(u)}{\lambda}
,\dots,\frac{\rho_{K_m}(u)}{\lambda}\right)\, d\mu(K_1,\dots,K_m)
\le \mu(C)\varphi(\rho_{L}(u)/\lambda,\dots,\rho_{L}(u)/\lambda)<\infty.
\end{equation}
For $0<\lambda\le \rho_{L}(u)/\tau$, the right side of \eqref{incinc2} is bounded from above by $1$. Now we can argue as before to see that $\rho_{\Spm}(x)$, $x\in\R^n\setminus\{o\}$, is the unique $\lambda=\lambda(x)>0$ such that \eqref{eqeq1} is satisfied, and hence that $S_{\varphi,\mu}\in\mathcal{S}^n_+$. Moreover, if $C\subset (\mathcal{S}^n_{c+})^m$ and if $L$ contains $rB^n$ for some $r>0$, then $S_{\varphi,\mu}\in\mathcal{S}^n_{c+}$.
\begin{lem}\label{dualconstlem}
Let $m,n\ge 2$, let $\varphi\in \Phi_m$, and let $\mu$ be a nonzero finite Borel measure in $({\cS}^n)^m$ with support contained in a bounded separable subset of $({\cS}^n)^m$. If $A\in GL(n)$, then
$$
A\left(\Spm\right)=\SpAm.
$$
The same statement holds when $\varphi\in \Psi_m$ and ${\cS}^n$ is replaced by $\mathcal{S}^n_+$.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
We omit the details, since the proof is similar to that of \cite[Lemma~4.4(ii)]{GHW2}. One replaces support functions of compact convex sets by radial functions of star sets and uses the formula $\rho_{AK}(x)=\rho_K(A^{-1}x)$ for $A\in GL(n)$ (see \cite[(0.33), p.~20]{Gar06}) for the change in a radial function under a nonsingular linear transformation, instead of the corresponding formula for the change in a support function.
\end{proof}
Let $m\ge 2$, let $\varphi\in \Phi_m$ (or $\varphi\in\Psi_m$), and for $j=1,\dots,m$, let $K_j\in {{\cS}}^n$ (or $K_j\in \mathcal{S}^n_+$, respectively). Define a measure $\mu$ in $({{\cS}}^n)^m$ (or $({{\cS}}^n_+)^m$, respectively) by
\begin{equation}\label{mugood}
\mu=\delta_{(K_1,\dots,K_m)}=\delta_{K_1}\times\cdots\times\delta_{K_m},
\end{equation}
where $\delta_x$ denotes the Dirac measure (a unit mass at $x$). The corresponding {\em radial Orlicz sum} of $K_1,\dots,K_m$ is defined to be $\Spm$, where $\Spm$ is as in (\ref{newdeff1}), and is denoted by $\widetilde{+}_{\varphi}(K_1,\dots,K_m)$. This means that for $\varphi\in \Phi_m$ and $K_j\in {{\cS}}^n$, $j=1,\dots,m$,
\begin{equation}\label{OrlComb1}
\rho_{\widetilde{+}_{\varphi}(K_1,\dots,K_m)}(x)=\inf\left\{\lambda>0: \varphi\left(\frac{\rho_{K_1}(x)}{\lambda}
,\dots,\frac{\rho_{K_m}(x)}{\lambda}\right)\le 1\right\},
\end{equation}
for all $x\in \R^n\setminus\{o\}$. Moreover, from our earlier remarks, or from (\ref{OrlComb1}) directly, it is clear that $\rho_{\widetilde{+}_{\varphi}(K_1,\dots,K_m)}$ is Borel measurable on $S^{n-1}$ and it follows that $\widetilde{+}_{\varphi}(K_1,\dots,K_m)\in {{\cS}}^n$.
Similarly, for $\varphi\in \Psi_m$ and $K_j\in \mathcal{S}^n_+$, $j=1,\dots,m$, $\rho_{\widetilde{+}_{\varphi}(K_1,\dots,K_m)}(x)$ is as in (\ref{OrlComb1}), but with $\ge 1$ instead of $\le 1$, and then $\widetilde{+}_{\varphi}(K_1,\dots,K_m)\in {{\cS}}^n_+$.
Equivalently, for $\varphi\in \Phi_m$ and $K_j\in {{\cS}}^n$, $j=1,\dots,m$, the radial Orlicz sum $\widetilde{+}_{\varphi}(K_1,\dots,K_m)$ can be defined implicitly (and uniquely) by
\begin{equation}\label{Orldef}
\varphi\left( \frac{\rho_{K_1}(x)}{\rho_{\widetilde{+}_{\varphi}(K_1,\dots,K_m)}(x)},\dots, \frac{\rho_{K_m}(x)}{\rho_{\widetilde{+}_{\varphi}(K_1,\dots,K_m)}(x)}\right) = 1,
\end{equation}
if $\rho_{K_1}(x)+\cdots+\rho_{K_m}(x)> 0$ and by $\rho_{\widetilde{+}_{\varphi}(K_1,\dots,K_m)}(x)=0$, otherwise, for all $x\in \R^n\setminus\{o\}$. For $\varphi\in \Psi_m$ and $K_j\in {{\cS}}^n_+$, $j=1,\dots,m$, the radial Orlicz sum $\widetilde{+}_{\varphi}(K_1,\dots,K_m)$ can also be defined implicitly (and uniquely) by (\ref{Orldef}). Here the set $L=K_1\cap\cdots\cap K_m\in\mathcal{S}^n_+$ can serve as the star set $L$ required before \eqref{incinc2}.
Note that if $\varphi\in {\Phi}_m$, then $\rho_{\widetilde{+}_{\varphi}(K_1,\dots,K_m)}(x)=0$ implies that $\rho_{K_1}(x)=\cdots=\rho_{K_m}(x)=0$. Also, if $\varphi\in {\Phi}_m^{(1)}$ and $\rho_{K_j}(x)=0$ for all $j\neq j_0$, then \eqref{Orldef} yields $\rho_{\widetilde{+}_{\varphi}(K_1,\dots,K_m)}(x)=\rho_{K_{j_0}}(x)$.
A consequence of our earlier remarks, or of (\ref{Orldef}) directly, is that $\widetilde{+}_{\varphi}:({\cS}^n_c)^m\rightarrow {\cS}^n_c$ for $\varphi\in \Phi_m$ and $\widetilde{+}_{\varphi}:({\cS}^n_{c+})^m\rightarrow {\cS}^n_{c+}$ for $\varphi\in \Phi_m\cup \Psi_m$.
An important special case is obtained when
\begin{equation}\label{spphi}
\varphi(x_1,\dots,x_m)=\sum_{j=1}^m\varphi_j(x_j),
\end{equation}
for some fixed $\varphi_j\in \Phi_1$, $j=1,\dots,m$ (or $\varphi_j\in \Psi_1$, $j=1,\dots,m$). We then write
$$\widetilde{+}_{\varphi}(K_1,\dots,K_m)=K_1\widetilde{+}_{\varphi}
\cdots\widetilde{+}_{\varphi}K_m.$$
This means that $K_1\widetilde{+}_{\varphi}\cdots\widetilde{+}_{\varphi}K_m$ can be defined for all $x\in \R^n\setminus\{o\}$ and $\varphi_j\in \Phi_1$, $j=1,\dots,m$, by the corresponding special case
\begin{equation}\label{lastone}
\sum_{j=1}^m\varphi_j\left( \frac{\rho_{K_j}(x)}{\rho_{K_1\widetilde{+}_{\varphi}
\cdots\widetilde{+}_{\varphi}K_m}(x)}\right) = 1
\end{equation}
of (\ref{Orldef}), when $\rho_{K_1}(x)+\cdots +\rho_{K_m}(x)>0$, and by $\rho_{K_1\widetilde{+}_{\varphi}\cdots\widetilde{+}_{\varphi}K_m}(x)=0$, otherwise, and similarly by (\ref{lastone}) when $\varphi_j\in \Psi_1$, $j=1,\dots,m$.
\begin{thm}\label{dualOrthm1}
If $m,n\ge 2$ and $\varphi\in \Phi_m$, then radial Orlicz addition $\widetilde{+}_{\varphi}:({\cS}^n)^m\rightarrow {\cS}^n$
\noindent{\rm(i)} is $GL(n)$ covariant, i.e., $A(\widetilde{+}_{\varphi}(K_1,\dots,K_m))=\widetilde{+}_{\varphi}(AK_1,\dots,AK_m)$ for $A\in GL(n)$ and $K_1,\dots,K_m\in {\cS}^n$;
\noindent{\rm(ii)} satisfies $+_{\varphi}:({\cS}^n_s)^m\rightarrow {\cS}^n_s$;
\noindent{\rm(iii)} is homogeneous of degree 1, i.e., $\widetilde{+}_{\varphi}(rK_1,\dots,rK_m)=r\widetilde{+}_{\varphi}(K_1,\dots,K_m)$
for $r\ge 0$ and $K_1,\dots,K_m\in {\cS}^n$;
\noindent{\rm(iv)} is section covariant, i.e., $\widetilde{+}_{\varphi}(K_1,\dots,K_m)\cap S=\widetilde{+}_{\varphi}(K_1\cap S,\dots,K_m\cap S)$ for any subspace $S$ of $\R^n$ and $K_1,\dots,K_m\in {\cS}^n$;
\noindent{\rm(v)} has the identity property, i.e., $\widetilde{+}_{\varphi}(\{o\},\dots,\{o\},K_j,\{o\},\dots,\{o\})=K_j$ for $j=1,\dots,m$ and $K_j\in {\cS}^n$, provided $\varphi\in {\Phi}_m^{(1)}$;
\noindent{\rm(vi)} is monotonic, i.e., if $K_j\subset L_j$ for $K_j,L_j\in {\cS}^n$, $j=1,\dots,m$, then $\widetilde{+}_{\varphi}(K_1,\dots,K_m)\subset \widetilde{+}_{\varphi}(L_1,\dots,L_m)$;
\noindent{\rm(vii)} is such that $\widetilde{+}_{\varphi}:({\cS}^n)^m\rightarrow {\cS}^n$ is continuous in the sense of pointwise convergence of radial functions and $\widetilde{+}_{\varphi}:({\cS}^n_{c+})^m\rightarrow {\cS}^n_{c+}$ is continuous in the radial metric.
With $r>0$ in {\rm(iii)}, all statements except {\rm(v)} hold when $\varphi\in \Psi_m$ and ${\cS}^n$ is replaced by ${\cS}^n_+$.
\end{thm}
\begin{proof} (i) This follows from Lemma~\ref{dualconstlem} in the same way that the $GL(n)$ covariance of Orlicz addition given in \cite[Theorem~5.2]{GHW2} follows from \cite[Lemma~4.4(ii)]{GHW2}.
Parts (ii) and (iii) are direct consequences of (i) applied to the maps $Ax=-x$ and $Ax=rx$, $x\in \R^n$, respectively.
Parts (iv) and (v) follow easily from definition (\ref{Orldef}) and the remarks thereafter; for (iv), one uses the obvious facts that $\rho_{K\cap S}(x)=\rho_K(x)$ if $x\in S$ and $\rho_{K\cap S}(x)=0$ if $x\not\in S$, for $K\in\cS^n$ and $x\in \R^n\setminus \{o\}$.
(vi) This also follows easily from (\ref{Orldef}); the proof is the same as that of the monotonicity of Orlicz addition in \cite[Theorem~5.2]{GHW2}, on replacing support functions by radial functions.
(vii) Let $K_{ij}\in \cS^n$, $i\in \N\cup\{0\}$, $j=1,\dots,m$, be such that $\rho_{K_{ij}}(u)\rightarrow \rho_{K_{0j}}(u)$ for all $u\in S^{n-1}$ as $i\rightarrow\infty$. The desired conclusion that $\rho_{\widetilde{+}_{\varphi}(K_{i1},\dots,K_{im})}\rightarrow
\rho_{\widetilde{+}_{\varphi}(K_{01},\dots,K_{0m})}$ pointwise as $i\rightarrow\infty$ follows from the continuity of $\varphi$ and the uniqueness of the solution of \eqref{Orldef}.
Now let $K_{ij}\in \cS_{c+}^n$, $i\in \N\cup\{0\}$, $j=1,\dots,m$, be such that $\widetilde{\delta}\left(\rho_{K_{ij}}, \rho_{K_{0j}}\right)\rightarrow 0$, that is, $\rho_{K_{ij}}\rightarrow \rho_{K_{0j}}$ uniformly on $S^{n-1}$ as $i\rightarrow\infty$, for $j=1,\dots,m$. From the previous paragraph we know that $\rho_{\widetilde{+}_{\varphi}(K_{i1},\dots,K_{im})}\rightarrow
\rho_{\widetilde{+}_{\varphi}(K_{01},\dots,K_{0m})}$ pointwise as $i\rightarrow\infty$. If the convergence is not uniform on $S^{n-1}$, then there is an $\ee>0$ such that for all $i\ge 1$, there are $n_i\ge i$ and $u_{n_i}\in S^{n-1}$ such that
\begin{equation}\label{dy1}
|\rho_{\widetilde{+}_{\varphi}(K_{n_i1},\dots,K_{n_im})}(u_{n_i})-
\rho_{\widetilde{+}_{\varphi}(K_{01},\dots,K_{0m})}(u_{n_i})|\ge \ee.
\end{equation}
Since $S^{n-1}$ is compact, we may assume that $u_{n_i}\to u_0$ as $i\to \infty$. We claim that we may also assume that there is a $c_0>0$ such that $\rho_{\widetilde{+}_{\varphi}(K_{n_i1},\dots,K_{n_im})}(u_{n_i})\to c_0$ as $i\to\infty$. To see this, note that since $\rho_{K_{ij}}\rightarrow \rho_{K_{0j}}$ uniformly on $S^{n-1}$, we have $c_1\le \rho_{K_{ij}}(u)\le c_2$, for some $c_1, c_2>0$ and all $u\in S^{n-1}$, $i\in \N\cup\{0\}$, and $j=1,\dots,m$. From (\ref{Orldef}) and our assumptions on $\varphi$, it follows that if $\varphi\in \Phi_m$ and $\tau>0$ are such that $\varphi(\tau,\dots,\tau)=1$, then
\begin{equation}\label{ee1}
c_1/\tau\le \rho_{\widetilde{+}_{\varphi}(K_{n_i1},\dots,K_{n_im})}(u)\le c_2/\tau,
\end{equation}
for all $u\in S^{n-1}$ and $i\in \N\cup\{0\}$. If $\varphi\in \Psi_m$, then (\ref{ee1}) holds with the inequalities reversed. In either case, the sequence $(\rho_{\widetilde{+}_{\varphi}(K_{n_i1},\dots,K_{n_im})}(u_{n_i}))$ is bounded and thus has a convergent subsequence, proving the claim.
From (\ref{Orldef}) and the fact that $\rho_{K_{ij}}\rightarrow \rho_{K_{0j}}$ uniformly on $S^{n-1}$ as $i\rightarrow\infty$, for $j=1,\dots,m$, we now obtain
$$1=\varphi\left(\frac{\rho_{K_{n_i1}}(u_{n_i})}{\rho_{\widetilde{+}_{\varphi}
(K_{n_i1},\dots,K_{n_im})}(u_{n_i})},\dots,\frac{\rho_{K_{n_im}}(u_{n_i})}
{\rho_{\widetilde{+}_{\varphi}(K_{n_i1},\dots,K_{n_im})}(u_{n_i})}\right)\to
\varphi\left(\frac{\rho_{K_{01}}(u_{0})}{c_0},\dots,\frac{\rho_{K_{0m}}(u_{0})}
{c_0}\right),$$
as $i\to\infty$, and hence by the previous expression and (\ref{Orldef}) again, we have $c_0=\rho_{\widetilde{+}_{\varphi}(K_{01},\dots,K_{0m})}(u_{0})$. But (\ref{dy1}) implies that
$$|\rho_{\widetilde{+}_{\varphi}(K_{n_i1},\dots,K_{n_im})}(u_{n_i})-
\rho_{\widetilde{+}_{\varphi}(K_{01},\dots,K_{0m})}(u_{n_i})|\to
|c_0-\rho_{\widetilde{+}_{\varphi}(K_{01},\dots,K_{0m})}(u_{0})|\ge\ee,$$
as $i\to \infty$, a contradiction. Therefore $\rho_{\widetilde{+}_{\varphi}(K_{i1},\dots,K_{im})}\rightarrow
\rho_{\widetilde{+}_{\varphi}(K_{01},\dots,K_{0m})}$ uniformly on $S^{n-1}$ as $i\rightarrow\infty$, which is equivalent to the convergence of the corresponding star bodies in the radial metric.
\end{proof}
For $\varphi\in\Phi_2$, radial Orlicz addition $\widetilde{+}_{\varphi}:({\cS}^n)^2\rightarrow {\cS}^n$ is clearly commutative if and only if $\varphi(x_1,x_2)=\varphi(x_2,x_1)$ for all $x_1,x_2\ge 0$, and the corresponding statement is true for $\varphi\in\Psi_2$. We also have the following result.
\begin{cor}\label{nonassoc}
Let $n\ge 2$. Radial Orlicz addition $\widetilde{+}_{\varphi}:({\cS}^n)^2\rightarrow {\cS}^n$, for $\varphi\in \Phi_2$, and $\widetilde{+}_{\varphi}:({\cS}^n_+)^2\rightarrow {\cS}^n_+$, for $\varphi\in \Psi_2$, is associative if and only if it is $p$th radial addition for some $p\in \R$, $p\neq 0$.
\end{cor}
\begin{proof}
By Theorem~\ref{dualOrthm1}, radial Orlicz addition is continuous in the sense of pointwise convergence of radial functions, homogeneous of degree 1, $GL(n)$ covariant, and section covariant. Let $\varphi\in \Phi_2$. By the proof of \cite[Theorem~7.17]{GHW}, the restriction $\widetilde{+}_{\varphi}:({\cS}^n_s)^2\rightarrow {\cS}^n_s$ to the $o$-symmetric sets is either $p$th radial addition for some $p\in \R$, $p\neq 0$, or we have $\widetilde{+}_{\varphi}(K,L)=\{o\}$, or $\widetilde{+}_{\varphi}(K,L)=K$, or $\widetilde{+}_{\varphi}(K,L)=L$, for all $K,L\in {\cS}^n_{s}$. (Note that while the continuity in \cite[Theorem~7.17]{GHW} is with respect to the radial metric, the proof only requires continuity in the sense of pointwise convergence of radial functions.) However, since $\varphi\in \Phi_2$, the latter three possibilities are excluded and in fact we must have $p>0$.
Now let $K,L\in {\cS}^n$, let $x\in \R^n\setminus\{o\}$, and let $\rho_K(x)=a$ and $\rho_L(x)=b$. Choose $K',L'\in {\cS}^n_{s}$ such that $\rho_{K'}(x)=a\ge 0$ and $\rho_{L'}(x)=b\ge 0$. Then by (\ref{Orldef}), both $\rho_{\widetilde{+}_{\varphi}(K,L)}(x)$ and $\rho_{\widetilde{+}_{\varphi}(K',L')}(x)$ equal the unique $\lambda>0$ such that $\varphi(a/\lambda,b/\lambda)=1$. Therefore,
$$\rho_{\widetilde{+}_{\varphi}(K,L)}(x)^p=
\rho_{\widetilde{+}_{\varphi}(K',L')}(x)^p=a^p+b^p=
\rho_{K}(x)^p+\rho_{L}(x)^p,$$
which completes the proof when $\varphi\in \Phi_2$. Essentially the same proof works for $\varphi\in \Psi_2$ when ${\cS}^n$ is replaced by ${\cS}^n_+$, with same conclusion but with $p<0$. The required changes concern the function $f$ used in the proof of \cite[Theorem~7.17]{GHW}, which is now chosen as a function $f:(0,\infty)^2\to (0,\infty)$, and the use of \cite[Theorem~1]{Pearson} instead of \cite[Theorem~2]{Pearson}.
\end{proof}
There is also a natural definition of an {\em Orlicz intersection body $I_\varphi K$ of a star body $K\in {\cS}^n_c$}. By analogy with the $L_p$-intersection body of a star body (see \cite{Hab08}), when $\varphi\in \Phi_1$, we define $I_\varphi K$ to be the star body with radial function
\begin{equation}\label{intbody1}
\rho_{I_\varphi K}(u)=\inf\left\{\lambda>0: \int_{K}\varphi\left(\frac{1}{\lambda|u\cdot x|}\right)\, dx\le 1\right\},
\end{equation}
for $u\in S^{n-1}$, with suitable restrictions imposed on $\varphi$ so that the infimum exists. More generally, when $\varphi\in \Phi_1$, an {\em Orlicz intersection body} is a star body $I_\varphi\mu$ whose radial function satisfies
\begin{equation}\label{intbody2}
\rho_{I_\varphi\mu}(u)=\inf\left\{\lambda>0: \int_{\R^n}\varphi\left(\frac{1}{\lambda|u\cdot x|}\right)\, d\mu(x)\le 1\right\},
\end{equation}
for $u\in S^{n-1}$, where $\mu$ is a finite Borel measure in $\R^n$. When $\varphi\in \Psi_1$, the inequality $\le 1$ in (\ref{intbody1}) and (\ref{intbody2}) should be replaced by $\ge 1$. Variants of these definitions are conceivable. We leave the investigation of these bodies for a future study.
\section{Dual Brunn-Minkowski-type inequalities}\label{DBMI}
The following result provides a dual Orlicz-Brunn-Minkowski inequality.
\begin{thm}\label{dualOBMI1}
Let $m, n\ge 2$, let $\varphi\in \Phi_m$, and let $\varphi_0(x_1,\dots,x_m)=\varphi(x_1^{1/n},\dots,x_m^{1/n})$ for $(x_1,\dots,x_m)\in [0,\infty)^m$. If $\varphi_0$ is concave, then for all $K_j\in {\cS}^n$, $j=1,\dots,m$, with some $V_n(K_j)>0$,
\begin{equation}\label{obmi}
\varphi\left(\left(\frac{V_n(K_1)}{V_n(\widetilde{+}_{\varphi}(K_1,\dots,
K_m))}\right)^{1/n},\dots,
\left(\frac{V_n(K_m)}{V_n(\widetilde{+}_{\varphi}(K_1,\dots,
K_m))}\right)^{1/n}\right)\ge 1,
\end{equation}
while if $\varphi_0$ is convex, the inequality is reversed. The same statements hold if instead $\varphi\in \Psi_m$ and $K_j\in {\cS}_{+}^n$, $j=1,\dots,m$.
If $\varphi_0$ is strictly concave (or convex, as appropriate) and $K_j\in {\cS}_{c+}^n$, $j=1,\dots,m$, equality holds if and only if $K_j$, $j=1,\dots,m$, are dilatates.
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
Let $\varphi\in \Phi_m$, let $\varphi_0$ be concave, and initially, suppose that $K_j\in {\cS}^n_+$, $j=1,\dots,m$. Then $\rho_{\widetilde{+}_{\varphi}(K_1,\dots,K_m)}(u)>0$, for $u\in S^{n-1}$. Hence, $V_n(\widetilde{+}_{\varphi}(K_1,\dots,
K_m))>0$ and the dual cone measure $\widetilde{V}_{\widetilde{+}_{\varphi}(K_1,\dots,
K_m)}$ (see (\ref{dualcone}) with $K$ replaced by $\widetilde{+}_{\varphi}(K_1,\dots,
K_m)$) is a probability measure in $S^{n-1}$ with positive density with respect to $V_{n-1}$ in $S^{n-1}$. We will use Jensen's inequality for concave functions (the reverse of (\ref{JenIneq})), with $X=S^{n-1}$, $\mu=\widetilde{V}_{\widetilde{+}_{\varphi}(K_1,\dots,
K_m)}$, $\varphi$ replaced by $\varphi_0$, $\R^n$ replaced by $\R^m$, $U=(0,\infty)^m$, and $g$ defined by
$$g(u)=\left(\frac{\rho_{K_1}(u)^n}{
\rho_{\widetilde{+}_{\varphi}(K_1,\dots,
K_m)}(u)^n},\dots,
\frac{\rho_{K_m}(u)^n}{\rho_{\widetilde{+}_{\varphi}(K_1,\dots,
K_m)}(u)^n}
\right).$$
With this and (\ref{Orldef}), we obtain
\begin{eqnarray*}
1&=& \int_{S^{n-1}}\varphi\left(\frac{\rho_{K_1}(u)}{
\rho_{\widetilde{+}_{\varphi}(K_1,\dots,
K_m)}(u)},\dots,
\frac{\rho_{K_m}(u)}{\rho_{\widetilde{+}_{\varphi}(K_1,\dots,
K_m)}(u)}
\right)\,d\widetilde{V}_{\widetilde{+}_{\varphi}(K_1,\dots,
K_m)}(u)\\
&=& \int_{S^{n-1}}\varphi_0\left(\frac{\rho_{K_1}(u)^n}{
\rho_{\widetilde{+}_{\varphi}(K_1,\dots,
K_m)}(u)^n},\dots,
\frac{\rho_{K_m}(u)^n}{\rho_{\widetilde{+}_{\varphi}(K_1,\dots,
K_m)}(u)^n}
\right)\,d\widetilde{V}_{\widetilde{+}_{\varphi}(K_1,\dots,
K_m)}(u)\\
&\le & \varphi_0\left(\int_{S^{n-1}}\frac{\rho_{K_1}(u)^n}{
\rho_{\widetilde{+}_{\varphi}(K_1,\dots,
K_m)}(u)^n}\,
d\widetilde{V}_{\widetilde{+}_{\varphi}(K_1,\dots,
K_m)}(u),\right.\\
& &
\hspace{1.5in}\left.\dots,\int_{S^{n-1}}\frac{\rho_{K_m}(u)^n}{
\rho_{\widetilde{+}_{\varphi}(K_1,\dots,
K_m)}(u)^n}\,
d\widetilde{V}_{\widetilde{+}_{\varphi}(K_1,\dots,
K_m)}(u)\right)\\
&=&\varphi_0\left(\frac{V_n(K_1)}{V_n(\widetilde{+}_{\varphi}(K_1,\dots,
K_m))},\dots,
\frac{V_n(K_m)}{V_n(\widetilde{+}_{\varphi}(K_1,\dots,
K_m))}\right)\\
&=&\varphi\left(\left(\frac{V_n(K_1)}{V_n(\widetilde{+}_{\varphi}(K_1,\dots,
K_m))}\right)^{1/n},\dots,
\left(\frac{V_n(K_m)}{V_n(\widetilde{+}_{\varphi}(K_1,\dots,
K_m))}\right)^{1/n}\right).
\end{eqnarray*}
Now suppose that $K_j\in {\cS}^n$, $j=1,\dots,m$, with $V_n(K_{j_0})>0$ for some $j_0$. Let $\ee>0$ and define $K_j(\varepsilon)\in\mathcal{S}^n_+$ by $\rho_{K_j(\varepsilon)}(u)=\rho_{K_j}+\varepsilon$, for $u\in S^{n-1}$ and $j=1,\ldots,m$. Then $\rho_{K_j(\varepsilon)}\downarrow\rho_{K_j}$ pointwise as $\varepsilon\downarrow 0$. By the Lebesgue dominated convergence theorem,
$V_n(K_j(\varepsilon))\downarrow V_n(K_j)$ as $\varepsilon\downarrow 0$, for $j=1,\dots,m$. Moreover, $\rho_{\widetilde{+}_{\varphi}(K_1(\varepsilon),\dots,
K_m(\varepsilon))}\downarrow\rho_{\widetilde{+}_{\varphi}(K_1,\dots,K_m)}$ pointwise as $\varepsilon\downarrow 0$. By the Lebesgue dominated convergence theorem again,
we obtain
$$
V_n(\widetilde{+}_{\varphi}(K_1(\varepsilon),\dots,
K_m(\varepsilon))\downarrow V_n(\widetilde{+}_{\varphi}(K_1,\dots,
K_m))\ge V_n(\widetilde{+}_{\varphi}(\{o\},\dots,K_{j_0},\dots,
\{o\}))>0,
$$
since $\rho_{K_{j_0}}>0$ on a subset of $S^{n-1}$ of positive $V_{n-1}$-measure. Since $\varphi$ is continuous and (\ref{obmi}) holds with $K_j$ replaced by $K_j(\ee)$, $j=1,\dots,m$, the required conclusion follows by taking the limit as $\varepsilon\downarrow 0$.
Suppose that $K_j\in {\cS}_{c+}^n$, $j=1,\dots,m$, and that equality holds in \eqref{obmi}. Then equality also holds in Jensen's inequality. If $\varphi_0$ is strictly concave, the equality condition for Jensen's inequality, together with the fact that the support of $\widetilde{V}_{\widetilde{+}_{\varphi}(K_1,\dots,
K_m)}$ is now $S^{n-1}$ and all radial functions involved are continuous, imply that $\rho_{K_j}(u)/\rho_{\widetilde{+}_{\varphi}(K_1,\dots,
K_m)}(u)$, $j=1,\dots,m$, and hence $\rho_{K_1}(u)/\rho_{K_j}(u)$, $j=1,\dots,m$, are constant on $S^{n-1}$. This establishes the equality condition.
The remainder of the theorem follows easily by similar arguments.
\end{proof}
Taking $m=2$, $K_1=K$, $K_2=L$, and $\varphi(x_1,x_2)=x_1^p+x_2^p$, $p\in \R$, $p\neq 0$, in Theorem~\ref{dualOBMI1}, we obtain the {\em dual $L_p$-Brunn-Minkowski inequality}
\begin{equation}\label{duallpBM}
V_n(K\widetilde{+}_p\,L)^{p/n}\le V_n(K)^{p/n}+V_n(L)^{p/n},
\end{equation}
and its equality conditions, where $p\in (0,n]$ and $\widetilde{+}_p$ is defined by (\ref{radialslp}), and where the inequality in (\ref{duallpBM}) is reversed if $p<0$ or $p>n$. See \cite[(85), p.~398]{Gar02}.
Of course, many other choices are possible. For example, let $t\in (0,1)$ and let $\varphi_t(x_1,x_2)=x_1^{n(1-t)}x_2^{nt}$, for $x_1,x_2>0$. Then $\varphi_t\not\in\Phi_2$, but $\varphi_t\in\Phi'_2$, where $\Phi'_2$ is as in Remark~\ref{rem1}. In this case radial Orlicz addition coincides with the radial log combination $(1-t)K\widetilde{+}_0\,tL$, i.e.,
$$\rho_{\widetilde{+}_{\varphi_t}(K, L)}(x)=\rho_{(1-t)K\widetilde{+}_0\,tL}(x)=
\rho_K(x)^{1-t}\rho_L(x)^t,$$
for $x\in \R^n\setminus\{o\}$ and $K, L\in \mathcal{S}_{+}^n$. With this choice of $\varphi$, Theorem~\ref{dualOBMI1} yields
$$V_n((1-t)K\widetilde{+}_0\,tL)\le V_n(K)^{1-t}V_n(L)^t,$$
for all $K, L\in \mathcal{S}_{+}^n$. This {\em dual log-Brunn-Minkowski inequality} is in fact the precise dual of the conjectured (and so far proved only for $n=2$) $\log$-Brunn-Minkowski inequality (see \cite[Problem~1.1]{BLYZ}):
$$V_n((1-t)K+_0\,tL)\ge V_n(K)^{1-t}V_n(L)^t,$$
where $(1-t)K+_0\,tL$ is the log Minkowski combination of origin-symmetric convex bodies $K$ and $L$ in $\R^n$.
\section{Radial Orlicz linear combination and dual Orlicz mixed volume}\label{radOlc}
Let $m,n\ge 2$ and suppose that $\alpha_j> 0$, $j=1,\dots,m$, and either $\varphi_j\in \Phi_1$, $j=1,\dots,m$, or $\varphi_j\in \Psi_1$, $j=1,\dots,m$. Let
\begin{equation}\label{phrest}
\varphi(x_1,\dots,x_m)=\sum_{j=1}^m\alpha_j\varphi_j(x_j).
\end{equation}
We define the {\em radial Orlicz linear combination} $\widetilde{+}_{\varphi}(K_1,\dots,K_m,\alpha_1,\dots,\alpha_m)$ for all $x\in \R^n\setminus\{o\}$ and $\varphi_j\in \Phi_1$ and $K_j\in{\mathcal S}^n$, $j=1,\dots,m$, by taking the function $\varphi$ in (\ref{OrlComb1}) to be as in (\ref{phrest}); in other words, by
\begin{equation}\label{hK021}
\rho_{\widetilde{+}_{\varphi}(K_1,\dots,K_m,\alpha_1,\dots,\alpha_m)
}(x)=\inf\left\{\lambda>0:\sum_{j=1}^m\alpha_j\,
\varphi_j\left(\frac{\rho_{K_j}(x)}
{\lambda}\right)\le 1\right\}.
\end{equation}
We use the same definition (\ref{hK021}) for $\varphi_j\in \Psi_1$ and $K_j\in{\mathcal S}^n_+$, $j=1,\dots,m$, with $\le 1$ replaced by $\ge 1$.
For our purposes, it suffices to focus on the special case when $m=2$, $\alpha_1=1$, and $\alpha_2=\ee>0$. Henceforth we shall write $K\widetilde{+}_{\varphi,\ee}L$ instead of $\widetilde{+}_{\varphi}(K,L,1,\ee)$. The radial Orlicz linear combination $K\widetilde{+}_{\varphi,\ee}L$ can be defined implicitly (and uniquely) for $x\in \R^n\setminus\{o\}$ by
\begin{equation}\label{rlc}
\varphi_1\left(\frac{\rho_K(x)}{\rho_{K\widetilde{+}_{\varphi,\ee} L}(x)}\right)+\ee\varphi_2
\left(\frac{\rho_L(x)}{\rho_{K\widetilde{+}_{\varphi,\ee} L}(x)}\right)=1,
\end{equation}
if $\varphi_1,\varphi_2\in \Phi_1$ and $\rho_K(x)+\rho_L(x)>0$, or if $\varphi_1,\varphi_2\in \Psi_1$ and $K,L\in \mathcal{S}^n_+$.
Note that we have $K\widetilde{+}_{\varphi,\ee}L\in {\cS}^n_c$ (or $K\widetilde{+}_{\varphi,\ee}L\in {\cS}^n_{c+}$) if $K, L\in {\cS}^n_c$ (or $K, L\in {\cS}^n_{c+}$, respectively).
The following lemma is a dual analog of \cite[Lemma~8.2]{GHW2}. It requires a different proof, since convergence of radial functions does not imply their uniform convergence, as it does for support functions.
\begin{lem}\label{newconvlem}
Suppose that either $\varphi_j\in {\Phi}_1^{(1)}$, $j=1,2$, $K,L\in {\mathcal{S}}^n$, and $c_1B^n\subset K$ for some $c_1>0$, or $\varphi_j\in {\Psi}_1^{(1)}$, $j=1,2$, $K,L\in {\mathcal{S}}_{+}^n$, and $c_2B^n\subset L$ for some $c_2>0$. Then $\rho_{K\widetilde{+}_{\varphi,\ee}L}\to \rho_{K}$ uniformly on $S^{n-1}$ as $\ee\to 0+$.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
Suppose that $\varphi_j\in {\Phi}_1^{(1)}$, $j=1,2$, and let $\ee\in (0,1]$. Using (\ref{rlc}), both as it stands and with $\ee$ replaced by $1$, and the fact that $\varphi_1$ and $\varphi_2$ are strictly increasing, it is easy to see that $K\subset K\widetilde{+}_{\varphi,\ee}L\subset K\widetilde{+}_{\varphi,1}L$. Let $M_1<\infty$ be such that $L\subset M_1B^n$ and $K\widetilde{+}_{\varphi,1}L\subset M_1B^n$, and define
$$a_1=\sup_{v\in S^{n-1}}\frac{\rho_L(v)}{\rho_K(v)}\le \frac{M_1}{c_1}<\infty.
$$
Let $u\in S^{n-1}$. Then, using (\ref{rlc}) and the fact that $\varphi_1$ and $\varphi_2$ are increasing, we obtain
$$
1-\ee\varphi_2(a_1)\le \varphi_1\left(\frac{\rho_K(u)}{\rho_{K\widetilde{+}_{\varphi,\ee}L}(u)}
\right)
.
$$
If $\ee$ is small enough, then $1-\ee \varphi_2(a_1)>0$ and hence
$
\rho_{K\widetilde{+}_{\varphi,\ee}L}(u)\varphi_1^{-1}\left(1-\ee\varphi_2(a_1)\right)\le \rho_K(u)
$. It follows that
\begin{equation}\label{bound1}
0\le
\rho_{K\widetilde{+}_{\varphi,\ee}L}(u)-\rho_K(u)
\le M_1\left(1-\varphi_1^{-1}\left(1-\ee\varphi_2(a_1)\right)\right).
\end{equation}
Since $\varphi_1(1)=1$ and $\varphi_1$ is strictly increasing and continuous, the same is true for $\varphi_1^{-1}$, and therefore $\rho_{K\widetilde{+}_{\varphi,\ee}L}\to \rho_{K}$ uniformly on $S^{n-1}$ as $\ee\to 0+$.
Suppose that $\varphi_j\in {\Psi}_1^{(1)}$, $j=1,2$, and let $\ee\in (0,1]$. If $K,L\in {\mathcal{S}}_{+}^n$, then we now have $K\widetilde{+}_{\varphi,\ee}L\subset K$. Let $M_2<\infty$ be such that $K\subset M_2B^n$ and define
$$a_2=\inf_{v\in S^{n-1}}\frac{\rho_L(v)}{\rho_K(v)}\ge \frac{c_2}{M_2}>0.
$$
Let $u\in S^{n-1}$. Then, using (\ref{rlc}) and the fact that $\varphi_1$ and $\varphi_2$ are decreasing, we obtain
$$
1-\ee\varphi_2(a_2)\le \varphi_1\left(\frac{\rho_K(u)}{\rho_{K\widetilde{+}_{\varphi,\ee}L}(u)}
\right).
$$
If $\ee$ is small enough, then $1-\ee \varphi_2(a_2)>0$ and using again that $\varphi_1$ is decreasing, we get
$
\rho_{K\widetilde{+}_{\varphi,\ee}L}(u)\varphi_1^{-1}\left(1-\ee\varphi_2(a_2)\right)\ge \rho_K(u)
$.
This implies
\begin{equation}\label{bound2}
0\le\rho_K(u)-\rho_{K\widetilde{+}_{\varphi,\ee}L}(u)
\le M_2\left(\varphi_1^{-1}\left(1-\ee\varphi_2(a_2)\right)-1\right)
\end{equation}
and we draw the desired conclusion as before.
\end{proof}
\begin{rem}\label{remarknew1}
{\em
A minor variation of the preceding argument shows the following.
Suppose that either $\varphi_j\in {\Phi}_1^{(1)}$, $j=1,2$, $K\in {\mathcal{S}}^n_+$, and $L\in {\mathcal{S}}^n$, or $\varphi_j\in {\Psi}_1^{(1)}$, $j=1,2$, and $K,L\in {\mathcal{S}}_{+}^n$. Then $\rho_{K\widetilde{+}_{\varphi,\ee}L}\to \rho_{K}$ pointwise on $S^{n-1}$ as $\ee\to 0+$.
}
\end{rem}
\begin{lem}\label{limiteqns}
Let $\varphi_j\in {\Phi}_1^{(1)}$, $j=1,2$, let $K\in {\mathcal{S}}_{+}^n$, and let $L\in {\mathcal{S}}^n$. If $(\varphi_1)'_l(1)$ exists and is positive, then
\begin{equation}\label{newlimits}
(\varphi_1)'_l(1)\lim_{\ee\rightarrow 0+}\frac{\rho_{K\widetilde{+}_{\varphi,\ee}L}(u)-\rho_K(u)}{\ee}=
\rho_K(u)\varphi_2\left(\frac{\rho_L(u)}{\rho_K(u)}\right),
\end{equation}
for $u\in S^{n-1}$. If $\varphi_j\in {\Psi}_1^{(1)}$, $j=1,2$, $K, L\in {\mathcal{S}}_{+}^n$, and $(\varphi_1)'_r(1)$ exists and is positive, then \eqref{newlimits} holds with $(\varphi_1)'_l(1)$ replaced by $(\varphi_1)'_r(1)$.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
Suppose that $\varphi_j\in {\Phi}_1^{(1)}$, $j=1,2$. Let $u\in S^{n-1}$ and let $\ee>0$. If $\rho_L(u)=0$, then $\rho_{K\widetilde{+}_{\varphi,\ee}L}(u)=\rho_K(u)$ and both sides of \eqref{newlimits} are zero. Suppose that $\rho_L(u)>0$. Then $\rho_K(u)/\rho_{K\widetilde{+}_{\varphi,\ee}L}(u)< 1$ and we also have $\rho_K(u)>0$ and $\varphi_2({\rho_L(u)}/{\rho_K(u)})>0$. Using these facts, Remark~\ref{remarknew1}, and (\ref{rlc}), we obtain
\begin{align*}
(\varphi_1)'_l(1) &= \lim_{\ee\rightarrow 0+}\frac{1-\varphi_1 \left(\frac{\rho_K(u)}{\rho_{K\widetilde{+}_{\varphi,\ee}L}(u)}\right)}
{1-\frac{\rho_K(u)}{\rho_{K\widetilde{+}_{\varphi,\ee}L}(u)}}
=\lim_{\ee\rightarrow 0+} \rho_{K\widetilde{+}_{\varphi,\ee}L}(u)\frac{\ee\varphi_2 \left(\frac{\rho_L(u)}{\rho_{K\widetilde{+}_{\varphi,\ee}L}(u)}\right)}
{\rho_{K\widetilde{+}_{\varphi,\ee}L}(u)-\rho_K(u)}\\
&=\rho_K(u)\varphi_2\left(\frac{\rho_L(u)}{\rho_K(u)}\right)
\lim_{\ee\rightarrow 0+} \frac{\ee}{\rho_{K\widetilde{+}_{\varphi,\ee}L}(u)-\rho_K(u)},
\end{align*}
which yields (\ref{newlimits}).
If $\varphi_j\in {\Psi}_1^{(1)}$, $j=1,2$, then $\rho_K(u)/\rho_{K\widetilde{+}_{\varphi,\ee}L}(u)> 1$ and as in the previous paragraph, we conclude that \eqref{newlimits} holds with $(\varphi_1)'_l(1)$ replaced by $(\varphi_1)'_r(1)$.
\end{proof}
\begin{thm}\label{maindov}
Suppose that $\varphi_j\in {\Phi}_1^{(1)}$, $j=1,2$, $K,L\in {\mathcal{S}}^n$, and $c_1B^n\subset K$ for some $c_1>0$. If $(\varphi_1)'_l(1)$ exists and is positive, then
\begin{equation}\label{ndov}
(\varphi_1)'_l(1)\lim_{\ee\rightarrow 0+}\frac{V_n(K\widetilde{+}_{\varphi,\ee}L)-V_n(K)}{\ee}=
\int_{S^{n-1}}
\varphi_2\left(\frac{\rho_L(u)}{\rho_K(u)}\right)\rho_K(u)^n\,du.
\end{equation}
Suppose instead that $\varphi_j\in {\Psi}_1^{(1)}$, $j=1,2$, $K, L\in {\mathcal{S}}_{+}^n$, and $c_2B^n\subset L$ for some $c_2>0$. If $(\varphi_1)'_r(1)$ exists and is positive, then \eqref{ndov} holds with $(\varphi_1)'_l(1)$ replaced by $(\varphi_1)'_r(1)$.
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
Let $\varphi_j\in {\Phi}_1^{(1)}$, $j=1,2$, let $K,L\in {\mathcal{S}}^n$, and let $c_1B^n\subset K$ for some $c_1>0$. By the polar coordinate formula for volume, we have
$$
(\varphi_1)'_l(1)\left.\frac{d}{d\ee}\right|_{\ee=0+} V_n(K\widetilde{+}_{\varphi,\ee}L)=(\varphi_1)'_l(1)
\frac{1}{n}\lim_{\ee\to 0+}\int_{S^{n-1}}\frac{1}{\ee}\left(\rho_{K\widetilde{+}_{\varphi,\ee}L}(u)^n-\rho_K(u)^n\right)\, du.
$$
For $\ee>0$ sufficiently small and $u\in S^{n-1}$, using the notation from the proof of Lemma~\ref{newconvlem}, we conclude from \eqref{bound1} that
\begin{equation}\label{upperb1}
0\le \frac{1}{\ee}\left(\rho_{K\widetilde{+}_{\varphi,\ee}L}(u)-\rho_K(u)\right)\le M_1\frac{1}{\ee}\left(1-\varphi_1^{-1}(1-\ee \varphi_2(a_1)\right).
\end{equation}
Since $(\varphi_1)'_l(1)>0$ and $\varphi_1$ is strictly increasing, we also have $(\varphi_1^{-1})'_l(1)>0$, so the right-hand side of \eqref{upperb1} is bounded above uniformly in $\ee>0$. Hence we can apply Lebesgue's dominated convergence theorem and Lemma~\ref{limiteqns} to obtain
\begin{align*}
(\varphi_1)'_l(1)\left.\frac{d}{d\ee}\right|_{\ee=0+} V_n(K\widetilde{+}_{\varphi,\ee}L)
&=(\varphi_1)'_l(1)\frac{1}{n}\int_{S^{n-1}}
\left.\frac{d}{d\ee}\right|_{\ee=0+}\rho_{K\widetilde{+}_{\varphi,\ee}L}(u)^n\, du\\
&=(\varphi_1)'_l(1)\frac{1}{n}\int_{S^{n-1}}
\left.\frac{d}{d\ee}\right|_{\ee=0+}\rho_{K\widetilde{+}_{\varphi,\ee}L}(u) n\rho_K(u)^{n-1}\, du\\
&=\int_{S^{n-1}}\varphi_2\left(\frac{\rho_{L}(u)}{\rho_{K}(u)}\right)
\rho_{K}(u)^{n}\, du.
\end{align*}
The second part of the theorem follows in the same way if \eqref{bound2} is used instead of \eqref{bound1}.
\end{proof}
Let $\varphi:(0,\infty)\to \R$. The formula (\ref{ndov}) for the first variation of volume suggests defining the {\em dual Orlicz mixed volume} of star sets $K,L\in\mathcal{S}^n_+$ by
\begin{equation}\label{dualOmv}
\widetilde{V}_\varphi(K,L)=\frac{1}{n}\int_{S^{n-1}}\varphi\left(\frac{\rho_{L}(u)}
{\rho_{K}(u)}\right)\rho_{K}(u)^{n}\,du=V_n(K)\int_{S^{n-1}}\varphi\left(\frac{\rho_L(u)}{\rho_K(u)}\right)\, d\widetilde{V}_K(u),
\end{equation}
whenever these expressions make sense, where integration on the right is with respect to the dual cone measure of $K$, defined by (\ref{dualcone}). A similar
remark applies if $\varphi:[0,\infty)\to\R$ and $K,L$ belong to an appropriate class of star sets.
For example, in the important special case when $\varphi(t)=t^p$, $p\in \R\setminus\{0\}$, the dual Orlicz mixed volume $\widetilde{V}_\varphi(K,L)$ becomes
\begin{equation}\label{dmvp}
\widetilde{V}_p(K,L)=\frac{1}{n}\int_{S^{n-1}}\rho_K(u)^{n-p}
\rho_L(u)^p\,du,
\end{equation}
where the latter quantity is defined as in \cite[(A.56), p.~410]{Gar06} (with $i=p$). Here it would be assumed that $K\in {\cS}^n$ contains a ball with positive radius if $p>n$ and that $L\in {\cS}^n$ contains a ball with positive radius if $p<0$.
\section{Dual Orlicz-Minkowski inequalities}\label{dOMi}
In this section, we prove some dual Orlicz-Minkowski inequalities and corollaries thereof.
\begin{thm}\label{maindom}
Let $\varphi:(0,\infty)\to \R$ be such that $\varphi_0(t)=\varphi(t^{1/n})$, $t>0$, is concave. If $K,L\in {\cS}_{c+}^n$, then
$$
\widetilde{V}_\varphi (K,L)\le V_n(K)\,\varphi\left(\left( \frac{V_n(L)}{V_n(K)} \right)^{1/n}\right),
$$
while if $\varphi_0$ is convex, the inequality is reversed. If $\varphi_0$ is strictly concave (or convex, as appropriate), equality holds if and only if $K$ and $L$ are dilatates.
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
By (\ref{dualOmv}) and Jensen's inequality for concave functions (the reverse of (\ref{JenIneq})), we obtain
\begin{align*}
\widetilde{V}_\varphi(K,L)&=V_n(K)\int_{S^{n-1}}\varphi\left(\frac{\rho_L (u)}{\rho_K( u)}\right)\, d\widetilde{V}_K(u)\\
&=V_n(K)\int_{S^{n-1}}\varphi_0\left(\left(\frac{\rho_L(u)}{\rho_K(u)}
\right)^n\right)\, d\widetilde{V}_K(u)\\
&\le V_n(K)\,\varphi_0\left(\int_{S^{n-1}}\left(\frac{\rho_L(u)}{\rho_K(u)}
\right)^n\,d\widetilde{V}_K(u)\right)\\
&=V_n(K)\,\varphi_0\left(\int_{S^{n-1}}\frac{\rho_L(u)^n}{nV_n(K)}\, du\right)\\
&= V_n(K)\,\varphi_0\left(\frac{V_n(L)}{V_n(K)}\right)=
V_n(K)\,\varphi\left(\left(\frac{V_n(L)}{V_n(K)}\right)^{1/n}\right).
\end{align*}
If equality holds, then equality also holds in Jensen's inequality. The assumption that $\varphi_0$ is strictly concave and the equality condition for Jensen's inequality imply that $\rho_{L}(u)/\rho_{K}(u)$ is constant on $S^{n-1}$. This establishes the equality condition.
The remainder of the theorem follows in the same fashion.
\end{proof}
Note that taking $\varphi(t)=t^p$, $p\in \R$, in Theorem~\ref{maindom}, we retrieve the {\em dual $L_p$-Minkowski inequality}
\begin{equation}\label{duallpM}
\widetilde{V}_p(K,L)^n\le V_n(K)^{n-p}V_n(L)^p,
\end{equation}
and its equality conditions, where $p\in [0,n]$ and $\widetilde{V}_p(K,L)$ is defined by (\ref{dmvp}), and where the inequality in (\ref{duallpM}) is reversed if $p<0$ or $p>n$. See \cite[(B.29), p.~422]{Gar06} (with $i=p$). We can also obtain the following result, which follows directly from Theorem~\ref{maindom} on taking $\varphi(t)=\log t$.
\begin{thm}\label{starlog}
If $K,L\in {\cS}_{c+}^n$, then
$$
\int_{S^{n-1}}\log\left(\frac{\rho_L(u)}{\rho_K(u)}\right)\, d\widetilde{V}_{K}(u)\le\log\left(\left(\frac{V_n(L)}{V_n(K)}\right)^{1/n}
\right),
$$
with equality if and only if $K$ and $L$ are dilatates.
\end{thm}
It is remarkable that the previous inequality is precisely the dual of the conjectured (and so far proved only for $n=2$) $\log$-Minkowski inequality (see \cite[p.~1976]{BLYZ}):
$$
\int_{S^{n-1}}\log\left(\frac{h_L(u)}{h_K(u)}\right)\, d\overline{V}_{K}(u)\ge\log\left(\left(\frac{V_n(L)}{V_n(K)}\right)^{1/n}
\right).
$$
Here $h_K$ and $h_L$ are the support functions of centrally symmetric convex bodies $K$ and $L$ in $\R^n$ and integration is with respect to the Borel probability measure in $S^{n-1}$ defined by
$$
d\overline{V}_K(u)=\frac{h_K(u)}{nV_n(K)}\,dS(K,u),
$$
where $S(K,\cdot)$ is the surface area measure of $K$. This measure is called the normalized cone measure (or cone-volume probability measure) of $K$.
\begin{cor}\label{polarcor}
Let $K$ and $L$ be convex bodies in $\R^n$ containing the origin in their interiors. Then
$$
\int_{S^{n-1}}\log\left(\frac{h_{L}(u)}{h_K(u)}\right)\, d\widetilde{V}_{K^\circ}(u)\ge\log\left(\left(\frac{V_n(K^\circ)}{V_n(L^\circ)}
\right)^{1/n}\right),
$$
with equality if and only if $K$ and $L$ are dilatates.
\end{cor}
\begin{proof}
In Theorem~\ref{starlog}, replace $K$ and $L$ by the polar bodies $K^\circ$ and $L^\circ$, respectively, and use the relation $\rho_{K^\circ}(u)=1/h_K(u)$, $u\in S^{n-1}$ (see \cite[(0.36), p.~20]{Gar06}).
\end{proof}
We end this section by remarking that Theorems~\ref{dualOBMI1} and~\ref{maindom} are related, as follows. Firstly, Theorem~\ref{maindom} implies the important special case of Theorem~\ref{dualOBMI1} when $\varphi$ is defined by (\ref{spphi}). To see this, one applies Theorem~\ref{maindom} with $K$, $L$, and $\varphi$ replaced by $K_1\widetilde{+}_{\varphi}\cdots \widetilde{+}_{\varphi}K_m$, $K_j$, and $\varphi_j$, respectively, for $j=1,\dots,m$, following the analogous argument in the remark after \cite[Theorem~9.2]{GHW2}. On the other hand, Theorem~\ref{dualOBMI1} implies Theorem~\ref{maindom} if it is assumed in addition that $\varphi\in \Phi_1^{(1)}\cup \Psi_1^{(1)}$. This can be seen by applying Theorem~\ref{dualOBMI1} with $m=2$, $K_1=K$, and $K_2=L$, to the function $\varphi(x_1)+\varphi(x_2)$, and following the analogous argument in \cite[pp.~370--371]{XJL}.
\section{Radial $M$-addition}\label{radialMadd}
For an arbitrary set $M\subset [0,\infty)^m$ and star sets $K_j\in {\cS}^n$, $j=1,\dots,m$, define the {\em radial $M$-sum} of $K_1,\dots,K_m$ by
\begin{equation}\label{radialMdef}
\widetilde{\oplus}_M(K_1,\dots,K_m)=\cup_{(\alpha_1,\dots,\alpha_m)\in M}
\,\alpha_1K_1\widetilde{+}\cdots\widetilde{+}\alpha_mK_m,
\end{equation}
where the radial linear combination in the union is defined as in (\ref{radials2}). This definition results from that of $M$-addition (see \cite[(25)]{GHW2} and the equivalent definition given immediately after it) when the Minkowski addition there is replaced by radial addition.
For each fixed $(\alpha_1,\dots,\alpha_m)\in M$, the radial linear combination $\alpha_1K_1\widetilde{+}\cdots\widetilde{+}\alpha_mK_m\in {\cS}^n$, but in general $\widetilde{\oplus}_M(K_1,\dots,K_m)\not\in {\cS}^n$ since it may not be a bounded Borel set. However, if $M$ is compact, then $\widetilde{\oplus}_M(K_1,\dots,K_m)\in {\cS}^n$, so we shall make this assumption about $M$ from now on.
The formula
\begin{equation}\label{M1}
\rho_{\widetilde{\oplus}_M(K_1,\dots,K_m)}(x)=h_{\conv M}\left(\rho_{K_1}(x),\dots,
\rho_{K_m}(x)\right),
\end{equation}
holds for $x\in \R^n\setminus\{o\}$, where $h_{\conv M}$ denotes the support function of the convex hull of $M$. Indeed,
\begin{eqnarray*}
\rho_{\widetilde{\oplus}_M(K_1,\dots,K_m)}(x)&=
&\rho_{\cup_{(\alpha_1,\dots,\alpha_m)\in M}
\,\alpha_1K_1\widetilde{+}\cdots\widetilde{+}\alpha_mK_m}(x)\\
&=& \max\{\rho_{
\alpha_1K_1\widetilde{+}\cdots\widetilde{+}\alpha_mK_m}(x):
(\alpha_1,\dots,\alpha_m)\in M\}\\
&=& \max\{\alpha_1\rho_{K_1}(x)+\cdots+\alpha_m \rho_{K_m}(x):(\alpha_1,\dots,\alpha_m)\in M\}\\
&=& \max\{(\alpha_1,\dots,\alpha_m)\cdot\left(\rho_{K_1}(x),\dots, \rho_{K_m}(x)\right):(\alpha_1,\dots,\alpha_m)\in M\}\\
&=&h_{\conv M}\left(\rho_{K_1}(x),\dots,
\rho_{K_m}(x)\right).
\end{eqnarray*}
In particular, if $M$ is also convex, we have
\begin{equation}\label{M2}
\rho_{\widetilde{\oplus}_M(K_1,\dots,K_m)}(x)=h_{M}\left(\rho_{K_1}(x),\dots,
\rho_{K_m}(x)\right),
\end{equation}
for $x\in \R^n\setminus\{o\}$.
It may be surprising that (\ref{M1}) and (\ref{M2}) involve a support function. But note that if $M\in {\cS}^n$, then the function
$$\rho_{M}\left(\rho_{K_1}(x),\dots,\rho_{K_m}(x)\right),$$
for $x\in \R^n\setminus\{o\}$ (the dual analog of \cite[Theorem 6.5(ii)]{GHW}, for example), does not define a radial function since it is homogeneous of degree 1 and not $-1$.
When $m=2$, the radial $M$-sum of $K, L\in {\cS}^n$ is denoted by $K\widetilde{\oplus}_M L$. Note that in this case, if $\{(1,1)\}\subset M\subset [0,1]^2$, then $\widetilde{\oplus}_M$ is ordinary radial addition, and if
\begin{equation}\label{mmm}
M=\left\{(a,b)\in [0,1]^2:a^{p'}+b^{p'}=1\right\}=\left\{\left((1-t)^{1/p'},t^{1/p'}\right): 0\le t\le 1\right\},
\end{equation}
where $p>1$ and $1/p+1/p'=1$ (or $\conv M$ or $\conv\{M,o\}$ with $M$ as in (\ref{mmm})), then $\widetilde{\oplus}_M$ is $p$th radial addition.
From either (\ref{radialMdef}) or (\ref{M1}), it can be verified that $\widetilde{\oplus}_M:\left({\cS}^n\right)^m\to {\cS}^n$ is homogeneous of degree 1, $GL(n)$ covariant, section covariant, and continuous in the sense of pointwise convergence of radial functions. It does not in general have the identity property.
For the next result, recall that a set in $\R^n$ is called {\em $1$-unconditional} if it is symmetric with respect to each coordinate hyperplane.
\begin{thm}\label{orlmadd}
If $M$ is a $1$-unconditional convex body in $\R^m$, then there is a convex function $\varphi\in \Phi_m$ such that
\begin{equation}\label{morl} \widetilde{\oplus}_{M\cap [0,\infty)^m}(K_1,\dots,K_m)=\widetilde{+}_{\varphi}(K_1,\dots,K_m),
\end{equation}
for all $K_j\in {\cS}^n$, $j=1,\dots,m$.
Conversely, given a convex $\varphi\in \Phi_m$, there is a $1$-unconditional convex body $M$ in $\R^n$ such that \eqref{morl} holds for all $K_j\in {\cS}^n$, $j=1,\dots,m$.
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
Since $M$ is $1$-unconditional, its polar body $M^{\circ}$ is also. Then, by an easy modification of \cite[Theorem~5.4]{GHW2} (with $K$ there replaced by $M^{\circ}$), there is a convex function $\varphi\in \Phi_m$ such that the part of the boundary of $M^{\circ}$ contained in $[0,\infty)^m$ is given by $\{(x_1,\dots,x_m)\in [0,\infty)^m: \varphi(x_1,\dots,x_m)=1\}$. Let $J_{\varphi}$ be the $1$-unconditional convex body in $\R^m$ defined by
\begin{equation}\label{jphi}
J_{\varphi}\cap [0,\infty)^m=\{(x_1,\dots,x_m)\in [0,\infty)^m:\varphi(x_1,\dots,x_m)\le 1\}.
\end{equation}
The argument in the first paragraph of the proof of \cite[Theorem~5.3]{GHW2} shows that $J_{\varphi}$ is indeed a $1$-unconditional convex body. Then we have $M^{\circ}=J_{\varphi}$ and hence $M=J_{\varphi}^{\circ}$. Let $x\in\R^n\setminus\{o\}$ and let $K_j\in {\cS}^n$, $j=1,\dots,m$, be such that $\rho_{K_1}(x)+\cdots+\rho_{K_m}(x)>0$. By (\ref{M2}),
\begin{eqnarray*}
\rho_{\widetilde{\oplus}_{M\cap [0,\infty)^m}(K_1,\dots,K_m)}(x)&=&h_{M\cap [0,\infty)^m}\left(\rho_{K_1}(x),
\dots,\rho_{K_m}(x)\right)=h_{M}\left(\rho_{K_1}(x),
\dots,\rho_{K_m}(x)\right)\\
&=&h_{J_{\varphi}^{\circ}}\left(\rho_{K_1}(x),\dots,
\rho_{K_m}(x)\right)=\rho_{J_{\varphi}}\left(\rho_{K_1}(x),\dots,
\rho_{K_m}(x)\right)^{-1}.
\end{eqnarray*}
By the definition of the radial function, $\rho_{J_{\varphi}}\left(\rho_{K_1}(x),\dots,
\rho_{K_m}(x)\right)$ is the number $c$ such that
$$c\left(\rho_{K_1}(x),\dots,
\rho_{K_m}(x)\right)\in\partial J_{\varphi}.$$ But this implies that $\varphi\left(c\rho_{K_1}(x),\dots,c\rho_{K_m}(x)\right)=1$ and hence, from (\ref{Orldef}),
\begin{equation}\label{eqrhos}
\rho_{\widetilde{+}_{\varphi}(K_1,\dots,K_m)}(x)=c^{-1}=
\rho_{\widetilde{\oplus}_{M\cap [0,\infty)^m}(K_1,\dots,K_m)}(x).
\end{equation}
If $\rho_{K_1}(x)=\cdots=\rho_{K_m}(x)=0$, the equality of the two radial functions in (\ref{eqrhos}) holds trivially. Therefore (\ref{morl}) holds.
Conversely, suppose that $\varphi\in \Phi_m$ is a convex function. Let $J_{\varphi}$ be the $1$-unconditional convex body in $\R^m$ defined by (\ref{jphi}). Let $x\in\R^n\setminus\{o\}$ and let $K_j\in {\cS}^n$, $j=1,\dots,m$, be such that $\rho_{K_1}(x)+\cdots+\rho_{K_m}(x)>0$. If $c>0$ is such that $\rho_{\widetilde{\oplus}_{M\cap [0,\infty)^m}(K_1,\dots,K_m)}(x)=1/c$, the steps in the previous paragraph can be reversed to conclude that (\ref{eqrhos}) and hence (\ref{morl}) holds with $M=J_{\varphi}^{\circ}$.
\end{proof}
The second statement in Theorem~\ref{orlmadd} is not true in general if $\varphi$ is not a convex function in $\Phi_m$. For example, suppose that $m=2$ and $\varphi(s,t)=\sqrt{s}+\sqrt{t}$ for $s,t\ge 0$. From (\ref{Orldef}), we get
$$\rho_{K\widetilde{+}_{\varphi}L}(x)=\left(\sqrt{\rho_K(x)}+
\sqrt{\rho_L(x)}\right)^2,$$
for all $x\in \R^n\setminus\{o\}$ and $K,L\in{\cS}^n$. Comparing with (\ref{M1}), we see that if $\widetilde{+}_{\varphi}$ is a radial $M$-addition on the class of star sets, we would have
$$h_{\conv M}\left(\rho_{K}(x),\rho_L(x)\right)=\left(\sqrt{\rho_K(x)}+
\sqrt{\rho_L(x)}\right)^2,$$
for $x\in \R^n\setminus\{o\}$ and all $K,L\in{\cS}^n$. Applying this equation with $K=sB^n$ and $L=tB^n$ for $s,t\ge 0$, we conclude that
$$h_{\conv M}(s,t)=\left(\sqrt{s}+\sqrt{t}\right)^2,$$
for $s,t\ge 0$. However, the function on the right-hand side is not sublinear and hence not a support function, so $\widetilde{+}_{\varphi}$ is not a radial $M$-addition for any $M$.
\section*{Appendix}\label{Appendix}
The present paper is a combination of a manuscript by the first three authors dated May~21, 2013, and the preprint arXiv:1404.6991 written independently by the fourth author. After the latter article was completed, the independent work \cite{ZZ} (see also \cite{ZZX}) came to the attention of the fourth author, who thanks B.~Zhu for communicating it.
In \cite{ZZ}, only functions $\varphi:(0,\infty)^2\to (0,\infty)$ of the form $\varphi(x_1,x_2)=\alpha_1\phi(x_1)+\alpha_2\phi(x_2)$, where $\phi$ is a convex strictly decreasing function on $(0,\infty)$, are considered. Moreover, for the most part \cite{ZZ} deals only with the class ${\cS}^n_{c+}$. The corresponding special cases of Theorems~\ref{dualOBMI1} and~\ref{maindom} are proved in \cite{ZZ}, but only under the rather stronger condition that the function $\phi$ is convex.
\bigskip
|
\section{Introduction}
Dynamic Spectrum Access (DSA) \cite{dsa_survey} aims to share the scarce radio frequency (RF) spectrum among multiple heterogeneous networks. With exclusive and static allocation of spectrum, it has been observed that the RF spectrum is significantly underutilized in the space, time, and frequency dimensions \cite{fcc_sptf}. One of the popular approaches to DSA is Opportunistic Spectrum Access (OSA) wherein the underutilized spectrum is exploited on a secondary basis when the owners of the spectrum are not actively using the spectrum. In this regard, Federal Communications Commission (FCC) ruling allowed access to television (TV) band white spaces in November 2008 \cite{fcc_2008} and the IEEE 802.22 WRAN standard was defined in 2011 to facilitate sharing of the underutilized spectrum in the TV bands.
There are several obstacles to adoption of OSA. The incumbents are concerned about disruption or degradation of their service due to harmful interference from secondary users. From the secondary-user perspective, the availability of the secondary spectrum, throughput, and quality of service cannot be ensured. These issues affect the business prospects and discourage secondary access to the underutilized spectrum.
To address these concerns, we need to investigate the potential of the spectrum sharing enabled by DSA and defining a SAM that can maximize exploitation of the available spectrum while providing a mechanism to ensure protection of the incumbents' uses of spectrum. We acknowledge that in order to improve spectrum sharing potential, firstly the \textit{absolute} available spectrum needs to be improved. Secondly, the \textit{recovery} of the available spectrum needs to be improved; and lastly, the \textit{exploitation} of the available spectrum needs to be improved \cite{oms_db}.
In this paper, we employ \textit{quantified dynamic spectrum access} (QDSA) paradigm that enables defining and enforcing quantified spectrum-access footprints for the cochannel transceivers. By controlling the spectrum consumption of each of the individual transmitters and receivers, efficient spectrum sharing can be accomplished. To maximize exploitation of the available spectrum, we address the problem of joint scheduling and power allocation. The problem is NP-hard and we define a suboptimal strategy based on minimizing the consumption of spectrum while maximizing the number of scheduled spectrum-access requests and minimizing the number of harmfully interfered receivers. We perform an experimental study to investigate how spectrum availability and exploitation could be maximized by choosing the transceiver and network-design parameters. We emphasize seeking coexistence between cochannel networks, fine granular spectrum access, and enforcing transceiver-performance standards. We encourage the incumbents to play an active role and extract more value out of their spectrum investments.
\subsection{Related Work}
Acknowledging the concept of receiver spectrum consumption \cite{itumetrics, gastpar}, we observed the need to separately quantify the spectrum consumed by individual transmitters and receivers when multiple heterogeneous wireless networks are sharing the spectrum in the time, space, and frequency dimensions. By discretizing the spectrum dimensions, we defined a methodology to quantify spectrum consumption spaces \cite{oms1_scq, oms1_sl}.
In order to improve spectrum sharing, it is important to understand the weaknesses of a SAM and quantify their impact on effectively exploit the underutilized spectrum. The poor exploitation of the spectrum due to conservative spectrum-access constraints enforced by the FCC white space ruling is illustrated in \cite{berk_wsc}. In \cite{oms2_sca}, we have quantified the loss of the available spectrum due to the lack of knowledge of the RF-environment.
To maximize the recovery of the available spectrum, it is necessary to acquire the RF environment information. In \cite{sgn_icnc}, we described algorithms to estimate the RF environment information by exploiting signal cyclostationarity. Similar to `Sensing as a Service' \cite{saas_weiss}, we separate the sensing function from the secondary user radio and apply an external RF-sensor network based infrastructure for estimating spectrum consumption in real time \cite{oms4_sce}.
Stine has proposed a model based spectrum management approach that suggests using RF-system models to capture the spectrum consumption by its transceivers and assess the compatibility between multiple uses of spectrum \cite{mbsm_stine}. The quantified spectrum access approach we apply here is based on the quantification of absolute spectrum consumption spaces \cite{oms1_sl}.
The problem of joint scheduling and power allocation is NP-hard \cite{jcpa_nphard} and a suboptimal approach is required to maximize the exploitation of spectrum. While several approaches use the concept of dynamic interference graph, for example, \cite{intf_graph}; our approach is based on prioritizing the spectrum-access requests based on their minimal spectrum consumption costs.
In \cite{pm_wwdsa}, Marshall and Kolodzy emphasized that DSA is beneficial to the secondary users \textit{as well as} to the incumbents. In order to maximize exploitation of the underutilized spectrum, we study how regulatory parameters could be defined by the incumbents in order to maximize a SAM's ability to provision secondary access to their spectrum and protect the primary receivers from harmful interference \cite{oms3_cf1}. In comparison to this work, \textit{in the present extended paper}, we first address the problems of maximizing the available spectrum and maximizing the exploitation of the available spectrum. We investigate parameters influencing spectrum availability. For maximizing exploitation of the available spectrum, we provide a detailed mathematical treatment and illustration of the concepts applied in the proposed suboptimal algorithm.
The paper is organized as follows. In Section 2, we present the spectrum consumption quantification approach that facilitates quantified sharing of the spectrum. It also enables us to quantify the available and the exploited spectrum. In Section 3, we study how the absolute available spectrum could be maximized and investigate the impact of spectrum access parameters and RF-environment knowledge. In Section 4, we describe the QDSA paradigm for defining and enforcing quantified spectrum-access footprints. In order to maximize the exploitation of the available spectrum, we present a sub-optimal approach to scheduling spectrum-access requests based on the spectrum consumed by the transceivers of the candidate spectrum-access requests. In Section 5, we perform an experimental study and investigate how the spectrum availability and exploitation could be maximized by choosing certain spectrum-access and transceiver design parameters. In particular, we develop a baseline experiment and illustrate incremental performance improvement with modifications to the baseline experiment. Finally, we draw conclusions in Section 6.
\section{Spectrum Consumption Quantification Methodology}
\subsection{How Spectrum is Consumed?}
Traditionally, we assume that spectrum is consumed by transmitters; however, the spectrum is \textit{also} consumed by receivers. Receivers consume spectrum in terms of constraining the spectrum-access by other transmitters. For example, constraints are imposed in terms of guard-bands, separation distances, and operational hours for protecting receivers. Thus, the presence of receivers enforces limits on the interference-power in the space, time, and frequency dimensions. Traditionally, the spectrum allocation is static and exclusive; hence, receivers' consumption of spectrum need not be separately considered \cite{itu}.
Dynamic spectrum sharing approach is a paradigm shift from the conventional static and exclusive approach to spectrum allocation. The networks could be \textit{spatially overlapping} and the spectrum access is \textit{shared} in the time, space, and frequency dimensions. We need the ability to quantify the spectrum that is \textit{actually} used by the transceivers of all the networks and the harmful interference caused by and to each of the transceivers\footnote{Some of the recently proposed metrics \cite{fccmetrics, xgmetrics, tandra_metrics} that can be applied have applications in specific cases and cannot be used for quantifying the utilization, availability, and degradation of spectrum under generic spectrum sharing scenarios.}. In this regard, we defined a methodology to quantify the spectrum consumption spaces by discretizing the spectrum access dimensions \cite{oms1_sl}. Here, in the context of defining a suboptimal approach to the joint scheduling and spectrum-footprint allocation problem, we provide a brief overview of the quantification methodology.
\subsection{Spectrum Consumption Quantification Methodology}
\noindent
\subsubsection{System Model}
We consider a generic collection of multiple heterogeneous RF-systems in two dimensional geometric space. Here, we define a \textit{network}\footnote{In order to make an efficient use of spectrum, we seek to define spectrum-access policy at the lowest granularity of spectrum-use within a RF-system.} as a set of a transmitter and its receivers corresponding to a spectrum-access request.
\noindent
\textbf{Interference Model:}
\noindent
The power received from a transmitter $t_n$ of network $n$ at a point $\rho$ in the geometric space is given by
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:gen_rcvd_power}
P(t_n, \rho) = P_{t_n} min\Big\{1, L({d(t_n,\rho)}^{\alpha})\Big\}
\end{equation}
where $P_{t_n}$ is the transmit power of the transmitter and $d(t_n,\rho)$ is the distance between the transmitter $t_n$ and the point $\rho$ in the space. ${\alpha}$ is the path-loss exponent and it is assumed that $\alpha > 2$. $L({d(t_n,\rho)}^{\alpha})$ denotes the path-loss factor. The \textit{min} operation in ~(\ref{eq:gen_rcvd_power}) ensures that the received power is never more than the transmitted power.
We assume that transceivers can optionally employ directional transmission and reception in order to minimize interference. A receiver can withstand non-zero interference when the received Signal to Interference and Noise Ratio (SINR) is greater than the given threshold\footnote{The threshold, $\beta_{n,m}$, represents the quality of the $m^{th}$ receiver of the $n^{th}$ network and incorporates receiver-noise and other receiver technology imperfections.} $\beta_{n,m}$.
\textit{We divide the spectrum space into multiple unit spectrum-spaces and quantify the spectrum consumption by each of the transceivers at a sample point in each of the unit spectrum-spaces.} We identify multiple spectrum consumption spaces: spectrum space consumed by a transmitter, spectrum space consumed by a receiver, spectrum space consumed by a spectrum-access request, and the spectrum space available for consumption. The spectrum consumption space in a geographical region is quantified by summing up the spectrum consumed in the unit spectrum-spaces.
We define the maximum power at any point in the system to be $P_{MAX}$ and the minimum power be $P_{MIN}$. In practice, transmitter design factors and human safety conditions determine $P_{MAX}$, and $P_{MIN}$ is driven by minimum measurable power. $P_{MAX}$ and $P_{MIN}$ together enable us to quantify the spectrum consumed by a transmitter or receiver in \textit{absolute} terms in the unit spectrum space. We consider a geographical region with $\hat{A}$ unit-regions, $\hat{B}$ unit-frequency-bands, and $\hat{T}$ unit-time-quanta. Thus, the \textit{total spectrum space} is $(P_{MAX}-P_{MIN})\hat{A}\hat{B}\hat{T}$ \ $Wm^2$.
\subsubsection{Quantifying Spectrum Consumed by a Transmitter}
We define \textit{transmitter-occupancy} in a unit-region $\chi$, in the time-quantum ${\tau}$, and in the frequency-band $\nu$ as the aggregate power received \textit{at a sample point} $\rho_0 \in \chi$ in the unit-region. Therefore, from (1), we get
\begin{equation}
\zeta(t_n, \chi, \tau, \nu) = P(t_n, \rho_{0}, \tau, \nu) .
\end{equation}
The spectrum consumed by transmitter $t_n$ in a geographical region is the sum of the transmitter-occupancy in all the unit-regions across the temporal and spectral dimensions
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:agsput}
\Psi_{utilized}(t_n) = \sum_{k=1}^{\hat{B}} \sum_{j=1}^{\hat{T}} \sum_{i=1}^{\hat{A}} {\zeta}(t_n, \chi_i, \tau_j, \nu_k) .
\end{equation}
\subsubsection{Quantifying the Spectrum Consumed by a Receiver}
\noindent
Let $r_{n,m}$ be the $m^{th}$ receiver of the $n^{th}$ network. The amount of interference receiver $r_{n,m}$ can tolerate is
\begin{equation}
\breve{P}_{r_{n,m}} = \frac{P(t_n, r_{n,m})}{\beta_{n,m}} - W_{r_{n,m}}
\end{equation}
where $W_{r_{n,m}}$ is the average ambient noise power at $r_{n,m}$. We define this quantity as the \textit{interference-margin} at the receiver. The unit of interference-margin is $W$.
We can view interference-margin $\breve{P}_{r_{n,m}}$ as the upper-bound on the transmit-power of an interferer positioned at a spatial separation of zero. We quantify the limit on interference-power at a point $\rho$ in space in terms of the receiver-imposed interference-power upper bound.
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:riub}
\breve{I}(r_{n,m}, \rho) = \breve{P}_{r_{n,m}} min\{1, L(d(\rho, r_{n,m})^{\alpha})\}
\end{equation}
where $d(\rho, r_{n,m})$ is the distance between the receiver $r_{n,m}$ and the point $\rho$ in space. $L(d(\rho, r_{n,m})^{\alpha})$ denotes the distance based path-loss.
Let $\ddot{I}(r_{n,m}, \rho)$ represent the aggregate interference seen by receiver $r_{n,m}$. Then, the \textit{interference opportunity} imposed by this receiver is given by the difference between the upper bound on the interference and the aggregate interference already experienced,
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:spoppt}
\acute{I}(r_{n,m}, \rho) = \breve{I}(r_{n,m}, \rho) - \ddot{I}(r_{n,m}, \rho)
\end{equation}
Let \textit{receiver-liability} represent the spectrum consumed by a receiver at a point in the spectrum-space. The receiver-liability of the receiver $r_{n,m}$ at point $\rho$ is the difference between the maximum power at any point and the maximum power allowed by the receiver $r_{n,m}$ at point $\rho$. The maximum power allowed by a receiver at a point is the sum of spectrum occupancy and interference opportunity. Therefore,
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:sprlpt}
\phi(r_{n,m}, \rho) = P_{MAX} - (\omega(\rho) + \acute{I}(r_{n,m}, \rho)) ,
\end{equation}
where $\omega(\rho)$ is the \textit{spectrum-occupancy} and is defined as the aggregate power received at a point $\rho$ in space
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:spocpt}
\omega(\rho) = \sum_{n} P(t_n, \rho) + W_{\rho} .
\end{equation}
The \textit{receiver-liability} in a unit-region $\chi$, at the ${\tau}^{th}$ snapshot of time, and in the frequency-band $\nu$, is defined as the receiver-liability \textit{at a sample point} $\rho_0 \in \chi$ in the given unit-region
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:spfb}
{\Phi}(r_{n,m}, \chi, \tau, \nu) = \phi(r_{n,m}, \rho_0, \tau, \nu) .
\end{equation}
The \textit{forbidden spectrum} in a geographical area is quantified as the sum of receiver-liability in all the unit-regions across all the frequency bands of interest, in the $\hat{T}$ time-quanta. Therefore,
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:agspfb}
\Psi_{forbidden}(r_{n,m}) = \sum_{k=1}^{\hat{B}} \sum_{m=1}^{\hat{T}} \sum_{i=1}^{\hat{A}} {\Phi}(r_{n,m}, \chi_i, \tau_j, \nu_k) .
\end{equation}
\subsubsection{The Available Spectrum Space}
By spatially combining the limits on the maximum interference power imposed by all the receivers of all the scheduled spectrum-access requests, we obtain \textit{spectrum opportunity} at a point $\rho$ as
\begin{equation}
\gamma(\rho) = \min_n (\min_m (\acute{I}(r_{n,m}, \rho)))
\end{equation}
The spectrum-opportunity at a point represents the maximum transmit-power that can be assigned to a potential transmitter without causing harmful interference to any of the cochannel receivers.
The spectrum-opportunity in a unit-region $\chi$ at the ${\tau}^{th}$ snapshot of time, and in the frequency-band $\nu$, is defined as the spectrum-opportunity \textit{at a sample point} $\rho_0 \in \chi$ in the given unit-region.
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:urspop}
{\Gamma}(\chi, \tau, \nu) = \gamma(\rho_0, \tau, \nu)
\end{equation}
To quantify the available-spectrum in a geographical region, we need to sum spectrum-opportunity in all the unit-regions across the temporal and spectral dimensions
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:agspav}
\Psi_{available} = \sum_{k=1}^{\hat{B}} \sum_{j=1}^{\hat{T}} \sum_{i=1}^{\hat{A}} {\Gamma}(\chi_i, \tau_j, \nu_k) .
\end{equation}
\subsubsection{Network Spectrum Consumption}
The spectrum consumed by a network is quantified by summing up the spectrum consumption by its transmitter and the receivers.
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:nsc}
\Psi_{NSC}(n) = \Psi_{utilized}(t_{n}) + \sum_m \Psi_{forbidden}(r_{n,m})
\end{equation}
\textit{Minimum network spectrum consumption:}
The spectrum consumption by receivers is minimum when receivers do not receive any interference power, that is the spectrum consumption by a transmitter and its receivers is minimum when the spectrum access is not shared with any other networks. We term it \textit{minimum network spectrum consumption} and apply it in the algorithm for the joint scheduling and spectrum-footprint allocation problem in Section 4.
\subsubsection{Illustration: Network Spectrum Consumption}
\label{illn_setup}
Let us quantify\footnote{Due to space, we cannot illustrate the spectrum consumption quantification methodology in detail. Refer to \cite{oms1_sl} for detailed illustration and extensive treatment of spectrum-space discretization.} the spectrum consumed by an example network in 4.3 $km$ x 3.7 $km$ geographical region. Let us assume that the region is divided into hexagonal unit-region with 100 $m$ side. Let $P_{MAX}$ to be 30 dBm, an arbitrary high value and $P_{MIN}$ to be -192 dBm, an arbitrary low value. Considering spectrum sharing in a unit time-quantum and a unit bandwidth channel, the total spectrum space is $676$ $Wm^2$.
Let us consider the topology in the \textbf{\textit{top-left}} portion of Figure~\ref{fig:L205_NSC_illn}. Spectrum-access is exercised by a transmitter and its eight receivers. The transmitter is at the center of the geographical region and all eight receivers are at a distance of 500 $m$ from the transmitter. The transceiver antennas are omnidirectional. The transmitter power is 21 dBm and the minimum SINR for successful reception is 3 dB. The propagation conditions are simplistic, with only distance-dependent path-loss. The path-loss index is assumed to be $3.5$. The noise-floor is assumed to be -106 dBm corresponding to a 6MHz channel bandwidth. In this case, the inband SINR at the receivers is 32.6 dB and the spectrum consumed by the transmitter and its receivers is 185.3 $Wm^2$ (27.4\% of the total spectrum space). In the \textbf{\textit{top-right}} topology shown in Figure~\ref{fig:L205_NSC_illn}, the receivers are at 1000 $m$ distance from the transmitter. The receivers experience a SINR of 22.1 dB and the spectrum consumption by the transceivers is 564.1 $Wm^2$ (83.4\% of the total spectrum space). In the \textbf{\textit{bottom-left}} topology of Figure~\ref{fig:L205_NSC_illn}, the transmitter is assumed to exercise 6 dB lower transmit-power of 15 dBm and the receivers are again 500 $m$ from the transmitter. The SINR at the receivers is 26.6 dB and the network spectrum consumption is 337.6 $Wm^2$ (49.9\% of the total spectrum space). We note that even though the spectrum consumed by the transmitter is reduced, the receiver spectrum consumption has in fact significantly increased due to lower SINR at the receivers. \textit{As a result, the spectrum available for sharing with other spatially overlapping networks is reduced. }
We note that in the three topologies considered so far, the receivers do not receive any interference from cochannel transmitters. Next, we assume that two additional networks are exploiting spectrum-access as shown in the \textbf{\textit{bottom-right}} topology in Figure~\ref{fig:L205_NSC_illn}. In this case, none of the receivers of the three networks experience harmful interference. (The SINR at all the receivers is higher than the minimum desired SINR for successful reception of the signal.) The spectrum consumed by all the cochannel transmitters and receivers is 195.2 $Wm^2$ (28.9\% of the total spectrum space). The spectrum consumed by the network with transmitter at the center is 191.8 $Wm^2$ (28.4\% of the total spectrum space). Here, we observe that with spectrum consumption by the network is higher as compared to the previous case (27.4\%) as the receivers experience some interference power from the cochannel networks and experience lower SINR.
\begin{figure}[htbp!]
\centering
{\includegraphics [width=0.472\textwidth, angle=0] {Exc/IllG2/L205_NSC_A_AV}}
{\includegraphics [width=0.472\textwidth, angle=0] {Exc/IllG2/L205_NSC_B_AV}}
{\includegraphics [width=0.472\textwidth, angle=0] {Exc/IllG2/L205_NSC_C_AV}}
{\includegraphics [width=0.472\textwidth, angle=0] {Exc/IllG2/L205_NSC_D_AV}}
\caption{The figure illustrates the consumption of spectrum by a network under four different scenarios. Each plot shows spatial distribution of the spectrum-opportunity. A transmitter is shown with a solid shape and its receivers are shown with the same non-solid shape. The higher the spectrum-opportunity in a unit-region, the lower is the spectrum consumption by the transmitters and the receivers in that unit-region. The aggregate spectrum consumption by the network with square shape in the given geographical region in the four cases is as follows: 185.3 $Wm^2$ i.e. 27.4\% (top-left), 564.1 $Wm^2$ i.e. 83.4\% (top-right), 337.6 $Wm^2$ i.e. 49.9\% (bottom-left), and 191.8 $Wm^2$ i.e. 28.9\% (bottom-right). With increased distance between the transmitter and the receivers, the network spectrum consumption is higher; with reduced transmit-power, the network spectrum-consumption is higher. Finally, the network spectrum consumption depends on the interference the network-receivers experience.}
\label{fig:L205_NSC_illn}
\end{figure}
\section{How to Maximize the Available Spectrum Space}
\noindent
For maximizing the spectrum sharing potential, we need to maximize the available spectrum space and the exploitation of the available spectrum space. In this section, we focus on the first objective and investigate the key parameters that influence the available spectrum space. In this regard, we quantify the impact of primary user (PU) transmit-power, lack of knowledge of the receiver positions, and the path-loss exponent (PLE) uncertainty.
\subsection{Impact of PU Transmit-power on the Available Spectrum Space}
When the transmit-power employed by the incumbent network is increased, the PU receivers experience higher SINR, and the available spectrum space is significantly increased. Figure \ref{fig:L306_AV} shows the impact of the transmit-power of a PU transmitter on the available spectrum space. It also captures the impact of the service-range of the incumbent RF-system. \textit{We argue that incumbents need to employ higher transmit-power in order to maximize the spectrum available for secondary access.
\begin{figure}[htbp!]
\centering
{\includegraphics [width=0.49\textwidth, angle=0] {Exc/Result3/L306_AV}}
\caption{The plot shows the available spectrum space increases with the \textit{PU transmit-power} due to increase in the SINR at the PU receivers in accordance with (\ref{eq:urspop}) and due to reduction in the range of the incumbent RF-system. The available spectrum space increases with lower value of the range (R) of the network.}
\label{fig:L306_AV}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Impact of Lack of Knowledge of the Receiver Positions on the Available Spectrum Space}
Due to lack of knowledge of the receiver positions, the secondary user (SU) transceivers are required to assume the worst-case positions of the primary receivers. In the next experiment, we quantify the \textit{lost available spectrum} with the assumption that the \textit{actual} receiver positions are not known and the worst-case receivers positions are considered. In this beginning, we position a PU receiver close to the PU transmitter (at a distance of 250 $m$). Then, we place an increasing number of receivers at the periphery of the network and quantify the available spectrum. From Figure \ref{fig:L307_AV}, we observe that as the number of boundary-case receivers increases, the spectrum available for sharing with other potential uses is increasingly lost. \textit{In order to maximize the available spectrum, it is necessary to incorporate the knowledge of the actual receiver positions.}
\begin{figure}[htbp!]
\centering
{\includegraphics [width=0.49\textwidth, angle=0] {Exc/Result3/L307_AV}}
\caption{The figure shows that the receivers at the worst-case (boundary) positions consume a significant amount of spectrum. When we lack the knowledge of the \textit{actual} receiver positions and assume all the receivers are at the boundary (R) positions, a significant amount of available spectrum space is effectively \textit{lost}.}
\label{fig:L307_AV}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Impact of Conservative PLE Assumptions on the Available Spectrum Space}
In the next experiment, we quantify the \textit{lost available spectrum} due to conservative assumptions on mean PLE. From Figure~\ref{fig:L304_AV}, we observe that assuming a conservative PLE value results in a significant loss of available spectrum\footnote{On the other hand, assuming an aggressive value for mean PLE gives a false impression of higher spectrum recovery and it may lead to harmful interference at the receivers. Please refer to \cite{oms2_sca} for additional results.}. This experiment emphasizes the need for fine granular characterization of the propagation environment in order to \textit{maximize available spectrum space}. We address this problem in \cite{oms4_gl2, oms4_sce}.
\begin{figure}[htbp!]
\centering
{\includegraphics [width=0.49\textwidth, angle=0] {Exc/Result3/L304_LA}}
\caption{The plot illustrates the impact of conservative assumptions with regards to PLE. When the assumed PLE is lower than the actual PLE, we lose a significant amount of the available spectrum. The lost spectrum availability with PLE uncertainty is more pronounced when the available spectrum is higher i.e. when the receivers are experiencing higher SINR.}
\label{fig:L304_AV}
\end{figure}
\section{Maximizing the Exploitation of the Available Spectrum Space}
\mycomment{
In order to maximize the \textit{exploitation} of the available spectrum space, we need to have an effective approach for scheduling of the spectrum-access requests and defining the spectrum-access parameters. In this regard, we present a suboptimal algorithm based on the strategy of minimizing spectrum consumption.
We apply this algorithm in the context of the quantified spectrum access paradigm that seeks the lowest (finest) spectrum-access granularity and provides the ability to \textit{precisely control} the spectrum consumption by spectrum-access requests. Here, we briefly describe the quantified spectrum access paradigm. Please refer to \cite{oms1_sl} for more details.
}
In the last section, we investigated maximizing of the spectrum available for secondary access. Having maximized the \textit{absolute} available spectrum space, its recovery needs to be maximized. We address this problem by learning RF-environment using an external RF-sensor network and inferring the spectrum consumption information in \cite{oms4_sce}. Thirdly, we need to maximize the exploitation of the \textit{recovered} available spectrum. In this regard, we present the QDSA paradigm \cite{oms1_sl} that seeks the lowest (finest) possible spectrum-access granularity and provides the ability to \textit{precisely control} the spectrum consumption by spectrum-access requests.
\subsection{Quantified Dynamic Spectrum Access (QDSA) Paradigm}
The QDSA paradigm enables \textit{quantified} sharing of the spectrum resource among spatially overlapping multiple heterogeneous RF-systems. The consumption of the spectrum by the transceivers is quantified in terms of \textit{unit-regions} in the spatial dimension, \textit{unit spectral-bands} in the frequency dimension, and \textit{unit time-quanta} in the temporal dimension. A \textit{spectrum-access footprint} of a transmitter or a receiver represents the spectrum consumed in the space, time and frequency dimensions. A \textit{spectrum-access policy} represents the spectrum-access attributes given the transmitter and receiver positions, the propagation environment, and the expected link quality. There are following essential spectrum management functions:
\begin{enumerate}
\item Estimating the available spectrum space,
\item Spectrum assignment that is assigning spectrum-access footprints to individual transceivers of a spectrum-access request
\item Defining a dynamic spectrum-access policy, and
\item Enforcement of the spectrum-access policy.
\end{enumerate}
For accomplishing the first and the last functions, the propagation environment needs to be characterized and the spectrum consumption spaces need to be estimated in real time. This can be accomplished with a grid of RF-sensors. Having known the available spectrum, the spectrum consumed by each of the transmitters and receivers is precisely controlled in terms of the dynamic spectrum-access policy.
The QDSA paradigm provides a SAM the visibility into the absolute available spectrum space and the spectrum consumed by the individual transceivers under the interference management approach chosen by the SAM. It additionally provides the capability to regulate the spectrum access provisioned by a SAM.
\subsection{Scheduling Spectrum-access Requests and Assigning the Spectrum-Access Footprints}
\subsubsection{Problem Description}
A SAM needs to schedule a set of spectrum-access requests and assign a spectrum-access footprint to each of the scheduled requests given a pool of the available spectrum resource. It needs to choose a frequency channel, the transmit-power, the directionality of the transceivers, and the spectrum-access time interval while ensuring no harmful interference to the cochannel receivers. In its simplest form, the problem of joint scheduling and defining spectrum access footprint reduces to the problem of \textit{joint scheduling and power allocation}. This problem is known to be NP-hard \cite{jcpa_nphard}; Hence, we need to define a suboptimal approach.
\subsubsection{Considerations in Scheduling and Defining of Spectrum-Access Footprints}
In order to define a suboptimal approach, we discuss the preferred SAM attributes and the intended behavior of the algorithm.\\
\noindent
\textbf{Preferred SAM attributes}\\
\noindent
We note that a SAM that \textit{minimizes the consumption of the spectrum} while maximizing the number of scheduled spectrum-access requests and minimizing the number of harmfully interfered receivers could be beneficial from a spectrum-provider's or an incumbent's perspective. The excess spectrum could be applied for scheduling a future set of spectrum-access requests, to handle user mobility, or to provide spectrum redundancy.
\noindent
\textbf{Choosing Transmit-Power for a Spectrum-Access Footprint}\\
From (4) and (11), we note that the higher the transmit-power, the higher is the interference-margin at the receivers, and therefore, higher is the spectrum-opportunity across the unit-regions of the geographical region. However, if the transmitter is located close to a cochannel receiver, the receiver may get harmfully interfered. A SAM having the knowledge of the receiver positions can avoid scheduling the spectrum-access-request or can schedule the spectrum-access-request with lower transmit power. However, the latter has the effect of reducing SINR at a receiver and consequently, it lowers the spectrum-opportunity across all the unit-regions of the geographical region. In this case, as more spectrum-access requests are scheduled, the cochannel receivers may experience harmful interference. Thus, depending upon the strategy for interference management of the SAM, employing a lower secondary user transmit power may lead to one of two effects
\begin{itemize}
\item The number of harmfully interfered SU-receivers increases
\item The number of scheduled spectrum-access requests decreases.
\end{itemize}
On the other hand, boosting the transmit power reduces the spectrum consumption by the receivers. The interference-opportunity imposed by a receiver is higher than the transmitter-occupancy by a transmitter as the receiver quality factor, $\beta$, from (1) is greater than unity. Effectively, network spectrum consumption decreases with the increase in transmit-power. The effect is more pronounced with higher number of receivers within a network.
\subsubsection{Scheduling by Minimal Network Spectrum Consumption}
In this paper, we propose a suboptimal strategy to \textit{minimize the spectrum consumed} by the scheduled spectrum-access requests. First, we quantify the \textit{minimal} spectrum consumed by a candidate spectrum-access request given by (\ref{eq:nsc}) and next schedule spectrum-access requests in the ascending order of their \textit{minimal network spectrum consumption} costs while ensuring the minimum SINR constraint is satisfied for \textit{all} the receivers. We term this approach as Network Spectrum Consumption based Coexistence (NSC-CX). Following are the steps:
\begin{enumerate}
\item Choose a channel for scheduling requests from the pool of the available channels.
\item Quantify the \textit{minimal} spectrum consumed by each of the candidate requests.
\item Schedule the request with the lowest minimal network spectrum consumption cost if it does not cause harmful interference to the receivers of the previously scheduled spectrum-access requests. If it causes harmful interference to any of the receivers, the spectrum-access request is excluded.
\item Repeat steps 2 and 3 until all requests are considered.
\item Repeat steps 1, 2, 3, and 4 for all the unscheduled requests
\end{enumerate}
\section{Maximizing Spectrum Sharing Benefits to the Incumbents}
In this section, we investigate the impact of various SAM design choices, the capabilities of transceivers, and granularity of spectrum access with regards to maximizing the availability and exploitation of the spectrum. First, we define a base-case simulation experiment and compare performance of various SAMs. We iteratively modify the experiment and observe the potential benefits for the spectrum-owners.
\subsection{Setup}
We consider a 4.3 $km$ x 3.7 $km$ geographical region with a primary transmitter at the center. We discretize the spectrum-space as previously described in Section \ref{illn_setup} and the total spectrum is 676 space $Wm^2$. We assume SUs do not have knowledge of the positions of the PU receivers and are assumed to be at the worst-case positions. We consider distance-dependent path loss model with the mean path-loss exponent as 3.5. The initial parameter settings are as follows.
\begin{itemize}
\item The minimum desired SINR for the worst-case PU receivers is 20 dB and the SINR experienced is equal to the minimum desired SINR, i.e. 20 dB. The minimum desired SINR for secondary receivers is 3 dB.
\item The range of the PU RF-system is 500 $m$. The range of the SU networks is 100 $m$ and the SU networks are scattered in the geographical region with uniformly distributed SU transmitter positions.
\item All the PU and SU transceivers are employing omnidirectional antennas.
\end{itemize}
We \textit{incrementally} change these parameters in order to reduce the spectrum consumption by transceivers and increase the \textit{available} spectrum space in the following series of experiments. This helps us study how the available spectrum gets \textit{exploited} by the candidate SAMs. In an actual scenario, RF-sensor network needs to be deployed for recovering the available spectrum space; in the experimentation, the available spectrum space is quantified based on the spectrum-access parameters of the transceivers and the modeled propagation environment. Regarding the size of geographical region, we purposefully choose a relatively smaller region as our emphasis is on exploiting the fine granular spatial spectrum opportunities. We deploy 100 SU networks within this geometry. A larger region would require a significantly higher number of SU networks to exploit the fine granular opportunities and the simulation complexity grows several folds.
\subsection{The SAM Candidates}
Per the \textbf{Underlay} SAM \cite{dsa_survey}, the secondary users (SUs) exploit the spectrum with a very low transmit-power in order to not cause severe interference at the primary user (PU) receivers. We consider the secondary transmit-power to be 30 dB above the thermal noise power (-106 dBm for 6 MHz band). The Underlay SAM does not require to check whether the primary RF-system is active.
The second approach to spectrum access is the \textbf{Overlay} SAM which requires secondary user devices to confirm that the primary transmitter signal is not present before it can access the spectrum with constrained transmit-power \cite{dsa_survey}. The key concern with this approach is the sensitivity required for PU detection translates to a large spatial range \cite{oms2_sca}. Thus, in most of the spatial locations, the spectrum could not be exercised when the primary RF-system is active.
The third approach we investigate is an enhancement to the previous overlay approach which employs a fixed limit on the SU transmit-power. It uses \textit{dynamic} SU transmit-power in order to ensure high SINR for its receivers and protect those receivers from cochannel interference from other SU networks. However, it cannot strictly ensure non-harmful interference to the primary users due to interference aggregation effect. We term this approach Secondary Throughput-oriented OVerlay SAM \textbf{(STOV SAM)}.
The final SAM assumes knowledge of the locations of the primary receivers and thus can correctly infer the interference margin imposed by the primary receivers. However, when multiple secondary networks are exercising secondary access with transmit power implied by the interference margin, the primary receiver may still experience harmful aggregate interference. To avoid this interference aggregation scenario, a \textit{guard margin} (of 10 dB) is used when deriving the transmit power for the secondary network. We term this approach Secondary Throughput and Primary Protection oriented OVerlay SAM \textbf{(STPPOV SAM)}.
Table 1 \mycomment{\ref{table:SAMCandSum}} shows the summary of spectrum access strategies of the SAM candidates. The four SAMs allow the SU networks to access the spectrum as long as their minimum SINR is met. To realize fairness to all the cochannel SU networks, the SU transmit power is proportionately increased until the transmit power reaches the upper limit. In addition to this, after a few experiments, we introduce a fifth SAM, NSC-CX SAM, that emphasizes non-harmful interference to all cochannel receivers and prioritizes spectrum-access requests based on the \textit{minimal network spectrum consumption} costs.
\begin{table}[h!b!p!]
\label{table:SAMCandSum}
\caption{Summary of the SAM Properties}
\centering
\begin{tabular}{lll}
\hline
SAM & Potential Interference & Constraint on SU maximum transmit-power\\
\hline
Underlay SAM & to PU and SU & Fixed and low\\
Overlay SAM & to PU and SU & Fixed and high\\
STOV SAM & to PU and SU & Dynamic and high\\
STPPOV SAM & to SU only & Dynamic and high\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
\subsection{Metrics}
From an incumbent's or a spectrum-provider's perspective, the preferred SAM minimizes the consumption of resource while maximizing the number of scheduled spectrum-access requests and minimizing the number of the harmfully interfered receivers. We compare the performance of SAMs in terms of
\begin{itemize}
\item the number of scheduled spectrum-access requests,
\item the number of harmfully interfered receivers,
\item the percentage of the available spectrum exploited by a SAM, and
\item the percentage of the spectrum that remained unexploited (the available spectrum).
\end{itemize}
\subsection{Experiments}
\subsubsection{The Base-Case Experiment}
The performance of four SAMs for this base setup is shown in Figure \ref{fig:LL501_ST0}. We make following observations about performance of the SAMs.
\begin{itemize}
\item In case of Underlay SAM, all the SU networks are exercising spectrum-access, thus the number of scheduled requests is same as the number of SU networks. However, since the transmit-power is heavily constrained, the signal power at the secondary receivers is very low. Also, these receivers experience interference from the PU transmitter and the transmitters of the cochannel SU networks resulting in unsuccessful reception in most cases.
\item In case of Overlay SAM, when PU transmitter is not within the sensing range of the SU network transceivers, a spectrum-access is exercised. The SU sensitivity is considered to be -80 dBm translates to 1390 $m$ of sensing range considering the mean PLE of 3.5. Thus, very often, a spectrum-access is not performed due to constraints imposed by the Overlay spectrum-access policy and the number of scheduled requests is poor when PU is present. When a SU transmitter can exercise access to the spectrum, the signal power at the SU receivers may not be high due to constraints on the SU transmit-power and those receivers need to tolerate interference from the cochannel PU and SU transmissions and can result into a significant number of harmfully interfered receivers.
\item The STOV SAM with unconstrained SU transmit power faces similar issues and shows low performance when PU is present. Because it employs high transmit power, the SINR at the SU receivers is high and receiver spectrum consumption is low and the available spectrum remains high.
\item The STPPOV SAM shows better performance as compared to Overlay SAM and STOV SAM in the cases SUs can detect the presence of the PU transmitter but their transmissions do not cause harmful interference to the PU receivers. However, the number of scheduled requests is much lower when available spectrum space is low due to the guard margin enforced to protect the PU receivers from the aggregate interference effect.
\end{itemize}
\begin{figure}[htbp!]
\centering
{\includegraphics [width=0.464\textwidth, angle=0] {Exc/Result4/LL501_ST0_XR}}
{\includegraphics [width=0.464\textwidth, angle=0] {Exc/Result4/LL501_ST0_DR}}
{\includegraphics [width=0.464\textwidth, angle=0] {Exc/Result4/LL501_ST0_AV}}
{\includegraphics [width=0.464\textwidth, angle=0] {Exc/Result4/LL501_ST0_nUS}}
\caption{The baseline performance of four SAMs with varying number of secondary networks when the PU is active \textbf{(The base experiment)}. A SAM with a lower number of unscheduled requests, a lower number of harmfully interfered receivers, and lower spectrum consumption by transceivers (that is, higher amount of available spectrum) makes more efficient use of the available spectrum.}
\label{fig:LL501_ST0}
\end{figure}
We note that the four SAMs do not provide protection to SU receivers from harmful interference from cochannel SU transmitters. \textit{The lack of \textbf{network coexistence with non-harmful interference} could be considered as a serious limitation factor in actual practice when the secondary spectrum access is employed for services requiring good link quality}.
\subsubsection{A Case for Higher PU Transmit-Power and Interference-Tolerant Transceivers (Experiment-1)}
In this experiment, we consider a scenario wherein the secondary spectrum access in a licensed band is managed by the spectrum-access policy defined by the incumbent owners of the spectrum. We term this scenario as \textit{Primary Owned Secondary Spectrum Access (POSSA)}. \textbf{POSSA allows improvement in the available spectrum by employing higher PU transmit-power}. We also attempt to improve the available spectrum space by using better quality directional PU receivers with 10 dB minimum desired SINR instead of 20 dB. We consider the SU transceivers to employ directional antennas.
\begin{figure}[htbp!]
\centering
{\includegraphics [width=0.464\textwidth, angle=0] {Exc/Result4/LL501_ST6_XR}}
{\includegraphics [width=0.464\textwidth, angle=0] {Exc/Result4/LL501_ST6_DR}}
{\includegraphics [width=0.464\textwidth, angle=0] {Exc/Result4/LL501_ST6_AV}}
{\includegraphics [width=0.464\textwidth, angle=0] {Exc/Result4/LL501_ST6_nS}}
\caption{Performance comparison of the four SAMs with varying number of secondary networks when the PU is active \textbf{(Experiment-1)}. In this experiment, the SU transceivers employ directional antennas and the incumbent network is assumed to be using higher transmit power to boost the SINR at the PU receivers in addition to the assumptions from the base-case experiment.}
\label{fig:LL501_ST6}
\end{figure}
From Figure \ref{fig:LL501_ST6}, we observe that the available spectrum has increased from close to $3 \%$ to close to $100 \%$. This is because the interference margin implied by the SINR at the PU receiver is much higher with increase in the PU signal power\footnote{With directional antennas only, the available spectrum increases from close to $3 \%$ to close to $15 \%$. Please refer to Experiment 2 from \cite{oms3_cf1}.}. Note that Figure \ref{fig:LL501_ST6} shows the number of \textit{scheduled} connections instead of the number of \textit{unscheduled} connections to emphasize the poor numbers of the scheduled connections even when the available spectrum is close to $100\%$.
\textbf{\textit{The secondary access scenario is not encouraging.}} The performance of STPPOV SAM which ensures protection of PU receivers while opportunistically improving the throughput for secondary networks is found to be \textit{not} able to exploit a substantial portion of the available spectrum even when nearly $100\%$ of the spectrum is available.
The inability of the SAMs to exploit the available spectrum is due to \textit{inefficient scheduling} of spectrum-access requests. The cochannel networks are spatially overlapping. With a greedy strategy and a limit on the maximum transmit-power, often many of the spatially overlapping spectrum-access requests are unable to get scheduled. In this experiment, we focus on improving the spectrum sharing performance by choosing an alternate scheduling approach.
\subsubsection{Favoring the Requests with Lower Spectrum Consumption Cost (Experiment-2)}
Under the QDSA paradigm, the role of SAM can be viewed as allocating a quantified amount of spectrum to networks (i.e. network transmitters and receivers). \textit{To accommodate a large number of spectrum-access requests, a SAM needs to define a spectrum-access policy for a spectrum-access request in such a fashion that the spectrum consumed by its transceivers is minimized and in turn the available spectrum is maximized.} Thus, our objective for designing a spectrum allocation algorithm is to maximize the number of scheduled connections and the available spectrum subject to the constraint that no (primary or secondary) receiver experiences SINR lower than the receiver-specific minimum desired SINR.
In this experiment, we add the `NSC-CX SAM', that schedules spectrum-access requests based on the \textit{minimal network spectrum consumption} and emphasizes coexistence\footnote{Here, we assume the networks are \textit{coexisting} when none of the network-receivers are harmfully interfered.} between all cochannel networks. The steps are described previously in Section 4.B.3. Here, we note that the spectrum-access requests employing
\begin{itemize}
\item a smaller network-range are favored by the `NSC-CX SAM' as the receivers experience higher SINR and the network spectrum consumption weight is lower,
\item directionality are favored as it helps to improve SINR for all receivers and reduces the network spectrum consumption.
\end{itemize}
\begin{figure}[htbp!]
\centering
{\includegraphics [width=0.464\textwidth, angle=0] {Exc/Result4/LL501i_ST6_XR}}
{\includegraphics [width=0.464\textwidth, angle=0] {Exc/Result4/LL501i_ST6_DR}}
{\includegraphics [width=0.464\textwidth, angle=0] {Exc/Result4/LL501i_ST6_AV}}
{\includegraphics [width=0.464\textwidth, angle=0] {Exc/Result4/LL501i_ST6_nS}}
\caption{Performance comparison of SAMs with varying number of secondary networks when the PU is active \textbf{(Experiment-2)}. The `NSC-CX SAM' favors spectrum-access requests with lower network spectrum consumption and also ensures coexistence with cochannel primary and secondary networks.}
\label{fig:LL501i_ST6}
\end{figure}
The setup for the experiment is kept the same as Experiment-1. The performance of the five SAMs is shown in Figure \ref{fig:LL501i_ST6}. The performance of `NSC-CX SAM' in terms of the number of scheduled requests seems very promising as most of the secondary spectrum-access requests are serviced. We note a salient feature of the algorithm is that it allows each network to perform the best in terms of minimizing the spectrum consumption \cite{oms2_sca}. This makes it possible to independently consider each request and then define the order for scheduling. A few more observations on the performance of `NSC-CX SAM':
\begin{itemize}
\item As mentioned earlier the objective of `NSC-CX SAM' is to minimize network spectrum consumption and maximize the number of scheduled connections. Thus, it does not have necessarily provide optimal performance in terms of scheduling and power allocation.
\item As expected, the number of harmfully interfered receivers with `NSC-CX SAM' is zero.
\item The exploited spectrum is higher due to the higher number of scheduled connections and it is the same reason why the available spectrum is lower with `NSC-CX SAM'.
\end{itemize}
\subsubsection{A Case for the Knowledge of the PU Receiver Positions (Experiment-3)}
The obvious next question is can we do better? In the previous experiments, we had assumed the primary receivers are located at the worst-case positions. This is mainly because, traditionally the primary receivers are assumed to be passive receivers. \textbf{With incumbents playing an active role}, it makes a reasonable case to exploit the knowledge of the \textit{actual} receiver positions to extract more value from the existing spectrum. Without the knowledge of the receiver positions, the secondary spectrum access is only possible \textit{outside} the range of the primary service network and this is not as appealing from a business perspective.
In this experiment, we position the primary receivers at half the range, that is, 250 $m$. We assume the knowledge of the actual receiver positions is available in case of the `STPPOV SAM' and `NSC-CX SAM'.
\begin{figure}[htbp!]
\centering
{\includegraphics [width=0.464\textwidth, angle=0] {Exc/Result4/LL501i_ST7_XR}}
{\includegraphics [width=0.464\textwidth, angle=0] {Exc/Result4/LL501i_ST7_DR}}
{\includegraphics [width=0.464\textwidth, angle=0] {Exc/Result4/LL501i_ST7_AV}}
{\includegraphics [width=0.464\textwidth, angle=0] {Exc/Result4/LL501i_ST7_nS}}
\caption{Performance comparison of the five SAMs with the varying number of secondary networks when the PU is active \textbf{(Experiment-3)}. In this experiment, the primary receivers are not positioned at the worst case locations but at a distance of half the range of the service networks. It results in a larger exploitable available spectrum thereby improving SAM performance.}
\label{fig:LL501_ST7}
\end{figure}
From Figure \ref{fig:LL501_ST7}, we observe that the performance of the `STPPOV SAM' has improved and the number of scheduled requests by `STPPOV SAM' is higher than the Overlay SAM and STOV SAM. As the PU receivers are positioned at a distance of half the range of the service networks, the \textit{exploitable} available spectrum in case of `STPPOV SAM' has increased.
The number of scheduled requests for `NSC-CX SAM' has also slightly improved because the networks within the primary service coverage area, that are not close to any of the primary receivers, are able to exercise the secondary spectrum access.
\subsubsection{The Case for Small-Cell Secondary Networks (Experiment-4)}
The next question is how far could we go with scheduling of the secondary spectrum-access requests? As we can see from the previous experiment, the available spectrum in case of `NSC-CX SAM' is close to $40\%$ when the number of requests is 100. As the number of scheduled connections are increased, the available spectrum may be insufficient. In this experiment, we reduce the network-range of the secondary networks to 40 $m$ and evaluate the performance of the SAMs. From Figure~\ref{fig:LL501_ST8}, we observe that
\begin{figure}[htbp!]
\centering
{\includegraphics [width=0.464\textwidth, angle=0] {Exc/Result4/LL501i_ST8_XR}}
{\includegraphics [width=0.464\textwidth, angle=0] {Exc/Result4/LL501i_ST8_DR}}
{\includegraphics [width=0.464\textwidth, angle=0] {Exc/Result4/LL501i_ST8_AV}}
{\includegraphics [width=0.464\textwidth, angle=0] {Exc/Result4/LL501i_ST8_nS}}
\caption{The performance comparison of SAMs with the varying number of the secondary networks when the PU is active \textbf{(Experiment-4)}. In this experiment, the secondary networks are assumed to exercise spectrum-access with a small network-range. With secondary receivers being closer to the respective secondary transmitters resulting in better SINR and higher number of scheduled spectrum-access requests.}
\label{fig:LL501_ST8}
\end{figure}
\begin{itemize}
\item the exploited spectrum has reduced and the available spectrum has significantly increased. The available spectrum with `STPPOV SAM' is higher than `NSC-CX SAM'. This is due to behavior of `STPPOV SAM' to choose transmit-powers that are \textit{not very high} as is the case with `NSC-CX SAM' thus limiting interference power but \textit{not low enough }to significantly increase the receiver consumed spectrum. The same behavior is used by the `Overlay SAM' and `STOV SAM', and the available spectrum is high in case of those mechanisms as well.
\item the performance of `NSC-CX SAM' and `STPPOV SAM' in terms of the number of connections has also improved. The higher number of scheduled requests in this experiment setup is attributed to the fine granular spatial spectrum access opportunities getting exercised. \textit{We argue that for realizing the potential of DSA, finer granularity of spatial reuse is essential.
\end{itemize}
\subsubsection{The Case for Dynamic Spectrum Sharing or Inactive PU (Experiment-5)}
Now, we consider a more generic case wherein the spectrum rights with all the networks are equal. In the context of POSSA, this case could also be seen the case when the primary service network is \textit{not active}. In this experiment, all the networks are randomly positioned. The range of all the networks is 40 $m$. The minimum desired SINR at the receivers is 3 dB. The transmitters and receivers are directional with $60^{\circ}$ antenna beamwidth. From Figure~\ref{fig:LL501_ST9}, we observe that
\begin{figure}[htbp!]
\centering
{\includegraphics [width=0.464\textwidth, angle=0] {Exc/Result4/LL501i_ST9_XR}}
{\includegraphics [width=0.464\textwidth, angle=0] {Exc/Result4/LL501i_ST9_DR}}
{\includegraphics [width=0.464\textwidth, angle=0] {Exc/Result4/LL501i_ST9_AV}}
{\includegraphics [width=0.464\textwidth, angle=0] {Exc/Result4/LL501i_ST9_nS}}
\caption{The performance comparison of SAMs with the varying number of the secondary networks \textbf{(Experiment-5)}. In this experiment, the primary network is assumed to be inactive. The performance of all the SAMs is higher with much higher available spectrum space.}
\label{fig:LL501_ST9}
\end{figure}
\begin{itemize}
\item Except for `STPPOV SAM', all SAMs have been able to schedule all the spectrum-access requests. The `STPPOV SAM' is not able to support $100 \%$ of the requests because of the guard margin setting to avoid the aggregate interference effect. \textit{This experiment brings out the potential of dynamic spectrum sharing paradigm.}
\item There are no harmfully interfered receivers for all SAMs other than the Underlay SAM. This is primarily attributed to the fine granular spatial spectrum access (smaller ranges of the networks).
\end{itemize}
It may not be always possible to choose a smaller network range depending on the nature of the desired service. In the next experiment, we characterize the behavior of the SAMs based on the network range.
\subsubsection{Characterizing the Effect of Network Range in Open Dynamic Spectrum Sharing Model (Experiment-6)}
In this experiment, the performance of various SAMs is characterized with the varying range of the networks in the dynamic spectrum sharing scenario. All the networks are randomly positioned. The minimum desired SINR at the receivers is 3 dB. The transmitters and receivers are directional with $60^{\circ}$ antenna beamwidth. From Figure~\ref{fig:L502_ST9}, we observe that
\begin{figure}[htbp!]
\centering
{\includegraphics [width=0.454\textwidth, angle=0] {Exc/Result4/L502_ST9_XR}}
{\includegraphics [width=0.454\textwidth, angle=0] {Exc/Result4/L502_ST9_DR}}
{\includegraphics [width=0.454\textwidth, angle=0] {Exc/Result4/L502_ST9_AV}}
{\includegraphics [width=0.454\textwidth, angle=0] {Exc/Result4/L502_ST9_nS}}
\caption{The performance comparison of SAMs with the varying network range \textbf{(Experiment-6)}. In this experiment, we observe that fine granular access with smaller network-ranges leads to a higher number of successful spectrum-access requests. }
\label{fig:L502_ST9}
\end{figure}
\begin{itemize}
\item The smaller network ranges lead to a larger number of spectrum-access requests being satisfied. The SINR and the hence the throughput is also high in this case. \textit{We argue that the fine granular spectrum access needs to be adopted whenever possible.}
\item This scenario helps us to understand the expected performance in terms of the number of successfully scheduled spectrum-access requests when larger network ranges are desired. The performance of `NSC-CX SAM' that exploits the knowledge of all transceiver positions and prioritizes the spectrum-access requests by spectrum-consumption costs is reasonably good for all network ranges; Especially, for the larger network ranges, `NSC-CX SAM' schedules a larger number of the spectrum-access requests as compared to other SAMs.
\end{itemize}
\section{Conclusions}
In this paper, we investigated the potential of spectrum sharing in order to make it non-harmful, efficient, and therefore feasible from the perspective of incumbents. In order to improve the potential of secondary spectrum access, we studied how the availability and the exploitation of the RF spectrum could be maximized. Our findings suggest the need for
\begin{itemize}
\item \textbf{Fine granular spectrum-access policy:} Spectrum is consumed by transmitters as well as receivers. Thus, spectrum-accesses within a RF-system may vary significantly in terms of their demand for RF-spectrum. \textit{Defining a spectrum-access policy at the granularity of individual spectrum-access request} enables us to share and exploit the available spectrum space more efficiently.
\item \textbf{Active role of incumbents:} By altering the primary spectrum-access attributes and incorporating the knowledge of spectrum-access attributes of the primary transceivers, the spectrum available for secondary access can be significantly improved.
\item \textbf{Exploiting fine granular spatial reuse opportunities:}. A large portion of the spectrum-access opportunities are fine granular in the space, time, and frequency dimensions. Thus, the ranges of the spectrum-access requests play a crucial role in the SAM's ability to exploit these fine granular spectrum-access opportunities. The throughput and the number of scheduled spectrum-access requests are significantly improved with a fine granular approach to spectrum access.
\item \textbf{Quantified spectrum-access footprints:} The spectrum consumed by the transmitters and the receivers can be precisely controlled with allocation of the \textit{quantified} spectrum-access footprints. This helps to improve the number of scheduled spectrum-access requests.
\item \textbf{Network-coexistence with non-harmful interference.} It is necessary to ensure minimum throughput for secondary spectrum access requests in order to make it attractive for designing services based on secondary access to spectrum. Thus, it is necessary for a SAM to ensure non-harmful interference among \textbf{\textit{all}} spectrum sharing networks.
\item \textbf{Adopting interference-tolerant signal model and transceiver technology:} A higher minimum SINR for successful reception of the signal under cochannel interference conditions implies a higher consumption of spectrum by the receivers. Adopting interference-tolerant modulation format and transceiver technology with higher interference-tolerance can help to improve the available spectrum. Also, directional transmission and reception abilities are desired in order to further reduce the spectrum consumption by transceivers.
\end{itemize}
The top-level conclusion of this study is secondary access to spectrum could be efficient while protecting the existing spectrum uses. \textit{We demonstrated that close to 100 spatially overlapping heterogeneous spectrum-access requests can be scheduled in a small 4.3 $km$ x 3.7 $km$ geographical region} using the suboptimal approach. By playing an active role in secondary spectrum access, an incumbent can extract significant value out of the underutilized spectrum while protecting their primary service networks. The potential business opportunities could be able to justify the cost of the infrastructure necessary for spectrum consumption management.
The uncertainties in the radio environment hinder the potential of a SAM to efficiently share the \textit{available} spectrum. We observed a significant amount of the available spectrum is \textit{lost} due to conservative assumptions regarding the propagation environment. In this regard, there is a need for fine granular characterization of the propagation environment that would enable more accurate estimation of the available spectrum in real-time. This would also help in the enforcement of quantified spectrum-access policy and facilitate real-time dynamic spectrum sharing.
|
\section{Introduction and main results}
The Fishburn numbers $\xi (n)$, which are defined by the formal power series
\begin{equation}
\sum_{n \geq 0} \xi (n) q^n = \sum_{n \geq 0} \prod_{j = 1}^n (1 -
(1 - q)^j), \label{eq:fishburn}
\end{equation}
count a variety of combinatorial objects, such as interval orders or unlabeled
$( 2 + 2)$-free posets \cite{fishburn70}, upper-triangular matrices with
nonnegative integer entries of total sum $n$ and no zero rows or columns
\cite{dp-fishburn}, \cite{blr-fishburn}, regular linearized chord diagrams
or Stoimenow matchings \cite{stoimenow-fishburn}, ascent sequences
\cite{bcdk-fishburn}, or non-2-neighbor-nesting matchings
\cite{levande-fishburn}. The generating function \eqref{eq:fishburn} is due
to D.~Zagier \cite{zagier-strange}, who used it to derive an asymptotic
expansion for the Fishburn numbers. On the other hand, striking arithmetic
properties of these numbers, such as a connection with (mock) modular forms
\cite{zagier-strange}, \cite{bopr-unimodal} and congruences resembling
those of the partition function \cite{as-fish}, \cite{garvan-fish} have
recently been discovered. This note is concerned with generalizing these
congruences.
In order to state the congruences discovered by G.~Andrews and J.~Sellers,
define, as in \cite{as-fish}, the sets
\begin{equation*}
S (p) = \{j \in \{0, 1, \ldots, p - 1\}: \hspace{1em} \text{$j \equiv
\tfrac{1}{2} n (3 n - 1)$ for some $n$} \}
\end{equation*}
of residues modulo $p$ which are pentagonal numbers. The main result of
\cite{as-fish} is the following.
\begin{theorem}
{\dueto{Andrews and Sellers, \cite{as-fish}}}\label{thm:as}Let $p$ be a
prime. If $j \in \{1, 2, \ldots, p - 1 - \max S ( p) \}$, then
\begin{equation}
\xi ( p m - j) \equiv 0 \pmod{p}
\label{eq:fishburn:c:as}
\end{equation}
for all positive integers $m$.
\end{theorem}
For primes $p$, which are quadratic nonresidues modulo $23$, the set $\{1, 2,
\ldots, p - 1 - \max S ( p) \}$ is nonempty; thus congruences of the form
\eqref{eq:fishburn:c:as} exist for infinitely many primes (indeed, half of
them). F.~Garvan proved \cite{garvan-fish} that such congruences also exist
for $p = 23$ (in which case $p - 1 - \max S ( p) = 0$) by replacing the set $S
( p)$ in Theorem~\ref{thm:as} with the smaller set $S^{\ast} ( p) = S ( p)
\backslash \{ i_0 \}$, where $i_0 \in \{ 0, 1, \ldots, p - 1 \}$ is such that
$i_0 \equiv - 1 / 24$ modulo $p$. The purpose of this note is to extend all of
these congruences to prime powers, thus answering a question posed by Andrews
and Sellers \cite{as-fish}. The following is a corollary of our main result,
which is stated as Theorem~\ref{thm:cong} below.
\begin{theorem}
\label{thm:as:x}Let $p \geq 5$ be a prime. If $j \in \{1, 2, \ldots, p
- 1 - \max S^{\ast} ( p) \}$, then
\begin{equation*}
\xi ( p^{\lambda} m - j) \equiv 0 \pmod{p^{\lambda}}
\end{equation*}
for all positive integers $m$ and $\lambda$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{example}
\label{eg:1}Theorem~\ref{thm:as:x} includes the congruences
\begin{eqnarray*}
\xi ( 5^{\lambda} m - 1) \equiv \xi ( 5^{\lambda} m - 2) & \equiv & 0
\pmod{5^{\lambda}},\\
\xi ( 7^{\lambda} m - 1) & \equiv & 0 \pmod{7^{\lambda}},\\
\xi ( 11^{\lambda} m - 1) \equiv \xi ( 11^{\lambda} m - 2) \equiv \xi (
11^{\lambda} m - 3) & \equiv & 0 \pmod{11^{\lambda}},\\
\xi ( 17^{\lambda} m - 1) & \equiv & 0 \pmod{17^{\lambda}},\\
\xi ( 19^{\lambda} m - 1) \equiv \xi ( 19^{\lambda} m - 2) & \equiv & 0
\pmod{19^{\lambda}},
\end{eqnarray*}
which generalize the ones obtained in \cite{as-fish}, as well as
\begin{equation*}
\xi ( 23^{\lambda} m - j) \equiv 0 \pmod{23^{\lambda}}
\end{equation*}
for $j \in \{ 1, 2, \ldots, 5 \}$, which generalize the additional
congruences of \cite{garvan-fish}.
\end{example}
The congruences for the Fishburn numbers $\xi ( n)$ provided by
Theorem~\ref{thm:as:x} are a special case of a more general result concerning
the numbers $\xi_{r, s} ( n)$ defined by
\begin{equation}
\sum_{n \geq 0} \xi_{r, s} (n) q^n = ( 1 - q)^s \sum_{n \geq 0}
\prod_{j = 1}^n (1 - (1 - q)^{r j}) = ( 1 - q)^s F ( ( 1 - q)^r),
\label{eq:fishburn:rs}
\end{equation}
where $F ( q)$ is defined in \eqref{eq:F}. Clearly, the case $r = 1$, $s = 0$
reduces to the Fishburn numbers $\xi ( n) = \xi_{1, 0} ( n)$. The case $r = -
1$ has combinatorial significance as well. The numbers $( - 1)^n \xi_{- 1, 0}
( n)$ count, for instance, upper-triangular matrices with $0$-1-entries of
total sum $n$ and no zero rows or columns \cite{aj-fishburn},
\cite{blr-fishburn}. In the case $s = 0$, we obtain the $r$-Fishburn numbers
$\xi_r ( n) = \xi_{r, 0} ( n)$ introduced by Garvan \cite{garvan-fish}. Note
that, for positive integers $s$, the numbers
\begin{equation*}
\xi_{r, s} ( n) = \sum_{j = 0}^s \binom{s}{j} ( - 1)^j \xi_r ( n - j)
\end{equation*}
are linear combinations of $r$-Fishburn numbers. As mentioned in
\cite{garvan-fish}, congruences satisfied by such combinations, such as
\begin{equation}
\xi ( 5 m + 2) - 2 \xi ( 5 m + 1) \equiv 0 \pmod{5},
\label{eq:gr5}
\end{equation}
have been first observed by S.~Garthwaite and R.~Rhoades. In order to state
the main result of \cite{garvan-fish}, let us introduce the sets
\begin{equation*}
S (p, r, s) = \{j \in \{0, 1, \ldots, p - 1\}: \hspace{1em} \text{$j - s
\equiv \tfrac{1}{2} r n (3 n - 1)$ for some $n$} \}
\end{equation*}
as well as, for $p \geq 5$, the smaller sets $S^{\ast} (p, r, s) = S (p,
r, s) \backslash \{ i_0 \}$, where $i_0 \in \{ 1, 2, \ldots, p - 1 \}$ is such
that $i_0 - s \equiv - r / 24$ modulo $p$. In other words, modulo $p$, the
sets $S^{\ast} (p, r, s) \equiv r S^{\ast} ( p) + s$ are linear translations
of the sets $S^{\ast} ( p)$.
\begin{theorem}
{\dueto{Garvan, \cite{garvan-fish}}}\label{thm:g}Let $p \geq 5$ be a
prime, $r$ an integer such that $p \nmid r$, and $s \in \{ 0, 1, \ldots, p -
1 \}$. If $j \in \{1, 2, \ldots, p - 1 - \max S^{\ast} ( p, r, s) \}$, then
\begin{equation}
\xi_{r, s} ( p m - j) \equiv 0 \pmod{p}
\label{eq:fishburn:c:g}
\end{equation}
for all positive integers $m$.
\end{theorem}
Our main result generalizes these congruences to prime powers. However, as is
illustrated by Examples~\ref{eg:523} and \ref{eg:garvan5} below, not all of
these congruences extend to congruences modulo $p^{\lambda}$, so that some
restriction on $p$, $r$ and $s$ is necessary. Recall that every rational
number $n$ has a unique $p$-adic expansion
\begin{equation}
n = \sum_{k = \nu_p ( n)}^{\infty} n_k p^k \label{eq:padic}
\end{equation}
where $n_k \in \{ 0, 1, \ldots, p - 1 \}$ and $\nu_p ( n)$ is the $p$-adic
valuation of $n$. We write $\operatorname{digit}_k ( n ; p) = n_k$. The following is
our main result.
\begin{theorem}
\label{thm:cong}Let $p$ be a prime, and $r, s$ integers such that $p \nmid
r$. If $j \in \{1, 2, \ldots, p - 1 - \max S ( p, r, s) \}$, then
\begin{equation*}
\xi_{r, s} ( p^{\lambda} m - j) \equiv 0 \pmod{p^{\lambda}}
\end{equation*}
for all positive integers $m$ and $\lambda$. Moreover, if $p \geq 5$
and the triple $( p, r, s)$ satisfies
\begin{equation}
\operatorname{digit}_1 ( s - r / 24 ; p) \neq p - 1, \label{eq:cong:C}
\end{equation}
then the set $S ( p, r, s)$ may be replaced with $S^{\ast} ( p, r, s)$.
\end{theorem}
Note that, if $r = 1$ and $s = 0$, then condition \eqref{eq:cong:C} is
satisfied for all primes $p \geq 5$, as can be seen from $( p^2 - 1) / 24
\in \mathbb{Z}$ and
\begin{equation*}
\operatorname{digit}_1 ( - 1 / 24 ; p) = \left\lfloor \frac{p^2 - 1}{24 p}
\right\rfloor = \left\lfloor \frac{p}{24} \right\rfloor < p - 1.
\end{equation*}
Hence, Theorem~\ref{thm:as:x} is a corollary of Theorem~\ref{thm:cong}.
Our proof of Theorem~\ref{thm:cong} is given in Section~\ref{sec:proof}. It
relies crucially on results of Andrews, Sellers and Garvan, which are recalled
in Section~\ref{sec:prelim}, as well as careful applications of Kummer's
theorem on $p$-adic valuations of binomial coefficients. For most of the
remainder of this introduction, we illustrate Theorem~\ref{thm:cong} with a
number of examples.
\begin{example}
\label{eg:gr}In the case $p = 5$ and $r = 1$, Theorem~\ref{thm:cong} shows
that, in addition to
\begin{equation*}
\xi ( 5^{\lambda} m - 1) \equiv \xi ( 5^{\lambda} m - 2) \equiv 0
\pmod{5^{\lambda}},
\end{equation*}
which were already observed in Example \ref{eg:1}, we have the congruences
\begin{equation*}
\xi_{1, 3} ( 5^{\lambda} m - 1) \equiv 0 \pmod{5^{\lambda}} .
\end{equation*}
Combining these with $\xi_{1, 3} ( n) = \xi ( n) - 3 \xi ( n - 1) + 3 \xi (
n - 2) - \xi ( n - 3)$, we conclude that
\begin{equation*}
\xi ( 5^{\lambda} m - 3) - 2 \xi ( 5^{\lambda} m - 4) \equiv 0
\pmod{5^{\lambda}},
\end{equation*}
generalizing the congruence \eqref{eq:gr5}, which was observed by Garthwaite
and Rhoades.
\end{example}
\begin{example}
We have already seen that, if $r = 1$ and $s = 0$, then the condition
\eqref{eq:cong:C} in Theorem~\ref{thm:cong} is automatically satisfied for
all primes $p \geq 5$. Let us illustrate in this example that condition
\eqref{eq:cong:C} is similarly vacuous for other ``small'' values of $r$ and
$s$. For instance, in the particularly interesting case $s = 0$, we find
that, if $r \in \{ 1, 2, \ldots, 23 \}$, then the only tuples $( p, r, s)$,
for which failure of condition \eqref{eq:cong:C} prevents additional
congruences, are $( 5, 23, 0)$ and $( 7, 23, 0)$. These two cases are
discussed in the next example, which demonstrates that the respective
congruences indeed fail to extend to prime powers.
To see that in the remaining cases, for which $r \in \{ 1, 2, \ldots, 23 \}$
and $s = 0$, we can ignore condition \eqref{eq:cong:C} in
Theorem~\ref{thm:cong}, observe that, modulo $p^2$,
\begin{equation*}
s - r / 24 \equiv r \frac{p^2 - 1}{24}
\end{equation*}
and that the right-hand is an integer in $\{ 0, 1, \ldots, p^2 - 1 \}$.
Condition \eqref{eq:cong:C} is therefore equivalent to the inequality $r (
p^2 - 1) / 24 < p ( p - 1)$. Rewriting this as $( 24 - r) p > r$, we find
that this inequality holds whenever $p > 23 \geq r$. Checking the
remaining small primes individually for all $r \in \{ 1, 2, \ldots, 23 \}$,
we conclude that the only cases, for which condition \eqref{eq:cong:C} fails
and $\max S ( p, r, s) > \max S^{\ast} ( p, r, s)$, are the two cases $( 5,
23, 0)$ and $( 7, 23, 0)$ mentioned above.
A similar analysis can be carried out for other small values of $s$.
\end{example}
\begin{example}
\label{eg:523}Note that $S ( 5, 23, 0) = \{ 0, 1, 3 \}$ and $S^{\ast} ( 5,
23, 0) = \{ 0, 1 \}$, as well as $S ( 7, 23, 0) = \{ 0, 2, 3, 4 \}$ and
$S^{\ast} ( 7, 23, 0) = \{ 0, 2, 3 \}$. Hence, by Garvan's
Theorem~\ref{thm:g}, the congruences
\begin{equation*}
\xi_{23} ( 5 m - j) \equiv 0 \pmod{5}, \hspace{2em}
\xi_{23} ( 7 m - j) \equiv 0 \pmod{7}
\end{equation*}
hold for all positive integers $m$ if $j \in \{ 1, 2, 3 \}$. On the other
hand, since condition \eqref{eq:cong:C} is not satisfied,
Theorem~\ref{thm:cong} shows that of these six families of congruences only
three extend to prime powers; namely,
\begin{equation*}
\xi_{23} ( 5^{\lambda} m - 1) \equiv 0 \pmod{5^{\lambda}} , \hspace{2em} \xi_{23} ( 7^{\lambda} m - 2) \equiv
\xi_{23} ( 7^{\lambda} m - 1) \equiv 0 \pmod{7^{\lambda}} .
\end{equation*}
On the other hand, the other three families cannot be extend to prime
powers, as is demonstrated by
\begin{equation*}
\xi_{23} ( 5^2 - 3) \equiv 10 \not\equiv 0 \pmod{5^2},
\hspace{1em} \xi_{23} ( 5^2 - 2) \equiv 5 \not\equiv 0 \pmod{5^2},
\end{equation*}
and $\xi_{23} ( 7^2 - 3) \equiv 42 \not\equiv 0$ modulo $7^2$. We should
mention that these numbers are already quite large. For instance,
\begin{equation*}
\xi_{23} ( 5^2 - 3) = 105368264798040017097834938676731639668933422960.
\end{equation*}
\end{example}
\begin{example}
\label{eg:garvan5}As mentioned above, the case $r = - 1$ has combinatorial
significance as well. Following \cite{garvan-fish}, we observe that $1$ is
a pentagonal number, which implies $p - 1 \in S ( p, - 1, 0)$. In fact, for
all primes $p > 5$, $p - 1 \in S^{\ast} ( p, - 1, 0)$, so that no
congruences are implied by Garvan's Theorem~\ref{thm:g} for these values of
$p, r, s$. In the case $p = 5$, on the other hand, $S ( 5, - 1, 0) = \{ 0,
3, 4 \}$ while $S^{\ast} (5, - 1, 0) = \{ 0, 3 \}$. Theorem~\ref{thm:g}
therefore yields the congruences
\begin{equation*}
\xi_{- 1} ( 5 m - 1) \equiv 0 \pmod{5},
\end{equation*}
which were conjectured in \cite{as-fish}. However, condition
\eqref{eq:cong:C} is not satisfied for $( p, r, s) = ( 5, - 1, 0)$ since
$\operatorname{digit}_1 ( 1 / 24 ; 5) = 4$, so that Theorem~\ref{thm:cong} does not
provide an extension of this congruence to prime powers $5^{\lambda}$.
Indeed, the congruences do not extend, as is demonstrated by
\begin{equation*}
\xi_{- 1} ( 5^2 - 1) = 11115833059268126770 \equiv 20 \not\equiv 0
\pmod{5^2} .
\end{equation*}
This is another illustration that, for $\lambda > 1$, we cannot, in general,
replace the set $S ( p, r, s)$ with the set $S^{\ast} (p, r, s)$ in
Theorem~\ref{thm:cong}.
On the other hand, we note that $S^{\ast} (5, - 1, 2) = \{ 0, 2 \}$ and that
condition \eqref{eq:cong:C} is satisfied for $( p, r, s) = ( 5, - 1, 2)$.
Hence, for $j \in \{ 1, 2 \}$ and all positive integers $m$ and $\lambda$,
$\xi_{- 1, 2} ( 5^{\lambda} m - j) \equiv 0$ modulo $5^{\lambda}$, or,
equivalently,
\begin{eqnarray*}
\xi_{- 1} ( 5^{\lambda} m - 1) - 2 \xi_{- 1} ( 5^{\lambda} m - 2) + \xi_{-
1} ( 5^{\lambda} m - 3) & \equiv & 0 \pmod{5^{\lambda}},\\
\xi_{- 1} ( 5^{\lambda} m - 2) - 2 \xi_{- 1} ( 5^{\lambda} m - 3) + \xi_{-
1} ( 5^{\lambda} m - 4) & \equiv & 0 \pmod{5^{\lambda}}
.
\end{eqnarray*}
\end{example}
Finally, we complement the congruences of Theorem~\ref{thm:cong} with
additional congruences for the case when $p$ divides $r$. These congruences
are considerably simpler to prove and are provided here only for the sake of
completeness and context.
\begin{lemma}
\label{lem:cong:pr}Let $p$ be a prime, and $r$ a nonzero integer. If $j$ is
coprime to $p$, then
\begin{equation*}
\xi_{p^{\lambda} r} ( p m - j) \equiv 0 \pmod{p^{\lambda}}
\end{equation*}
for all positive integers $m$ and $\lambda$.
\end{lemma}
\section{Preliminaries}\label{sec:prelim}
The formal generating series \eqref{eq:fishburn} of the Fishburn numbers
equals $F (1 - q)$, where
\begin{equation}
F (q) = \sum_{n \geq 0} (q ; q)_n \label{eq:F}
\end{equation}
is ``Kontsevich's strange function'' \cite{zagier-strange}. Note that the
series $F (q)$ is peculiar in that it does not converge in any open subset of
the complex plane; it is, however, well-defined, since it terminates, whenever
$q$ is a root of unity. As in \cite{as-fish}, we consider the truncated
series
\begin{equation*}
F (q, N) = \sum_{n = 0}^N (q ; q)_n,
\end{equation*}
which we dissect as
\begin{equation}
F (q, N) = \sum_{i = 0}^{p - 1} q^i A_p (N, i, q^p), \label{eq:Ap}
\end{equation}
where $A_p (N, i, q)$ is a polynomial in $q$. We record the following crucial
divisibility property of these polynomials, which was proved in
\cite{as-fish}.
\begin{lemma}
\label{lem:alpha}Let $p$ be a prime. If $i \not\in S (p)$, then
\begin{equation*}
A_p (p n - 1, i, q) = (1 - q)^n \alpha_p (n, i, q),
\end{equation*}
where the $\alpha_p (n, i, q)$ are polynomials in $q$ with integer
coefficients.
\end{lemma}
As observed in \cite{as-fish}, numerical evidence suggests that, for $i \not\in
S (p)$, the polynomials $A_p (p n - 1, i, q)$ are in fact divisible by $(q ;
q)_n$.
A similar result is shown in \cite{garvan-fish} for indices $i$ such that $i
\equiv - 1 / 24$ modulo a prime coprime to $24$. Since, modulo $p$, one
obtains the conclusion of Lemma~\ref{lem:alpha}, this result allowed Garvan to
prove the additional congruences provided by Theorem~\ref{thm:g}.
\begin{lemma}
\label{lem:alpha24}Let $p \geq 5$ and $i \in \{ 1, 2, \ldots, p - 1
\}$. If $i \equiv - 1 / 24$ modulo $p$, then
\begin{equation*}
A_p (p n - 1, i, q) = \left( \frac{12}{p} \right) p q^{\lfloor p / 24
\rfloor} F ( q^p, p n - 1) + (1 - q)^n \beta_p (n, i, q),
\end{equation*}
where the $\beta_p (n, i, q)$ are polynomials in $q$ with integer
coefficients.
\end{lemma}
\section{Proofs}\label{sec:proof}
Before turning to the proof of Theorem~\ref{thm:cong}, we prove some lemmas,
which will be helpful for establishing the desired congruences modulo
$p^{\lambda}$. In the sequel, given formal power series $A ( q), B ( q) \in
\mathbb{Z} [ [ q]]$, we write
\begin{equation*}
A ( q) \equiv B ( q) \pmod{p^{\lambda}}
\end{equation*}
to mean that the coefficients of $A ( q)$ and $B ( q)$ agree modulo
$p^{\lambda}$.
To begin with, we recall a well-known result of Kummer \cite{kummer-binom},
which gives the $p$-adic valuation of binomial coefficients. As usual, and as
in \eqref{eq:padic}, the $p$-adic digits $n_0, n_1, n_2, \ldots$ of a
(possibly negative) integer $n$ are determined by $n_i \in \{ 0, 1, \ldots, p
- 1 \}$ and $n = n_0 + n_1 p + n_2 p^2 + \cdots$.
\begin{theorem}
\label{thm:kummer}{\dueto{Kummer, \cite{kummer-binom}}}Let $p$ be a prime,
and $n, k$ integers such that $k \geq 0$. Then the $p$-adic valuation
of the binomial coefficient $\binom{n}{k}$ is equal to the number of carries
when adding $k$ and $n - k$ in base $p$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Since this result is commonly only stated for the case $n \geq k
\geq 0$, we assume that this case has been proved and show here only
how to use it to deduce the case of general $n$. First, in the case $n
\geq 0$ and $n < k$, the binomial coefficient is zero, so that its
$p$-adic valuation is $\infty$. On the other hand, the $p$-adic addition of
$k$ and $n - k < 0$ results in infinitely many carries.
Suppose now that $n < 0$. Observe that, for large enough $\lambda$,
\begin{equation*}
\nu_p \left( \binom{n}{k} \right) = \nu_p \left( \binom{p^{\lambda} +
n}{k} \right)
\end{equation*}
and, by Kummer's theorem in the nonnegative case, the right-hand side is the
number of carries when adding $k$ and $p^{\lambda} + n - k$ in base $p$. It
only remains to observe that this equals the number of carries when adding
$k$ and $n - k$.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}
\label{lem:cong:pr2}Let $p$ be a prime, $r$ an integer, and $j \in \{ 1, 2,
\ldots, p - 1 \}$. If $s$ is an integer such that
\begin{equation}
\binom{s}{p^2 - j} \equiv 0 \pmod{p},
\label{eq:cong:pr2:assum}
\end{equation}
then, for any positive integers $m$, $\lambda$,
\begin{equation*}
\xi_{p^2 r, s} ( p^{\lambda} m - j) \equiv 0 \pmod{p^{\lambda - 1}} .
\end{equation*}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Using Zagier's generating function \eqref{eq:fishburn}, we have
\begin{equation*}
\sum_{n \geq 0} \xi_{p^2 r, s} (n) q^n = ( 1 - q)^s \sum_{n
\geq 0} \prod_{j = 1}^n (1 - (1 - q)^{p^2 r j}) .
\end{equation*}
Expanding the product on the right-hand side, this can be written in the
form
\begin{equation*}
\sum_{n \geq 0} c_n ( 1 - q)^{p^2 r n + s}
\end{equation*}
for some integer coefficients $c_n$. It therefore suffices to show that, for
any integer $a$, the coefficient of $q^{p^{\lambda} m - j}$ in $( 1 -
q)^{p^2 a + s}$ vanishes modulo $p^{\lambda - 1}$. Equivalently, it is
enough to prove that, for any integer $a$,
\begin{equation}
\binom{p^2 a + s}{p^{\lambda} m - j} \equiv 0 \pmod{p^{\lambda - 1}} . \label{eq:cong:pr2:binom}
\end{equation}
By Kummer's Theorem~\ref{thm:kummer}, the $p$-adic valuation of the binomial
coefficient $\binom{n}{k}$ is equal to the number of carries when adding $k$
and $n - k$ in base $p$. Write $n = p^2 a + s$, $k = p^{\lambda} m - j$ and
$k' = n - k$. Denote with $k_0, k_1, \ldots$ the $p$-adic digits of $k =
p^{\lambda} m - j$, and, likewise, with $k'_0, k_1', \ldots$ the digits of
$k'$. By construction, $k_0 = p - j$ and $k_1 = k_2 = \ldots = k_{\lambda -
1} = p - 1$. Since the digits $k_1, k_2, \ldots, k_{\lambda - 1}$ have
maximal value, if a carry occurs when adding $k_0 + k_1 p$ and $k'_0 + k_1'
p$, then the number of carries when adding $k$ and $k'$ is at least $\lambda
- 1$. Hence, \eqref{eq:cong:pr2:binom} follows from Kummer's theorem.
It remains to observe that, again by Kummer's Theorem~\ref{thm:kummer},
assumption \eqref{eq:cong:pr2:assum} is equivalent to a carry occuring when
adding $k_0 + k_1 p$ and $k'_0 + k_1' p$.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}
\label{lem:bigO}Let $\lambda \geq 1$ be an integer. For integers $r$
and $n$ such that $n \geq \lambda$,
\begin{equation*}
( 1 - (1 - q)^{r p})^n \equiv O (q^{p n - (p - 1) (\lambda - 1)})
\pmod{p^{\lambda}} .
\end{equation*}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Note that the case $\lambda = 1$ is an immediate consequence of the fact
that $( 1 - q)^p \equiv 1 - q^p$ modulo $p$. In general, we conclude that
$(1 - q)^p = 1 + p q f (q) - q^p$ for some polynomial $f (q) \in \mathbb{Z}
[q]$. It follows from another binomial expansion that, for any integer $r$,
\begin{equation*}
1 - (1 - q)^{r p} = 1 - ( 1 + p q f (q) - q^p)^r = p q h_1 (q) + q^p h_2
( q)
\end{equation*}
for some power series $h_1 (q), h_2 ( q) \in \mathbb{Z} [ [ q]]$.
Therefore, modulo $p^{\lambda}$,
\begin{eqnarray*}
( 1 - (1 - q)^{r p})^n & = & \sum_{k = 0}^n \binom{n}{k} (p q h_1 (q))^k
(q^p h_2 ( q))^{n - k}\\
& \equiv & \sum_{k = 0}^{\lambda - 1} \binom{n}{k} (p q h_1 (q))^k (q^p
h_2 ( q))^{n - k}\\
& = & O (q^{(\lambda - 1) + p (n - (\lambda - 1))}),
\end{eqnarray*}
as claimed.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}
\label{lem:binom0}Let $p$ be a prime, $a$ an integer and $i \in \{0, 1,
\ldots, p - 1\}$. If $j$ is an integer such that $0 < j < p - i$, then
\begin{equation*}
\binom{p a + i}{p^{\lambda} m - j} \equiv 0 \pmod{p^{\lambda}} .
\end{equation*}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Write $n = p a + i$ and $k = p^{\lambda} m - j$. By Kummer's
Theorem~\ref{thm:kummer}, we need to show that there are at least $\lambda$
carries when adding $k$ and $n - k$ in base $p$. Let $n_0, n_1, \ldots$ be
the $p$-adic digits of $n$, and let $k_0, k_1, \ldots$ be the $p$-adic
digits of $k$. By assumption, $n_0 = i$ and $k_0 = p - j$, so that the
condition on $j$ implies that $k_0 > n_0$. In other words, a carry occurs
when adding the least-order $p$-adic digits of $k$ and $n - k$. Moreover,
since $k_1 = k_2 = \ldots = k_{\lambda - 1} = p - 1$, we conclude that
adding $k$ and $n - k$ in base $p$ results in at least $\lambda$ carries.
\end{proof}
We are now in a position to prove Theorem~\ref{thm:cong}.
\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem~\ref{thm:cong}]
We need to show that the coefficient of
$q^{p^{\lambda} m - j}$ in
\begin{equation*}
( 1 - q)^s F ( ( 1 - q)^r) = \lim_{N \rightarrow \infty} ( 1 - q)^s F ( (
1 - q)^r, N)
\end{equation*}
vanishes modulo $p^{\lambda}$. Let $n \geq \lambda$ be an integer.
Following \cite{as-fish}, we split the truncated series
\begin{equation*}
F ((1 - q)^r, p n - 1) = \sum_{i = 0}^{p - 1} (1 - q)^{r i} A_p (p n - 1,
i, (1 - q)^{r p})
\end{equation*}
into the part corresponding to indices $i \in S (p)$ and a second part
corresponding to indices $i \not\in S (p)$. Here, the polynomials $A_p$ are as
defined by \eqref{eq:Ap}. If $i \not\in S (p)$, then Lemma~\ref{lem:alpha}
implies that
\begin{equation*}
A_p (p n - 1, i, (1 - q)^{r p}) = (1 - (1 - q)^{r p})^n \alpha_p (n, i,
(1 - q)^{r p}) .
\end{equation*}
It therefore follows from Lemma~\ref{lem:bigO} that, for $i \not\in S (p)$,
\begin{equation*}
A_p (p n - 1, i, (1 - q)^{r p}) \equiv O (q^{p n - (p - 1) (\lambda -
1)}) \pmod{p^{\lambda}} .
\end{equation*}
(In fact, it suffices to observe the simpler fact that $A_p (p n - 1, i, (1
- q)^{r p}) = O (q^n)$.) We conclude that, modulo $p^{\lambda}$,
\begin{equation*}
F ((1 - q)^r, p n - 1) \equiv \sum_{i \in S (p)} (1 - q)^{r i} A_p (p n -
1, i, (1 - q)^{r p}) + O (q^{p n - (p - 1) (\lambda - 1)}) .
\end{equation*}
Choosing $n$ large enough, it therefore suffices to show that the
coefficient of $q^{p^{\lambda} m - j}$ in
\begin{equation}
(1 - q)^{r i + s} A_p (p n - 1, i, (1 - q)^{r p}) \label{eq:A:pf}
\end{equation}
vanishes modulo $p^{\lambda}$ for all $i \in S ( p)$.
First, suppose that $j \in \{1, 2, \ldots, p - 1 - \max S ( p, r, s) \}$.
Since $A_p (p n - 1, i, q)$ is a polynomial in $q$, it suffices to show
that, for any integer $a$,
\begin{equation}
[q^{p^{\lambda} m - j}] (1 - q)^{a p + r i + s} \equiv 0 \pmod{p^{\lambda}} . \label{eq:coeffp0}
\end{equation}
Since $r$ is relatively prime to $p$, the condition $i \in S (p)$ implies $r
i + s \equiv i'$ modulo $p$ for some $i' \in S (p, r, s)$. The condition on
$j$ implies that $j < p - i'$, and congruence \eqref{eq:coeffp0} follows
from Lemma~\ref{lem:binom0}.
Finally, suppose that the triple $( p, r, s)$ satisfies condition
\eqref{eq:cong:C} and that $j \in \{1, 2, \ldots, p - 1 - \max S^{\ast} ( p,
r, s) \}$. Let $i_0 \in \{ 0, 1, \ldots, p - 1 \}$ be such that $i_0 \equiv
- 1 / 24$ modulo $p$. If we can show that, for $i = i_0$, the coefficient of
$q^{p^{\lambda} m - j}$ in \eqref{eq:A:pf} vanishes modulo $p^{\lambda}$,
then it only remains to consider \eqref{eq:A:pf} for $i \in S^{\ast} ( p) =
S ( p) \backslash \{ i_0 \}$ and the same argument as in the previous case
proves our desired congruence.
By Lemma~\ref{lem:alpha24},
\begin{equation*}
A_p (p n - 1, i_0, q) = \left( \frac{12}{p} \right) p q^{\lfloor p / 24
\rfloor} F ( q^p, p n - 1) + O ( ( 1 - q)^n) .
\end{equation*}
As above, it follows from Lemma~\ref{lem:bigO} that, if $n$ is large enough,
then we may ignore the term $O ( ( 1 - q)^n)$. It therefore suffices to show
that the coefficient of $q^{p^{\lambda} m - j}$ in
\begin{equation*}
\left( \frac{12}{p} \right) p (1 - q)^{r i_0 + s + r p \lfloor p / 24
\rfloor} F ( (1 - q)^{r p^2})
\end{equation*}
vanishes modulo $p^{\lambda}$. Equivalently, we need to prove that
\begin{equation*}
\xi_{p^2 r, r i_0 + s + r p \lfloor p / 24 \rfloor} ( p^{\lambda} m - j)
\equiv 0 \pmod{p^{\lambda - 1}} .
\end{equation*}
These congruences follow from Lemma~\ref{lem:cong:pr2} if
\begin{equation}
\binom{r i_0 + s + r p \lfloor p / 24 \rfloor}{p^2 - j} \equiv 0
\pmod{p} . \label{eq:cong:Cj}
\end{equation}
Observe that the $p$-adic expansion of $- 1 / 24$ is $i_0 + i_1 p + i_2 p^2
+ \cdots$, where $i_1 = \lfloor p / 24 \rfloor$. This is easily seen from
\begin{equation*}
\operatorname{digit}_1 \left( - \frac{1}{24} ; p \right) = \operatorname{digit}_1 \left(
\frac{p^2 - 1}{24} ; p \right) = \left( \frac{p^2 - 1}{24} - i_0 \right)
/ p = \left\lfloor \frac{p^2 - 1}{24 p} \right\rfloor = \left\lfloor
\frac{p}{24} \right\rfloor .
\end{equation*}
Since $p \nmid r$, it follows that
\begin{equation}
r i_0 + s + r p \lfloor p / 24 \rfloor \equiv s - r / 24 \pmod{p^2} . \label{eq:cong:i0}
\end{equation}
Combining \eqref{eq:cong:Cj} and \eqref{eq:cong:i0}, it only remains to
prove
\begin{equation}
\binom{s - r / 24}{p^2 - j} \equiv 0 \pmod{p} .
\label{eq:cong:Cj2}
\end{equation}
Observing that $\operatorname{digit}_1 ( p^2 - j ; p) = p - 1$, we find that this
congruence follows from Kummer's Theorem~\ref{thm:kummer} and the assumption
that $\operatorname{digit}_1 ( s - r / 24 ; p) < p - 1$. This completes our proof.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}
By Kummer's Theorem~\ref{thm:kummer}, congruence \eqref{eq:cong:Cj2} is
equivalent to
\begin{equation}
\operatorname{digit}_1 ( s - r / 24 ; p) < p - 1, \hspace{1em} \text{or}
\hspace{1em} \operatorname{digit}_0 ( s - r / 24 ; p) < p - j. \label{eq:cong:Cjx}
\end{equation}
The purpose of this remark is to note that the second of these conditions
does not hold in the cases which are considered in the course of our proof
of Theorem~\ref{thm:cong}. In other words, one does not obtain a stronger
version of Theorem~\ref{thm:cong} by replacing condition \eqref{eq:cong:C}
with the weaker condition \eqref{eq:cong:Cj2}.
Recall that $S^{\ast} (p, r, s)$ is obtained from $S (p, r, s)$ by removing
the element $s_0 \in \{ 0, 1, \ldots, p - 1 \}$ which is congruent to $s - r
/ 24$ modulo $p$. By construction, $s_0 = \operatorname{digit}_0 ( s - r / 24 ; p)$.
Note that replacing $S (p, r, s)$ with $S^{\ast} (p, r, s)$ in
Theorem~\ref{thm:cong} provides additional congruences only if $\max S ( p,
r, s) = s_0$ and the value of $j$ is such that $j > p - 1 - s_0$. In this
case, we have $p - j \leq s_0$, so that the second condition in
\eqref{eq:cong:Cjx} does not hold.
\end{remark}
Finally, let us prove the considerably simpler Lemma~\ref{lem:cong:pr}.
\begin{proof}[Proof of Lemma~\ref{lem:cong:pr}]
We have to show that $\xi_{p^{\lambda}
r} ( p m + j) \equiv 0$ modulo $p^{\lambda}$ whenever $j$ is not divisible
by $p$. These congruences are equivalent to the fact that, modulo
$p^{\lambda}$, the generating series \eqref{eq:fishburn:rs} for the numbers
$\xi_{p^{\lambda} r} ( n)$ can be written as
\begin{equation*}
\sum_{n \geq 0} \xi_{p^{\lambda} r} (n) q^n = \sum_{n \geq 0}
\prod_{j = 1}^n (1 - (1 - q)^{p^{\lambda} r j}) \equiv \sum_{n \geq
0} c_n q^{p n},
\end{equation*}
for some integers $c_n$. It therefore suffices to show that
\begin{equation*}
(1 - q)^{p^{\lambda} r j} \equiv h ( q^p) \pmod{p^{\lambda}},
\end{equation*}
for some power series $h ( q) \in \mathbb{Z} [ [ q]]$. After binomially
expanding the left-hand side, this last congruence, follows if we can show
that, for any integers $n$ and $k$, such that $k > 0$ and $p$ does not
divide $k$,
\begin{equation}
\binom{p^{\lambda} n}{k} \equiv 0 \pmod{p^{\lambda}} .
\label{eq:binom0k}
\end{equation}
Again, this is a direct consequence of Kummer's Theorem~\ref{thm:kummer}.
Since the last $p$-adic digit of $k$ is nonzero by assumption, the $p$-adic
addition of $k$ and $p^{\lambda} n - k$ has to involve at least $\lambda$
carries in order for the sum $p^{\lambda} n$ to end in $\lambda$ many zero
digits, and \eqref{eq:binom0k} follows.
\end{proof}
\section{Conclusion}
We have extended the congruences $\xi (p m - j) \equiv 0$ modulo $p$ of
Andrews and Sellers \cite{as-fish} as well as Garvan \cite{garvan-fish} to
the case of prime powers. Limited numerical evidence suggests that the
congruences for the Fishburn numbers provided by Theorem~\ref{thm:as:x} are
complete. That is, we expect that every congruence of the form
\begin{equation*}
\xi ( \alpha m + \beta) \equiv 0 \pmod{\rho},
\end{equation*}
which holds for all integers $m$, is implied by Theorem~\ref{thm:as:x}
together with the Chinese Remainder Theorem. We have numerically verified this
conjecture for all $\beta < \alpha \leq 100$ and $\rho \leq 100$ by
checking that no additional congruences exist.
Finally, we echo the problem posed in \cite{garvan-fish} to investigate
congruences for coefficients related to other quantum modular forms, of which
$q^{1 / 24} F ( q)$, as defined in \eqref{eq:F}, is an instance
\cite{zagier-strange}.
\begin{acknowledgements}
I am grateful to Frank Garvan for comments on an
earlier version of this paper.
\end{acknowledgements}
|
\section{Introduction}
Semiconducting 2D materials are very promising for nanoelectronics and nanophotonics applications. Semimetallic graphene, though being the first 2D material to be synthesized and studied \cite {Novoselov2D2005}, cannot be used in these applications as efforts to open the band gap are not yet successful. Due to presence of an intrinsic band gap, molybdenum disulphide (MoS$_2$) a layered material has been explored extensively. The possibility of obtaining free standing single to few layers experimentally \cite{Novoselov2D2005,Frindt1963,frindtMoS1966,Joensen1986,Schumacher1993,ColemanLiquid2011,Ramak2010,Eda2011} with excellent optical absorption and photoconductivity \cite {Frindt1963, korn2011} has attracted recent interest in MoS$_2$. Bulk MoS$_2$ is an indirect band gap semiconductor with a band gap of 1.23 eV \cite{KamBGap1982}. The band gap of MoS$_{2}$ increases with the decrease in number of layers \cite{Han2011} and becomes direct \cite{Splendiani2010}, with a value of 1.9 eV \cite{Mak2010} for monolayer. This semiconducting behaviour has been exploited to various applications such as field effect transistors with high room-temperature current on/off ratios \cite{RadisavljevicNatnano} and higher on-current density \cite {Liu2011,Yoon2011}, integrated circuits \cite {Radisavljevic2011}, sensors \cite{Late2013,Li2012}, memory cells \cite{Bertolazzi2013} and phototransistors \cite{Yin2012}.
Many electronic and photonics applications require band gap tuning. For MoS$_2$, band gap tuning has been achieved by application of strain \cite{Bhattacharyya2012,Scalise2012} and electric field \cite {Ramasubramaniam2011,Qihang2012}. Semiconductor to metal (S-M) transition was observed in bilayer MoS$_2$ under NC \cite{Bhattacharyya2012} as well as in mono and bilayer MoS$_2$ under BC and BT strains \cite{Scalise2012,Yun2012,Yue2012,Mohammad2013}. Also, for bulk MoS$_2$, application of hydrostatic pressure has shown to reduce the resistivity \cite{Dave2004}. Recently, it has been experimentally shown for the first time that few-layered MoS$_{2}$ undergoes a complete semiconductor to metal transition under the applied hydrostatic pressure \cite{avinash}.
Apart from band gap, strain has also been shown as a potential method to tune the thermoelectric properties of various layered materials \cite{Zahn,Luo,Okuda,MoS2_jap,Guo}. Recent studies have shown that thermoelectric properties of Bi$_2$Te$_3$ \cite{Luo} and Sb$_2$Te$_3$ \cite{Zahn} can further be improved by application of strain. Pardo et al. reported that strain can optimize thermoelectric properties of hole-doped La$_2$NiO$_{4+\delta}$ \cite{Okuda}. MoS$_2$ and other members of dichalogenides family are sought as promising candidates for the next generation thermoelectric devices. They have several advantages, including good environmental compatibility, high thermal as well as chemical stability \cite{mos2_cm} and abundance in nature. They possess high power factors, which are comparable to that of commercially available thermoelectric materials such as Bi$_2$Te$_3$ \cite{Bi2Te3_jmc} and PbTe \cite{MoS2_jap,MoS2_fewL_JCP, mos2_pccp, PbTe_prb}. The theoretical study of Zhang et. al has shown that thermoelectric performance of bulk MoS$_{2}$ can be enhanced by the application of hydrostatic pressure \cite{MoS2_jap}. Recent studies on thermoelectric properties as a function of number of layers for MoS$_{2}$ predicted the possibility of tuning thermoelectric performance by optimizing the layer thickness \cite{MoS2_fewL_JCP,mos2_pccp}. Another important advantage of using few layers is their lower thermal conductivity compared to
bulk \cite{apl_mos2}, which is the most important parameter for efficient thermoelectric performance.
The ability to tune band gap as well as the thermoelectric properties by the application of strain shows great potential of using this 2D material as an electomechanical and thermoelectric device. However, to the best of our knowledge, no studies have investigated the strain induced S-M transition and change in thermoelectric properties of MoS$_{2}$ as a function of applied strain and layer thickness. Here we study the effect of strain and number of layers on electronic as well as thermoelectric properties of MoS$_{2}$. Using first-principles density functional calculations and Boltzmann transport theory, a comprehensive study is performed to understand the origin of S-M transition under various types of applied strains and its dependence on number of layers. We report that the S-M transition is independent of the number of layers for all the strain types. Although the trend in change in band gap remains same for all the multilayers under the same strain, it is quite distinct for different types of strain. The critical strain for S-M transition increases (decreases) for normal (biaxial) strain. The S-M transition significantly improves the electrical conductivity while keeping a large value of thermopower (250-350 $\mu$V/K), for all the multilayers studied here, giving rise to enhanced thermoelectric transport properties. We optimized the thermoelectric properties with respect to number of layers and strain, and found that 3L- and 2L-MoS$_2$ are the best materials for thermoelectric applications under 0.08 NC and 0.05 BT strain respectively for both \textit{p}- and \textit{n}-type doping.
\section{Method}
The calculations were performed using \textit{ab}-initio density functional theory (DFT) in conjunction with all-electron projector augmented wave potentials \cite{Blochl94,Kresse99} and the Perdew-Burke-Ernzerhof \cite{Perdew96} generalized gradient approximation to the electronic exchange and correlation, as implemented in the Vienna \textit{Ab initio} Simulation Package (VASP) \cite{Kresse1993}. A well converged Monkhorst-Pack \textbf{k}-point set ($15 \times 15 \times 1$) was used for the Brillouin zone sampling and conjugate gradient scheme was employed to optimize the geometries until the forces on every atom were $\leqslant $0.005 eV/\AA. Sufficient vacuum was used in perpendicular to few-layered MoS$_2$, to avoid spurious interaction among the periodic images. Grimme's DFT-D2 method \cite{Grimme2006} as implemented in VASP was used to incorporate the week van der Waals (vdW) interaction. In Grimme's method, a semi-empirical dispersion potential (D) is added to the conventional Kohn-Sham DFT energy, through a pair-wise force field.
For transport calculations, Boltzmann transport theory \cite{ashcroft,Ziman} was used, which enables calculation of the temperature and doping level-dependent thermopower and other transport parameters from the electronic structure. All the transport properties were calculated within the constant scattering time approximation (CSTA) \cite{ashcroft,Ziman}. The CSTA is based on the assumption that the scattering time does not vary strongly with energy. It also does not consider any assumptions on temperature and doping level dependence of the scattering time. Within the CSTA, the energy dependence of transport function is described through both the density of states and carrier velocity.
In this theory, the motion of an electron is treated semi-classically, and its group velocity in a specific band is given by
\begin{equation}
\nu_\alpha(i, \textbf{k}) = \frac{1}{\hbar} \frac{\partial\epsilon(i,\textbf{k})}{\partial \textbf{k}_\alpha}
\label{eq:1}
\end{equation}
where $\epsilon(i,\textbf{k})$ and $\textbf{k}_\alpha$ are the ${i^{th}}$ energy band and $\alpha^{th}$ component of wavevector $\textbf{k}$, respectively.
From group velocity $\nu_\alpha(i, \textbf{k})$ the thermopower and electrical conductivity can be obtained as
\begin{equation}
S_{\alpha\beta}(T, \mu) = \frac{1}{eT} \frac{\int\nu_\alpha{(i,\textbf{k})}\nu_\beta{(i,\textbf{k})}(\epsilon-\mu)\bigg[-\frac{\partial{f_{\mu}}(T,\epsilon)}{\partial\epsilon}\bigg]d\epsilon}{\int \nu_\alpha{(i,\textbf{k})}\nu_\beta{(i,\textbf{k})}\bigg[-\frac{\partial f_{\mu}(T,\epsilon)}{\partial\epsilon}\bigg]d\epsilon}
\label{eq:2}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\frac{\sigma_{\alpha\beta}(T, \mu)}{\tau (i, \textbf{k})} = \frac{1}{V} \int e{^2}\nu_\alpha{(i,\textbf{k})}\nu_\beta{(i,\textbf{k})}\bigg[-\frac{\partial{f_{\mu}}(T,\epsilon)}{\partial\epsilon}\bigg]d\epsilon
\label{eq:3}
\end{equation}
where $e$, $T$, $V$, $\tau$ and ${f_{\mu}}$ are the electronic charge, temperature, volume of the unit cell, relaxation time and Fermi-Dirac distribution function, respectively. Brillouin zone was sampled by a well converged 50$\times$50$\times$1 Monkhorst-Pack \textbf{k}-mesh~\cite{pack}. Subsequently, the group velocities were obtained by Fourier interpolation~\cite{fourier} of band energies on converged denser \textbf{k}-grid. These values are used in Eqs.~\ref{eq:2} and~\ref{eq:3}, to calculate the transport properties as implemented in BoltzTraP code~\cite{Madsen}. This approach has been shown to provide a good estimate of thermopower as a function of temperature and carrier concentration in a variety of thermoelectric materials without any adjustable parameters~\cite{Jodin2004,Singh2011,Lee2011,Parker2013,Pandey2013}.
\section{Results and Discussion}
\begin{figure*}[!ht]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=6.5in]{figure1.pdf}
\caption{ (a) Structure of $n$-layered 2H-MoS$_2$. The Mo and S atoms are shown by purple and yellow spheres. The direction of NC strain is shown by vertical arrows. (b) Top view of MoS$_2$ multilayers with arrows showing the application of biaxial strain. (c) Band structures of $n$L-MoS$_2$ for $n =$ 2, 3, 4 and 5 are shown along the high symmetric K points. The horizontal dotted line represents the Fermi level.}
\label{fig:1}
\end{figure*}
The optimization of the lattice parameters was done using the primitive unit cell of bulk MoS$_2$. The calculated values of $a$ (3.21 \AA) and $c$ (12.42 \AA) are very close to other reported theoretical \cite{Espejo2013} and experimental \cite{Boker2001} results. The multi-layered structures were obtained by arranging MoS$_2$ layers one over another to form AB stacking (Fig. \ref{fig:1} (a)) and named as $n$L-MoS$_2$, where $n$ is the number of MoS$_2$ layers. The NC strain was applied perpendicular to the plane of the multi-layers and along $c$ axis for the bulk case (Fig. \ref{fig:1} (a)). The upper and the lower layers were constrained to move along the normal direction at each NC strain for the multi-layers. For the biaxial cases, equal strain was applied along the $a$ and $b$ axes of the multi-layers as shown in Fig. \ref{fig:1} (b). However, no constraint was used while applying the biaxial strain, allowing the layers to optimize their interlayer distance in each strain. The change in electronic structure and angular momentum resolved density of states (LDOS) under the application of strain was also analyzed for each multilayer MoS$_2$.
Unstrained MoS$_2$ with more than one layer and bulk has an indirect band gap with valence band maxima (VBM) and conduction band minima (CBM) at $\Gamma$- and K-points of the Brillouin zone, respectively as shown in Fig. \ref{fig:1} (c) for $n$L-MoS$_2$ with $n=$ 2, 3, 4 and 5. The band structure of all these multilayers show that the number of bands forming VBM and CBM increases and are equal to the number of layers. These bands are nearly degenerate at K-point and completely split at the $\Gamma$-point. Furthermore, the spacing between the VBM and VBM$-1$ at the $\Gamma$-point decreases with the increasing number of layers. This nature of the band structure has important implications under the applied strain.
\subsection{Normal compressive strain}
First, we study the effect of NC strain on electronic structure and thermoelectric properties of a few-layer MoS$_2$. The calculated band gap as a function of NC strain is plotted in Fig. \ref{fig:2} (a) for $n$L-MoS$_2$ with increasing number of layers. The applied NC strain leads to S-M transition for all the multilayers and bulk MoS$_2$. The band gap reduces smoothly and becomes zero at a threshold strain $\varepsilon_{th}$, the magnitude of which increases with increasing number of layers and converges towards the bulk limit, i.e., $-0.16$ (Fig. \ref{fig:2} (a) inset). The change in the electronic structure under the application of strain was analyzed for each multilayer and is shown for 3L-MoS$_2$ (which is the best case in terms of thermoelectric performance as shown below) in Fig. \ref{fig:2} (b). With the increase in normal compression, the degenerate bands begin to split (Fig. \ref{fig:2} (b)). The splitting is observed to be more prevalent in the valence band (VB) as compared to the conduction band (CB). The VBM as well as the CBM start to move towards the Fermi level with strain, reducing the band gap smoothly as shown in Fig. \ref{fig:2} (a). An S-M transition occurs when the VBM crosses the Fermi level at the $\Gamma$-point. Upon removal of NC strain, MoS$_{2}$ recovers its semiconducting phase, completely.
\begin{figure*}[!ht]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=6.5in]{figure2.pdf}
\caption{(a) Variation of band gap under NC strain is plotted for various multilayers. The variation of $\varepsilon_{th}$ with the inverse of layer thickness ($d$) is shown in the inset. (b) Band structure of 3L-MoS$_{2}$ with increasing NC strain. (c) Calculated $\sigma/\tau$ ratio for MoS$_{2}$ as a function of NC strain for different layer thicknesses. Solid and dotted lines correspond to \textit{p}- and \textit{n}-type of doping, respectively. Thermopower (S) for MoS$_{2}$ as a function of strain at different layer thickness for (d) \textit{p}-type and (e) \textit{n}-type doping. Calculated power factors with respect to relaxation time ($S^{2}\sigma/\tau$) for MoS$_{2}$ as a function of strain for different layer thicknesses for (f) \textit{p}-type and (g) \textit{n}-type doping. In the above transport calculations, the doping level and temperature are fixed at 5 $\times$10$^{19}$ cm$^{-3}$ and 900 K, respectively.}
\label{fig:2}
\end{figure*}
The change in electronic structure influences the transport and thermoelectric properties, significantly. Next, we studied the effect of NC strain on transport properties of MoS$_2$ with increase in the number of layers. The calculated $\sigma/\tau$ is shown in Fig. \ref{fig:2} (c). $\sigma/\tau$ increases with increasing NC strain for both \textit{p}- and \textit{n}-type of carrier. Upon application of NC strain both conduction and valence bands become more dispersive giving rise to multi carrier transport, which leads to the increase in conductivity. For the same number of layers, the value of $\sigma/\tau$ was observed to be higher in the case of \textit{n}-type carrier under NC strain. This is expected because conventionally MoS$_2$ is an \textit{n}-type semiconductor. This observation is in good agreement with previous theoretical studies \cite{MoS2_fewL_JCP, mos2_pccp}. The dependence of $\sigma/\tau$ on strain can be explained from the changes in band dispersion as shown in Fig. \ref{fig:2} (b) for 3L-MoS$_2$. Upon application of NC strain, the conduction band gets highly affected in comparison to valence band. CBM becomes more dispersive than VBM increasing the mobility of $n$-type charge carriers, resulting in an enhanced value of conductivity in comparison to the \textit{p}-type carriers. With the increase in strain, 3L- and 2L-MoS$_2$ show highest value of $\sigma/\tau$ (under both \textit{p} and \textit{n}-type doping) due to the contribution from the additional conduction channels, which open up on application of strain. Among all the layers studied here, the factor $\sigma/\tau$ is maximum for 3L-MoS$_2$ over the entire range of NC strains. Assuming relaxation time ($\tau$) to be independent of number of layers, one can conclude that 3L-MoS$_2$ will show the highest electrical conductivity.
Next, we calculated the thermopower of the unstrained and strained MoS$_{2}$ for different layer thicknesses. The average thermopower ($S$) at 900 K as a function of the NC strain with increasing layer thickness, for \textit{p} and \textit{n}-type doping, are shown in Figs. \ref{fig:2} (d) and (e), respectively. The average thermopower is defined as 1/3 of the trace of the thermopower tensor ($S_{av} = (S_{xx} + S_{yy} + S_{zz})/3$). For these calculations, the doping level is fixed at 5 $\times$ 10$^{19}$ cm$^{-3}$ which is the optimized value for all the layers. The thermoelectric performance peaks at 900 K, and therefore, all the results are presented at this temperature.
\begin{figure*}[!ht]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=6.5in]{figure3.pdf}
\caption{(a) Variation of band gap under BC strain is plotted for various multilayers. The variation of $\varepsilon_{th}$ with the inverse of layer thickness ($d$) is shown in the inset. (b) Band structure of 2L-MoS$_{2}$ under increasing BC strain. (c) Calculated $\sigma/\tau$ ratio for BC strain for MoS$_{2}$ as a function of strain for different layer thicknesses. Solid and dotted lines correspond to \textit{p}- and \textit{n}-type of doping, respectively. Thermopower ($S$) for MoS$_{2}$ as a function of strain at different layer thicknesses for (d) \textit{p}-type and for (e) \textit{n}-type doping. Calculated power factors with respect to relaxation time ($S^{2}\sigma/\tau$) for MoS$_{2}$ as a function of strain for different layer thicknesses for (f) \textit{p}-type and (g) \textit{n}-type doping. In the above transport calculations, the doping level and temperature are fixed at 5 $\times$10$^{19}$ cm$^{-3}$ and 900 K, respectively.}
\label{fig:3}
\end{figure*}
With increase in the number of layers, the thermopower increases due to increase in charge carrier pockets Fig. \ref{fig:2} (b). Under applied NC strain, the changes in the thermopower show the same trend for different layer thicknesses except for 2L- and 3L-MoS$_2$ at lower strains, where the thermopower, first increases and then decreases with peaks at -0.04 and -0.09 for \textit{p}- and \textit{n}-type of carriers, respectively. The absence of such peak for four and higher number of layers indicates the advent of bulk-like behaviour. With the application of strain the band gap starts to decrease, which leads to a slight decrease in thermopower. However, under the strain range studied here, the value of thermopower still remains high, lying in between 250-380 and 390-440 $\mu$V/K for \textit{p}- and \textit{n}-type doping, respectively. Such high values of thermopower are comparable to the best known thermoelectric materials such as PbTe \cite{PbTe_prb} and Bi$_2$Te$_3$ \cite{Bi2Te3_jmc}. These high values of thermopower can be explained by analyzing the band structure, as mentioned previously. Upon application of strain, the bands move close to the Fermi level, giving rise to more electron and hole pockets, which leads to high thermopower.
In order to quantify the effect of strain on thermoelectric performance ($ZT = S^{2}\sigma/\kappa_{total}$, where $\kappa_{total}$ is the total thermal conductivity), we calculate power factor ($S^{2}\sigma$), which is the most dominant term in $ZT$. The power factor represents the ability of a material to produce useful electrical power at a given temperature gradient. The large power factor is indicative of better thermoelectric performance. As a first approximation for power factor ($S^{2}\sigma$), here, the quantity $S^{2}\sigma/\tau$ is calculated at 900K for different layer thicknesses as a function of applied NC strain and is shown in Figs. \ref{fig:2} (f) and (g) for \textit{p} and \textit{n}-type doping, respectively. 3L-MoS$_{2}$ gives the highest value of $S^{2}\sigma/\tau$ due to its highest conductivity and large thermopower for all the NC strain ranges. For 2L- and 3L-MoS$_2$, the power factor peaks at -0.04 and -0.09 strain for \textit{p}- and \textit{n}-type of doping, respectively. With the applied NC strain, the power factor slightly increases for \textit{p}-type. However, for \textit{n}-type, power factor increases by nearly two times in comparison to unstrained case, attaining a maxima near -0.09 strain. Therefore, NC strain has emerged an effective way to tune both electronic and thermoelectric properties.
\subsection{Biaxial compressive strain}
We further study the effect of BC strain on electronic structure and thermoelectric properties of few layer MoS$_2$.
\begin{figure*}[!ht]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=6.5in]{figure4.pdf}
\caption{(a) Variation of band gap under BT strain is plotted for various multilayers. The variation of $\varepsilon_{th}$ with the inverse of layer thickness ($d$) is shown in the inset. (b) Band structure of 2L-MoS$_{2}$ under increasing BT strain. (c) Calculated $\sigma/\tau$ ratio for BT strain for MoS$_{2}$ as a function of strain for different layer thicknesses. Solid and dotted lines correspond to \textit{p}- and \textit{n}-type of doping, respectively. Thermopower ($S$) for MoS$_{2}$ as function of strain at different layer thicknesses for (d) \textit{p}-type and (e) \textit{n}-type doping. Calculated power factors with respect to relaxation time ($S^{2}\sigma/\tau$) for MoS$_{2}$ as a function strain for different layer thicknesses for (f) \textit{p}-type and for (g) \textit{n}-type doping. In the above transport calculations, the doping level and temperature are fixed at 5 $\times$ and 900 K, respectively.}
\label{fig:4}
\end{figure*}
The calculated band gap as a function of BC strain is plotted in Fig. \ref{fig:3} (a) for increasing number of layers. For BC strain, the band gap increases first and then decreases all the way to zero as shown in Fig. \ref{fig:3} (a). The change in band structure is also observed to be very different for BC strain compared to NC strain. The nature of the dispersion changes near the Fermi level with the increase in strain as shown in Fig. \ref{fig:3} (b) for 2L-MoS$_2$. The position of VBM and CBM changes as we move towards higher strain. With the change in the combination of the positions of VBM and CBM, the slope of the band gap vs. strain plot changes as seen in Fig. \ref{fig:3} (a). Five different slopes were seen in the band gap vs. strain plot (Fig. \ref{fig:3} (a)). Initially the position of CBM and VBM are at the high symmetric K- and $\Gamma$-points, respectively, till a strain of -0.02 is reached. During this interval of strain, the band gap increases as shown in Fig. \ref{fig:3} (a) (region of first slope). The position of CBM then changes from K-point to in between K- and $\Gamma$-point, while VBM remains at the $\Gamma$-point, till a strain of -0.04 is reached (region of second slope). Beyond this strain, the band gap begins to decrease as VBM changes to K-point, while CBM remains in between K and $\Gamma$ (region of third slope). At a strain of -0.12 the VBM changes from K- to M-point, while the CBM remains unchanged. At this point, the dispersion of the band becomes flat near the VBM (region of fourth slope). The position of CBM shifts from M- towards $\Gamma$-point, slightly after a strain of -0.13 (region of fifth slope). Finally the CBM crosses the Fermi level at a strain of $\varepsilon_{th}=$-0.15 to give S-M transition. The magnitude of $\varepsilon_{th}$ decreases with increasing number of layers as shown in Fig. \ref{fig:3} (a) inset.
Overall both CBM and VBM move towards the Fermi level. Unlike NC strain, CBM crosses the Fermi level first. The nature of change in the band structure remains the same for all multilayers under BC strain.
Similar to the band gap, the transport and thermoelectric properties also show different behaviour under BC strain. The plot of $\sigma/\tau$ as a function of BC strain, as shown in Fig. \ref{fig:3} (c) shows opposite trend for both types of charge carriers. $\sigma/\tau$ first decreases with increasing strain and subsequently increases, for both types of carriers. This effect can, once again, be explained on the basis of the band structure. As shown in Fig. \ref{fig:3} (a) the band gap first increases for lower strain values, which leads to initial decrease in conductivity. On further increase in strain, value of $\sigma/\tau$ increases for all the multilayers. The rate of change of conductivity is higher for $n$-type than $p$-type, because the conduction band becomes more dispersive (Fig. \ref{fig:3} (b)) under increasing BC strain giving rise to enhancement in $\sigma/\tau$. However, the bands close to VBM becomes less dispersive (heavy) Fig. \ref{fig:3} (b), which reduces the mobility of holes, and hence, the reduction in $\sigma/\tau$. Under BC strain, 2L-MoS$_{2}$ shows highest value of $\sigma/\tau$ for both $p$ and $n$-type doping.
\begin{figure*}[!ht]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=6.5in]{figure5.pdf}
\caption{ Percentage change in band gap with strain for (a) NC (b) BC, and (c) BT strain types.}
\label{fig:5}
\end{figure*}
Next, we study the effect of BC strain on thermopower as shown in Figs. \ref{fig:3} (d) and (e) for \textit{p}- and \textit{n}-type doping, respectively. The thermopower decreases with increase in strain and saturates at higher strains for $n$-type doping. However, for \textit{p}-type doping, there is an initial decrease with a gradual increase, which finally saturates. This difference in trend of thermopower for \textit{n} and \textit{p}-type of carrier can also be attributed to the band structure, as shown in Fig. \ref{fig:3} (b). Under strain, the conduction band becomes more dispersive. However, some of the valence bands become heavy, for e.g., the band along M-$\Gamma$. The presence of these heavy bands increases the thermopower with increasing strain for \textit{p}-type doping. A similar trend is also observed for all the multilayers. Furthermore, the power factor increases and attains a maxima around -0.05 and -0.075 BC strain for \textit{p} and \textit{n}-type doping. The highest power factor achieved is for 2L- and 5L-MoS$_2$ under \textit{p}- and \textit{n}-type doping. In particular, under \textit{n}-type doping, the factor $S^{2}\sigma/\tau$ gets enhanced by 4.5 times. Interestingly, these layers also posses highest electrical conductivity, implying that by tuning the electrical conductivity using BC strain, one can enhance the thermoelectric performance, considerably.
\subsection{Biaxial tensile strain}
\begin{figure*}[!ht]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=6.5in]{figure6.pdf}
\caption{Angular momentum projected density of states (LDOS) of Mo and S and corresponding isosurfaces (value of 0.09 eV/\AA$^3$) of the band-decomposed charge density (VBM and CBM) for 3L-MoS$_2$ under NC strains of (a) 0.00 (b) -0.06 and (c) -0.12, respectively. The Fermi level is shown by red dotted lines.}
\label{fig:6}
\end{figure*}
We investigate the effect of BT strain on electronic structure and transport properties of MoS$_{2}$. For all the multilayers, band gap reduces smoothly with the increase in BT strain and becomes zero after a threshold strain $\varepsilon_{th}$, exhibiting S-M transition. Similar to the BC strain, the magnitude of $\varepsilon_{th}$ decreases with increasing number of layers as shown in the inset of Fig. \ref{fig:4} (a). The nature of the dispersion does not change as shown in Fig. \ref{fig:4} (a) for 2L-MoS$_2$. The VBM and CBM remain at K- and $\Gamma$-points, respectively throughout the applied strain range. No significant splitting of bands was observed for this type of strain. The CBM and the VBM move towards the Fermi level as shown in the band structure plots. Similar to the case of NC strain, VBM crosses the Fermi level at $\Gamma$ point at the S-M transition. However, the nature of the change in the band gap vs. strain plot is different in BT strain (Fig. \ref{fig:4} (a)) as compared to the NC and BC strains.
The calculated $\sigma/\tau$ is shown in Fig. \ref{fig:4} (c) for BT strain. $\sigma/\tau$ ratio increases with increasing strain for both types of carriers. This is similar to the NC strain. However, the rate of increase in conductivity is more in the case of \textit{n}-type carriers than the \textit{p}-type. Under this strain, CBM becomes more dispersive than VBM, thereby, increasing the mobility of charge carriers, leading to enhanced value of conductivity in comparison to the \textit{p}-type carriers. More importantly, the factor $\sigma/\tau$ attains a high order of magnitude under BT strain when compared to NC strain indicating better tuning of transport properties. We next calculate the thermopower under BT strain as shown in Figs. \ref{fig:4} (d) and (e) for \textit{p} and \textit{n}-type doping. The thermopower with BT strain shows similar behaviour as that in the case of NC strain.
For biaxial strain as suggested by high conductivity values, the quantity $S^{2}\sigma/\tau$ becomes maximum for tensile strain. The highest power factor achieved under BT strain is for 2L$-$MoS$_{2}$, which is nearly 1.5 and 4 times higher in comparison with unstrained case for \textit{p}- and \textit{n}-type doping, as shown in Figs. \ref{fig:4} (f) and (g), respectively. The figure of merit $ZT$ closely follows the overall change in the $S^{2}\sigma/\tau$ and hence, it can also be enhanced by the same factor.
\begin{figure*}[!ht]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=6.5in]{figure7.pdf}
\caption{ Angular momentum projected density of states (LDOS) of Mo and S and corresponding isosurface (value of 0.09 eV/\AA$^3$) of band-decomposed charge density (VBM and CBM) for 2L-MoS$_2$ under BC and BT strains. (a) For unstrained case. (b)-(d) Under -0.04, -0.07 and -0.15 BC strains, respectively. (e)-(f) under 0.03 and 0.06 BT strains. The Fermi level is shown by red dotted lines.}
\label{fig:7}
\end{figure*}
\subsection{Mechanism of S-M transition}
In order to compare the sensitivity in terms of change in band gap under the application of NC, BC and BT strains, the percentage reduction in band gap was calculated for all the multilayers considered in this work. The plots of band gap reduction as a function of strain are shown in Figs. \ref{fig:5} (a), (b) and (c) for NC, BC and BT strain, respectively. The curves are almost linear for both the NC as well as the BT strain. The curves are non-linear in case of BC strain, showing a combination of different slopes corresponding to the different regions, as shown in the Fig. \ref{fig:3} (a). From the plots, it is seen that the BT strain leads to the fastest S-M transition as compared to other strains. Increase in the number of layers increases the sensitivity for this kind of strain.
Though the threshold strain ($\varepsilon_{th}$) is the lowest for BT strain, the application of NC strain is still practically more feasible than the biaxial strains. This is because of the fact that intra-layer covalent bonding between Mo and S is much more stronger than inter-layer vdW bonding. Although the strain required is small in case of BT strain, in comparison to NC strain, more energy and hence pressure will be required to obtain S-M transition as compared to the later case.
To understand the mechanism for this S-M transition under NC, BC, and BT strain, we analyze the contribution from different molecular orbitals by performing LDOS and band-decomposed charge density calculations. This is shown in Fig. \ref{fig:6} for 3L-MoS$_2$ under NC strain and in Fig. \ref{fig:7} for 2L-MoS$_2$ under biaxial strain. For all unstrained MoS$_2$ multilayers, the Mo-$d$ and S-$p$ orbitals have the highest contribution to the VB as well as the CB as shown in Figs. \ref{fig:6} (a) and \ref{fig:7} (a) for 3L- and 2L-MoS$_2$, respectively. Both VB and CB are mainly composed of Mo-$d_{x^2-y^2}$ and $d_{z^2}$. However, in the case of VB, there is some additional contribution from S-$p_{z}$ orbital. This is clearly seen in the band-decomposed charge density (Fig. \ref{fig:6} (a)), where CBM and VBM mainly originate from around Mo-$d_{x^2-y^2}$ (in-plane lobes) and $d_{z^2}$ (out-of-plane lobes). The contribution of S-$p_{z}$ orbital to the VBM is also indicated by the out-of-plane lobes in the band-decomposed charge density. With the application of NC strain, the LDOS corresponding to VB and CB moves towards the Fermi level resulting in the reduction of band gap. All the orbitals of Mo and S atoms contribute to the shift in CB, while in case of VB the movement towards the Fermi level occurs mainly due to the contribution from Mo-$d_{z^2}$ and S-$p_z$ orbitals. The most dominant interaction happens between the Mo-$d_{z^2}$ orbital of one layer and to the S-$p_z$ orbital of another layer. Similar changes were observed for other layers and bulk MoS$_2$. Based on the LDOS and band-decomposed charge density analysis, one can conclude that the strong inter-layer interaction between Mo-$d_{z^2}$ and S-$p_{z}$ is the main cause for S-M transition under NC strain.
The change in LDOS is completely different in case of BC strain. The tail in LDOS of Mo-$d_{z^2}$, forming the VBM and CBM moves away from the Fermi level as the in-plane interaction increases caused by reduction in Mo-S bond lengths. Due to this movement of Mo-$d_{z^2}$ orbitals, initially the band gap increases for lower strain values. With further increase in strain, LDOS of Mo-$d_{z^2}$ crosses the tail of the LDOS of Mo-$d_{x^2-y^2}$, which now consists both CBM and VBM. The in-plane orbitals begin to interact strongly, causing the shift in the position of VBM from $\Gamma$ to K while the CBM moves from K to in between K and $\Gamma$. This can also be seen in the band-decomposed charge density plots where, the VBM changes to completely planar, while CBM has a slight out-of-plane contribution from Mo-$d_{z^2}$ orbital (Figs. \ref{fig:7} (b) and (c)). With further increase in in-plane interaction, the Mo-$d_{x^2-y^2}$ and S-$p_x$ orbitals hybridize strongly within the layer as seen in Fig. \ref{fig:7} (d). This strong intra-layer hybridization leads to the closing of gap. This phenomenon can be seen in the band-decomposed charge density Fig. \ref{fig:7} (d), where the VBM and CBM show strong in-plane character near S-M transition.
In the case of BT strain, the VBM and the CBM has maximum contribution from Mo-$d_{z^2}$ orbitals (Fig. \ref{fig:7} (e)). With the increase in BT strain, Mo-$d_{z^2}$ and S-$p_{z}$ orbitals start to hybridize strongly within the same layer. This strong hybridization further leads to S-M transition Fig. \ref{fig:7} (f). Although in the case of both NC and BT strains, the S-M transition is dominated by Mo-$d_{z^2}$ and S-$p_{z}$, but in the case of NC strain the interaction happens between Mo and S atoms from different layers. However, for BT strain this interaction is within the same layer.
\section{Conclusion}
In conclusion, we show the tuning of band gap in multilayer MoS$_2$ under the application of normal as well as biaxial strains. A reversible semiconductor to metal transition is obtained by applying NC, BC and BT strains. The nature of the transition in terms of the electronic structure is different in each kind of strain. For a particular strain, the reduction in the band gap remains unchanged for different number of layers. However, the threshold strain at which the transition occurs, increases (decreases) with increase in number of layers for normal (biaxial) strain. Threshold strain is the least in case of the BT strain and is the maximum for the BC strain. The mechanism behind the S-M transition is also investigated in terms of angular momentum resolved density of states and band-decomposed charge density. We demonstrate that inter-layer interaction between Mo-$d_{z^2}$ and S-$p_z$ causes the S-M transition under NC strain. However, S-M transition under BC and BT strain is caused by the strong hybridization of the intra-plane Mo-$d_{x^2-y^2}$ and S-$p_x$ orbitals and Mo-$d_{z^2}$ and S-$p_{z}$ orbitals, respectively. The change in transport properties of multilayers MoS$_{2}$ were also investigated under the application of NC, BC, and BT strain for different layer thicknesses. The strain modifies the dispersion of bands, which improves the thermoelectric performance of the material, significantly. The thermopower results suggest that under NC strain the efficient thermoelectric performance can be achieved at -0.04 and -0.09 \% for \textit{p} and \textit{n}-type doping respectively. The 3L-MoS$_{2}$ shows maximum power factor under NC strain. While for biaxial strain, the enhanced performance could be achieved under 0.05 \% compressive/tensile strain for 2L-MoS$_{2}$. The possibility of tuning of band gap by applying strain provides potential application of MoS$_2$ multilayers not only in thermoelectric but also in sensors and other electromechanical devices. Moreover, the value of the threshold strain provides a means to determine the number of layers in an experimentally grown multilayer MoS$_{2}$. Our results indicate that the maximum thermoelectric performance can be achieved under biaxial strain, which can be achievable in experiments. Recently, it has been shown that biaxial strain can be applied by growing thin films on lattice mismatched substrates \cite{MoS2_apl_strain,local_strain_MOS2,few_layer_mOS2}. Therefore, the complete potential of tuning electronic and thermoelectric properties of this wonderful material, can be realized experimentally.
\section*{Acknowledgements}
This work was supported by the ADA under NPMASS and DST nanomission. The authors thank the Supercomputer Education and Research Centre and Materials Research Centre, IISc, for providing the required computational facilities for the above work.
\section*{References}
\providecommand{\newblock}{}
|
\section{Introduction}
In general, a propositional calculus is given by a finite set of propositional formulas over some signature together with a finite set of rules of inferences. The problem of recognizing axiomatizations for a propositional calculus is formulated as follows: whether a given finite set of propositional formulas constitutes (axiomatizes) an adequate axiom system for this calculus, i.e., each formula of the calculus is derivable from a given set of formulas by the rules of the calculus. The question of decidability of this problem was proposed by Tarski in 1946~\cite{Sinaceur:2000}. In this paper we consider only the propositional calculus with the rules of modus ponens and substitution.
The undecidability of recognizing axiomatizations for the classical propositional calculus was obtained due to Linial and Post in 1949~\cite{LinialPost:49}. They gave sketch of proofs for a number of results, one of them expressible in the form that it is undecidable whether a given finite set of propositional formulas axiomatizes all classical tautologies. Note that they considered only formulas over the signature $\{ \neg, \vee \}$ and the rule of modus ponens was formulated appropriately. Later the proof of their result was restored by Davis~\cite[pp.~137--142]{Davis:58}, and a complete proof appeared in the work of Yntema~\cite{Yntema:64}.
For the intuitionistic propositional calculus over the signature $\left\{ \neg, \vee, \&, \to \right\}$ the same result was proved by Kuznetsov in 1963~\cite{Kuznetsov:63}. Moreover, he proved that this holds for every superintuitionistic calculus, i.e., a finitely axiomatizable extension of the intuitionistic propositional calculus. Particularly, this holds for the classical propositional calculus and the Linial and Post theorem.
In 1961, A. A. Markov (Jr.) proposed the following problem: is it decidable whether a given finite set of implicational propositional formulas, i.e., formulas over the signature $\{\to\}$, axiomatizes all classical implicational tautologies? Kuznetsov in~\cite{Kuznetsov:63} mentioned that this problem seems to be still open.
In 1994, Marcinkowski~\cite{Marcinkowski:94} proved that Markov's problem is undecidable. Moreover, Marcinkowski obtained a much stronger result: fix an implicational propositional tautology $A$ that is not of the form $B \to B$ for some formula $B$, then it is undecidable whether $A$ is derivable from a given finite set of implicational formulas by the rules of modus ponens and substitution.
Recently, Zolin in 2013~\cite{Zolin:2013} re-established the result of Kuznetsov for the superintuitionistic propositional calculus over the signatures $\{ \wedge, \to \}$ and $\{ \vee, \to \}$. It is based on the so-called tag systems introduced by Post~\cite{Post:43} and proposed in 2009 by Bokov~\cite{Bokov:2009} for the proof of the result of Linial and Post. Besides Zolin in~\cite{Zolin:2013} gave a detailed and useful historical survey of related results.
The aim of this paper is to prove the undecidability of the problem of recognizing axiomatizations for every superintuitionistic implicational propositional calculus over a signature containing the connective $\to$. By a superintuitionistic implicational propositional calculus we mean a finitely axiomatizable extension of intuitionistic implicational propositional calculus.
The paper is organized as follows. In the first part we introduce the basic notation, give a historical survey of related results, and state our main result. In the second part we reduce the halting problem for tag systems to the problem of recognizing axiomatizations for propositional calculi, and prove our main result.
\section{Preliminaries and results}
Let $\mathcal{V}$ be an infinite set of propositional variables. Letters $x, y, z, u$, etc., are used to denote propositional variables. The signature $\Sigma$ is a finite set of connectives. Each connective is associated with a unique, classical, two-valued truth-function. Usually connectives are binary or unary such as $\{\neg, \vee, \wedge, \to\}$.
Propositional formulas or $\Sigma$-formulas are built up from the signature $\Sigma$ and propositional variables from $\mathcal{V}$ in the usual way. Capital letters $A, B, C$, etc., are used to denote propositional formulas. Throughout the paper, we will omit the outermost parentheses in formulas and parentheses assuming the customary priority of connectives.
In this paper, we will consider arbitrary signatures containing the binary connective $\to$. Note that by Gladstone~\cite{Gladstone:65} we can suppose that the signature $\Sigma$ does not contain the symbol~$\to$, but there is some propositional formula having $x, y$ as sole variables, whose truth-table interpretation is ``$x$ implies $y$''. In this case we denote the specified formula simply by $x \to y$.
A \emph{propositional calculus} $P$ over a signature $\Sigma$ (or a $\Sigma$-\emph{calculus}) is a system consisting of a finite set $P$ of $\Sigma$-formulas referred to as \emph{axioms} and two rules of inference:
1) \emph{modus ponens}
\begin{equation*}
A, A \to B \vdash B;
\end{equation*}
2) \emph{substitution}
\begin{equation*}
A \vdash \sigma A,
\end{equation*}
where $\sigma A$ is the substitution instance of $A$, i.e., the result of applying the substitution $\sigma$ to the formula $A$.
Denote by $[P]$ the set of derivable (or provable) formulas of a calculus $P$. A \emph{derivation} in $P$ is defined from the axioms and the rules of inference in the usual way. The statement that a formula $A$ is drivable from $P$ is denoted by $P \vdash A$.
Let us introduce the following partial order relation on the set of all propositional calculus. We write $P_1 \leq P_2$ (or, equivalently, $P_2 \geq P_1$) if each drivable formula of $P_1$ is also drivable from $P_2$, i.e., if $[P_1] \subseteq [P_2]$. We write $P_1 \sim P_2$ and say that two calculi $P_1$ and $P_2$ are \emph{equivalent} if $[P_1] = [P_2]$. Finally, we write $P_1 < P_2$ if $[P_1] \subsetneq [P_2]$.
Denote by $\mathbf{Cl}_{\Sigma}$ the classical propositional calculus over a signature $\Sigma$, and by $\mathbf{Int}_{\Sigma}$ the intuitionistic propositional calculus over a signature $\Sigma$~\cite{Kleene:2002}. We assume that the signature $\Sigma$ of the intuitionistic propositional calculus $\mathbf{Int}_{\Sigma}$ is a subset of the following set of connectives $\{\wedge, \vee, \neg, \to, \leftrightarrow, \top, \bot\}$.
Consider the intuitionistic implicational propositional calculus $\mathbf{Int}_{\{\to\}}$ with the set of axioms~\cite[p.69]{HilbertBernays:68}:
\smallskip \noindent
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{ll}
$(\mathrm{A}_1)$ & $x \to (y \to x)$, \\
$(\mathrm{A}_2)$ & $(x \to (y \to z)) \to ((x \to y) \to (x \to z))$. \\
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\smallskip
\noindent The classical implicational propositional calculus $\mathbf{Cl}_{\{\to\}}$ is obtained from $\mathbf{Int}_{\{\to\}}$ by adding the Peirce law $((x \to y) \to x) \to x$~\cite[p.52]{Tarski:83}.
Now we define some recognizing problems for a fixed propositional calculus $P_0$.
\begin{Problem}[Recognizing axiomatizations]
Given a propositional calculus $P$, determine whether $P_0 \sim P$.
\end{Problem}
\begin{Problem}[Recognizing extensions]
Given a propositional calculus $P$, determine whether $P_0 \leq P$.
\end{Problem}
\begin{Problem}[Recognizing completeness]
Given a propositional calculus $P$ such that $P \leq P_0$, determine whether $P_0 \leq P$.
\end{Problem}
The previous results can be summarized as follows.
\begin{Theorem}[Linial and Post, 1949]
The problems of recognizing axiomatizations, extensions, and completeness for $\mathbf{Cl}_{\{\neg, \vee\}}$ are undecidable.
\end{Theorem}
\begin{Theorem}[Kuznetsov, 1963]
Fix a calculus $P_0 \geq \mathbf{Int}_{\{\neg, \vee, \&, \to\}}$, then the problems of recognizing axiomatizations, extensions, and completeness for $P_0$ are undecidable.
\end{Theorem}
\begin{Theorem}[Marcinkowski, 1994] \label{T:Marcinkowski}
Fix a $\{\to\}$-tautology $A$ that is not of the form $B \to B$ for some formula $B$, then the problem of recognizing extensions for the $\{\to\}$-calculus $\{A\}$ is undecidable.
\end{Theorem}
Since the implicational calculi $\mathbf{Cl}_{\{\to\}}$ and $\mathbf{Int}_{\{\to\}}$ can be axiomatized by the following single formulas, as shown by {\L}ukasiewicz~\cite{Lukasiewicz:48} and Meredith~\cite{Meredith:53},
\begin{align*}
\mathbf{Cl}_{\{\to\}} & \sim \{ ((x \to y) \to z) \to ((z \to x) \to (u \to x)) \} \\
\mathbf{Int}_{\{\to\}} & \sim \{ ((x \to y) \to z) \to (u \to ((y \to (z \to v)) \to (y \to v))) \}
\end{align*}
the following result also makes sense.
\begin{Corollary}
The problems of recognizing axiomatizations, extensions, \\ and completeness for $\mathbf{Cl}_{\{\to\}}$ and the problem of recognizing extensions for $\mathbf{Int}_{\{\to\}}$ are undecidable.
\end{Corollary}
In 1930, Tarski~\cite{Tarski:83} proved that every propositional calculus, which contains the formulas $x \to ( y \to x )$ and $x \to ( y \to ( ( x \to ( y \to z ) ) \to z ) )$, can be axiomatized by a single formula. Since these formulas are derivable from $\mathbf{Int}_{\{\to\}}$, we have the following corollary of the Marcinkowski result.
\begin{Corollary}
\end{Corollary}
Fix a signature $\Sigma \supseteq \{\to\}$ and a $\Sigma$-calculus $P_0 \geq \mathbf{Int}_{\{\to\}}$, then the problem of recognizing extensions for $P_0$ is undecidable.
\begin{Theorem}[Zolin, 2013]
Fix a signature $\Sigma \supseteq \{\wedge, \to\}$ and a $\Sigma$-calculus $P_0 \geq \mathbf{Int}_{\{\wedge, \to\}}$, then the problems of recognizing axiomatizations, extensions, and completeness for $P_0$ are undecidable.
\end{Theorem}
Our main result is the following theorems.
\begin{Theorem} \label{T:main}
Fix a signature $\Sigma \supseteq \{\to\}$ and a $\Sigma$-calculus $P_0 \geq \mathbf{Int}_{\{\to\}}$, then the problems of recognizing axiomatizations and completeness for $P_0$ are undecidable.
\end{Theorem}
\section{The proof of undecidability}
In order to prove Theorem~\ref{T:main}, we shall effectively reduce the halting problem for tag systems to the problem of recognizing completeness for propositional calculi. Then, the proof of Theorem~\ref{T:main} is immediate from the undecidability of the halting problem~\cite{Minsky:61}.
More precisely, we fix any signature $\Sigma$ such that $\{ \to \} \subseteq \Sigma$ and any $\Sigma$-calculus $P_0 \geq \mathbf{Int}_{\{\to\}}$. For a given tag system $T$ and a word $\omega$, we will construct a $\Sigma$-calculus $P = P_{T,\omega,P_0}$ such that $P \leq P_0$ and $T$ halts on the input word $\omega$ iff $P_0 \leq P$.
First let us recall the notion of a tag system introduced by Post~\cite{Post:43}.
\subsection{Tag systems}
Let $\mathcal{A}$ be a finite alphabet of letters $a_1, \dots, a_m$. By $\mathcal{A}^*$ denote the set of all words over $\mathcal{A}$, including the empty word. For $\alpha \in \mathcal{A}^*$, denote by $|\alpha|$ the length of the word $\alpha$.
\begin{Definition}[Post,~\cite{Post:43}]
A \emph{tag system} is a triple $T = \langle \mathcal{A}, \mathcal{W}, d \rangle$, where $\mathcal{A} = \{ a_1, \dots, a_m \}$ is a finite alphabet of $m$ symbols, $\mathcal{W} = \{ \omega_1, \dots, \omega_m\} \subseteq \mathcal{A}^*$ is a set of $m$ words, and $d \in \mathbb{N}$ is a \emph{deletion number}. Each words $\omega_i$ is associated to the letters $a_i$: $a_1 \to \omega_1, \dots, a_m \to \omega_m$.
\end{Definition}
We say that $T$ is applicable to a word $\alpha \in \mathcal{A}^*$ if $|\alpha| \geq d$. The application of $T$ to a word $\alpha \in \mathcal{A}^*$ is defined as follows. Examine the first letter of the word $\alpha$. If it is $a_i$ then
\begin{enumerate}
\item remove the first $d$ letters from $\alpha$, and
\item append to its end the word $\omega_i$.
\end{enumerate}
Perform the same operation on the resulting word, and repeat the process so long as the resulting word has $d$ or more letters. To be precise, if $\alpha = a_i \beta \gamma$, $|\beta| = d-1$, and $\gamma \in \mathcal{A}^*$, then $T$ produces the word $\gamma \omega_i$ from the word $a_i \beta \gamma$. Denote this production by $a_i \beta \gamma \stackrel{T}{\longmapsto} \gamma \omega_i$. We write $\alpha \stackrel{T}{\DOTSB\mapstochar\Longrightarrow} \beta$ if there are words $\gamma_1, \dots, \gamma_n$, $n \geq 1$, such that $\alpha = \gamma_1$, $\beta = \gamma_n$, and $\gamma_i \stackrel{T}{\longmapsto} \gamma_{i+1}$ for all $1 \leq i \leq n-1$.
Define the halting problem of tag systems. We say that a tag system $T$ \emph{halts} on a word $\alpha \in \mathcal{A}^*$ if there exists a word $\beta \in \mathcal{A}^*$ such that $\alpha \stackrel{T}{\DOTSB\mapstochar\Longrightarrow} \beta$ and $T$ is not applicable to $\beta$, i.e. $|\beta| < d$. The \emph{halting problem} for a fixed tag system $T$ is, given any word $\alpha \in \mathcal{A}^*$, to determine whether $T$ halts on $\alpha$.
\begin{Theorem}[Minsky,~\cite{Minsky:61}] \label{T:Minsky}
There is a tag system $T$ for which the halting problem is undecidable.
\end{Theorem}
Moreover, Wang~\cite{Wang:63} showed that this holds even for some tag system $T$ with $d = 2$ and $1 \leq |\omega_i| \leq 3$ for all $1 \leq i \leq m$. For this reason, throughout the paper we will assume that all words $\omega_i$ are nonempty.
\subsection{Encoding of letters and words}
Let $\mathcal{A}$ be a finite set $\{a_1, \dots, a_m\}$. The set of all nonempty words over $\mathcal{A}$ is denoted by $\mathcal{A}^+$. We encode letters and words on $\mathcal{A}$ as $\{\to\}$-formulas.
Fix a variable $x^0$ not occurring in $P_0$. Then the code of the letter $a_i \in \mathcal{A}$, for $1 \leq i \leq m$, is a formula
\begin{equation*}
\overline{a_i} := ( (x^0 \to \underbrace{x^0 ) \to \dots \to x^0 )}_i \to ( x^0 \to ( x^0 \to x^0 ) ).
\end{equation*}
It is easily shown that $\mathbf{Int}_{\{\to\}} \vdash B \to A$ whenever $\mathbf{Int}_{\{\to\}} \vdash A$. Since $x^0 \to ( x^0 \to x^0 )$ is a substitution instance of the axiom $\mathrm{A}_1$, we have the following lemma.
\begin{Lemma} \label{L:DerivabilityOfCodeOfLetter}
$\mathbf{Int}_{\{\to\}} \vdash \overline{a}$, for every letter $a \in \mathcal{A}$.
\end{Lemma}
Now we introduce the following notation. Let $x \vee y$ be an abbreviation for the following formula:
\begin{equation*}
(x \to y) \to y.
\end{equation*}
For a word $\alpha = a_{i_1} \dots a_{i_k} \in \mathcal{A}^+$, we write $\overrightarrow{\alpha}$ as a shortcut for the formula
\begin{equation*}
\overline{a_{i_1}} \vee \left( \overline{a_{i_2}} \vee \dots \vee \left(\overline{a_{i_{k-1}}} \vee \overline{a_{i_k}} \right)\right),
\end{equation*}
and $\overleftarrow{\alpha}$ as a shortcut for the formula
\begin{equation*}
\left( \left ( \overline{a_{i_1}} \vee \overline{a_{i_2}} \right) \vee \dots \vee \overline{a_{i_{k-1}}} \right) \vee \overline{a_{i_k}}.
\end{equation*}
The notation can be extended to the alphabet $\mathcal{A} \cup \mathcal{V}$, where $\mathcal{V}$ is the infinite set of propositional variables defined above. For example, $\overrightarrow{a x b y} = \overline{a} \vee \left(x \vee \left(\overline{b} \vee y\right)\right)$, where $a, b \in \mathcal{A}$ and $x, y \in \mathcal{V}$.
\begin{Lemma} \label{L:DerivabilityOfDisjunction}
In $\mathbf{Int}_{\{\to\}}$ the following derivations hold:
\begin{align*}
\mathbf{Int}_{\{\to\}} & \vdash x \to x \vee y, \\
\mathbf{Int}_{\{\to\}} & \vdash y \to x \vee y.
\end{align*}
\end{Lemma}
\begin{proof}
The formula $y \to x \vee y$ is the substitution instance of the axiom $\mathrm{A}_1$. Since
\begin{equation*}
x, x \to y \vdash y,
\end{equation*}
we have $\mathbf{Int}_{\{\to\}} \vdash x \to x \vee y$ by the deduction theorem.
\end{proof}
\begin{Definition} (Zolin,~\cite{Zolin:2013}) \label{D:AlphabeticFormula}
An \emph{alphabetic formula} over the alphabet $\mathcal{A}$, or an $\mathcal{A}$-\emph{formula} for short, is an arbitrary $\{\vee\}$-formula over the codes of letters from $\mathcal{A}$. Formally, $\overline{a}$ is a $\mathcal{A}$-formula for each letter $a \in \mathcal{A}$, and if $A$, $B$ are $\mathcal{A}$-formulas then so is $A \vee B$.
\end{Definition}
In particular, $\overrightarrow{\alpha}$ and $\overleftarrow{\alpha}$ are $\mathcal{A}$-formulas. Lemma~\ref{L:DerivabilityOfCodeOfLetter} and Lemma~\ref{L:DerivabilityOfDisjunction} imply:
\begin{Lemma} \label{L:DerivabilityOfAFormulas}
$\mathbf{Int}_{\{\to\}} \vdash A$, for every $\mathcal{A}$-formula $A$.
\end{Lemma}
Given a formula $A$, denote by $A^*$ the set of all substitution instances of $A$. Similarly, given a set $M$ of formulas, denote by $M^*$ the set
\begin{equation*}
M^* := \bigcup_{A \in M} A^*.
\end{equation*}
In accordance with~\cite{Zolin:2013} let us call two formulas $A$ and $B$ \emph{unifiable} if $A^* \cap B^* \neq \emptyset$.
\begin{Lemma} \label{L:AlphabeticFormulas}
No two distinct $\mathcal{A}$-formulas are unifiable.
\end{Lemma}
\begin{proof}
By induction on the definition of an $\mathcal{A}$-formula $A$.
Let $A$ be the code of a letter $a_i \in \mathcal{A}$. If $B$ is the code of a letter $a_j \in \mathcal{A}$, then $i \neq j$. Without loss of generality, $i < j$. Denote by $C$ the following formula
\begin{equation*}
((y \to \underbrace{x^0) \to \dots \to x^0)}_i \to (x^0 \to (x^0 \to x^0)).
\end{equation*}
Since $\overline{a_i}$ is the substitution instance of $C$ with respect to replacing the propositional variable $y$ by $x^0$ and $\overline{a_j}$ is the substitution instance of $C$ with respect to replacing the propositional variable $y$ by
\begin{equation*}
((x^0 \to \underbrace{x^0) \to \dots \to x^0)}_{j-i},
\end{equation*}
we conclude that $A$ and $B$ are not unifiable.
If $B$ is a formula $B_1 \vee B_2$ for some $\mathcal{A}$-formulas $B_1$ and $B_2$, then $A = \overline{a_i}$ is a substitution instance of
\begin{equation*}
(y \to x^0) \to (x^0 \to (x^0 \to x^0))
\end{equation*}
and $B$ is the substitution instance of $(u \to v) \to v$. Since the formulas $x^0$ and $x^0 \to (x^0 \to x^0)$ are not unifiable, we see that $A$ and $B$ are not unifiable either.
Now let $A = A_1 \vee A_2$ for some $\mathcal{A}$-formulas $A_1$ and $A_2$, so it can be assumed that $B = B_1 \vee B_2$ for some $\mathcal{A}$-formulas $B_1$ and $B_2$. If $A$, $B$ are unifiable, then also $A_1$, $B_1$ and $A_2$, $B_2$ are unifiable. By induction hypothesis, $A_1 = B_1$ and $A_2 = B_2$. Hence, $A = B$.
This completes the proof of the lemma.
\end{proof}
Denote by $\rhd$ the following formula
\begin{equation*}
((x^0 \to x^0) \to x^0) \to x^0.
\end{equation*}
Since formulas $x \to x$ and $(y \to z) \to z$ are not unifiable, we obtain the following lemma.
\begin{Lemma} \label{L:Triangle}
Formulas $\rhd$, $\rhd \to A$ are not unifiable for any formula $A$, and formulas $\rhd$, $(\rhd \to B) \to C$ are also not unifiable for any formulas $B$, $C$.
\end{Lemma}
Next, we define the code of a word $\alpha \in \mathcal{A}^+$ as the finite set $\mathsf{Code}(\alpha)$ consisting of all tautologies of the following four types:
\bigskip
\begin{tabular}{lll}
Type 0 & $\rhd \to \overrightarrow{\alpha}$ & \\
Type 1 & $\rhd \to \overrightarrow{\alpha_1} \vee \overrightarrow{\alpha_2}$ & $\alpha = \alpha_1 \alpha_2$, $|\alpha_1| \geq 2$, $|\alpha_2| \geq 1$; \\
Type 2 & $\rhd \to (\overleftarrow{\alpha_1} \vee \overrightarrow{\alpha_2}) \vee \overrightarrow{\alpha_3}$ & $\alpha = \alpha_1 \alpha_2 \alpha_3$, $|\alpha_1| \geq 2$, $|\alpha_2| \geq 2$, $|\alpha_3| \geq 1$; \\
Type 3 & $\rhd \to \overleftarrow{\alpha_1} \vee \overrightarrow{\alpha_2}$ & $\alpha = \alpha_1 \alpha_2$, $|\alpha_1| \geq 3$, $|\alpha_2| \geq 1$. \\
\end{tabular}
\bigskip
\noindent Furthermore, we will call each formula of $\mathsf{Code}(\alpha)$ as the code of same word $\alpha$. The code of type $0$ is said to be \emph{canonical}.
\subsection{Construction of the calculus $P_{T,\omega,P_0}$}
Let $T = \langle \mathcal{A}, \mathcal{W}, d \rangle$ be a tag system, $\omega$ a nonempty word over $\mathcal{A}$, and $P_0$ a $\Sigma$-calculus. Recall that $\mathcal{A} = \{ a_1, \dots, a_m \}$, $\mathcal{W} = \{ \omega_1, \dots, \omega_m\}$, and all $\omega_i$ are assumed to be nonempty. Denote by $P_{T,\omega,P_0}$ a $\Sigma$-calculus with axioms:
\bigskip
\noindent
\begin{tabular}{llll}
$(\mathrm{W}_{\omega})$ & $\rhd \to \overrightarrow{\omega}$, & \\
$(\mathrm{T}_1)$ & $(\rhd \to \overrightarrow{a_i \alpha y\ }) \to (\rhd \to \overrightarrow{y \omega_i})$, & \multicolumn{2}{l}{for all $\alpha \in \mathcal{A}^*$, $|\alpha| = d-1$, $1 \leq i \leq m$,} \\
$(\mathrm{T}_2)$ & $(\rhd \to \overrightarrow{a_i \alpha\ }) \to (\rhd \to \overrightarrow{\omega_i})$, & \multicolumn{2}{l}{for all $\alpha \in \mathcal{A}^*$, $|\alpha| = d-1$, $1 \leq i \leq m$,} \\
$(\mathrm{H})$ & $(\rhd \to \overrightarrow{\alpha}) \to A$, & \multicolumn{2}{l}{for all $\alpha \in \mathcal{A}^*$, $0 < |\alpha| < d$, $A \in P_0$,} \\
$(\mathrm{R}_1)$ & \multicolumn{2}{l}{$(\rhd \to (y \vee \overrightarrow{az}) \vee u) \to (\rhd \to (\overleftarrow{ya} \vee z) \vee u)$,} & for all $a \in \mathcal{A}$, \\
$(\mathrm{R}_2)$ & \multicolumn{2}{l}{$(\rhd \to \overleftarrow{ya} \vee z) \to (\rhd \to y \vee \overrightarrow{az})$,} & for all $a \in \mathcal{A}$. \\
\end{tabular}
\bigskip
Let $P_{T}$ be the subsystem of $P_{T,\omega,P_0}$ consisting of axioms $\mathrm{T}_1$, $\mathrm{T}_2$, $\mathrm{R}_1$, $\mathrm{R}_2$ and $P_{T, \omega} = P_T \cup \{\mathrm{W}_{\omega}\}$. Now we prove some properties of the calculus $P_{T,\omega,P_0}$.
\begin{Lemma}
$P_{T,\omega} \leq \mathbf{Int}_{\{\to\}}$.
\end{Lemma}
\begin{proof}
Easily follows from Lemmas~\ref{L:DerivabilityOfCodeOfLetter},~\ref{L:DerivabilityOfDisjunction} and~\ref{L:DerivabilityOfAFormulas}.
\end{proof}
\begin{Corollary} \label{C:Inclusion}
$P_{T,\omega,P_0} \leq P_0$.
\end{Corollary}
\subsection{Derivability of the $T$-productions}
Here we show that the calculus $P_T$ can ``simulate'' productions of the tag system $T$. At the beginning let us prove auxiliary lemmas.
\begin{Lemma}
$\mathrm{R}_1, \rhd \to (\overleftarrow{\xi} \vee \overrightarrow{\beta}) \vee \overrightarrow{\zeta} \vdash \rhd \to \overleftarrow{\xi \beta} \vee \overrightarrow{\zeta}$, for all $\xi, \beta, \zeta \in \mathcal{A}^+$.
\end{Lemma}
\begin{proof}
By induction on $|\beta|$. If $|\beta| = 1$, then the formulas $\rhd \to (\overleftarrow{\xi} \vee \overrightarrow{\beta}) \vee \overrightarrow{\zeta}$ and $\rhd \to \overleftarrow{\xi \beta} \vee \overrightarrow{\zeta}$ are identical.
Now let $|\beta| \geq 2$, then $\beta = a \delta$ for a letter $a \in \mathcal{A}$ and a nonempty word $\delta$. Therefore,
\begin{equation*}
\mathrm{R}_1,~\rhd \to (\overleftarrow{\xi} \vee \overrightarrow{a \delta}) \vee \overrightarrow{\zeta}~\vdash~\rhd \to (\overleftarrow{\xi a} \vee \overrightarrow{\delta}) \vee \overrightarrow{\zeta}
\end{equation*}
by modus ponens. By induction hypothesis, we have
\begin{equation*}
\mathrm{R}_1,~\rhd \to (\overleftarrow{\xi a} \vee \overrightarrow{\delta}) \vee \overrightarrow{\zeta}~\vdash~\rhd \to \overleftarrow{\xi \beta} \vee \overrightarrow{\zeta}.
\end{equation*}
This completes the proof of the lemma.
\end{proof}
\begin{Corollary}
$\mathrm{R}_1,~\rhd \to \overrightarrow{\xi} \vee \overrightarrow{\zeta}~\vdash~\rhd \to \overleftarrow{\xi} \vee \overrightarrow{\zeta}$, for all $\xi, \zeta \in \mathcal{A}^+$.
\end{Corollary}
\begin{Lemma}
$\mathrm{R}_2,~\rhd \to \overleftarrow{\xi} \vee \overrightarrow{\zeta}~\vdash~\rhd \to \overrightarrow{\xi\zeta}$, for all $\xi, \zeta \in \mathcal{A}^+$.
\end{Lemma}
\begin{proof}
By induction on $|\xi|$. If $|\xi| = 1$, then the formulas $\rhd \to \overleftarrow{\xi} \vee \overrightarrow{\zeta}$ and $\rhd \to \overrightarrow{\xi\zeta}$ are identical.
Now let $|\xi| \geq 2$, then $\xi = \beta a$ for a letter $a \in \mathcal{A}$ and a nonempty word $\beta$. Therefore,
\begin{equation*}
\mathrm{R}_2,~\rhd \to \overleftarrow{\beta a} \vee \overrightarrow{\zeta}~\vdash~\rhd \to \overleftarrow{\beta} \vee \overrightarrow{a \zeta}
\end{equation*}
by modus ponens. By induction hypothesis, we have
\begin{equation*}
\mathrm{R}_2,~\rhd \to \overleftarrow{\beta} \vee \overrightarrow{a \zeta}~\vdash~\rhd \to \overrightarrow{\xi\zeta}.
\end{equation*}
This completes the proof of the lemma.
\end{proof}
\begin{Corollary} \label{C:CodeUniforme}
$\mathrm{R}_1,~\mathrm{R}_2,~\rhd \to \overrightarrow{\xi} \vee \overrightarrow{\zeta}~\vdash~\rhd \to \overrightarrow{\xi\zeta}$, for all $\xi, \zeta \in \mathcal{A}^+$.
\end{Corollary}
\begin{Lemma} \label{L:Derivability}
If $\xi \stackrel{T}{\longmapsto} \zeta$ then $P_T,~\rhd \to \overrightarrow{\xi}~\vdash~\rhd \to \overrightarrow{\zeta}$, for all $\xi, \zeta \in \mathcal{A}^+$.
\end{Lemma}
\begin{proof}
Since $T$ is applicable to $\xi$, we have $|\xi| \geq d$. Therefore, $\xi = a_i \alpha \beta$ and $\zeta = \beta \omega_i$, where $|\alpha| = d-1$ and $|\beta| \geq 0$.
\noindent If $|\beta| = 0$, then
\bigskip
\begin{tabular}{rcll}
$P_T$ & $\vdash$ & $(\rhd \to \overrightarrow{\xi}) \to (\rhd \to \overrightarrow{\zeta})$ & by the axiom $(\mathrm{T}_2)$, and \\
$P_T,~\rhd \to \overrightarrow{\xi}$ & $\vdash$ & $\rhd \to \overrightarrow{\zeta}$ & by modus ponens. \\
\end{tabular}
\bigskip
\noindent Let $|\beta| > 0$, so
\bigskip
\begin{tabular}{rcll}
$P_T$ & $\vdash$ & $(\rhd \to \overrightarrow{\xi}) \to (\rhd \to \overrightarrow{\beta} \vee \overrightarrow{\omega_i})$ & by the axiom $(\mathrm{T}_1)$, \\
$P_T,~\rhd \to \overrightarrow{\xi}$ & $\vdash$ & $\rhd \to \overrightarrow{\beta} \vee \overrightarrow{\omega_i}$ & by modus ponens, \\
$P_T,~\rhd \to \overrightarrow{\xi}$ & $\vdash$ & $\rhd \to \overrightarrow{\zeta}$ & by Corollary~\ref{C:CodeUniforme}. \\
\end{tabular}
\bigskip
\noindent The lemma is proved.
\end{proof}
\begin{Corollary} \label{C:Derivability}
If $\xi \stackrel{T}{\DOTSB\mapstochar\Longrightarrow} \zeta$ then $P_T,~\rhd \to \overrightarrow{\xi}~\vdash~\rhd \to \overrightarrow{\zeta}$, for all $\xi, \zeta \in \mathcal{A}^+$.
\end{Corollary}
The proof is trivial by definition of the tag system.
\subsection{Production of the $P_T$-derivations}
Here we show that the tag system $T$ can produce, on the input word $\omega$, the words whose codes have derivations in $P_{T, \omega, P_0}$ of a ``small'' height (to be defined below). As a preliminary let us introduce some notation and prove auxiliary lemmas.
Given $\alpha \in \mathcal{A}^*$, denote by $\mathsf{Code}_T(\alpha)$ the set of formulas:
\begin{equation*}
\mathsf{Code}_T(\alpha) := \bigcup_{\beta \in \mathcal{A}^*,~\alpha \stackrel{T}{\DOTSB\mapstochar\Longrightarrow} \beta} \mathsf{Code}(\beta).
\end{equation*}
It is clear that $\mathsf{Code}(\alpha) \subseteq \mathsf{Code}_T(\alpha)$ for all $\alpha \in \mathcal{A}^*$.
For any propositional calculus $P$, denote by $\left\langle P \right\rangle$ the set of propositional formulas obtained from $P$ by applying modus ponens and substitution once:
\begin{align*}
\left\langle P \right\rangle := & \left\{ B \mid A, A \to B \in P \text{ for some formula } A \right\} \cup \\
& \left\{ \sigma A \mid A \in P \text{ and } \sigma \text{ is a substitution} \right\}.
\end{align*}
Furthermore, let $\left\langle P \right\rangle_0 = P$ and
\begin{equation*}
\left\langle P \right\rangle_{n+1} = \left\langle \left\langle P \right\rangle_n \right\rangle
\end{equation*}
for $n \geq 0$. It follows easily that $\left\langle P \right\rangle_n \subseteq \left\langle P \right\rangle_{n+1}$ for all $n \geq 0$ and the set $[P]$ of all derivable formulas of the calculus $P$ can be represented as
\begin{equation*}
[P] = \left\langle P \right\rangle_{\infty} = \bigcup_{n \geq 0} \left\langle P \right\rangle_n.
\end{equation*}
Let $A$ be a formula derivable from $P$. We say that $A$ has the \emph{derivation height} $n$, if $A \in \left\langle P \right\rangle_n$ and $A \notin \left\langle P \right\rangle_{n-1}$.
Consider the tag system $T$ and the calculus $P_{T,\omega,P_0}$. Let $T$ halts on the input word $\omega$, we take the minimal $n \geq 0$ such that $\left\langle P_{T,\omega,P_0} \right\rangle_n$ contains at least one substitution instance of the code of some word $\alpha \in \mathcal{A}^*$ with $|\alpha| < d$:
\begin{equation*}
N_{\omega} = \min \{ n \geq 0 \mid \mathsf{Code}^*(\alpha) \cap \left\langle P_{T, \omega, P_0} \right\rangle_{n} \neq \emptyset, \text{ for some } \alpha \in \mathcal{A}^* \text{ with } |\alpha| < d \}.
\end{equation*}
If $T$ does not halt, then we put $N_{\omega} = \infty$. Recall that $\mathsf{Code}^*(\alpha)$ is the set of all substitution instances of formulas in $\mathsf{Code}(\alpha)$. Denote $P_{T, P_0} = P_T \cup \{\mathrm{H}\}$.
\begin{Lemma} \label{L:FormOfDerivations}
$\left\langle P_{T,\omega,P_0} \right\rangle_{N_{\omega}} \subseteq \mathsf{Code}_T^*(\omega) \cup P_{T, P_0}^*$ for all $\omega \in \mathcal{A}^*$.
\end{Lemma}
\begin{proof}
We will prove by induction on $n \leq N_{\omega}$ that
\begin{equation*}
\left\langle P_{T,\omega,P_0} \right\rangle_n \subseteq \mathsf{Code}_T^*(\omega) \cup P_{T, P_0}^*.
\end{equation*}
If $n = 0$, then $\left\langle P_{T,\omega,P_0} \right\rangle_0 = P_{T,\omega,P_0}$. It can easily be checked that the axiom $\mathrm{W}_{\omega}$ is in $\mathsf{Code}_T^*(\omega)$ and all the other axioms of $P_{T,\omega,P_0}$ are in $P_{T, P_0}^*$.
Let the induction assumption be satisfied for some $1 \leq n < N_{\omega}$. Since the right-hand side of the inclusion is closed under substitution, we only consider the case of a formula $B$ obtained by modus ponens from some formulas $A,\ A \to B \in \left\langle P_{T,\omega,P_0} \right\rangle_n$. By induction hypothesis,
\begin{equation*}
\left\langle P_{T,\omega,P_0} \right\rangle_n \subseteq \mathsf{Code}_T^*(\omega) \cup P_{T, P_0}^*.
\end{equation*}
We claim that (1) $A \to B \in P_{T, P_0}^*$, and (2) $A \in \mathsf{Code}_T^*(\omega)$. Proofs are below. Then we will show that $B \in \mathsf{Code}_T^*(\omega)$, which suffices for proving Lemma~\ref{L:FormOfDerivations}.
Note that $\mathsf{Code}_T^*(\omega) \cap P_{T, P_0}^* = \emptyset$, due to Lemma~\ref{L:Triangle}.
\textbf{Proof of (1):} Assume the contrary: $A \to B \in \mathsf{Code}_T^*(\omega)$. Since $\rhd$ is the premise of any code of any word, we have $A \in \rhd^*$. However, $A \in \mathsf{Code}_T^*(\omega) \cup P_{T, P_0}^*$, which is impossible, because all formulas in $\mathsf{Code}_T^*(\omega)$ and $P_{T, P_0}^*$ have the form $(\rhd \to C)$ or $(\rhd \to C) \to D$, for some $C$, $D$, and so are not unifiable with $\rhd$ by Lemma~\ref{L:Triangle}.
\textbf{Proof of (2):} Assume the contrary: $A \in P_{T, P_0}^*$. Then $A$ is a substitution instance of a formula of the from $(\rhd \to C) \to D$, for some $C$, $D$. By (1), $A \to B \in P_{T, P_0}^*$. So, $A \to B$ is a substitution instance of a formula of the from $(\rhd \to E) \to F$, for some $E$ and $F$. This would apply that $(\rhd \to C)$ is unifiable with $\rhd$, which is impossible by Lemma~\ref{L:Triangle}.
We are going to show that $B \in \mathsf{Code}_T^*(\omega)$. Since $A \in \mathsf{Code}^*(\xi)$ for some word $\xi \in \mathcal{A}^+$ such that $\omega \stackrel{T}{\DOTSB\mapstochar\Longrightarrow} \xi$, and $A \to B$ is a substitution instance of some of the 5 axioms in $P_{T, P_0}$, we need to consider the following 5 cases.
\textbf{Case 1.} $A \to B$ is a substitution instance of the axiom $\mathrm{T}_1$. Hence
\begin{equation*}
A \in \left( \rhd \to \overrightarrow{a_i \alpha y} \right)^*
\end{equation*}
for some letter $a_i \in \mathcal{A}$ and a word $\alpha \in \mathcal{A}^*$ such that $|\alpha| = d-1$. Since the formula $A \in \mathsf{Code}^*(\xi)$, it is easily shown by Lemma~\ref{L:AlphabeticFormulas} that
\begin{equation*}
A \in \left( \rhd \to \overrightarrow{a_i \alpha \gamma} \right)^*
\end{equation*}
for some $\gamma \in \mathcal{A}^+$, so that $\xi = a_i \alpha \gamma$. Therefore $B$ is the substitution instance of the code
\begin{equation*}
\rhd \to \overrightarrow{\gamma} \vee \overrightarrow{\omega_i}
\end{equation*}
for the word $\zeta = \gamma \omega_i$ and $\xi \stackrel{T}{\longmapsto} \zeta$.
\textbf{Case 2.} $A \to B$ is a substitution instance of the axiom $\mathrm{T}_2$. Hence
\begin{equation*}
A \in \left( \rhd \to \overrightarrow{a_i \alpha} \right)^*
\end{equation*}
for some letter $a_i \in \mathcal{A}$ and a word $\alpha \in \mathcal{A}^*$ such that $|\alpha| = d-1$. So, $\xi = a_i \alpha$. Therefore $B$ is the substitution instance of the code
\begin{equation*}
\rhd \to \overrightarrow{\omega_i}
\end{equation*}
for the word $\zeta = \omega_i$ and $\xi \stackrel{T}{\longmapsto} \zeta$.
\textbf{Case 3.} $A \to B$ is a substitution instance of the axiom $\mathrm{H}$. This case is impossible, since otherwise we would have $A \in (\rhd \to \overrightarrow{\alpha})^*$ for some $\alpha \in \mathcal{A}^*$, $0 < |\alpha| < d$. This contradicts to the fact that
\begin{equation*}
\left( \rhd \to \overrightarrow{\alpha} \right)^* \cap \left\langle P_{T, \omega, P_0} \right\rangle_{n} \neq \emptyset
\end{equation*}
and $n < N_{\omega}$.
\textbf{Case 4.} $A \to B$ is a substitution instance of the axiom $\mathrm{R}_1$. Hence
\begin{equation*}
A \in \left( \rhd \to \left( y \vee \overrightarrow{az} \right) \vee u \right)^*
\end{equation*}
for some $a \in \mathcal{A}$. Since the formula $A \in \mathsf{Code}^*(\xi)$, we have by Lemma~\ref{L:AlphabeticFormulas} that
\begin{equation*}
A \in \left( \rhd \to \left( \overleftarrow{\xi_1} \vee \overrightarrow{a\xi_2} \right) \vee \overrightarrow{\xi_3} \right)^*
\end{equation*}
for some $\xi_1, \xi_2, \xi_3 \in \mathcal{A}^+$ such that $\xi = \xi_1 a \xi_2 \xi_3$. Therefore $B$ is a substitution instance of the code
\begin{equation*}
\rhd \to \left( \overleftarrow{\xi_1 a} \vee \overrightarrow{\xi_2} \right) \vee \overrightarrow{\xi_3}
\end{equation*}
for the same word $\xi = \xi_1 a \xi_2 \xi_3$.
\textbf{Case 5.} $A \to B$ is a substitution instance of the axiom $\mathrm{R}_2$. Hence
\begin{equation*}
A \in \left( \rhd \to \overleftarrow{ya} \vee z \right)^*
\end{equation*}
for some $a \in \mathcal{A}.$ Since the formula $A \in \mathsf{Code}^*(\xi)$, we have by Lemma~\ref{L:AlphabeticFormulas} that
\begin{equation*}
A \in \left( \rhd \to \overleftarrow{\xi_1 a} \vee \overrightarrow{\xi_2} \right)^*
\end{equation*}
for some $\xi_1, \xi_2 \in \mathcal{A}^+$ such that $\xi = \xi_1 a \xi_2$. Therefore $B$ is the substitution instance of the code
\begin{equation*}
\rhd \to \overleftarrow{\xi_1} \vee \overrightarrow{a \xi_2}
\end{equation*}
for the same word $\xi = \xi_1 a \xi_2$.
Cases 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 exhaust all possibilities and so we have that $B \in \mathsf{Code}^*(\zeta)$ for some word $\zeta \in \mathcal{A}^*$ such that $\xi \stackrel{T}{\DOTSB\mapstochar\Longrightarrow} \zeta$. Then $B \in \mathsf{Code}_T^*(\omega)$, since $\omega \stackrel{T}{\DOTSB\mapstochar\Longrightarrow} \xi$ by induction hypothesis. The proof is completed.
\end{proof}
Now we prove that the code of each nonempty word over $\mathcal{A}$ derivable from $P_{T,\omega,P_0}$ with the derivation height less then or equal to $N_{\omega}$ is the code of a word produced from $\omega$ by the tag system $T$.
\begin{Corollary} \label{C:Production}
If $\mathsf{Code}^*(\alpha) \cap \left\langle P_{T,\omega,P_0} \right\rangle_{N_{\omega}} \neq \emptyset$ then $\omega \stackrel{T}{\DOTSB\mapstochar\Longrightarrow} \alpha$, for all $\alpha \in \mathcal{A}^+$.
\end{Corollary}
\begin{proof}
By Lemma~\ref{L:FormOfDerivations}, we have
\begin{equation*}
\left\langle P_{T,\omega,P_0} \right\rangle_{N_{\omega}} \subseteq \mathsf{Code}_T^*(\omega) \cup P_{T, P_0}^*.
\end{equation*}
Furthermore, the application of Lemma~\ref{L:Triangle} yields
\begin{equation*}
\mathsf{Code}_T^*(\omega) \cap P_{T, P_0}^* = \emptyset.
\end{equation*}
It is obvious that $\mathsf{Code}^*(\alpha) \cap P_{T, P_0}^* = \emptyset$. Hence $\mathsf{Code}^*(\alpha) \cap \mathsf{Code}_T^*(\omega) \neq \emptyset$, and so $\omega \stackrel{T}{\DOTSB\mapstochar\Longrightarrow} \alpha$ by definition of the set $\mathsf{Code}_T^*(\omega)$. The lemma is proved.
\end{proof}
\section{The proof of Theorem~\ref{T:main}}
Let us show that the following problem is undecidable: given a tag system $T$ and a word $\omega \in \mathcal{A}$, determine whether $P_0 \leq P_{T, \omega, P_0}$.
Indeed, if the tag system $T$ halts on the input word $\omega$, then $\omega \stackrel{T}{\DOTSB\mapstochar\Longrightarrow} \alpha$ for some word $\alpha \in \mathcal{A}^+$ such that $|\alpha| < d$. Hence the code $\rhd \to \overrightarrow{\alpha}$ of $\alpha$ is derivable from $P_{T, \omega, P_0}$ by Corollary~\ref{C:Derivability}. If we recall that $P_{T, \omega, P_0}$ contains the formula
\begin{equation*}
(\rhd \to \overrightarrow{\alpha}) \to A
\end{equation*}
for every $A \in P_0$, we obtain that $P_0 \leq P_{T, \omega, P_0}$.
Now assume $P_0 \leq P_{T, \omega, P_0}$. Since $\mathbf{Int}_{\{\to\}} \leq P_0$, so by Lemma~\ref{L:DerivabilityOfAFormulas}, we have
\begin{equation*}
P_{T,\omega,P_0} \vdash \rhd \to \overrightarrow{\alpha}
\end{equation*}
for every $\alpha$ such that $|\alpha| < d$. Hence $N_{\omega} < \infty$. Fix any word $\alpha$ with $|\alpha| < d$ such that $\mathsf{Code}^*(\alpha) \cap \left\langle P_{T,\omega,P_0} \right\rangle_{N_{\omega}} \neq \emptyset$. By Corollary~\ref{C:Production}, we obtain $\omega \stackrel{T}{\DOTSB\mapstochar\Longrightarrow} \alpha$. Therefore, $T$ halts on $\omega$.
Thus, we reduce the halting problem of tag systems to the problem of recognizing extensions for the $\Sigma$-calculus $P_0$. Since the halting problem of tag systems is undecidable by Theorem~\ref{T:Minsky} and $P_{T, \omega, P_0} \leq P_0$ by Corollary~\ref{C:Inclusion}, this completes the proof of undecidability of recognizing completeness. As corollary we have the undecidability of problem of recognizing axiomatizations.
\section{Acknowledgement}
The author is grateful to Evgeny Zolin for useful comments and advices that improved the manuscript.
|
\section{Introduction}
The origin of the \textsc{ALUGrid}\xspace package dates back to the late 20th century
as part of the PhD thesis of Bernhard Schupp
\cite{schupp:phd}.
Back then, the task was to develop a software that could solve the
compressible Euler equations of gas dynamics with a Finite Volume scheme
on a parallel computer in 3d including local grid adaptivity.
To achieve this task Schupp implemented a 3d hexahedral adaptive mesh
including dynamic load balancing based on METIS graph partitioning \cite{metis}.
Later, support for tetrahedral elements was
added\footnote{Tetrahedral element support was implemented by M. Ohlberger.} to the grid manager
and the code was successfully used to simulate
solar eruption phenomena based on the MHD equations \cite{dedner:MHDCode}.
Shortly after this, the library was used to implement the \dune grid interface
\cite{dunepara:05}. The \textsc{ALUGrid}\xspace bindings were the first grid
implementation providing the full interface for an adaptive,
distributed grid including dynamic load balancing.
It has been shown that \textsc{ALUGrid}\xspace is a very efficient
implementation of the \dune grid interface. For an explicit Finite Volume scheme, the performance loss
introduced by the \dune bindings is roughly $10\%$ compared to the native \textsc{ALUGrid}\xspace
implementation~\cite{dunepaperII:08,dunepara:05,kloefkorn:phd}.
At that time also a serial 2d simplex grid was added to the code basis.
The following releases of the software saw only maintenance work with no
substantial increase in the feature set.
In this paper the first major overhaul of the \textsc{ALUGrid}\xspace code basis is
described. Originally, \textsc{ALUGrid}\xspace was available as a stand alone library with a quite complex user API.
Consequently, \textsc{ALUGrid}\xspace was used exclusively through the bindings available
in the \dune[Grid] module. To reduce maintenance and improve usability we integrated
both, the original \textsc{ALUGrid}\xspace library and its bindings to \dune, into the new
\dune[ALUGrid] module.
In addition a number of new features have been added and the
efficiency of the code has been increased while the memory footprint has
been substantially reduced.
\textsc{ALUGrid}\xspace is a capable and reliable parallel-adaptive grid manager and
has been used in codes based on \dune, for example, in life science
applications \cite{kopf:13,jehl:14}, in the simulation of nanotechnology \cite{may:09,Fallahi:12},
in simulations related to numerical weather and climate prediction \cite{dunecosmo:12,mueller:14},
simulation of reactive flow in a moving domain \cite{motor:13}, or in
subsurface simulations \cite{faigle:14} and other works.
Within \dune the other unstructured grid manager capable of parallel-adaptive
computations is \textsc{UG}\xspace~\cite{lang:05} with the \code{UGGrid} realization of the \dune grid
interface.
A comparison for time-explicit applications with and without adaptivity
using the different grid implementations available
in \dune is presented in~\cite{perfpit:12}.
Besides a vast number of structured or Cartesian grid managers supporting adaptive
refinement (see \url{http://math.boisestate.edu/~calhoun/www_personal/research/amr_software/})
there exist a few other open source unstructured grid managers (at present
without bindings to \dune), for example,
deal.II~\cite{dealII81} which is build on top of p4est~\cite{burstedde:11}. Hexahedral
grids with non-conforming refinement are provided. Excellent scalability has been reported.
As a drawback, the macro mesh has be present on every core limiting the macro mesh size.
Other very capable unstructured grid managers are, for
example, the "Flexible Distributed Mesh Database (FMDB)"~\cite{fmdb:12},
\texttt{libMesh}~\cite{libMeshPaper}, or AMDIS~\cite{amdis}. The latter is providing
tetrahedral elements with bisection refinement.
In this paper we present work done in recent years to improve the useablility, efficiency, and reduce
maintanace cost of \textsc{ALUGrid}\xspace:
In the previous versions of \textsc{ALUGrid}\xspace the implementation of the 2d and 3d grids
were completely seperate. This resulted in a disjoint set of features with the 2d grid
implementing bisection not available for the 3d grid while at the same time the 2d
grid did not provide any parallel features. In \dune[ALUGrid] the original code for the
2d grid has been removed. Grids in two space dimensions or surface grids are now
implemented by embedding them into three space dimensions, making it possible to
directly use the 3d grid implementation. The main advantage of this is the significant
reduction in code maintance while at the same time all improvements in performance or
feature set of the 3d code will be directly available also for 2d grids.
Furthermore, since conforming bisection is now also available in 3d, this merge has not
resulted in any loss of functionality.
To simplify the installation, the \dune bindings and the library itself have been combined in a single \dune module.
This module includes a number of new features,
which make the \textsc{ALUGrid}\xspace implementation a lot more flexible and make it
possible to use it through \dune for a wider range of problems:
\begin{itemize}
\item {\bf extension to implement a wider range of methods:} \\
the main extension is conforming grid refinement implemented in the
parallel 3d code. Furthermore the 2d grid can be used for distributed computations
so that the 2d and 3d code now share the same feature set.
In addition the support for quadrilateral and surface grids in 2d and
periodic boundary treatment in 3d for parallel computations has been
improved.
\item {\bf increasing usability and efficiency:} \\
the memory footprint is considerably reduced (Section~\ref{sec:memory}),
a cleaner interface for callback adaptation, which was partially
available before, is discussed in Section~\ref{sec:adaptcallback}.
\item {\bf increasing usability and efficiency for parallel computation:} \\
new features include:
parallel grid construction (discussed in Section~\ref{sec:parallelgrid}),
backup and restore (discussed in Section~\ref{sec:dataio}),
overlapping communication and computation, (discussed in
Section~\ref{sec:communication}),
wider range of load balancing algorithms
(including internal implementations), and user-defined partitioning algorithms
(these are discussed in Sections~\ref{sec:userdeflb} and \ref{userdeflb}).
In summary \dune[ALUGrid] now provides
\begin{itemize}
\item intrinsic partitioning based on space filling curves, making
\dune[ALUGrid] independent of other packages,
\item bindings for the library \textsc{Zoltan}\xspace \cite{zoltan},
\item an interface for user-defined partitioning.
\end{itemize}
\end{itemize}
In Section~\ref{sec:performance testing} we describe how we have evaluated the
performance of the \dune[ALUGrid] module and report on a number of different strong and
weak scaling results obtained on both a computing cluster and a highly integrated
high performance computing system. Following, in Section~\ref{sec:using dune-alugrid}, we present the new features
and interface extensions from a user's point of view,
Finally we make some concluding remarks and discuss some open issues
with this module.
For a successful and satisfactory reading of this paper it is
recommended to be familiar with the \dune papers \cite{dunepaperII:08,dunepaperI:08}
and the terminology used therein.
\section{Performance Testing}
\label{sec:performance testing}
The aim of \cite{schupp:phd} was to develop an efficient parallel
implementation of an adaptive explicit Finite Volume scheme. These schemes are
widely used for solving hyperbolic conservation laws. The appearance of steep
gradients or shocks in the solution make grid adaptivity a good choice to
increase the efficiency of a scheme. These shocks move in time requiring the
refinement zones to move with the shocks and coarsening to take place
behind them. In combination with a domain decomposition approach for
parallel computation, this means that the load is difficult to balance
between processors and dynamic load balancing is essential. So in each time
step the grid needs to be locally refined or coarsened and the grid has to be
repartitioned quite often. What makes this problem extremely challenging is
the fact that evolving the solution from one time step to the next is very
cheap since the update is explicit and no expensive linear systems have
to be solved. So adaptivity and load balancing will dominate the
computational cost of the solver. Both of these steps require global
communication steps and the communication of possibly a significant amount
of data and are therefore difficult to implement even with a moderate
amount of parallel efficiency (see for example \cite{burstedde:11}).
Since this is a very demanding problem for a parallel code,
we have decided to continue using explicit Finite Volume schemes to measure the
performance of the \dune[ALUGrid] module. Grid performance plays a role in
matrix-free methods where frequent grid iteration occurs
in order to evaluate differential operators even if the used discrete function space is of higher
order.
In contrast, the performance of implicit matrix-based methods will have a
stronger dependency on the efficiency of the parallel solver package
than on the grid implementation.
Therefore, testing implicit methods would not provide as much insight into the
performance of the grid module itself.
\begin{comment}
We very briefly recall the definition of a standard first order explicit adaptive
Finite Volume method in Algorithm~\ref{alg:fv} to solve a conservation law
of the form
$$ \partial_t u + \nabla\cdot f(u) = 0~,\quad
u(0,\cdot) = U_0(\cdot)~,\quad \text{and boundary conditions}.
$$
A simplest Finite Volume discretization takes the form
$$
U_K^{n+1} = U_K^n - \Delta t^n \sum_{\rm neighbor\,N} G_{K,N}(U_K,U_N) \quad \forall
\;{\rm element }\; K
$$
For further reading on Finite Volume schemes we refer to \cite{kroener:NumericalSchemes}.
\begin{algorithm}[!ht]
\caption{A standard explicit Finite Volume scheme with a suitable flux
function $G$ and local time step sizes denoted with $\Delta t_{K,N}$.
Note that $G_{N,K}(U_N,U_K)=-G_{K,N}(U_K,U_N)$.}
\label{alg:fv}
\begin{algorithmic}[1]
\STATE{Read macro grid}
\STATE{Set initial conditions $U = U_0$}
\FOR{l=0,\dots,L}
\STATE{Mark elements for refinement}
\STATE{Adapt and load balance grid}
\STATE{Set initial conditions $U = U_0$}
\ENDFOR
\WHILE{ $t\leq T $}
\STATE{ $F=0$, $\Delta t=\infty$ }
\FORALL{Elements $K$}
\FORALL{ neighbors $N$ of $K$ }
\IF{ $N$ not done }
\STATE{ $F_K \gets F_K - G_{K,N}(U_K,U_N)$ }
\STATE{ $F_N \gets F_N + G_{K,N}(U_K,U_N)$ }
\STATE{ Compute $\Delta T_{K,N}$ }
\STATE{ $\Delta t \gets \min\{\Delta t, \Delta t_{K,N}\} $ }
\ENDIF
\STATE{ Mark $K$ as done }
\ENDFOR
\ENDFOR
\STATE{ Communicate update vector $F$ from interior to ghost elements }
\STATE{ Compute global minima of all $\Delta t$ }
\STATE{ $U \gets U + \Delta t\,F$ }
\STATE{ $t \gets t + \Delta t$ }
\STATE{ Mark elements for refinement and coarsening }
\STATE{ Adapt and load balance grid }
\ENDWHILE
\end{algorithmic}
\end{algorithm}
We mark the elements based on the modulus of the jump of some quantity
across edges. For scalar problems this means that an element $K$ is refined if
$ |U^n_K-U^n_N| > {\rm TOL_{ref}} $ for at least one neighbor $N$. An
element is coarsened if this quantity is smaller than some second tolerance.
\end{comment}
As a simple example, we consider the scalar transport equation
\begin{equation*}
\partial_t u + \nabla\cdot \bigl( (1.25,1.25,0)^T\,u \bigr) = 0
\end{equation*}
with suitable initial and boundary data (see
\file{examples/problem-transport.hh}).
In the adaptive Finite Volume scheme we use an upwind numerical flux and a
jump indicator to trigger grid adaptation.
For a more damanding example, we also apply this scheme to the Euler equations
of gas dynamics
\begin{equation*}
\partial_t \begin{pmatrix} \rho \\ \rho\,\vec{v} \\ \epsilon \end{pmatrix}
+ \nabla \cdot \begin{pmatrix} \rho\,\vec{v} \\ \rho\,\vec{v} \otimes \vec{v} + p\,\mathbb{I} \\ (\epsilon + p)\,\vec{v} \end{pmatrix}
= 0,
\end{equation*}
where $\mathbb{I} \in \mathbb{R}^{d \times d}$ denotes the identity matrix.
We consider an ideal gas, i.e.,
$p = (\gamma - 1)\,(\epsilon - \frac{1}{2}\,\rho\,\lvert \vec{v} \rvert^2)$,
with the adiabatic constant $\gamma = 1.4$.
In the adaptive scheme, we use an HLLC numerical flux \cite{toro:09} in the
evolution step and the relative jump in the density to drive the grid adaptation.
Two typical test problems found in the literature, the Forward Facing Step and
the interaction between a shock and a bubble (see \cite{limiter:11} and
references therein) are implemented (see \file{examples/problem-euler.hh}).
To benchmark solely adaptation and load balancing, we implemented a third, even
more demanding test case.
Instead of using the solution to a partial differential equation to determine
the zones for grid refinement and coarsening, a simple boolean function
$E \mapsto \eta_{E}$ is used (see \file{examples/problem-ball.hh}).
We refine all elements located near the surface of a ball rotating around the
center of the 3d unit cube:
\begin{equation}
\label{test:ball}
\begin{aligned}
\boldsymbol{y}( t ) &:= \Bigl( \tfrac{1}{2} + \tfrac{1}{3} \cos(2\pi t), \tfrac{1}{2} + \tfrac{1}{3} \sin(2\pi t), \tfrac{1}{2} \Bigr)^T, \\
\eta_{E} &:=
\begin{cases}
1 & \text{if } 0.15 < |\boldsymbol{x}_{E} - \boldsymbol{y}( t )| < 0.25, \\
0 & \text{otherwise,}
\end{cases}
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
where $\boldsymbol{x}_{E}$ denotes the barycenter of the element $E$.
A cell $E$ is marked for refinement, if $\eta_{E} = 1$ and for coarsening otherwise.
This sort of problem was also studied in \cite{schupp:phd}.
Since the center of the ball is rotating, frequent refinement and coarsening occurs,
making this an excellent test for the implemented adaptation and load balancing
strategies.
\subsection{Memory Consumption}
\label{sec:memory}
Memory consumption has become more and more critical for any numerical software
since the overall memory available per core has declined lately.
First we need to give a short summary of the data structure used to store
grid elements:
A vertex stores its coordinates, an edge stores pointers
to the two vertices, a quadrilateral face stores pointers to the four edges and a hexahedron stores
pointers to the six faces it consists of. For example, the memory consumption of a vertex on a
64bit architecture is $56$ bytes due to the storage of coordinates ($3$ \code{double} result in $24$ bytes),
$8$ bytes for the vtable (all interfaces in \textsc{ALUGrid}\xspace use dynamic polymorphism),
$8$ bytes for a pointer to the grid class,
and another $12$ bytes for flags, reference counting, and index storage, which due to padding this adds up to
$56$ bytes.
\begin{table}[ht]{}
\renewcommand{\arraystretch}{1.5}
\tbl{Memory consumption by ALUGrid's entities in bytes (in braces we put the memory
consumption in ALUGrid's 1.52 version).}{%
\begin{tabular}{l|rr|rr}
type & \multicolumn{1}{c}{tetra} & \multicolumn{1}{c|}{ hexa} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{ macro tetra} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{ macro hexa} \\ \hline \hline
vertex & 56 \phantom{5}(64) & 56 \phantom{5}(64) & 80 \phantom{5}(80) & 80 \phantom{5}(80) \\
edge & 56 (136) & 56 (136) & 64 (144) & 64 (144) \\
face & 88 (160) & 96 (174) & 96 (168) & 104 (184) \\
element & 96 (160) & 112 (184) & 104 (168) & 120 (192) \\
\end{tabular}}
\end{table}
Depending on the size of the macro grid and the face/edge to element ratio a hexahedral
grid consumes between $700$ and $800$ bytes per element. The tetrahedral version of the grid
consumes between $350$ and $400$ bytes per element. Note that these numbers strongly
depend on the macro grid chosen and might vary for other macro grids.
For the old version $1.52$ storing a hexahedral element needed between $1\,300$ and
$1\,500$ bytes. For a tetrahedral element version $1.52$ needed between $650$ and $750$ bytes.
In Figure \ref{fig:memcompare} we show the memory consumption for the old and the new
version for the ball test case with adaptation using the refinement from \eqref{test:ball}.
In summary the memory consumption has been reduced by about a factor of $2$.
\begin{figure}
\subfloat[cube]{
\includegraphics[width=0.45\linewidth]{comp314_cube}}
\subfloat[simplex]{
\includegraphics[width=0.45\linewidth]{comp314_simp}}
\caption{Comparison of memory usage for the old and the new version. Both version use
dlmalloc as memory allocator. The $1.52$ version has been patched for this purpose.}
\label{fig:memcompare}
\end{figure}
In an adaptive grid, entities are frequently created during refinement and
destroyed during coarsening.
As \textsc{ALUGrid}\xspace allocates memory for each grid entity separately, efficient memory
allocation and deallocation plays an important part in this process.
To allow for customization, \textsc{ALUGrid}\xspace derives all entities from an object
called \code{MyAlloc}, which contains overloaded operators \code{new} and \code{delete}.
Two such objects are shipped with \dune[ALUGrid].
\begin{description}
\item[default]
does not overload the operators \code{new} and \code{delete}, so that
standard C++ memory allocation is used. This is the default memory allocation used.
\item[dlmalloc]
makes use of Doug Lea's memory allocator (\code{dlmalloc}) \cite{dlmalloc:96},
which can be downloaded from \url{http://g.oswego.edu/dl/html/malloc.html}.
If the configure option \\
\texttt{--with-dlmalloc=PATH}
is provided specifying a path to the \code{dlmalloc} installation,
\code{dlmalloc} will be used for allocation of grid entities.
\end{description}
\begin{figure}[!ht]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.65\linewidth]{memcompare314}
\end{center}
\caption{Comparison of run times for the different memory allocation strategies. The
memory allocation using Doug Lea's memory allocator \cite{dlmalloc:96}
performed best, the strategy used in \textsc{ALUGrid}\xspace 1.52 performed worst and has
therefore been removed in the new version.
For load balancing we used the internal space filling curve approach with locally
computed linkage (partition method id 4).}
\label{fig:memman}
\end{figure}
In Figure \ref{fig:memman} we present a comparison of runtimes between the different
memory allocation strategies.
The former internal \textsc{ALUGrid}\xspace implementation based on \code{std::map} and \code{std::stack}
has been removed since it did not lead to performance gains, anymore.
For adaptation with the ball refinement from equation \eqref{test:ball} using
\code{dlmalloc} around $10\,\%$ less CPU time is consumed in comparison to the standard
C++ memory allocation on Yellowstone \cite{Yellowstone}.
As mentioned in the introduction the codes for the 2d and 3d grid have been unified.
The only drawback of embedding the 2d into a 3d
grid is an increase in the memory requirements of the 2d grid. For example a 2d
quadrilateral grid is modelled using a 3d hexahedral grid by replacing each quadrilateral by one
hexahedron. Effectively this leads to a doubling of the memory usage in this case.
For a triangular grid the resulting increase in memory usage is less severe.
This is confirmed by the results shown in Figure~\ref{fig:memcompare2d_mem}.
This increase in memory consumption in the new version in compensated by
improvements in performance, as can be seen in Figure~\ref{fig:memcompare2d_run}.
\begin{figure}
\subfloat[memory]{\label{fig:memcompare2d_mem}
\includegraphics[width=0.45\linewidth]{memory_2d}}
\subfloat[run times]{\label{fig:memcompare2d_run}
\includegraphics[width=0.45\linewidth]{runtimes_2d}}
\caption{Comparison of memory usage and run times for the 2d version
in the old and the new implementation. Both versions use
dlmalloc as memory allocator. The $1.52$ version has been patched for this purpose.}
\label{fig:memcompare2d}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Scaling results}
We start with testing the new parallel version of the 2d code.
In Figure \ref{fig:speedup_strong_cluster2d} we present the results of a 2d
version of the shock-bubble interaction problem taken from \cite{limiter:11}
using a small size computer cluster consisting of 20 Intel Core-i3 2100 (Sandy-Bridge)
desktop computers connected via standard gigabit ethernet.
The curves represent different parts of the code
(\emph{solve}:\ computation and synchronization of the update vector,
\emph{comm}:\ global synchronization of time step,
\emph{adapt}:\ grid adaptation, and
\emph{lb}:\ load balancing).
Finally we show the \emph{total} runtime. Note that there are some small
parts of the time loop not seperately shown so that the total runtime is
not exactly the sum of the four parts shown.
For the dynamic load
balancing we use the space filling curve approach newly implemented in
\dune[ALUGrid], see Section~\ref{sec:userdeflb}.
The grid load balancing is checked every $25^{th}$ time step and
is performed when the number of elements between the largest
and smallest partition differs by $20\%$ or more.
\begin{figure}[!ht]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.75\linewidth]{strong_cluster_2d}
\caption{Strong scaling results for 2d Euler shock-interaction problem on a small size
computer cluster.
}
\label{fig:speedup_strong_cluster2d}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
As we can see the Finite Volume part of the
code scales very well up to $64$ cores. The overall scaling is still
acceptable. Note that we are using hyperthreading to execute four
processes per node although these are dualcore machines. Parallel
efficiency increases by about $10\%$ when only two proceses are put on one
node but the runtime using a given number of nodes is quite a bit higher.
Note that the number of degrees of freedom
was quite small in this simulation so that even on a
few cores, the cost for the solve step and for the adaptation are comparable. Thus the
total runtime more or less follows the curve for the adaptation cost leading to
$50\%$ efficiency going from $4$ to $64$ cores while the solve step itself is still
close to optimal.
We repeated the same test but now using the 3d grid (Figure \ref{fig:speedup_strong_cluster3d}).
The macro grid was larger in this
simulation and combined with a slightly higher per element
cost of the 3d Finite Volume scheme, the solve step dominates the adaptation
up to 64 cores. The efficiency going from $4$ to $64$ cores is thus higher with an
value at about $70\%$.
In Figure \ref{fig:speedup_strong_hpc} we present resuts for the same
computation but this time on the \emph{Yellowstone} supercomputer
\cite{Yellowstone}. We made two
changes to the settings described above which increase performance on large
core counts with a strong interconnect: we use the space filling curve
approach with linkage storage (see Section~\ref{sec:userdeflb}) and instead of
rebalancing when the partitions differ by $20\%$, the grid is repartitioned
already when the inbalance is more than $5\%$.
Efficiency is quite good up to $2\,048$ processors but after that the problem
size is to small to adequately distribute among $4\,096$ core
and no noticeable performance increase is achieved. At
this point the communication cost becomes comparable to the actual
evolution step. The grid adaptation stage is still scaling well at $1000$
cores while the loadbalancing starts becoming less efficient earlier. But
the computational costs of these two parts of the algorithm is still quite
small compared to the evolution step. Note that in the previous cluster case with
its slow interconnect the loadbalancing step was not scaling at all.
The computations reported on above were strong scaling tests, keeping the
problem the same and only increasing the number of cores used. Thus the
computational cost is reduced while increasing the parallelization overhead at the
same time. In addition parallel efficiency is difficult to achieve since
obtaining a good load distribution becomes challenging when the problem size is fixed.
Therefore, we also include a weak scaling test in Figure \ref{fig:speedup_weak_hpc}.
Since with adaptive simulations it is difficult to increase the problem size
in the systematic way necessary for weak scaling experiments, we have
performed a fixed grid computation here.
As can be seen the
computational cost only slowly increases leading to high parallel
efficiency of $88\%$ going from $16$ to $8192$ cores.
\begin{figure}[!ht]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.75\linewidth]{cluster_euler}
\caption{Strong scaling results for 3d Euler shock-interaction problem on a small size
computer cluster. The macro grid contains $4\,096$ hexahedrons which is also the
coarsest grid and the maximal refinement level is set to $4$ (parameter $22\ 0\ 4$).}
\label{fig:speedup_strong_cluster3d}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[!ht]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.75\linewidth]{hpc_euler}
\caption{Strong scaling results for Euler shock-interaction problem on the peta scale
supercomputer Yellowstone \cite{Yellowstone}.
The macro grid contains $32\,768$ hexahedrons which is also the
coarsest grid and the maximal refinement level is set to $6$ (parameter $23\ 0\ 6$).}
\label{fig:speedup_strong_hpc}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[!ht]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.75\linewidth]{hpc_weak_results}
\caption{Weak scaling results for Euler shock-interaction problem on the peta scale
supercomputer Yellowstone \cite{Yellowstone}. The number of elements is kept
constant per core at $131\,072$ hexahedrons (parameter $25\ 2\ 0$).}
\label{fig:speedup_weak_hpc}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\section{Using the \textsc{DUNE-ALUGrid} Module}
\label{sec:using dune-alugrid}
This section discusses the features of \dune[ALUGrid] from a user perspective.
Special emphasis will be put on extensions to the \dune grid interface.
\subsection{Structure of the Module}
The structure of the new module is as follows:
the main code for the grid implementation and the \dune bindings are in the
\file{dune} folder of the \dune[ALUGrid] module. A program to read in a macro grid on a single
processor and to write a partitioned version in a binary format to a file is
provided in the \file{utility} folder. Finally the \file{examples} folder
contains the main executables for testing the \dune[ALUGrid] modules.
All the test problems can be used with any grid manager implementing the \dune[Grid] interface.
This makes it not only possible to test the \textsc{ALUGrid}\xspace implementation but also
to compare with other realizations of the \dune grid interface.
The code is very similar to the example provided in the \dune[Fem-Howto] and
comparable with the tutorial found in the \dune[Grid-Howto].
The code is mainly distributed across four files;
\begin{description}
\item[main.cc] contains the initial grid construction and the time loop.
\item[fvscheme.hh] contains the computation of the update vector
and the marking strategy.
\item[adaptation.hh] contains the code for carrying out the grid modification.
\item[piecewisefunction.hh] contains all classes used to handle the degrees of
freedom including storage, restriction and prolongation, and
communication.
\end{description}
Switching between the three different test cases is done via pre-processor
flags or by making one of the three executables
\file{main_ball}, \file{main_transport}, or \file{main_euler}.
Each program takes three command line parameters:
\begin{verbatim}
./main [problem-nr] [startLevel] [maxLevel]
\end{verbatim}
The first one determines the test case to use (including initial data and macro grid);
\code{startLevel} and \code{maxLevel} determine the coarsest and finest grid level,
respectively.
Extensions of the \dune grid interface discussed in
this paper can be tested in different sub-folders of \file{examples}.
The basic code is always the same with the necessary changes described
in detail in the following chapters.
There are four sub-folders, each containing a script, to compare the original and the modified
implementation. Again, pre-processor defines are used to provide different
implementations in the same code:
\begin{description}
\item[callback]
compare dof storage and callback adaptation in serial.\\
Script: \file{check-adaptation.sh}\\
Pre-processor flags: \code{CALLBACK} and \code{USE_VECTOR_FOR_PWF}.
\item[communication]
test asynchronous communication with callback adaptation and persistent
container (best from before)\\
Script: \file{check-communication.sh} \\
Pre-processor flags: \code{NON_BLOCKING}.
\item[loadbalance]
test the extensions to the loadbalancing interface. In addition to the internal
loadbalancing methods, user-defined weights can be added (preprocessore flag
\code{USE_WEIGHTS} and a simple user-defined loadbalancing strategy
is available (flag \code{USE_SIMPLELB}. With the flag \code{USE_ZOLTAN} a complete
reimplementation of the internal zoltan bindings is available based on the
extensions of the grid interface (requires the configure option
\code{enable-experimental-grid-extensions}).
\item[testEfficiency]
test on one computer using multi-core, e.g.\ $1\to2\to4\to8$, and
test on cluster with N computers and P cores, e.g., $P\to2P\to4P\to8P$.
By changing the pre-processor flags in the script different versions
can be tested.\\
Script: \file{check-efficiency.sh}\\
Pre-processor flags: \code{CALLBACK}, \code{USE_VECTOR_FOR_PWF}, \code{NON_BLOCKING}.
\end{description}
Note that by default the cube version of \dune[ALUGrid] is used.
This can be changed in \file{Makefile.am}.
\subsection{Configuration}
The new \dune[ALUGrid] module is available via the module home page
\url{http://users.dune-project.org/projects/dune-alugrid}.
The repository can be accessed using the \code{git} repository from
\url{https://users.dune-project.org/repositories/projects/dune-alugrid.git}.
The \dune[ALUGrid] module depends on \dune[Grid] and can be easily
configured using the \dune build system. Using \dune[ALUGrid] in a user module then
only requires adding a dependency (or suggestion) in the \file{dune.module} file,
including \file{dune/alugrid/grid.hh}, and using
\begin{center}
\code{Dune::ALUGrid< dimgrid, dimworld, eltype, refinetype, communicator >}
\end{center}
with $2 \le$ \code{dimgrid} $\le$ \code{dimworld} $\le 3$ for grid and world dimension,
\code{eltype} $=$ \code{Dune::simplex},\code{Dune::cube}, and
\code{refinetype} $=$ \code{Dune::conforming},\code{Dune::nonconforming}.
In this version, the only restriction is that conforming refinement is
not a valid choice for cube grids.
Contrary to previous versions, conforming refinement for a 3d simplex grid is
now available.
For the communicator, either \code{ALUGridMPIComm} for a parallel grid or
\code{ALUGRIDNoComm} for serial grid can be used.
By default, MPI communication is used, if available. Note that if
\dune[ALUGrid] was compiled in parallel mode then MPI has to be initialized
before constructing a grid object even in a serial computation.
There are a number of packages which can be used to increase the flexibility and
performance of the \dune[ALUGrid] module. Paths to the installed versions of these
packages have to be provided during the configuration of the module, i.e., within the
configuration file used in the call of the \code{dunecontrol} script:
\begin{description}
\item[\tt{--with-dlmalloc=PATH}:]
path to Doug Lea's malloc library (required version $>= 2.8.6$). If this library is
available the memory management for \dune[ALUGrid] will use the \textsc{dlmalloc}\xspace package
\cite{dlmalloc:96}.
This can improve performance as shown in Section~\ref{sec:memory}.
\item[\tt--with-metis=PATH:]
path to the \textsc{Metis}\xspace library \cite{metis}. If available, \textsc{Metis}\xspace can be used for
load balancing.
\item[\tt--with-metis-lib=NAME:]
name of the metis libraries (default is \code{metis}).
\item[\tt--with-zoltan=PATH:]
path to the \textsc{Zoltan}\xspace package. This package provides a wide range of additional
load balancing methods including those provided by \textsc{Metis}\xspace and \textsc{ParMetis}\xspace.
Details on how to use different load balancing methods are provided in
Section~\ref{sec:userdeflb}.
\item[\tt--with-zlib=PATH:]
path to \textsc{zlib}\xspace \cite{zlib}. If available, \textsc{zlib}\xspace compression can be used for
backup and restore of a full \dune[ALUGrid] grid object.
More details on data I/O are provided in Section~\ref{sec:dataio}.
\end{description}
\subsection{Parallel Grid Construction}
\label{sec:parallelgrid}
Any grid-based numerical simulation must at some time construct a grid of the
computational domain.
The general \dune grid interface assists this step by providing three basic
construction mechanisms:
\begin{description}
\item[GridFactory]
is a general interface for the construction of unstructured grids.
Basically, it constructs the grid from a list of vertex coordinates and
a list of elements.
\item[StructuredGridFactory]
can be used to construct a grid of an axis-aligned cube domain.
For unstructured grids, a default implementation based on the GridFactory is
provided.
\item[GridReaders] can be used to read files given in a special format.
These readers will generally use the \code{GridFactory} to construct the
grid. A \dune specific format is available through the \code{DGF}
reader.
An extension of this format to partitioned grids is discussed in Section~\ref{sec:paralleldgf}.
\end{description}
Additionally, \dune[ALUGrid] provides a native file format for predistributed
macro grids.
At the time of this writing, the \code{GridFactory} interface does not support
the construction of unstructured grids in parallel.
The entire grid must first be constructed on one process and then distributed to
all processes using the load balancing algorithm.
For large macro grids, this method is at least inefficient if not impossible as
the macro grid might not even fit into the memory of one computational node.
Without specialization, this restriction also holds for the
\code{StructuredGridFactory} and the DGF parser.
\dune[ALUGrid] overcomes this difficulty by providing specializations of all
three grid construction mechanisms.
In addition the \dune[ALUGrid] module contains
utility tools to perform the distribution off line, writing native
distributed \textsc{ALUGrid}\xspace files for use in the actual computation. These will be described at
the end of this section.
\subsubsection{The GridFactory}
In \dune, the construction of unstructured grids is handled by the
\code{GridFactory} class, which has to be specialized for each grid
implementation supporting them.
The most important interface methods are
\begin{lstlisting}
void insertVertex ( const Dune::FieldVector<ctype,dimensionworld> &coord );
void insertElement( const Dune::GeometryType &type,
const std::vector<unsigned int> &vertices );
void insertBoundarySegment( const std::vector<unsigned int> &vertices );
\end{lstlisting}
The main difficulty when constructing a predistributed grid is the identification of
the process boundaries. Using a large amount of global communication and coordinate
comparison this could be achieved using the interface provided by the \dune[Grid]
module. Since this is neither efficient nor very reliable, we extend the interface
requiring the user to provide a globally unique number for each vertex in the macro
grid using the method:
\begin{lstlisting}
void insertVertex ( const Dune::FieldVector<ctype, dimensionworld> &coord,
VertexId globalId );
\end{lstlisting}
This unique numbering is sufficient to use the grid factory concept in parallel.
Notice that elements and boundaries are inserted using a local vertex number
corresponding to the insertion order. \code{VertexId} in the current implementation is
an unsigned integer.
To further increase efficiency, faces on process boundaries can also be inserted,
reducing the need for global communication during grid construction.
Similar to the \code{insertBoundarySegment} method, the grid factory in
\dune[ALUGrid] allows the insertion of process borders through the method
\begin{lstlisting}
void insertProcessBorder ( const std::vector<unsigned int> &vertices );
\end{lstlisting}
While it is not necessary to insert process borders, we strongly recommend
doing so, because the construction of this information within the grid factory
requires an expensive global communication.
Note that this method will not work accurately, if it is called for some process
borders only.
In some cases it is easier to simply insert into the factory that a certain
face of an element is on the border or on the boundary (see the example in
Section~\ref{sec:StructuredGridFactory}).
The grid factory in \dune[ALUGrid] allows this through the following methods:
\begin{lstlisting}
void insertBoundary ( int element, int faceInElement );
void insertProcessBorder ( int element, int faceInElement );
\end{lstlisting}
The local face numbering used for \code{faceInElement} corresponds to the \dune
reference element.
\subsubsection{StructuredGridFactory}
\label{sec:StructuredGridFactory}
An example of how to use the new methods on the grid factory to construct a distributed grid
is provided in the specialization of the \code{StructuredGridFactory} in
\file{dune/alugrid/common/structuredgridfactory.hh}.
Given an interval $[a,b]\subset\mathbb{R}^3$ and a subdivision vector $N \in \mathbb{N}^3$, a
distributed Cartesian grid is constructed.
Each process first uses \code{SGrid} (a structured grid manager available in
\dune[grid]) to setup a Cartesian grid.
A space filling curve is then used to partition this grid and the
distributed grid is constructed using the extended grid
factory of \dune[ALUGrid] on each process.
Note that the resulting partition on each process does not consist of a product
of intervals, since the distribution is done using a space filling curve.
The following code snippet shows the idea in a very general setting.
The \code{gridView} object is the leaf grid view of a given grid (e.g.
of a \code{SGrid}), \code{indexSet} denotes its index set, and the
\code{partitioner} object provides a method \code{rank(const Entity &)}
returning the MPI rank that the entity shall be assigned to (e.g. based on a
space filling curve).
\begin{lstlisting}
// create ALUGrid GridFactory
GridFactory< Grid > factory;
// map global vertex ids to local ones
std::map< IndexType, unsigned int > vtxMap;
const int numVertices = (1 << dim);
std::vector< unsigned int > vertices( numVertices );
int nextElementIndex = 0;
const auto end = gridView.template end< 0 >();
for( auto it = gridView.template begin< 0 >(); it != end; ++it )
{
const Entity &entity = *it;
if( partitioner.rank( entity ) != myrank )
continue;
// insert vertices and element
const typename Entity::Geometry geo = entity.geometry();
for( int i = 0; i < numVertices; ++i )
{
const IndexType vtxId = indexSet.subIndex( entity, i, dim );
auto result = vtxMap.insert( std::make_pair( vtxId, vtxMap.size() ) );
if( result.second )
factory.insertVertex( geo.corner( i ), vtxId );
vertices[ i ] = result.first->second;
}
factory.insertElement( entity.type(), vertices );
const int elementIndex = nextElementIndex++;
const auto iend = gridView.iend( entity );
for( auto iit = gridView.ibegin( entity ); iit != iend; ++iit )
{
const Intersection &isec = *iit;
const int faceNumber = isec.indexInInside();
// insert boundary face in case of domain boundary
if( isec.boundary() )
factory.insertBoundary( elementIndex, faceNumber );
// insert process boundary if the neighboring element has a different rank
if( isec.neighbor() && (partitioner.rank( *isec.outside() ) != myrank) )
factory.insertProcessBorder( elementIndex, faceNumber );
}
}
\end{lstlisting}
\subsubsection{Dune Grid Format (DGF)}
\label{sec:paralleldgf}
The \code{DGFParser} has also been extended to make use of the parallel
grid construction available in \dune[ALUGrid]. For each process a
\code{dgf} file (e.g., \file{grid.dgf.P.1}, ...,\file{grid.dgf.P.P}) is used
containing only one part of the grid. As in the serial case the blocks with the
information on the elements uses a process local numbering of the vertices.
A new block \code{GlobalVertexIndex} has to be added, where a globally unique integer for
each vertex in this partition is provided in the same order used for the coordinates in
the \code{Vertex} block.
The file passed to the \code{GridPtr} class
(e.g. \file{grid.dgf.P}) contains only the block \code{ALUParallel} listing the
file names of the individual partitions for each process.
The following shows an example for the domain $[0,1]^3$ divided into $4$ elements and distributed over
two processors:
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}[t]{lll}
\file{cube.dgf.2} & \file{cube.dgf.2.1} & \file{cube.dgf.2.2} \\
\begin{lstlisting}[boxpos=t]
DGF
ALUPARALLEL
cube.dgf.2.1
cube.dgf.2.2
#
\end{lstlisting} &
\begin{lstlisting}[boxpos=t]
DGF
VERTEX
0 0 0
0.5 0 0
0 0.5 0
0.5 0.5 0
0 0 1
0.5 0 1
0 0.5 1
0.5 0.5 1
0 1 0
0.5 1 0
0 1 1
0.5 1 1
#
CUBE
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
2 3 8 9 6 7 10 11
#
GLOBALVERTEXINDEX
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
12
13
14
15
#
\end{lstlisting} &
\begin{lstlisting}[boxpos=t]
DGF
VERTEX
0.5 0 0
1 0 0
0.5 0.5 0
1 0.5 0
0.5 0 1
1 0 1
0.5 0.5 1
1 0.5 1
0.5 1 0
1 1 0
0.5 1 1
1 1 1
#
CUBE
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
2 3 8 9 6 7 10 11
#
GLOBALVERTEXINDEX
1
8
3
9
5
10
7
11
13
16
15
17
#
\end{lstlisting}
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
These files were generated by using the utility
\code{ParallelDGFWritter} class (in
\file{dune/alugrid/common/writeparalleldgf.hh}) to provide distributed dgf
files from a given input dgf file.
\subsubsection{Utility programs}
The \dune[ALUGrid] module also provides an utility program \file{utils/convert-macrogrid/convert}
to convert a normal DGF file or a legacy \textsc{ALUGrid}\xspace
macro grid file into \dune[ALUGrid]'s new binary or compressed binary macro grid file format.
This tool can also decompose the macro grid into several partitions.
\dune[ALUGrid] is able
to read decomposed macro grids if the number of partitions of the macro grid is smaller
or equal to the used number of cores. This is especially useful for very
large macro grids which will not fit into the memory of a single core. In addition the compressed
binary format reduces storage requirements and decreases storage access times.
\subsection{Backup and Restore}
\label{sec:dataio}
For backup and restore as it is needed for checkpointing and postprocessing
a new interface was recently introduced into \dune[Grid]. To our knowledge
\dune[ALUGrid] is the first grid manager implementing this interface so we will
go into a bit more detail in the following.
The interface is given by
\begin{lstlisting}
template< int dim, int dimworld,
ALUGridElementType elType,
ALUGridRefinementType refineType, class Comm >
struct BackupRestoreFacility<
ALUGrid< dim, dimworld, elType, refineType, Comm > >
{
/** perform backup of grid to given std::ostream */
static void backup ( const Grid &grid, std::ostream &stream ) ;
/** restore grid from std::istream and return pointer to
newly created grid object */
static Grid* restore ( std::istream &stream ) ;
};
\end{lstlisting}
The \code{BackupRestoreFacility} provides two further \code{backup} and \code{restore} methods
where a filename is the argument instead of a stream. These methods have been added for
legacy codes like \textsc{ALBERTA}\xspace \cite{alberta:05} that might not support the read and write via streams.
For \dune[ALUGrid] these are simply implemented using a file stream and the calling the
above mentioned methods.
For data I/O on large parallel machines we provide two mechanisms. The conventional
approach is to use standard file streams to create a binary file for each process containing the macro
grid cells, refinement tree, and index information for the corresponding partition.
This becomes very cumbersome when the code is used with many cores.
Therefore, the second approach is to use a \code{std::stringstream} to write all information into
a buffer of type \code{char*} and then use a library like \textsc{SIONlib}\xspace \cite{sionlib} to
write the data to the storage unit. This approach has the advantage that libraries like
\textsc{SIONlib}\xspace provide the maximal I/O performance but do not limit
\dune[ALUGrid] to be used only with this library. For libraries that require the size
of data to be written, like \textsc{SIONlib}\xspace, the intermediate storage in a
\code{char} buffer is necessary since for the adaptive grid the number elements is not
known apriori. How \textsc{SIONlib}\xspace is used is shown in the examples presented in
\file{examples/backuprestore}. This example explains how backup/restore is done
using different ways to write data to the storage device.
Note that \dune[ALUGrid] will only backup/restore it's \code{LocalIdSet}. The
\code{GlobalIdSet} is generated from the unique macro element id (built from the unique vertex ids)
and the position in the refinement tree and therefore does not need to be stored explicitly.
Furthermore, the persistent order of the macro grid automatically induces the
same traversal order for the hierarchical grid.
Since both, the \code{LevelIndexSet} and the \code{LeafIndexSet} are
generated by grid traversal and \textit{insert on first visit} strategy, both index set variants
preserve their indices over a backup and restore process.
\subsection{Overlapping Communication and Computation}
\label{sec:communication}
In a numerical algorithm, degrees of freedom are typically attached to grid
entities.
Now, a single grid entity can be visible to multiple processes and any data
attached to it needs to be synchronized between these processes.
The \dune\ grid interface therefore requires each grid view to support this
synchronization through a \code{communicate} method:
\begin{lstlisting}
template< class DataHandle >
void communicate ( DataHandle &, InterfaceType,
CommunicationDirection ) const;
\end{lstlisting}
The interface type and communication direction specify the set of entities on
which data has to be sent or received.
On the sending side the data handle is responsible for packing entity data into
a buffer; on the receiving side it unpacks the data again.
The actual data transfer is done transparently by the grid implementation.
After all data has been sent, the grid implementation has to wait until incoming
data is received, which can be a waste of valuable computation time.
Indeed, many numerical algorithms can be split into work that depends on the
shared data and work that does not.
The latter part can actually be done while communication is in progress
simply by splitting sending and receiving in two parts and is supported even by
the oldest MPI implementations.
To make use of the valuable communication time, \dune[ALUGrid] allows to delay
the receiving process to a convenient point in the algorithm.
The actual communication initiated by \code{communicate} becomes an object:
\begin{lstlisting}
template< class DataHandle >
Communication< DataHandle > communicate ( DataHandle &, InterfaceType,
CommunicationDirection ) const;
\end{lstlisting}
Such a \code{Communication} object satisfies the following interface:
\begin{lstlisting}
struct Communication
{
// wait for communication to finish if not already done
~Communication () { if( pending() ) wait(); }
// is this communication still pending?
bool pending () const;
// wait for communication to finish
void wait ();
};
\end{lstlisting}
While the communication is pending, i.e., while wait has not been called, the
reference to the data handle must remain valid.
As \code{wait} is automatically called in the destructor, ignoring the return
value will result in a blocking communication. Thus no change is required
to existing code if blocking communucation is to be used.
If \code{gridView} is a grid view of an \code{ALUGrid} object, overlapping communication
and computation is rather simple:
\begin{lstlisting}
// construct data handle for the communication
auto comm = gridView.impl().communicate ( dataHandle, interface, dir );
// do some computation not depending on the remote data
comm.wait();
// do computation depending on the remote data
\end{lstlisting}
Note that the method \code{impl} is only available if
experimental grid extensions have been enabled in \dune[Grid]
and would no longer be required once the new interface is added into \dune[Grid].
A possible usage of the communication hiding
is presented in the following code snippet.
The method is implemented in \file{examples/communication} where the main
change in the time loop is quite simple:
\begin{lstlisting}
// original non-blocking code: dt = scheme( time, solution, update ) ;
{
// new code: compute data on border and ghost entities
dt = scheme.border( time, solution, update );
// start non-blocking communication
auto commObject = grid.communicate( handle, interface, direction );
// do computation not depending on remote data
dt = std::min(dt , scheme( time, solution, update ) );
} // communication will be finished when commObject goes out of scope
\end{lstlisting}
\subsection{Adaptation Using Call-Backs}
\label{sec:adaptcallback}
Grid modification in \dune is performed in three steps. First
\code{grid.preadapt()} is called to start the modification phase. After
this method has been called the index sets are no longer valid
and data has to be accessed based either on one of the \code{IdSets} or using a
\code{PersistentContainer}. Both allow storage of data persistently during
grid modification and on the whole hierarchy of the grid making it possible for data
to be restricted and prolongated from one level to another. Next
\code{grid.adapt()} is called which refines or coarsens grid elements according
to markers set by the user. Finally \code{grid.postadapt()} is called,
ending the modification phase and reinitializing the \dune consecutive,
zero starting index sets allowing to store user data in consecutive memory
locations.
The main steps for the user consist in making data persistent
during the modification stage of the grid, prolongation of data if
elements are refined, and restriction of data if elements are coarsened.
A common approach is to store the data in a vector-like structure in the
computation phase for efficient memory access.
The necessary copying of the data into a \code{PersistentContainer} during
the modification phase makes this step computationally more expensive.
Alternatively, the user can store data directly in a \code{PersistentContainer}
which means that the storage does not have to be modified during grid changes but
sacrificing efficiency during the computation phase due to more expensive data
access.
In \dune the \code{PersistentContainer} can be specialized
for each grid implementation. A default implementation uses a
\code{std::map} to store the data using the \code{LocalIdSet} of the grid
as key. \dune[ALUGrid] uses a speciallization of this class based on a
\code{std::vector} to store the data. Each entity stores an integer which
is unique within the grid hierarchy and which can be used to access the
data within the vector. In contrast to a \dune \code{IndexSet} this index
is not necessarily zero starting and consecutive, resulting in holes within
the \code{PersistentContainer} but allowing for a constant retrieval time
of the data. In our example adaptive Finite Volume scheme the two storage strategies
are available for testing. By default the \code{PersistentContainer} is used
but by defining \code{USE_VECTOR_FOR_PWF} the degrees of freedom will be
stored in a vector-like structure and moved into a
\code{PersistentContainer} only during the grid modification stage.
In all our tests the storage of data in the \code{PersistentContainer} was
significantly more efficient.
Some results are shown in the \dune columns of Table~\ref{tab:checkadaptation}.
In addition to the approach described above, \dune[ALUGrid] provides an
adaptation mechanism using a callback approach, similar to the \dune
communication and loadbalancing interface
(see Section \ref{sec:userdeflb}).
Instead of the \code{grid.preAdapt()}, \code{grid.adapt()}, \code{grid.postAdapt()}
algorithm, a single call to \code{grid.adapt( dataHandle )} is required.
The \code{dataHandle} has to be derived from
\begin{lstlisting}
template< class Grid, class Impl >
struct AdaptDataHandle
{
typedef typename Grid::template Codim< 0 >::Entity Element;
void preCoarsening ( const Element &father );
void postRefinement ( const Element &father );
};
\end{lstlisting}
The method \code{preCoarsening} is called on the element \code{father} before all its
descendants are removed. Accordingly, the method \code{postRefinement} is called
immediately after descendants for an entity \code{father} are created.
Since these methods are called during grid modification the
\code{IndexSets} on the grid are not available and data has to be stored in
some peristent manner, e.g., using the \code{PersistentContainer}. There is
no need to call \code{preAdapt(),postAdapt()} on the grid.
This variant of the adaptation cycle is implemented in
\file{examples/callback/adaptation.hh}.
Assuming that the degrees of freedom are stored in a
\code{PersistentContainer} one simply needs to call
\begin{lstlisting}
grid_.adapt( *this );
\end{lstlisting}
and implement the two callback methods
\begin{lstlisting}
void preCoarsening ( const Entity &father )
{
Container &container_ = getSolution().container();
// average the data from all children and copy onto the father entity
Vector::restrictLocal( father, container_ );
}
// called when children of father where newly created
void postRefinement ( const Entity &father )
{
Container &container_ = getSolution().container();
container_.resize();
// copy the data from the father onto all its children
Vector::prolongLocal( father, container_ );
}
\end{lstlisting}
The results of using the callback approach are shown in the corresponding
columns of Table~\ref{tab:checkadaptation}.
In summary, our tests indicate a gain of up to $10\%$ using callback
adaptation.
In addition the overall implementation is simpler since the
hierarchic restriction and prolong methods do not have to be implemented.
To run the test described here go to the \file{examples/callback} directory and run the
\code{check-adaptation.sh} script. The implementation with a
\code{PersistentContainer} is also compared here with the version based on
vector-like structure. The advantage of using a
\code{PersistentContainer} for the degrees of freedom in the Finite Volume
scheme is significant (more than $20\%$).
\begin{table}[ht]{}
\renewcommand{\arraystretch}{1.5}
\begin{center}
\caption{Results for callback adaptation and dof storage strategy obtained on
a single core from our small cluster.
See script \file{examples/callback/check-adaptation.sh}.
\textbf{T} stands for transport problem and \textbf{E} for Euler problem, followed
by the three program parameters used.}
\begin{tabular}{rr|cccc}
\multicolumn{2}{r|}{storage} & \code{vector} & \code{vector} & \code{PersistentContainer} & \code{PersistentContainer} \\ \hline
\multicolumn{2}{r|}{adaptation} & \dune & callback & \dune & callback \\
\hline\hline
\textbf{T} & \code{2 0 2} & 251s & 227s & 194s & 173s \\ \hline
\textbf{T} & \code{2 0 3} & 2411s & 1820s & 2222s & 1647s \\ \hline
\textbf{E} & \code{21 0 3} & 106s & 83s & 99s & 77s \\ \hline
\textbf{E} & \code{21 0 4} & 1070s & 1037s & 833s & 766s \\
\end{tabular}
\label{tab:checkadaptation}
\end{center}
\end{table}
\subsection{Internal Load Balancing}
\label{sec:userdeflb}
There are two stages in a computation where load balancing is essential in a simulation.
During the start up phase of the computation where the grid has to be distributed over the
available number of processes and after the grid has been locally refined. Even if the
grid has been partitioned beforehand and \dune[ALUGrid]'s parallel grid factory is used,
it is still sometimes of practical interest to repartition the grid after creation,
e.g., if a larger number of processes are available for the computation.
To this end the \dune[Grid] interface provides the method
\begin{lstlisting}
bool loadBalance();
\end{lstlisting}
Even if the initial grid is optimally distributed, the load can become
unbalanced during the computation for example if local adaptivity is used.
In this case the method mentioned above is not sufficient as it does not allow to
migrate user data together with elements from one process to another.
To manage data migration the \dune[Grid] interface provides a second method
\begin{lstlisting}
template< class DataHandleImpl, class Data >
bool loadBalance( CommDataHandleIF< DataHandleImpl, Data > &dataHandle );
\end{lstlisting}
The handling of user data is achieved by a callback mechanism using the same
interface used for communication during the computation. Basically, for each
element to be removed on the given process a method \code{gather} is called (to collect data to be
shipped with the element) and when a new element is added to the grid
on the process then a method
\code{scatter} is called (to deliver the data that was shipped with the element )
on the \code{dataHandle} instance.
The main problem with these two methods is that there is no mechanism for
the user to intervene with the details of partitioning computed by the grid
manager. This new module provides two mechanisms for the user to improve the
internal load balancing to suit the need of the application at hand.
Before presenting these improvements, we give a brief description of how
\dune[ALUGrid]'s internal load balancing strategy works.
\dune[ALUGrid] only allows for horizontal load balancing,
i.e., partitioning of the elements on the macro level, migrating the whole
tree below a given macro element from one process to another. Each macro
element $E$ is assigned a weight equal to the number of leaf elements below
$E$. Using these weights either a space filling curve approach is used
or a graph partitioning algorithm is used.
In \textsc{ALUGrid}\xspace 1.52 only serial graph partitioning using the \textsc{Metis}\xspace library
\cite{metis} could be used. The serial graph partitioning requires the communication
of the whole assembled graph to all processes which does not scale in terms of memory
and communication time.
While this method can still be used in \dune[ALUGrid], additional bindings to
\textsc{Zoltan}\xspace \cite{zoltan} have been added (providing space filling curve and
graph partitioning methods).
Via the \textsc{Zoltan}\xspace interface \textsc{ParMetis}\xspace \cite{parmetis} is available as well.
The graph is constructed using the weighted macro elements as nodes and connecting
neighboring macro elements $E_1,E_2$ with an edge in the graph. These edges are assigned
weights according to the number of leafs below $E_1,E_2$ which are
neighbors. The node weights are to represent the computational cost, while
the edge weights represent the communication size in the case that these
elements come to be on different processors.
The newly implemented partition algorithm for
space filling curves makes \dune[ALUGrid] more self contained.
As a default we are using the Hilbert space filling curve (see for example \cite{bader:13}) provided by \textsc{Zoltan}\xspace \cite{zoltan}.
The element weights described above are used to determine the optimal
partitioning of the space filling curve. Besides the space filling curve based
approach provided by \textsc{Zoltan}\xspace called HSFC (id 13) \dune[ALUGrid] also provides it's own load
distribution algorithm. In this case it is assumed that the elements of the macro mesh
are sorted by a space filling curve. Then the distribution of the load boils down to the
distribution of a 1d graph with attached weights. If \textsc{Zoltan}\xspace is available
and no pre-ordered mesh is provided, the Hilbert space filling curve from the \textsc{Zoltan}\xspace
package is used to sort the elements. As a fallback \dune[ALUGrid] also provides it's
on implementation based on the Z-curve (aka Morton curve) approach.
The algorithm to partition the 1d graph is based on the one described in
\cite[Algorithm 16]{burstedde:11} with some slight modifications such as avoiding empty partitions in any
case if the number of macro elements is larger than the number of cores used.
\dune[ALUGrid]'s internal space filling curve with linkage (id 4) algorithm comes with a further advantage:
The communication after a redistribution to identify master-slave node relations can be
done without communication. In all other cases listed in Table \ref{tab:lbmethods} an all-to-all communication
is needed to compute the master-slave relation of vertices that are present on multiple cores.
The simplest way to tweak the internal load balancing algorithm are three
parameters read from a file called \file{alugrid.cfg}, which
is searched for in the current working directory.
This file has to contain three values.
The fist two numbers (\code{lbUnder}, \code{lbOver})
in the \file{alugrid.cfg} file allow to specify a
certain amount of load inbalance which has to be exceeded before the
partitioning is adjusted. A new partitioning is computed only if the
maximum number of leaf elements in a partition exceeds
\code{lbOver} times the mean number of elements or the minumum number is
smaller than \code{lbUnder} times the mean number of elements in all
partitions.
The third value is an integer between
$0$ and $15$ determining the partitioning method to use.
Table~\ref{tab:lbmethods} gives an overview of available methods and their
numbering.
\begin{table}
\renewcommand{\arraystretch}{1.25}
\caption{Internal partitioning methods and corresponding id.
}
\label{tab:lbmethods}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{lc|lc}
method name & id & method name & id \\ \hline \hline
NONE & 0 & COLLECT (to rank $0$) & 1 \\
Space Filling Curve (linkage) & 4
&Space Filling Curve & 9 \\
METIS (PartGraphKway) & 11
& METIS (PartGraphRecursive) & 12 \\
ZOLTAN (HSFC) & 13
& ZOLTAN (GRAPH) & 14 \\
ZOLTAN (PARMETIS) & 15
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\end{table}
A second option to influence the outcome of the load balancing algorithm is
to provide other weights for the elements (i.e., the graph nodes).
This can improve the overall
effciency of a scheme if the number of leaves does not directly represent
the computational cost associated with a given macro element. An example
for this are reactive flow problems where substepping in time is used to
resolve stiff sources locally on each element \cite{gessner:01}.
Further examples are the solution of PDEs in a moving domain \cite{motor:13} or
a multi-domain approach where partial differential equations with different
complexity are solved in different domains represented on the same underlying grid~\cite{multidomain:12}.
The corresponding additional methods are
\begin{lstlisting}
template< class LBWeights >
bool loadBalance ( LBWeights &weights );
template< class LBWeights, class DataHandleImpl, class Data >
bool loadBalance ( LBWeights &weights,
CommDataHandleIF< DataHandleImpl, Data > &dataHandle );
\end{lstlisting}
\code{LBWeights} must implement \code{int operator()(const Grid::Codim<0>::Entity &)}
which will be called for each macro element to provide the weight, here an integer value.
An example usage is shown in
\file{examples/loadbalancing/loadbalance_simple.hh}. Each leaf element is assumed to
carry a computational cost of $2^l$ where $l$ is the level of the leaf element.
The weight for a macro element is then simply the sum of the weights over all underlying leaf elements.
In Figure \ref{fig:scaling314_comparison}, \ref{fig:scaling314_conf}, \ref{fig:scaling314_cube}, and \ref{fig:scaling403_cube}
we present a comparison of the different load balancing algorithms available in \dune[ALUGrid].
The results show a strong scaling study using the ball example with
refinement as described in \eqref{test:ball}.
The scaling studies have been carried out on Yellowstone \cite{Yellowstone}.
In Figure \ref{fig:scaling314_comparison} we present a comparison of run times for
\textsc{ALUGrid}\xspace's $1.52$ version and the new \dune[ALUGrid] module.
Since in version $1.52$ only \textsc{Metis}\xspace was available
for partitioning we only compare the run times using the \textsc{Metis}\xspace partitioning.
We discover that both the tetrahedral and the hexahedral version perform better in the new
\dune[ALUGrid] implementation.
For the comparison of load balancing methods in
Figure~\ref{fig:scaling314_conf}, \ref{fig:scaling314_cube}, and \ref{fig:scaling403_cube}
we can see that the
space filling curve approaches, either \dune[ALUGrid]'s internal methods
or the HSFC method from \textsc{Zoltan}\xspace,
perform best even if the macro grid does not allow a good partitioning
anymore because the average element per core ratio is very small. The graph
partitioning methods are in general more expensive even though the created partitions
seem to be more efficient in terms of communications effort resulting in faster run
times for the adaptation step (see Figure \ref{fig:scaling314_ad},
\ref{fig:scaling314_cube_ad}, and \ref{fig:scaling403_cube_ad}).
As a drawback all tested graph partitioning methods fail when the number of elements per core
becomes very small. We have to point out that this example is
heavily communication based and especially
the load balancing step, which is done in every time step, is very communication
intensive. So it seems even more impressive that the run times still drop when
using $2048$ or $4096$ cores.
This is confirmed by a comparable study in \cite{amdis2} where a stagnation in strong
scaling was observed when adaptivity and load balancing was done every time step.
As a conclusion the space filling curve approaches seem
more suitable for problems with frequent redistribution of the mesh whereas the graph
partitioning methods seem more favorable for productions runs on a fixed non-adaptive
grid.
\begin{figure}[!ht]
\subfloat[overall]{\label{fig:scaling314_simp}
\includegraphics[width=0.32\linewidth]{scaling314_simp}}
\subfloat[adaptation]{\label{fig:scaling314_simp_ad}
\includegraphics[width=0.32\linewidth]{scaling314_simp_ad}}
\subfloat[load balancing]{\label{fig:scaling314_simp_lb}
\includegraphics[width=0.32\linewidth]{scaling314_simp_lb}}
\caption{Comparison of \textsc{ALUGrid}\xspace $1.52$ and \dune[ALUGrid] using the
ball example with a macro mesh of $32\,768$ hexahedrons or $196\,608$ tetrahedrons.
The grid is refined uniformly once and the maximal refinement level is
$4$ (parameter 3 1 4 for example \code{main_ball}).
Here, we only use the METIS PartGraphKway (partition method id 11)
method for domain decomposition.}
\label{fig:scaling314_comparison}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[!ht]
\subfloat[overall]{\label{fig:scaling314_simpconf}
\includegraphics[width=0.32\linewidth]{scaling314_conf}}
\subfloat[adaptation]{\label{fig:scaling314_ad}
\includegraphics[width=0.32\linewidth]{scaling314_conf_ad}}
\subfloat[load balancing]{
\label{fig:scaling314_lb}
\includegraphics[width=0.32\linewidth]{scaling314_conf_lb}}
\caption{Strong scaling of the
ball example from equation \eqref{test:ball} using a conforming simplex grid with
a macro mesh containing $196\,608$ tetrahedrons.
The grid is refined uniformly once and the maximal allowed refinement level is
$4$ (parameter 3 1 4 for example \code{main_ball}).
The graphs show the average run time per time step of different parts of the
algorithm.}
\label{fig:scaling314_conf}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[!ht]
\subfloat[overall]{\label{fig:scaling314_cube_ov}
\includegraphics[width=0.32\linewidth]{scaling314_cube}}
\subfloat[adaptation]{\label{fig:scaling314_cube_ad}
\includegraphics[width=0.32\linewidth]{scaling314_cube_ad}}
\subfloat[load balancing]{\label{fig:scaling314_cube_lb}
\includegraphics[width=0.32\linewidth]{scaling314_cube_lb}}
\caption{Strong scaling of the ball example from equation \eqref{test:ball} using a non-conforming cube grid with
a macro mesh containing $32\,768$ hexahedrons.
The grid is refined uniformly once and the maximal allowed refinement level is
$4$ (parameter 3 1 4 for example \code{main_ball}).
The graphs show the average run time per time step of different parts of the
algorithm.}
\label{fig:scaling314_cube}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[!ht]
\subfloat[overall]{\label{fig:scaling403_cube_ov}
\includegraphics[width=0.32\linewidth]{scaling403_cube}}
\subfloat[adaptation]{\label{fig:scaling403_cube_ad}
\includegraphics[width=0.32\linewidth]{scaling403_cube_ad}}
\subfloat[load balancing]{\label{fig:scaling403_cube_lb}
\includegraphics[width=0.32\linewidth]{scaling403_cube_lb}}
\caption{Strong scaling of the ball example from equation \eqref{test:ball} using a non-conforming cube grid with
a macro mesh containing $262\,144$ hexahedrons.
The maximal allowed refinement level is
$3$ (parameter 4 0 3 for example \code{main_ball}).
The graphs show the average run time per time step of different parts of the
algorithm.}
\label{fig:scaling403_cube}
\end{figure}
\subsection{User Defined Partitioning}
\label{userdeflb}
A more general approach is provided by the methods
\begin{lstlisting}
template< class LBDestinations >
bool repartition ( LBDestinations &destinations );
template< class LBDestinations, class DataHandleImpl, class Data >
bool repartition ( LBDestinations &destinations,
CommDataHandleIF< DataHandleImpl, Data > &dataHandle);
\end{lstlisting}
performing load balancing either without or with migrating user data using
callback on the \code{dataHandle} instance.
Otherwise, the whole load balancing is taken care of by the user.
The class \code{LBDestinations} has to fulfill the following interface
\begin{lstlisting}
struct LBDestinations
{
// Return process number the given macro element should be assigned to.
int operator()(const Grid::Codim<0>::Entity &);
// Fill set of ranks the current process will receive elements from and return true
// in this case. If false is returned, then ALUGrid will compute this information
// via a global communication.
bool importRanks( std::set<int>& ranks ) const;
};
\end{lstlisting}
where the \code{int operator()(const Grid::Codim<0>::Entity &)} returns the process
number an element is to be moved to. In \dune[ALUGrid] this method will be
called for each macro element on the given rank and that macro element
together with all its children will be moved to the desired partition.
The method
\code{importRanks} can simply return \code{false} and then does not need to
fill the set \code{ranks}. However, this decreases performance
due to the global communication required to find out from which ranks to expect
data.
Some partitioning tools like \textsc{Zoltan}\xspace provide this information, so that the user only
needs to copy it to \code{ranks} vector and return \code{true} to improve parallel efficiency.
An example usage is shown in
\file{examples/loadbalancing/loadbalance_simple.hh}. The partitioning is
computed by keeping the center on process zero and distributing the rest of
the grid in equal slices to the other processors.
The only changes required to the algorithm are in \file{main.cc} and
\file{adaptation.hh} where the calls of the \code{loadbalance(...)} method
on the grid are replaced with the new \code{repartition(...)} methods
In each step of the
scheme before calling \code{grid.repartition(...)} the method
\code{repartition()} is called on the loadbalance handle. This causes an
internal variable to be increased, leading each time to a new partitioning:
\begin{lstlisting}
template< class Grid >
struct SimpleLoadBalanceHandle
{
typedef SimpleLoadBalanceHandle This;
typedef typename Grid :: Traits :: template Codim<0> :: Entity Element;
SimpleLoadBalanceHandle ( const Grid &grid )
: angle_( 0 )
, maxRank_( grid.comm().size() )
{}
/** this method is called before invoking the repartition
method on the grid, to check if the user-defined
partitioning needs to be readjusted */
bool repartition ()
{
angle_ += 2.*M_PI/50.;
return true;
}
/** This is the method, called from the grid for each macro element.
It returns the rank to which the element is to be moved. */
int operator()( const Element &element ) const
{
typedef typename Element::Geometry::GlobalCoordinate Coordinate;
Coordinate w = element.geometry().center();
w -= Coordinate(0.5);
if (w[0]*w[0]+w[1]*w[1] > 0.1 && maxRank_>0)
{ // distribute everything away from the center in equal slices
double phi=arg(std::complex<double>(w[0],w[1]));
if (w[1]<0) phi+=2.*M_PI;
phi += angle_;
phi *= double(maxRank_-1)/(2.*M_PI);
int p = int(phi)
return p+1;
}
else // keep the center on proc 0
return 0;
}
/** This method can simply return false, in which case ALUGrid
will internally compute the required information through
some global communication. To avoid this overhead the user
can provide the ranks of partitions from which elements will
be moved to the calling repartition. */
bool importRanks( std::set<int> &ranks) const { return false; }
private:
double angle_;
int maxRank_;
};
\end{lstlisting}
A more useful example is given in
\file{examples/loadbalancing/loadbalance_zoltan.hh}, where the algorithm
in \dune[ALUGrid] relying on the \textsc{Zoltan}\xspace's graph partitioner is replicated
using the \dune interface. Note that the results will not be identical
since the order of the edges within the graph will differ slightly when
using the \dune interface to build it.
Nevertheless, the algorithm and parameter
settings for \textsc{Zoltan}\xspace are identical. Based on this implementation it is easy
to experiment with the wide range of options \textsc{Zoltan}\xspace provides to optimize
the partitioning algorithm for a given application.
Note also that the class again contains a \code{repartitioning} method using the
same \code{lbOver}, \code{lbUnder} values provided in the \file{alugrid.cfg}
file.
Constructing the graph relying only on the available \dune interface would
be quite cumbersome and involve quite a bit of overhead. There is no direct
way to compute the edge weights and the master rank for each ghost element
has to be passed on to \textsc{Zoltan}\xspace, information requiring an extra
communication step within \dune. To simplify constructing the graph
\dune[ALUGrid] provides a new method on the grid.
\begin{lstlisting}
template<PartitionIteratorType pitype>
typename Partition<pitype>::MacroGridView macroView() const;
\end{lstlisting}
This method returns a view of the macro grid level of the grid. The
\code{MacroGridView} contains the usual method to iterate over the macro
grid and obtain an index set but in addition includes some useful
methods to construct the dual weighted graph:
\begin{lstlisting}
// return the master process of the given element
int master ( const typename Codim< 0 > :: Entity &entity ) const;
// return a globally uniqe integer id for this element
int macroId ( const typename Codim< 0 > :: Entity &entity ) const;
// return the weight (number of leaf elements) for the given elements
int weight ( const typename Codim< 0 > :: Entity &entity ) const;
// return the weight for this intersection
int weight ( const Intersection &intersection ) const;
\end{lstlisting}
The \textsc{Zoltan}\xspace example demonstrates a practical usage of the new load balancing
interface and also an extension not directly available using the internal
bindings: The hypergraph algorithm of \textsc{Zoltan}\xspace can be
used to fix a set of elements to a given processor. By changing the
variable \code{fix_bnd_} to \code{true} the partitioning is computed such
that all elements adjacent to left boundary face are kept on process zero
throughout the simulation. A practical example of this possibility is
discussed in \cite{jehl:14}. It should be noted that, although the algorithm used in
this example mirrors the one used in the \dune[ALUGrid] internal bindings to \textsc{Zoltan}\xspace,
the results might not be the same. The reason is that iteration order over the macro
elements can differ and this results in slightly different dual graphs.
{\bf Note:} As pointed out above, \dune[ALUGrid] only allows to partition
the macro level of the grid. Depending on the problem the macro grid might
not contain enough elements or the adaptivity might be too localized to
allow for a balanced load if only macro elements are distributed. On
manycore systems a possible solution is to use fewer processes to distribute the
macro grid and use threading to partition directly on
the leaf level. This approach has been evaluated in
\cite{dgimpl:12}.
\section{Conclusions}
In this paper we briefly described the main new features available in the overhaul
of \dune[ALUGrid]. The main improvements concern the
parallel feature set of the library, including now user-defined load
balancing and parallel grid construction as well as a decreased memory footprint.
Since \textsc{ALUGrid}\xspace is and was widely used within the \dune community we expect that
numerous \dune users will benefit from work presented here.
We also presented a number of extensions to the \dune grid interface that prove useful
and will hopefully be integrated into the \dune grid interface in the near future.
The increased feature set also includes newest vertex bisection for tetrahedral
grids in 3d, making it the only parallel grid manager within \dune with
this feature.
This will enable the usage of conforming adaptive discretization methods, such as
conforming adaptive Finite Elements, in parallel. Nevertheless, there are some
shortcomings that still have to be resolved in the future.
The 2d code has been parallelized by reformulating it as an extension to the 3d code and it thus also inherited all the major features. The usage is similar to the usage of the 3d code.
\subsection{Shortcomings and Outlook}
A major drawback of the current implementation is that load balancing
is performed solely based on the
macro grid. This works fine for many problems where the refinement zones are
not too restricted to one area of the domain, but will completely fail for
very local refinement regions. As already mentioned the situation can be
improved by using a hybrid parallelization approach. But the next major improvement will be the
implementation of a more flexible partitioning of elements allowing for partitioning of
various sets of elements. Furthermore, the current implementation
lacks support for ghost elements when bisection refinement is used. This is
hopefully fixed in the near future.
\section*{Acknowledgements}
We would like to acknowledge high-performance computing
support from Yellowstone \cite{Yellowstone} provided
by NCAR's Computational and Information Systems
Laboratory, sponsored by the National Science Foundation.
Robert Kl\"ofkorn acknowledges
the DOE BER Program under the award DE-SC0006959 and the
National IOR Centre of Norway.
|
\section*{Figure Captions\markboth
{FIGURECAPTIONS}{FIGURECAPTIONS}}\list
{Figure \arabic{enumi}:\hfill}{\settowidth\labelwidth{Figure
999:}
\leftmargin\labelwidth
\advance\leftmargin\labelsep\usecounter{enumi}}}
\let\endfigcap\endlist \relax
\def\tablecap{\section*{Table Captions\markboth
{TABLECAPTIONS}{TABLECAPTIONS}}\list
{Table \arabic{enumi}:\hfill}{\settowidth\labelwidth{Table
999:}
\leftmargin\labelwidth
\advance\leftmargin\labelsep\usecounter{enumi}}}
\let\endtablecap\endlist \relax
\def\reflist{\section*{References\markboth
{REFLIST}{REFLIST}}\list
{[\arabic{enumi}]\hfill}{\settowidth\labelwidth{[999]}
\leftmargin\labelwidth
\advance\leftmargin\labelsep\usecounter{enumi}}}
\let\endreflist\endlist \relax
\def\list{}{\rightmargin\leftmargin}\item[]{\list{}{\rightmargin\leftmargin}\item[]}
\let\endquote=\endlist
\makeatletter
\newcounter{pubctr}
\def\@ifnextchar[{\@publist}{\@@publist}{\@ifnextchar[{\@publist}{\@@publist}}
\def\@publist[#1]{\list
{[\arabic{pubctr}]\hfill}{\settowidth\labelwidth{[999]}
\leftmargin\labelwidth
\advance\leftmargin\labelsep
\@nmbrlisttrue\def\@listctr{pubctr}
\setcounter{pubctr}{#1}\addtocounter{pubctr}{-1}}}
\def\@@publist{\list
{[\arabic{pubctr}]\hfill}{\settowidth\labelwidth{[999]}
\leftmargin\labelwidth
\advance\leftmargin\labelsep
\@nmbrlisttrue\def\@listctr{pubctr}}}
\let\endpublist\endlist \relax
\makeatother
\newskip\humongous \humongous=0pt plus 1000pt minus 1000pt
\def\mathsurround=0pt{\mathsurround=0pt}
\def\eqalign#1{\,\vcenter{\openup1\jot \mathsurround=0pt
\ialign{\strut \hfil$\displaystyle{##}$&$
\displaystyle{{}##}$\hfil\crcr#1\crcr}}\,}
\newif\ifdtup
\def\panorama{\global\dtuptrue \openup1\jot \mathsurround=0pt
\everycr{\noalign{\ifdtup \global\dtupfalse
\vskip-\lineskiplimit \vskip\normallineskiplimit
\else \penalty\interdisplaylinepenalty \fi}}}
\def\eqalignno#1{\panorama \tabskip=\humongous
\halign to\displaywidth{\hfil$\displaystyle{##}$
\tabskip=0pt&$\displaystyle{{}##}$\hfil
\tabskip=\humongous&\llap{$##$}\tabskip=0pt
\crcr#1\crcr}}
\relax
\def\begin{equation}{\begin{equation}}
\def\end{equation}{\end{equation}}
\def\begin{eqnarray}{\begin{eqnarray}}
\def\end{eqnarray}{\end{eqnarray}}
\def\bar{\partial}{\bar{\partial}}
\def\bar{J}{\bar{J}}
\def\partial{\partial}
\def f_{,i} { f_{,i} }
\def F_{,i} { F_{,i} }
\def f_{,u} { f_{,u} }
\def f_{,v} { f_{,v} }
\def F_{,u} { F_{,u} }
\def F_{,v} { F_{,v} }
\def A_{,u} { A_{,u} }
\def A_{,v} { A_{,v} }
\def g_{,u} { g_{,u} }
\def g_{,v} { g_{,v} }
\def\kappa{\kappa}
\def\rho{\rho}
\def\alpha{\alpha}
\def {\bar A} {\Alpha}
\def\beta{\beta}
\def\Beta{\Beta}
\def\gamma{\gamma}
\def\Gamma{\Gamma}
\def\delta{\delta}
\def\Delta{\Delta}
\def\epsilon{\epsilon}
\def\Epsilon{\Epsilon}
\def\p{\pi}
\def\Pi{\Pi}
\def\chi{\chi}
\def\Chi{\Chi}
\def\theta{\theta}
\def\Theta{\Theta}
\def\mu{\mu}
\def\nu{\nu}
\def\omega{\omega}
\def\Omega{\Omega}
\def\lambda{\lambda}
\def\Lambda{\Lambda}
\def\s{\sigma}
\def\Sigma{\Sigma}
\def\varphi{\varphi}
\def{\cal N}{{\cal N}}
\def{\cal M}{{\cal M}}
\def\tilde V{\tilde V}
\def{\cal V}{{\cal V}}
\def\tilde{\cal V}{\tilde{\cal V}}
\def{\cal L}{{\cal L}}
\def{\cal R}{{\cal R}}
\def{\cal A}{{\cal A}}
\def{\cal{G} }{{\cal{G} }}
\def{\cal{D} } {{\cal{D} } }
\def\tilde{m}{\tilde{m}}
\defSchwarzschild {Schwarzschild}
\defReissner-Nordstr\"om {Reissner-Nordstr\"om}
\defChristoffel {Christoffel}
\defMinkowski {Minkowski}
\def\bigskip{\bigskip}
\def\noindent{\noindent}
\def\hfill\break{\hfill\break}
\def\qquad{\qquad}
\def\bigl{\bigl}
\def\bigr{\bigr}
\def\overline\del{\overline\partial}
\def\relax{\rm I\kern-.18em R}{\relax{\rm I\kern-.18em R}}
\def\relax{\rm 1\kern-.35em1}{\relax{\rm 1\kern-.35em1}}
\renewcommand{\thesection.\arabic{equation}}}{\thesection.\arabic{equation}}
\csname @addtoreset\endcsname{equation}{section}
\def$SL(2,\IR)_{-k'}\otimes SU(2)_k/(\IR \otimes \tilde \IR)${$SL(2,\relax{\rm I\kern-.18em R})_{-k'}\otimes SU(2)_k/(\relax{\rm I\kern-.18em R} \otimes \tilde \relax{\rm I\kern-.18em R})$}
\def Nucl. Phys. { Nucl. Phys. }
\def Phys. Lett. { Phys. Lett. }
\def Mod. Phys. Lett. { Mod. Phys. Lett. }
\def Phys. Rev. Lett. { Phys. Rev. Lett. }
\def Phys. Rev. { Phys. Rev. }
\def Ann. Phys. { Ann. Phys. }
\def Commun. Math. Phys. { Commun. Math. Phys. }
\def Int. J. Mod. Phys. { Int. J. Mod. Phys. }
\def\partial_+{\partial_+}
\def\partial_-{\partial_-}
\def\partial_{\pm}{\partial_{\pm}}
\def\partial_{\mp}{\partial_{\mp}}
\def\partial_{\tau}{\partial_{\tau}}
\def \bar \del {\bar \partial}
\def {\bar h} { {\bar h} }
\def \bphi { {\bar \phi} }
\def {\bar z} { {\bar z} }
\def {\bar A} { {\bar A} }
\def {\tilde {A }} { {\tilde {A }}}
\def {\tilde {\A }} { {\tilde { {\bar A} }}}
\def {\bar J} {{\bar J} }
\def {\tilde J} { {\tilde {J }}}
\def {1\over 2} {{1\over 2}}
\def {1\over 3} {{1\over 3}}
\def \over {\over}
\def\int_{\Sigma} d^2 z{\int_{\Sigma} d^2 z}
\def{\rm diag}{{\rm diag}}
\def{\rm const.}{{\rm const.}}
\def\relax{\rm I\kern-.18em R}{\relax{\rm I\kern-.18em R}}
\def^{\raise.15ex\hbox{${\scriptscriptstyle -}$}\kern-.05em 1}{^{\raise.15ex\hbox{${\scriptscriptstyle -}$}\kern-.05em 1}}
\def$SL(2,\IR)\otimes SO(1,1)^{d-2}/SO(1,1)${$SL(2,\relax{\rm I\kern-.18em R})\otimes SO(1,1)^{d-2}/SO(1,1)$}
\def$SL(2,\IR)_{-k'}\otimes SU(2)_k/(\IR \otimes \tilde \IR)${$SL(2,\relax{\rm I\kern-.18em R})_{-k'}\otimes SU(2)_k/(\relax{\rm I\kern-.18em R} \otimes \tilde \relax{\rm I\kern-.18em R})$}
\def$SO(d-1,2)_{-k}/ SO(d-1,1)_{-k}${$SO(d-1,2)_{-k}/ SO(d-1,1)_{-k}$}
\def$SO(d-1,2)/ SO(d-1,1)${$SO(d-1,2)/ SO(d-1,1)$}
\defPoisson--Lie T-duality{Poisson--Lie T-duality}
\def{\cal M}{{\cal M}}
\def\tilde V{\tilde V}
\def{\cal V}{{\cal V}}
\def\tilde{\cal V}{\tilde{\cal V}}
\def{\cal L}{{\cal L}}
\def{\cal R}{{\cal R}}
\def{\cal A}{{\cal A}}
\def{\tilde X}{{\tilde X}}
\def{\tilde J}{{\tilde J}}
\def{\tilde P}{{\tilde P}}
\def{\tilde L}{{\tilde L}}
\def{\rm tr}{{\rm tr}}
\def{\hat i}{{\hat i}}
\def{\hat j}{{\hat j}}
\def{\hat k}{{\hat k}}
\begin{document}
\begin{titlepage}
\begin{center}
\vskip .5in
{\LARGE Spinning strings in $AdS_3 \times S^3$ with NS-NS flux}
\vskip 0.4in
{\bf Rafael Hern\'andez}\phantom{x} and \phantom{x}
{\bf Juan Miguel Nieto}
\vskip 0.1in
Departamento de F\'{\i}sica Te\'orica I\\
Universidad Complutense de Madrid\\
$28040$ Madrid, Spain\\
{\footnotesize{\tt <EMAIL>, <EMAIL>}}
\end{center}
\vskip .4in
\centerline{\bf Abstract}
\vskip .1in
\noindent
The sigma model describing closed strings rotating in $AdS_3 \times S^3$ is known to reduce to the one-dimensional
Neumann-Rosochatius integrable system. In this article we show that closed spinning strings in $AdS_3 \times S^3 \times T^4$
in the presence of NS-NS three-form flux can be described by an extension of the Neumann-Rosochatius system. We consider
closed strings rotating with one spin in $AdS_3$ and two different angular momenta in $S^3$. For a class of solutions with constant
radii we find the dependence of the classical energy on the spin and the angular momenta as an expansion in the square
of the 't Hooft coupling of the theory.
\noindent
\vskip .4in
\noindent
\end{titlepage}
\vfill
\eject
\def1.2{1.2}
\baselineskip 20pt
\section{Introduction}
Integrability has become a promising path towards a deeper understanding of the AdS/CFT correspondence.
After the uncovering of an integrable structure underlying four-dimensional Yang-Mills theory with maximal supersymmetry~\cite{MZ}-\cite{AFS},
integrability has proved to be a common feature of many other examples of the correspondence. A case of special interest where integrability
has also been discovered is the duality between string backgrounds with an $AdS_3$ factor and maximally supersymmetric two-dimensional
conformal field theories, the AdS$_3$/CFT$_2$ correspondence. First evidences that integrability could be present in these type of backgrounds
came from the construction of giant magnon solutions~\cite{DS}. Later on it was shown that the Green-Schwarz action of type IIB strings
with R-R three-form flux compactified on $AdS_3 \times S^3 \times M_4$, where $M_4$ is either $T^4$ or $S^3 \times S^1$, is an integrable
classical theory~\cite{BSZ}. This observation has boosted the analysis of the AdS$_3$/CFT$_2$ correspondence using integrability inspired
methods~\cite{Zarembo}-\cite{BSSS2} (for a review see reference~\cite{Sfondrini}).
Integrability has also been found recently to be a symmetry of more general $AdS_3 \times S^3 \times M_4$ backgrounds with
a mixture of R-R and NS-NS fluxes \cite{CZ}. This discovery has preluded a series of studies of the
AdS$_3$/CFT$_2$ correspondence with mixed fluxes using integrability~\cite{HT}-\cite{Babichenko}.
Many of the advances in the analysis of $AdS_3 \times S^3 \times M_4$ backgrounds using integrability have been influenced
by the developments in the study of the AdS$_5$/CFT$_4$ correspondence. In the case of closed string solutions rotating in
$AdS_5 \times S^5$ a beautiful picture came from the identification of the corresponding lagrangian with the Neumann-Rosochatius
integrable system~\cite{NR}. A natural question from the point of view of the AdS$_3$/CFT$_2$ correspondence
is what is the extension of this description to backgrounds with non-vanishing fluxes. This is the problem that we will consider in this note
for the case of closed strings rotating in $AdS_3 \times S^3 \times M_4$ with NS-NS three-form flux.
The remaining part of the article is organized as follows. In section~2 we will consider an ansatz for a closed
string rotating with two different angular momenta in $S^3$ and NS-NS three-form flux. The presence of flux introduces
an additional term in the Neumann-Rosochatius system. We find a class of solutions with constant radii relying on a similar
set of solutions in the absence of flux. In section~3 we extend the analysis to the case where the string rotates
both in $AdS_3$ and in $S^3$. We find a class of solutions with constant radii and one spin in $AdS_3$ and two different angular
momenta in $S^3$. We conclude in section 4 with some general remarks and a discussion on related open problems.
\section{Rotating strings in $S^3$}
\noindent
In this note we will be interested in closed spinning string solutions in $AdS_3 \times S^3 \times T^4$ with NS-NS three-form flux.
The solutions that we will study will have no dynamics along the torus and thus we will not include these directions in what follows.
The background metrics will then be
\begin{eqnarray}
ds_{AdS_3}^2 & \!\! = \!\! & - \cosh^2 \rho \, dt^2 + d \rho^2 + \sinh^2 \rho \, d \phi^2 \ , \nonumber \\
ds_{S^3}^2 & \!\! = \!\! & d\theta^2 + \sin^2 \theta d\phi_1^2 + \cos^2 \theta d \phi_2^2 \ ,
\end{eqnarray}
and the NS-NS B-field will be
\begin{equation}
b_{t \phi} = q \sinh^2 \rho \ , \quad b_{\phi_1 \phi_2} = - q \cos^2 \theta \ ,
\end{equation}
where $0 \leq q \leq 1$.
The value $q=0$ corresponds to the case of pure R-R flux, where the theory can be formulated in terms of a Green-Schwarz coset.
The value $q=1$ is the limit of pure NS-NS flux, and can be described by a supersymmetric WZW model.
In the absence of flux the sigma model for closed strings rotating in $AdS_3 \times S^3$ becomes the Neumann-Rosochatius
integrable system, which describes an oscillator on a sphere or an hyperboloid with a centrifugal potential.
The presence of flux introduces an additional term in the lagrangian of the Neumann-Rosochatius system~\cite{NR}.
In order to exhibit this it will be convenient to use the embedding coordinates rather than the global coordinates.
The embedding coordinates are related to the global $AdS_3$ and $S^3$ angles by
\footnote{We will follow closely conventions and notation in \cite{NR}.}
\begin{eqnarray}
Y_1 + i Y_2 \! \! \! & = & \! \! \! \sinh \rho \, e^{i\phi} \ , \quad Y_3 + i Y_0 = \cosh \rho \, e^{i \, t} \ , \\
X_1 + i X_2 \! \! \! & = & \! \! \! \sin \theta \, e^{i\phi_1} \ , \quad X_3 + i X_4 = \cos \theta \, e^{i\phi_2} \ .
\end{eqnarray}
In this section we will restrict the dynamics of the strings to rotation on $S^3$, so that we will take $Y_3 + i Y_0 = e^{i t}$,
with $t=\kappa \tau$, and $Y_1=Y_2=0$.
For the coordinates along $S^3$ we will choose an ansatz with two different angular momenta,
\begin{equation}
X_1 + i X_2 = r_1 (\sigma) \, e^{i \varphi_1 (\tau, \sigma)} \ , \quad X_3 + i X_4 = r_2 (\sigma) \, e^{i \varphi_2 (\tau, \sigma)} \ ,
\label{ansatz}
\end{equation}
where the angles will be taken to be
\begin{equation}
\varphi_i (\tau,\sigma) = \omega_i \tau + \alpha_i(\sigma) \ .
\label{ansatzangle}
\end{equation}
As we are going to consider solutions that lie on a sphere, the functions $r_i(\sigma)$ must satisfy
\begin{equation}
r_1^2+r_2^2=1 \ . \label{sphere}
\end{equation}
As we will be interested in closed strings solutions, the above functions must satisfy
\begin{equation}
r_i(\sigma + 2 \pi) = r_i(\sigma) \ , \quad \alpha_i(\sigma + 2 \pi) = \alpha_i(\sigma) + 2 \pi \bar{m}_i \ ,
\end{equation}
with $\bar{m}_i$ some integer numbers acting as winding numbers.
When we enter this ansatz in the Polyakov action
\begin{equation}
S = \frac {\sqrt{\lambda}}{4 \pi} \int d^2 \sigma \big[ \sqrt{-h} h^{ab} G_{MN} \partial_a X^M \partial_b X^N
- \epsilon^{ab} B_{MN} \partial_a X^M \partial_b X^N \big] \ ,
\end{equation}
we find the lagrangian
\begin{equation}
L_{S^3} = \frac {\sqrt{\lambda}}{2 \pi} \Big[ \sum_{i=1}^2 \frac {1}{2} \big[ (r_i')^2 + r_i^2 (\alpha_i')^2 - r_i^2 \omega_i^2 \big]
- \frac {\Lambda}{2} ( r_1^2 + r_2^2 - 1) + q r_2^2 \, ( \omega_1 \alpha_2' - \omega_2 \alpha_1' ) \Big] \ ,
\label{NRq}
\end{equation}
where the prime stands for derivatives with respect to $\sigma$, $\Lambda$ is a Lagrange multiplier and we have chosen
the conformal gauge. The first piece in (\ref{NRq}) is the Neumann-Rosochatius integrable system \cite{NR}. The presence
of the non-vanishing flux introduces the last term in the lagrangian. \footnote{Note that in the
WZW model limit $q=1$
the lagrangian simplifies greatly because we can complete squares.
We will find further evidence on this simplification below.}
We will now write the equations of motion. The lagrangian is cyclic on the variables~$\alpha_i$. Therefore we easily conclude that
\begin{equation}
\alpha_i' = \frac {v_i + q r_2^2 \epsilon_{ij} \omega_j}{r_i^2} \ , \quad i = 1,2 \ ,
\label{alphaprime}
\end{equation}
where $v_i$ are some integrals of motion and $\epsilon_{12}=+1$ (we assume summation on $j$).
The variation of the lagrangian with respect to the radial coordinates gives us
\begin{align}
r_1''&=-r_1 \omega_1^2 +r_1 \alpha_1^{'2}-\Lambda r_1 \ , \label{r1} \\
r_2''&=-r_2 \omega_2^2 +r_2 \alpha_2^{'2}-\Lambda r_2 + 2 q r_2 ( \omega_1 \alpha_2' - \omega_2 \alpha_1' )\ .
\label{r2}
\end{align}
To these equations we have to add the Virasoro constraints,
\begin{align}
&\sum_{i=1}^2 \big( r_i^{'2} +r_i^2 ( \alpha_i^{'2}+ \omega_i^2 ) \big)=\kappa^2 \ , \\
&\sum_{i=1}^2 r_i^2 \omega_i \alpha_i'=0 \ , \label{virasoro1}
\end{align}
In terms of the integrals $v_i$ the second Virasoro constraint can be rewritten as
\begin{equation}
\omega_1 v_1+\omega_2 v_2=0 \ .
\end{equation}
The energy and the angular momenta of the string are given by
\begin{align}
E & = \sqrt{\lambda} \, \kappa \ , \label{E} \\
J_1 & = \sqrt{\lambda} \int_0^{2\pi} {\frac {d\sigma}{2 \pi} \left( r_1^2 \omega_1 - q r_2^2 \alpha_2' \right)} \ , \label{J1} \\
J_2 & = \sqrt{\lambda} \int_0^{2 \pi} {\frac {d\sigma}{2 \pi} \left( r_2^2 \omega_2 + q r_2^2 \alpha_1' \right)} \label{J2} \ .
\end{align}
\subsection{Constant radii solutions}
A simple solution to the equations of motion can be obtained if we take the radii $r_i$ to be some constants, $r_i=a_i$.
In this case the derivatives of the angles also become constant and thus
\begin{equation}
\alpha_i = \bar{m}_i \sigma + \alpha_{0i} \ ,
\end{equation}
where the windings become
\begin{equation}
\bar{m}_i \equiv \frac {v_i + q a_2^2 \epsilon_{ij} \omega_j}{a_i^2} \ .
\end{equation}
The integration constants $\alpha_{0i}$ can be set to zero through a rotation, and the constants $\bar{m}_i$ must be integers
in order to satisfy the closed string periodicity condition. The equations of motion for $r_i$ reduce now to
\begin{align}
& \omega_1^2 - \bar{m}_1^2 + \Lambda = 0 \label{o1} \ , \\
& \omega_2^2 -\bar{m}_2^{2} - 2 q ( \omega_1 \bar{m}_2 - \omega_2 \bar{m}_1 )+ \Lambda = 0 \label{o2} \ ,
\end{align}
and thus we conclude that the Lagrange multiplier $\Lambda$ is constant on this solution. The Virasoro constraints can then be written as
\begin{align}
& \sum_{i=1}^2 a_i^2 \left( \bar{m}_i^{2}+\omega_i^2 \right) = \kappa^2 \ , \label{energy} \\
& \bar{m}_1 J_1 + \bar{m}_2 J_2 = 0 \ . \label{virasoro2}
\end{align}
We will now find the energy as a function of the angular momenta and the integer numbers $\bar{m}_i$. In order to do this we will first use
equations (\ref{sphere}) and (\ref{virasoro1}) to write the radii as functions of $\omega_i$ and $\bar{m}_i$,
\begin{equation}
a_1^2 = \frac{\omega_2 \bar{m}_2}{\omega_2 \bar{m}_2-\omega_1 \bar{m}_1} \ , \quad
a_2^2 = \frac{\omega_1 \bar{m}_1}{\omega_1 \bar{m}_1 - \omega_2 \bar{m}_2} \ .
\end{equation}
With these relations at hand and the definitions (\ref{E})-(\ref{J2}), together with (\ref{energy}), we find
\begin{equation}
E^2 = \frac{(J_1+ \sqrt{\lambda} q a_2^2 \bar{m}_2)^2}{a_1^2} +\frac{(J_2- \sqrt{\lambda} q a_2^2 \bar{m}_1)^2}{a_2^2}
+ \lambda \left( a_1^2 \bar{m}_1^2 + a_2^2 \bar{m}_2^2 \right) \ ,
\end{equation}
or after some immediate algebra,
\begin{align}
E^2 & = (J_1+J_2)^2 +J_1 J_2 \frac{(1 - \hbox{w})^2}{\hbox{w}} -2 \sqrt{\lambda} q \bar{m}_1 ( J_1 \hbox{w} + J_2 ) \notag \\
& + \lambda \left( \bar{m}_ 1 \bar{m}_2 - q^2 \bar{m}_1^2 \hbox{w} \right) \frac{\bar{m}_1 - \bar{m}_2 \hbox{w}}{\bar{m}_2 - \bar{m}_1 \hbox{w}} \ ,
\label{EJ1J2}
\end{align}
where we have made use of (\ref{virasoro2}) and we have introduced $\hbox{w} \equiv \omega_1/\omega_2$.
Now we need to write the ratio $\hbox{w}$ as a function of the windings $\bar{m}_i$ and the angular momenta $J_i$.
This can be done by adding equations (\ref{J1}) and (\ref{J2}), subtracting equation (\ref{o2}) from (\ref{o1}),
and solving the resulting system of equations,
\begin{align}
& \big[ \bar{m}_1 J- \sqrt{\lambda} q \bar{m}_1 (\bar{m}_1 -\bar{m}_2) \big] \hbox{w} - \bar{m}_2 J - \sqrt{\lambda} (\bar{m}_1 -\bar{m}_2)\omega_1 = 0 \ ,
\label{J1J2} \\
& \omega_1^2 -\bar{m}_1^2-\frac{\omega_1^2}{\hbox{w}^2} +\bar{m}_2^2 +2 q \bar{m}_2 \omega_1 -2 q \bar{m}_1 \frac{\omega_1}{\hbox{w}} = 0 \ ,
\end{align}
where $J \equiv J_1+J_2$ is the total angular momentum. When we eliminate $\omega_1$ in these expressions we are left
with a quartic equation
\begin{align}
& (\bar{m}_1 \hbox{w} - \bar{m}_2 )^2 \Big[ 1 - \Big( 1 - \frac {\sqrt{\lambda}}{J} q (\bar{m}_1 -\bar{m}_2 ) \Big)^2
\hbox{w}^2 \Big] \nonumber \\
& + \frac {\lambda}{J^2} \hbox{w}^2 (\bar{m}_1 + \bar{m}_2 ) (\bar{m}_1 - \bar{m}_2 )^3 (1- q^2) = 0 \ .
\label{quartic}
\end{align}
Rather than trying to solve this equation explicitly, we can write the solution as a power series expansion in large $J/\sqrt{\lambda}$.
\footnote{Alternatively we can solve equation (\ref{quartic}) around the WZW limiting point $q=1$ to get
\begin{align*}
\omega_1 & = \frac {J}{\sqrt{\lambda}} + \frac {\sqrt{\lambda} \bar{m}_1 (\bar{m}_1 + \bar{m}_2) J}{(J + \sqrt{\lambda} \bar{m}_2)^2} (1-q) + \dots \ , \\
\omega_2 & = \frac {J}{\sqrt{\lambda}} - (\bar{m}_1 -\bar{m}_2)
+ \frac {(J^2 - \lambda \bar{m}_1 \bar{m}_2) (\bar{m}_1 - \bar{m}_2) + \sqrt{\lambda} \bar{m}_2 J (3 \bar{m}_1 - \bar{m}_2)}{(J + \sqrt{\lambda} \bar{m}_2)^2} (1-q) + \dots \ ,
\end{align*}
which reduce to (\ref{w1}) and (\ref{w2}) in the limit where $J/\sqrt{\lambda}$ is large.
}
Out of the four different solutions to (\ref{quartic}), the only one with a well-defined expansion is
\begin{equation}
\hbox{w} =1 + \frac {\sqrt{\lambda}}{J} q ( \bar{m}_1-\bar{m}_2)
+ \frac {\lambda}{2J^2} ( \bar{m}_1-\bar{m}_2) \big( \bar{m}_1+\bar{m}_2 +q^2 ( \bar{m}_1 - 3 \bar{m}_2) \big) + \cdots
\label{w}
\end{equation}
which implies that
\begin{align}
\omega_1 & = \frac {J}{\sqrt{\lambda}} + \frac {\sqrt{\lambda}}{2J} \bar{m}_1 (\bar{m}_1 +\bar{m}_2) (1-q^2)
\Big[ 1 - 2 \frac {\sqrt{\lambda}}{J} q \bar{m}_2 + \dots \Big] \ , \label{w1} \\
\omega_2 & = \frac {J}{\sqrt{\lambda}} - q (\bar{m}_1 -\bar{m}_2) + \frac {\sqrt{\lambda}}{2J} \bar{m}_2 (\bar{m}_1 + \bar{m}_2) (1-q^2)
\Big[ 1 - \frac {\sqrt{\lambda}}{J} q (\bar{m}_1 + \bar{m}_2) + \dots \Big] \ . \label{w2}
\end{align}
Note that the ${\cal O}(\sqrt{\lambda}/J)$ terms and the subsequent corrections in (\ref{w1}) and (\ref{w2}) are dressed
with a common factor of $\bar{m}_1 + \bar{m}_2$ that vanishes for equal angular momenta.
We can easily prove the existence of this factor if we set $\bar{m}_1 = - \bar{m}_2 \equiv m$ in equation (\ref{quartic}), which reduces to
\begin{equation}
(1 + \hbox{w})^2 \big[ (J - 2 \sqrt{\lambda} q m )^2 \hbox{w}^2 - J^2 \big] = 0 \ ,
\end{equation}
whose only well-defined solution is
\begin{equation}
\hbox{w} = \frac {J}{J - 2 \sqrt{\lambda} q m} \ ,
\label{wexact}
\end{equation}
and therefore we can calculate the frequencies $\omega_1$ and $\omega_2$ exactly,
\begin{equation}
\omega_1 = \frac {J}{\sqrt{\lambda}} \ , \quad
\omega_2 = \frac {J}{\sqrt{\lambda}} - 2 q m \ .
\end{equation}
An identical reasoning can be employed to prove the existence of the global factor $1-q^2$.
If we substitute the value of $\hbox{w}$ in equation (\ref{w}) in relation (\ref{EJ1J2}) we find
\begin{equation}
E^2 = J^2 - 2 \sqrt{\lambda} q \bar{m}_1 J + \frac {\lambda}{J} \big[ (\bar{m}_1^2 J_1+\bar{m}_2^2 J_2) (1-q^2)
+ q^2 \bar{m}_1^2 J \big] + \cdots
\label{qdispersion}
\end{equation}
When the flux vanishes this expression becomes the expansion for the energy in the Neumann-Rosochatius system
describing closed string solutions rotating with two different angular momenta \cite{NR}.
We must note that the subleading terms not included in (\ref{qdispersion}) contain a common factor of $\bar{m}_1 + \bar{m}_2$.
Therefore if we look at the particular case of $\bar{m}_1= - \bar{m}_2$ relation (\ref{qdispersion}) simplifies to
\begin{equation}
E^2 = J^2 - 2 \sqrt{\lambda} q m J + \lambda m^2 \ .
\label{HSTdispersion}
\end{equation}
This is the expression for the energy in the case of circular string solutions with two equal angular momenta found in \cite{HST}.
We stress that relation (\ref{HSTdispersion}) is an exact result because the ratio $\hbox{w}$ is given by equation (\ref{wexact}).
In a similar way if we focus on the case of pure NS-NS flux, where $q=1$, the energy can also be found exactly,
\begin{align}
E^2 & = \frac {1}{J} \Big[ J^3 + (\sqrt{\lambda} \bar{m}_1 - J_2) J_1^2 - (\sqrt{\lambda} \bar{m}_1 + J_1) J_2^2 - 2 \sqrt{\lambda} \bar{m}_1 J^2 + \lambda \bar{m}_1^2 J \nonumber \\
& - \sqrt{\lambda} (\bar{m}_1 - \bar{m}_2) J_1 J_2 - \frac { (\sqrt{\lambda} \bar{m}_1 + J_1)(\sqrt{\lambda} \bar{m}_1 - J_2) J^2}{J- \sqrt{\lambda} (\bar{m}_1 - \bar{m}_2)}
\Big] \ ,
\end{align}
which reduces to
\begin{equation}
E = J - \sqrt{\lambda} \bar{m}_1
\end{equation}
when we write the angular momenta $J_1$ and $J_2$ in terms of the total momentum $J$.
\section{Rotating strings in $AdS_3 \times S^3$}
We will now extend the analysis in the previous section to the case where the string can rotate both in $AdS_3$ and $S^3$,
again with no dynamics along $T^4$. The string solutions that we will consider will therefore have one spin $S$ in $AdS_3$
and two angular momenta $J_1$ and $J_2$ in $S^3$. We can describe these configurations
with the ansatz (\ref{ansatz})--(\ref{ansatzangle}), together with
\begin{equation}
Y_3 + i Y_0 = z_0 (\sigma) \, e^{i \phi_0 (\tau, \sigma)} \ , \quad Y_1 + i Y_2 = z_1 (\sigma) \, e^{i \phi_1 (\tau, \sigma)} \ ,
\label{ansatzAdS}
\end{equation}
where the angles are
\begin{equation}
\phi_a (\tau,\sigma) = w_a \tau + \beta_a (\sigma) \ ,
\end{equation}
together with the periodicity conditions
\begin{equation}
z_a(\sigma + 2 \pi) = z_a (\sigma) \ , \quad \beta_a(\sigma + 2 \pi) = \beta_a(\sigma) + 2 \pi \bar{k}_a \ ,
\end{equation}
with $a=0,1$. Note however that the time direction has to be single-valued so we need to exclude windings
along the time coordinate. Therefore we must take $\bar{k}_0=0$. When we substitute this ansatz in the Polyakov action
in the conformal gauge we obtain again lagrangian (\ref{NRq}) for rotation in the $S^3$ piece, together with the contribution
from $AdS_3$,
\begin{equation}
L_{AdS_3} = \frac{\sqrt{\lambda}}{4\pi} \Big[ g^{ab} \left( z'_a z'_b + z_a z_a \beta_b'^2 - z_a z_a w_b^2 \right)
-\frac {\tilde{\Lambda}}{2} \left( g^{ab} z_a z_b +1 \right) - 2 q z_1^2 ( w_0 \beta '_1 - w_1 \beta '_0 ) \Big] \ ,
\end{equation}
where we have chosen $g=\hbox{diag}(-1,1)$ and $\tilde{\Lambda}$ is a Lagrange multiplier. We will now write the equations of motion.
As the pieces of the lagrangian describing motion along $AdS_3$ and $S^3$ are decoupled the equations of motion for $r_i$ and $\alpha_i$
are given directly by expressions (\ref{alphaprime})--(\ref{r2}). In a similar way, the equations of motion for $z_a$ are
\begin{align}
z''_0 &=z_0 \beta^{'2}_0 -z_0 w_0^2 -\tilde{\Lambda} z_0 \ , \\
z''_1 &=z_1 \beta^{'2}_1 -z_1 w_1^2 -\tilde{\Lambda} z_1 -2 q z_1 ( w_0 \beta'_1 - w_1 \beta'_0 ) \ ,
\end{align}
and the equations for the angles are
\begin{equation}
\beta '_a = \frac{u_a + q z_1^2 \epsilon_{ab} w_b}{g^{aa} z_a^2} \ , \\
\end{equation}
where $u_a$ are some integration constants. To these equations we need to add the constraint
\begin{equation}
- z_0^2 + z_1^2 = - 1 \ ,
\label{AdSconstraint}
\end{equation}
together with the Virasoro constraints, which are responsible for the coupling between the $AdS_3$ and the $S^3$ systems,
\begin{align}
& z^{'2}_0 + z_0^2 (\beta ^{'2}_0 + \kappa^2 ) = z^{'2}_1 + z_1^2 (\beta ^{'2}_1 + w_1^2)
+ \sum_{i=1}^2 \big( r^{'2}_i + r_i^2 (\alpha^{'2}_i + \omega^2_i ) \big) \ , \\
& z_1^2 w_1 \beta '_1 + \sum_{i=1}^2 r_i^2 \omega _i \alpha '_i = z_0^2 \kappa \beta '_0 \ ,
\end{align}
where we have set $w_0 \equiv \kappa$. The spin and the energy in this case are given by
\begin{align}
E & = \sqrt{\lambda} \int_0^{2\pi} {\frac{d\sigma}{2\pi} (z_0^2 \kappa - q z_1^2 \beta'_1)} \ , \label{EAdS} \\
S & = \sqrt{\lambda} \int_0^{2\pi} {\frac{d\sigma}{2\pi}
(z_1^2 w_1 -q z_1^2 \beta'_0)} \ , \label{SAdS}
\end{align}
and the angular momenta are defined again as in equations (\ref{J1}) and (\ref{J2}).
\subsection{Constant radii solutions}
As before a simple solution to these equations can be found when the string radii are taken as constant,
$r_i=a_i$ and $z_a=b_a$. In this case the periodicity condition on $\beta_0$ and the fact that the time coordinate is single-valued implies
\begin{equation}
\beta'_0=0 \ .
\end{equation}
Furthermore the angles can be easily integrated again,
\begin{equation}
\beta'_1= \bar{k} \ , \quad \alpha'_i=\bar{m}_i \ , \quad i=1,2 \ ,
\end{equation}
and thus the equations of motion reduce to
\begin{align}
& w_1^2 -\bar{k}^2 - \kappa^2 + 2 q \kappa \bar{k} = 0 \ , \label{eom1} \\
& (\omega_2^2 -\omega_1^2)-(\bar{m}_2^2 -\bar{m}_1^2) - 2q ( \omega_1 \bar{m}_2 - \omega_2 \bar{m}_1 ) = 0 \label{eom2} \ .
\end{align}
The Virasoro constraints become then
\begin{align}
& b_1^2 (w_1^2 +\bar{k}^{2}) + \sum_{i=1}^2 a_i^2 (\omega^2_i + \bar{m}^{2}_i) = b_0^2 \kappa^2 \ , \\
& \bar{k} S + \bar{m}_1 J_1 + \bar{m}_2 J_2 = 0 \ .
\end{align}
Using the definitions of the energy and the spin, equations (\ref{EAdS}) and (\ref{SAdS}), together with the constraint (\ref{AdSconstraint}),
we can write
\begin{equation}
E_{\pm} = \sqrt{\lambda} \, \kappa \pm \frac{S (\kappa - q \bar{k})}{\sqrt{\kappa^2 + \bar{k}^2 - 2 q \bar{k} \kappa }} \ .
\label{ESJ1J2}
\end{equation}
The plus sign corresponds to the case where $\kappa$ and $w_1$ are chosen to have equal signs, while the minus sign corresponds
to the choice of opposite signs.
We can use now this expression to write the energy as a function of the spin, the two angular momenta
and the winding numbers $\bar{k}$ and $\bar{m}_i$. As in the previous section we can take the second
Virasoro constraint together with the condition that $a_1^2+a_2^2=1$ to find that
\begin{equation}
a_1^2 = \frac{ \bar{k} S + \sqrt{\lambda} \omega_2 \bar{m}_2}{\sqrt{\lambda} (\omega_2 \bar{m}_2 - \omega_1 \bar{m}_1)} \ , \quad
a_2^2 = \frac{ \bar{k} S +\sqrt{\lambda} \omega_1 \bar{m}_1}{\sqrt{\lambda} (\omega_1 \bar{m}_1 - \omega_2 \bar{m}_2)} \ .
\label{a1a2}
\end{equation}
Taking these relations into account when adding the angular momenta (\ref{J1}) and (\ref{J2}) we find
a relation between the frequencies $\omega_1$ and $\omega_2$,
\begin{align}
& \left[ \bar{k} S + \bar{m}_1 J -\sqrt{\lambda} q \bar{m}_1 (\bar{m}_1 - \bar{m}_2) \right]
\frac{\omega_1}{\omega_2} - ( \bar{k} S + \bar{m}_2 J ) \nonumber \\
& - \sqrt{\lambda} ( \bar{m}_1 - \bar{m}_2) \, \omega_1 - \frac{q \bar{k} S (\bar{m}_1 - \bar{m}_2)}{\omega_2} = 0 \ ,
\label{w1w2}
\end{align}
which extends expression (\ref{J1J2}) to the case of spin in $AdS_3$. Combining now equation (\ref{eom2}) with (\ref{w1w2})
we can solve for $\omega_1$. The result is again a quartic equation,
\begin{align}
& \Big[(\omega_1 +q \bar{m}_2)^2 -(\bar{m}_1^2-\bar{m}_2^2) (1-q^2) \Big] \Big[ \lambda (\bar{m}_1-\bar{m}_2)\omega_1^2
+ 2\sqrt{\lambda} (\bar{m}_2 J+ \bar{k} S) \omega_1 \notag \\
& - \big( ( \bar{m}_1 + \bar{m}_2 ) J + 2 \bar{k} S \big) J \Big]
- ( \bar{m}_1 + \bar{m}_2 ) ( \bar{m}_1 J + \bar{k} S )^2 (1-q^2) = 0 \ .
\label{quarticAdS}
\end{align}
Once we have found the solution to this equation, we can read $\omega_2$ from (\ref{w1w2}) and
use then the first Virasoro constrain to calculate $\kappa$. But before writing the resulting equation let us first take into account that
\begin{equation}
b_1^2 w_1^2 +b_1^2 \bar{k}^2 -b_0^2 \kappa^2= b_1^2 (2\bar{k}^2 -2q \kappa \bar{k})- \kappa^2
= \frac{ 2\bar{k} S (\bar{k}-q \kappa)}{\sqrt{\lambda (\kappa^2 +\bar{k}^2 -2q \bar{k} \kappa )}} - \kappa^2 \ ,
\end{equation}
where we have made use of (\ref{eom1}). The Virasoro constraint becomes thus a sixth-grade equation for $\kappa$,
\begin{equation}
\frac{4\bar{k}^2 S^2 (\bar{k}-q\kappa)^2}{\lambda (\kappa^2 + \bar{k}^2 -2q\bar{k} \kappa)}=\big( \kappa^2 - a_1^2 (\omega_1^2 + \bar{m}_1^2 )
- a_2^2 ( \omega_2^2 + \bar{m}_2^2) \big)^2 \ .
\label{kappaequation}
\end{equation}
The solution to this equation provides $\kappa$, and thus the energy, as a function of the spin, the angular momenta,
and the winding numbers $\bar{k}$ and $\bar{m}_i$. However equations (\ref{quarticAdS}) and (\ref{kappaequation})
are difficult to solve exactly. As in the previous section, instead of trying to find an exact solution we can write the solution
in the limit $J_i/\sqrt{\lambda} \sim S/\sqrt{\lambda} \gg 1$. Out of the four different solutions to (\ref{quarticAdS}),
the only one with a well-defined limit is
\begin{equation}
\omega_1 = \frac {J}{\sqrt{\lambda}} + \frac{\sqrt{\lambda}}{2J^2} (\bar{m}_1 + \bar{m}_2) (\bar{m}_1 J + \bar{k} S ) (1-q^2)
\Big[ 1 - \frac {\sqrt{\lambda}}{J} q \bar{m}_2 + \cdots \Big] \ .
\label{w1AdS}
\end{equation}
Using now relation (\ref{w1w2}) we find
\footnote{Note that as in the case of rotation just in the sphere the ${\cal O}(\sqrt{\lambda}/J)$ terms and the subsequent corrections
in the expansions for $\omega_1$ and $\omega_2$ are again proportional to $\bar{m}_1 + \bar{m}_2$. We can prove the existence
of this factor as in the previous section by setting $\bar{m}_1 = - \bar{m}_2$ in equation (\ref{quarticAdS}).}
\begin{align}
\omega_2 & = \frac {J}{\sqrt{\lambda}} - q ( \bar{m}_1 - \bar{m}_2) + \frac {\sqrt{\lambda}}{2J^2} (\bar{m}_1 + \bar{m}_2) (1-q^2) \nonumber \\
& \times \Big[ \bar{m}_2 J + \bar{k} S
- \frac {\sqrt{\lambda}}{J} q \bar{m}_2 (\bar{m}_1 J + \bar{m}_2 J + 2 \bar{k} S ) + \cdots \Big] \ .
\label{w2AdS}
\end{align}
Next we can calculate the radii $a_1$ and $a_2$ using (\ref{a1a2}), and solve equation (\ref{kappaequation}) to get
\begin{align}
\kappa_+ & = \frac {J}{\sqrt{\lambda}} - q \left( \bar{m}_1 + 2 \frac{ \bar{k} S}{J} \right)
+ \frac{\sqrt{\lambda}}{2 J^2}(\bar{m}_1^2 J_1+\bar{m}_2^2 J_2 + 2 \bar{k}^2 S) (1-q^2)
\notag \\
& - \frac{\sqrt{\lambda}}{J^3} 2 q^2 \bar{k} S ( \bar{m}_1 J + \bar{k} S ) + \cdots \\
\kappa_- & = \frac {J}{\sqrt{\lambda}} - q \bar{m}_1
+ \frac{\sqrt{\lambda}}{2 J^2}(\bar{m}_1^2 J_1+\bar{m}_2^2 J_2 - 2 \bar{k}^2 S) (1-q^2) + \cdots \\
\end{align}
where as in equation (\ref{ESJ1J2}) the plus or minus subindices refer respectively to the cases where $\kappa$ and $w_1$ are chosen
with identical or opposite signs. These expressions can now be substituted in relation (\ref{ESJ1J2}) to obtain
\begin{align}
E_+ & = J + S - \sqrt{\lambda} q \left( \bar{m}_1 + 2 \frac{ \bar{k} S}{J} \right) + \frac{\lambda}{2 J^2}(\bar{m}_1^2 J_1+\bar{m}_2^2 J_2 + \bar{k}^2 S) (1-q^2) \notag \\
& - \frac{\lambda}{J^3} 2 q^2 \bar{k} S (\bar{m}_1 J+\bar{k} S) + \cdots \ ,\\
E_- & = J - S - \sqrt{\lambda} q \bar{m}_1 + \frac{\lambda}{2 J^2}(\bar{m}_1^2 J_1+\bar{m}_2^2 J_2 - \bar{k}^2 S) (1-q^2) + \cdots
\end{align}
In the absence of flux the expression for $E_+$ reduces to the expansion for the energy in the Neumann-Rosochatius system for a closed circular
string of constant radius rotating with one spin in $AdS_3$ and two different angular momenta in $S^3$ \cite{NR}.
As in the previous section, we can now consider the limit of pure NS-NS flux. In this case the above expressions simplify greatly, and we get
\begin{align}
E_+ & = S + \sqrt{ \big(J - \sqrt{\lambda} \bar{m}_1 \big)^2 - 4 \sqrt{\lambda} \bar{k} S} \ , \\
E_- & = J - S - \sqrt{\lambda} \bar{m}_1 \ .
\end{align}
\section{Concluding remarks}
In this letter we have studied closed string solutions rotating in $AdS_3 \times S^3 \times T^4$ with NS-NS three-form flux.
The corresponding string sigma model reduces to the Neumann-Rosochatius integrable system with an additional
contribution coming from the non-vanishing flux term. We have considered the cases where the string can rotate either
in $S^3$ with two different angular momenta, or in $AdS_3 \times S^3$ with one spin and two different angular momenta.
The equations of motion can be easily integrated either as a power series in $J/\sqrt{\lambda}$ or as a power series around
the pure NS-NS point $q=1$ for the case of constant radii strings. We have found the classical energy in terms of the conserved quantities
and the parameter governing the strength of the NS-NS flux.
There are many natural extensions of our analysis in this note. An immediate one is the choice of an ansatz where the worldsheet
coordinates $\tau$ and $\sigma$ are exchanged. This kind of ansatz, where the radial coordinates depend on the time variable,
corresponds to the pulsating string solutions considered in~\cite{GKP,Minahanpulsating}. A similar solution can indeed be readily constructed
also in the presence of non-vanishing three-form flux. An equally straightforward continuation of our analysis is the analysis
of more general solutions. It would be for instance very interesting to find elliptic solutions with non-vanishing flux,
following the analysis in the case of the Neumann-Rosochatius system~\cite{NR}.
Another important question is the study of the spectrum of small quadratic fluctuations~\cite{FT,NR} around the circular
solutions that we have constructed in this note. This problem is a necessary step in order to determine the conditions
of stability of our solutions and to find the spectrum of excited string states. It would also be very interesting to extend the analysis in this note to deformations
of the $AdS_3$ backgrounds. An appealing case is that of the $\eta$-deformation of $AdS_5 \times S^5$ \cite{DMV}, which has been
recently shown to lead to an integrable extension of the Neumann-Rosochatius system \cite{AM}. However the $\eta$-deformed Neumann-Rosochatius system
is much more involved than the one that we have obtained in this note because the deformation is obtained by breaking the isometries of the metric down
to the Cartan algebra. Currently only the metric and the NS-NS flux are known for the $\eta$-deformation, but if a complete solution was constructed one could
expect to be able to introduce a spinning string ansatz with mixed fluxes, depending on the $q$ and $\eta$ parameters.
\vspace{8mm}
\centerline{\bf Acknowledgments}
\vspace{2mm}
\noindent
The work of R.~H. is supported by MICINN through a Ram\'on y Cajal contract and grant FPA2011-24568,
and by BSCH-UCM through grant GR58/08-910770. J.~M.~N. wishes to thank the Instituto de F\'{\i}sica Te\'orica UAM-CSIC
for kind hospitality during this work.
\newpage
|
\section{Introduction}
\label{sec:introduction}
The scattering problem analyzes how incident waves, radiation, or particles, which are transmitted in a medium, are
scattered at inhomogeneities of this medium. The associated inverse problem aims to determine characteristics of
the inhomogeneities from the asymptotic behavior of such scattered waves. This problem appears in various
flavors in different application areas, e.g. non-destructive testing, ultrasound tomography,
and echolocation. For an overview of the problem and recent developments, we refer to the survey article
\cite{CCMScatteringSurvey2000}.
Various numerical methods have been proposed for the solution of inverse scattering problems.
A very common approach to solve a nonlinear inverse scattering problem are \emph{fix-point iterations}, which produce a sequence of \emph{linear} inverse scattering problems with solutions that converge, under some suitable assumptions, to a solution of the nonlinear problem. One such
approximation technique is the \emph{Born approximation}, see e.g. \cite{BaoTr2010,MosS}. However, one drawback of this class of approaches is the fact that it requires the solution of a linear inverse scattering problem in every
iteration step, which is typically again an \emph{ill-posed} problem that is hard to solve in the presence of noisy data or data with linearization errors.
On the other hand, the nonlinear problem can be solved directly by an optimization approach, see \cite{ColK}. One particular such technique, see \cite{LKKLpRegularization2013}, tackles the nonlinear problem by minimizing a \emph{Tikhonov functional} with a suitably chosen regularization term. The success of such an approach depends heavily on how properties of the solution are encoded in the
regularization term. This, however, requires typically that a priori knowledge about characteristics of
the solution is available.
We discuss both these approaches and combine them with a sparsity based methodology which makes use of representing the scatterer in a sparse way, as it has been suggested in several other areas of inverse problems.
This methodology is based on the hypothesis that most types of data indeed admit a sparse approximation by
a suitably chosen basis or frame,
see Subsection \ref{subsec:frames},
and today this is a well-accepted paradigm. Generally speaking, knowledge of a sparsifying
basis or frame, appropriately applied, allows precise and stable reconstruction from very few and even noisy measurements. One prominent way to infuse such knowledge is by a regularization term such as in a Tikhonov functional. Indeed, in \cite{LKKLpRegularization2013}, it is assumed that the to-be-detected objects are sparse in the sense of small support, which is then encoded by using an $L^p$-norm for $p$ close to $1$ as regularization term, thereby promoting sparsity.
In this paper, we also aim to utilize sparsity to solve inverse medium scattering problems, but follow a different
path. The key idea of our new approach is to generate a model for a large class of natural structures and an associated representation system, which provides asymptotically optimal sparse approximation of elements of this model class. We use this approach for solving the nonlinear as well as a linearized inverse scattering problem. As problem cases we consider the \emph{acoustic inverse medium scattering problem} and the \emph{inverse scattering problem of the Schr\"{o}dinger equation}.
\subsection{Modeling of the Scatterer}
Typically, a scatterer is a natural structure, which distinguishes itself from the surrounding medium
by a change in density. In the 2D setting, this inhomogeneity can be regarded as a curve with, presumably, certain regularity properties. The interior as well as the exterior of this curve is usually assumed to be homogeneous.
In the area of imaging sciences, the class of \emph{cartoon-like functions} \cite{DCartoonLikeImages2001} is frequently used as model for images governed by
anisotropic structures such as edges.
Roughly speaking, a cartoon-like function is a compactly supported function which is a twice continuously differentiable function, apart from a piecewise $C^2$ discontinuity curve, see Definition \ref{def:CartoonLikeFunction} below.
This cartoon-like model is well-suited for many inverse scattering problems, where the discontinuity
curve
models the boundary of a homogeneous domain. In some physical applications, one may debate this regularity of the curve as well as the homogeneity of the domains, but a certain smoothness on small pieces of the boundary seems a realistic scenario.
\subsection{Directional Representation Systems}
Having agreed on a model, one needs a suitably adapted representation system which ideally provides asymptotically optimal sparse approximations of cartoon-like functions in the sense of the decay of the $L^2$-error of best $N$-term approximation. Such a system can then be used for the regularization term of a Tikhonov functional.
The first (directional) representation system which achieved asymptotic optimality were \emph{curvelets} introduced
in \cite{CD2004}. In fact, in \cite{CandD2002CurveletsInIllPosedProblems} curvelets are used to regularize linear
ill-posed problems. This is done under the premise that the solution of the inverse problem exhibits edges, which tend to get smoothed out in a regularization procedure, while curvelets as a system adapted to edges overcomes
this obstacle. However, on the practical side, curvelets suffer from the fact that
often a faithful numerical realization of the associated transform is difficult.
In \cite{GKL2006} shearlet systems were introduced, which similarly achieve the desired optimal sparse approximation rate \cite{KLcmptShearSparse2011}, but in addition allow a unified treatment of the continuum and digital realm \cite{shearlab}. As curvelets, shearlets are mainly designed for image processing applications, in
which they are also used for different inverse problems such as separation of morphologically distinct components
\cite{Donoho2010c,KLImageSeparationWaveShear2012}, recovery of missing data \cite{GK15,king2014analysis},
or
reconstruction from the Radon transform \cite{ColEGL2010ShearletsRadon}. Furthermore, in contrast to curvelets, compactly supported shearlet frames for high spatial localization are available \cite{KGLConstrCmptShear2012}, see \cite{KL2012} for a survey.
In view of this discussion, shearlet frames seem a good candidate as a regularizer for inverse scattering problems, and in fact this will be key to our approach.
\subsection{Inverse Scattering Problems}
We examine two conceptually different approaches to numerically solve inverse scattering problems. More precisely, we study a method to directly tackle the
nonlinear problem as well as a linearization approach. As problem cases we focus on two types of inverse scattering problems, see e.g. \cite{ColK}, which are
the \emph{acoustic inverse scattering problem}, and the \emph{inverse scattering problem of the Schr\"{o}dinger equation}. For the second, we analyze the
strategy to linearize the inverse scattering problem by means of the Born approximation.
The \emph{acoustic inverse scattering problem} aims to reconstruct a contrast function which encodes the scatterer by
emitting an acoustic wave and measuring the scattered waves. Common application areas are radar, sonar,
and geophysical exploration, see e.g. \cite{ColK} for a survey of applications.
The minimization of a suitable Tikhonov functional is a common approach to directly solve this nonlinear inverse
problem. In
\cite{LKKLpRegularization2013} a sparsity-based regularization term is introduced which uses the $L^p$-norm with $p$ close to $1$ directly on the function to-be-recovered. This regularization scheme is very successful when the object under consideration has small support.
Following our methodological concept, and assuming that cartoon-like functions are an appropriate model for the
scatterer, we instead choose as regularization term the $\ell_p$-norm of the associated shearlet coefficient sequence with $p$ larger or equal to $1$.
After giving the theoretical background in Section \ref{sec:acoustic}, we present numerical experiments that compare our approach to that of \cite{LKKLpRegularization2013}, see Subsection~\ref{subsec:exp_results}. These examples show convincing results, both in terms of the reconstruction error and the number of iterations. In particular, it is demonstrated that edges of the scatterer are recovered with high accuracy.
The \emph{inverse scattering problem of the Schr\"{o}dinger equation} aims to determine a quantum mechanical scattering potential from measurements of backscattering data.
A prominent method to linearize this inverse scattering problem is by means of the Born approximation.
Modeling the scatterer by cartoon-like functions, shearlets can be used again as a regularizer, provided that the transition from the nonlinear towards the linear problem does not influence the
fact that the solution belongs to the class of cartoon-like functions. It has been shown in \cite{OlaPS2001,Serov2013} that certain singularities of the scatterer can still be found in the
solution of the associated linearized problem.
However, all these results require a global regularity of the scatterer to describe the regularity of the inverse Born approximation.
On the other hand, in the case of cartoon-like functions we have strong local but poor global regularity and therefore the results of \cite{OlaPS2001,Serov2013} can not be applied to our situation. To provide a theoretical basis for the application of shearlet frames, we prove that indeed the Born approximation
to the Schr\"odinger equation gives rise to a scattering problem that exhibits sharp edges in the
solution of the linearized problem. In particular, we show that the cartoon model is almost invariant under the
linearization process, see Theorem \ref{thm:MainSchroedinger} and Corollary \ref{cor:cartoon}. This implies that the sparsity structure of the model stays untouched by the linearization. These results
then provide the theoretical justification that shearlet systems can be used as regularization for the numerical solution of the associated linearized problems.
\subsection{Outline of the Paper}
The paper is organized as follows. The precise definition of shearlet systems, their frame properties, and
their sparse approximation properties for cartoon-like functions are summarized in Section \ref{sec:shearlets}.
Section \ref{sec:acoustic} is devoted to the nonlinear scattering problem. We first describe the direct
and associated inverse problem, followed by the introduction of our new approach to regularize the inverse
scattering problem using the shearlet transform in Subsection \ref{subsec:reg_frames}. In Section \ref{sec:numEx} these methods are then compared numerically to other approaches.
The scattering problem of the Schr\"{o}dinger equation, which will be solved by a linearization, is then introduced and
studied in Section \ref{sec:electro} with Theorem~\ref{thm:MainSchroedinger} being the main result on
local regularity of the inverse Born approximation. Corollary~\ref{cor:cartoon} analyzes the situation
of using the cartoon-like model as scatterer. In Subsection \ref{subsec:Schr_Num} we describe possible numerical algorithms that use Corollary~\ref{cor:cartoon} as well as the effect on real world problems.
\section{Shearlet Systems}
\label{sec:shearlets}
In this section we provide a precise definition of shearlet frames and recall their sparse approximation properties,
see \cite{KL2012} for a survey on shearlets and \cite{Christensen2003a} for a survey on frames.
\subsection{Review of Frame Theory}
\label{subsec:frames}
A \emph{frame} generalizes the notion of orthonormal bases by only requiring a norm equivalence between the Hilbert space norm of a vector and the $\ell_2$-norm of the associated sequence of coefficients. To be more precise, given a Hilbert space $\mathcal{H}$ and an index set $I$, then a
system $\{\varphi_i\}_{i \in I} \subset \mathcal{H}$, is called a \emph{frame} for $\mathcal{H}$, if there exist constants $0< \alpha_{1} \leq \alpha_2 <\infty$
such that
\[
\alpha_1\|f\|^2 \leq \sum_{i \in I} \absip{f}{\varphi_i}^2 \leq \alpha_2\|f\|^2 \quad \mbox{for all } f \in \mathcal{H}.
\]
The constants $\alpha_1$, $\alpha_2$ are referred to as the \emph{lower} and \emph{upper frame bound}, respectively. If $\alpha_1=\alpha_2$ is possible, then the frame is called \emph{tight}.
Each frame $\Phi:= \{\varphi_i\}_{i \in I} \subset \mathcal{H}$ is associated with an \emph{analysis operator} $T_\Phi$ defined by
\[
T_\Phi : \mathcal{H} \to \ell^2(I), \quad T_\Phi(f) = (\ip{f}{\varphi_i})_{i \in I},
\]
which decomposes a function into its \emph{frame coefficients}. The adjoint of $T_\Phi$ is called \emph{synthesis operator} and is given by
\[
T_\Phi^* : \ell^2(I) \to \mathcal{H}, \quad T_\Phi^*((c_i)_{i \in I}) = \sum_{i \in I} c_i \varphi_i.
\]
Finally, the \emph{frame operator} is defined by $S_\Phi := T_\Phi^*T_\Phi$. The operator $S_\Phi$, which can be shown to be self-adjoint and invertible, see e.g. \cite{Christensen2003a}, allows both a reconstruction of $f$ (given its frame coefficients) and an expansion of $f$ in terms of the frame elements, i.e.,
\[
f = \sum_{i \in I} \ip{f}{\varphi_i} S_\Phi^{-1} \varphi_i = \sum_{i \in I} \ip{f}{S_\Phi^{-1} \varphi_i} \varphi_i \quad \mbox{for all } f \in \mathcal{H}.
\]
Hence, although $\Phi$ does not constitute a basis, there exists a reconstruction formula using the system $\{\tilde{\varphi}_i\}_{i \in I}:= \{S_\Phi^{-1} \varphi_i\}_{i \in I}$, which can actually be shown to also form a frame, the \emph{so-called canonical dual frame}.
As for efficient expansions of a function $f \in \mathcal{H}$ in terms of $\Phi$ we can identify with $(\ip{f}{\tilde{\varphi}_i})_{i \in I}$ one explicit coefficient sequence. However, this is typically by far not the `best' possible coefficient sequence in the sense of rapid decay in absolute value. Since one has better control over the sequence $(\ip{f}{\varphi_i})_{i \in I}$ of frame coefficients, it is often advantageous to instead consider the expansion $f = \sum_{i \in I} c_i \tilde{\varphi}_i$ of $f$ in terms of the canonical dual frame. The reason is that, if fast decay of the frame coefficients can be shown, then this form provides an efficient expansion of $f$.
\subsection{Shearlet systems and Frame Properties}
Shearlet systems are designed to asymptotically optimal encode geometric features in two space dimensions.
For their construction we define for $ j, k \in \mathbb{Z}$ the matrices
\[
A_j = \begin{bmatrix} 2^j & 0 \\ 0 & 2^{\frac{j}{2}} \end{bmatrix}, \quad \text{ and } S_k = \begin{bmatrix} 1 & k \\ 0 & 1 \end{bmatrix}.
\]
The former is called \emph{parabolic scaling matrix} and ensures that the elements of the shearlet system have an essential support of size $2^{-j} \times 2^{-\frac{j}{2}}$ following the
\emph{parabolic scaling law} `\emph{width} $\approx$ \emph{length}$^2$'. The matrix $S_k$ is called \emph{shearing matrix}, which in contrast to rotation matrices used in the construction of curvelets \cite{CD2004}, leave the digital grid $\mathbb{Z}^2$ invariant, and ensure the possibility of a faithful numerical realization.
The formal definition of a shearlet system as it was defined in \cite{KGLConstrCmptShear2012} is as follows.
\begin{definition}\label{def:shearletSystem}
Let $\varphi, \psi, \tilde{\psi} \in L^2(\mathbb{R}^2)$, $c= [c_1,c_2]^T \in \mathbb{R}^2$ with $c_1,c_2>0$. Then the \emph{(cone-adapted) shearlet
system} is defined by
\[
\mathcal{SH}(\varphi, \psi, \tilde{\psi}, c) = \Phi(\varphi, c_1) \cup \Psi(\psi, c) \cup \tilde{\Psi}(\tilde{\psi}, c),
\]
where
\begin{eqnarray*}
\Phi(\psi, c_1) &=& \left \{ \varphi(\cdot - c_1 m) :m\in \mathbb{Z}^2 \right\},\\
\Psi(\psi, c) &=& \left\{ \psi_{j,k,m} = 2^{\frac{3j}{4}}\psi(S_k A_{j}\cdot - M_c m ): j\in \mathbb{N}_0, |k| \leq 2^{\left\lceil\frac{j}{2}\right\rceil}, m\in \mathbb{Z}^2 \right\},\\
\tilde{\Psi}(\tilde{\psi}, c) &=& \left\{ \tilde{\psi}_{j,k,m} = 2^{\frac{3j}{4}}\tilde{\psi}(S_k^T \tilde{A}_{j}\cdot - M_{\tilde{c}} m ): j\in \mathbb{N}_0, |k| \leq
2^{\left\lceil\frac{j}{2}\right\rceil}, m\in \mathbb{Z}^2 \right\},
\end{eqnarray*}
with $M_c:= {\text{\rm diag}}( c_1, c_2 )$, $M_{\tilde{c}} = {\text{\rm diag}}( c_2 , c_1 )$, and $\tilde{A}_{2^j} = {\text{\rm diag}}(2^{\frac{j}{2}},2^{j})$.
\end{definition}
One possibility to obtain a frame is to choose $\varphi, \psi \in L^2(\mathbb{R}^2)$ such that, for $\alpha>\gamma>3$,
\begin{eqnarray*}
|\widehat{\varphi}(\xi_1, \xi_2)| &\leq& C_1 \min\{ 1, |\xi_1|^{-\gamma}\} \min \{1, |\xi_2|^{-\gamma}\} \mbox{ and }\\
|\widehat{\psi}(\xi_1, \xi_2)| &\leq& C_2 \min\{1,|\xi_1|^\alpha\}\min\{1, |\xi_1|^{-\gamma}\} \min \{1, |\xi_2|^{-\gamma}\},
\end{eqnarray*}
where $\widehat{g}$ denotes the Fourier transform of $g\in L^2(\mathbb{R}^2)$, and $\tilde{\psi}(x_1, x_2) := \psi(x_2, x_1)$. In this situation it has been established in \cite{KGLConstrCmptShear2012} that there exists a sampling vector $c= [c_1, c_2]^T\in \mathbb{R}^2$, $c_1,c_2>0$ such that $\mathcal{SH}(\varphi, \psi, \tilde{\psi}; c)$
forms a frame for $L^2(\mathbb{R}^2)$. One special case are compactly supported shearlet frames.
Faithful implementations of shearlet frames and the associated analysis operators
are available at \url{www.ShearLab.org}, see also \cite{shearlab}.
\subsection{Sparse Approximation}
\label{subsec:sparseapprox}
Shearlets have well-analyzed approximation properties, in particular, for cartoon-like functions as initially introduced in \cite{DCartoonLikeImages2001}. Denoting by $\chi_D \in L^2(\mathbb{R}^2)$ the characteristic function on a bounded, measurable set $D \subset \mathbb{R}^2$, we have the following definition.
\begin{definition} \label{def:CartoonLikeFunction}
The class $\mathcal{E}^2(\mathbb{R}^2)$ of \emph{cartoon-like functions} is the set of functions $f:\mathbb{R}^2 \to \mathbb{C}$ of the form
\[
f = f_0 + f_1 \chi_D,
\]
where $D \subset [0,1]^2$ is a set with $\partial D$ being a closed $C^2$-curve with bounded curvature and $f_i \in C^2(\mathbb{R}^2)$
are functions with support $\suppp f_i \subset [0,1]^2$ as well as $\|f_i\|_{C^2}\leq 1$ for $i = 0,1$.
\end{definition}
We measure the approximation quality of shearlets with respect to the
cartoon model by the decay of the $L^2$-error of best $N$-term approximation. Recall that for a general representation system
$\{\psi_i\}_{i\in I} \subset \mathcal{H}$ and $f\in \mathcal{H}$, the \emph{best $N$-term approximation} is defined as
\[
f_N = \argmin \limits_{\substack{\Lambda \subset \mathbb{N}, |\Lambda| = N,\\ \tilde{f}_N = \sum \limits_{i \in \Lambda} c_i \psi_i}} \|f- \tilde{f}_N \|.
\]
In contrast to the situation of orthonormal bases, if $\{\psi_i\}_{i\in I}$ forms a frame or even a tight frame, it is not clear at all how the set $\Lambda$ has to be chosen. Therefore, often the \emph{best $N$-term approximation} is substituted by the $N$-term approximation using the $N$ largest coefficients.
To be able to claim \emph{asymptotic optimality} of a sparse approximation, one requires a benchmark result. In
\cite{DCartoonLikeImages2001} it was shown that for an arbitrary representation system $\{\psi_i\}_{i\in I} \subset L^2(\mathbb{R}^2)$, the minimally achievable asymptotic approximation error for $f \in \mathcal{E}^2(\mathbb{R}^2)$ is
\[
\|f-f_N\|_2^2 = O(N^{-2}) \quad \mbox{as } N \to \infty,
\]
provided that only polynomial depth search is used to compute the approximation. The condition on the polynomial depth search means, that the $i$-th term in the expansion can be chosen in accordance with a selection rule
$\sigma(i,f)$, which obeys $\sigma(i,f) \leq \pi(i)$
for a fixed polynomial $\pi(i)$, see also \cite{DCartoonLikeImages2001}.
In the above definition of asymptotic optimality, we made use of the Landau symbol $O(f(a))$, which for a function $f$ describes the asymptotic convergence behavior as $a \to 0$ for the set of functions $g$ such that $\limsup_{x\to a}$ $\frac{g(x)}{f(x)} < \infty$.
Shearlets achieve this asymptotically optimal rate up to a $\log$-factor as the following result shows.
\begin{theorem}[\cite{KLcmptShearSparse2011}]
\label{thm:ShearletOptimallySparseApproximation}
Let $\varphi, \psi, \tilde{\psi} \subset L^2(\mathbb{R}^2)$ be compactly supported, and assume that the shearlet system
$\mathcal{SH}(\varphi, \psi, \tilde{\psi}, c)$ forms a frame for $L^2(\mathbb{R}^2)$. Furthermore, assume that, for all $\xi =
[\xi_1, \xi_2]^T \in \mathbb{R}^2$, the function $\psi$ satisfies
\begin{eqnarray*}
|\widehat{\psi}(\xi)| &\leq& C \min\{1, |\xi_1|^{\delta}\} \min \{1, |\xi_1|^{-\gamma}\} \min \{1, |\xi_2|^{-\gamma}\},\\
\left |\frac{\partial }{\partial \xi_2}\widehat{\psi}(\xi)\right | &\leq& |h(\xi_1)| \left(1+\frac{|\xi_2|}{|\xi_1|} \right)^{-\gamma},
\end{eqnarray*}
where $\delta >6$, $\gamma \geq 3$, $h\in L^1(\mathbb{R})$ and $C$ is a constant, and $\tilde{\psi}$ satisfies analogous conditions
with the roles of $\xi_1$ and $\xi_2$ exchanged. Then $\mathcal{SH}(\varphi, \psi, \tilde{\psi}, c)$ provides an asymptotically optimal sparse approximation
of $f \in \mathcal{E}^2(\mathbb{R}^2)$, i.e.,
\[
\norm{f - f_N}_2^2 =O(N^{-2} \cdot (\log N)^3)\quad \mbox{as } N \to \infty.
\]
\end{theorem}
Theorem~\ref{thm:ShearletOptimallySparseApproximation} indicates that shearlet systems provide a very good model for encoding the governing features of a scatterer.
\section{The Nonlinear Acoustic Scattering Problem} \label{sec:acoustic}
In this section we focus on the first of the two numerical approaches, which is to directly tackle the nonlinear problem. As a case study, we consider the
acoustic scattering problem. After briefly discussing the direct problem, we introduce the related inverse problem, which we approach
using a Tikhonov type functional with regularization by $\ell_p$ minimization, with $p$ close to or equal to $1$, applied to the shearlet coefficients.
For this setting, we will provide numerical examples and compare with other regularization approaches.
\subsection{The Direct Problem}
\label{subsec:directproblem}
A very common model for the behavior of an acoustic wave $u : \mathbb{R}^2 \to \mathbb{C}$ in an inhomogeneous medium is the Helmholtz equation \cite{ColK}. Given a \emph{wave number} $k_0>0$ and a compactly supported \emph{contrast function} $f \in L^2(\mathbb{R}^2)$, the Helmholtz equation has the form
\begin{equation}
\Delta u + k_0^2 (1-f) u = 0, \label{eq:Helmholtz}
\end{equation}
where the contrast function $f$ models the inhomogeneity of the medium due the scatterer. In a typical situation one models $f$ as a function which is smooth, apart from a model of the scatterer which is again assumed to be an essentially homogeneous medium, whose density is, however, significantly different from the surrounding medium. To model the boundary of the scatterer, a typical approach is to use a curve with a particular regularity, say $C^2$. Recalling the definition of a cartoon-like function in Definition \ref{def:CartoonLikeFunction}, we suggest to use $\mathcal{E}^2(\mathbb{R}^2)$ as a model for the boundary.
Furthermore, even if the boundary of the scatterer is only a piecewise $C^2$ curve, then
the shearlets provide a very good model, since the sparse approximation results of shearlets as well as our analysis also hold in this more general situation.
As further ingredient for the acoustic scattering problem, we introduce
\emph{incident waves} $u^{\textrm{inc}}$, which are solutions to the \emph{homogeneous Helmholtz equation}, i.e., \eqref{eq:Helmholtz} with $f \equiv 0$. A large class of such solutions take the form
\begin{equation} \label{eq:solution_ud}
u^{\textrm{inc}}_d : \mathbb{R}^2 \to \mathbb{C}, \quad u^{\textrm{inc}}_d(x) = e^{i k_0 \ip{x}{d}}
\end{equation}
for some direction $d \in \mathbb{S}^1$. Then, for a given $f \in L^2(\mathbb{R}^2)$ and a solution $u^{\textrm{inc}}$ to the homogeneous Helmholtz equation, every solution to \eqref{eq:Helmholtz} can be expressed as \hl{$u = u^{s} + u^{\textrm{inc}}$}, where $u^{s}$ denotes the \emph{scattered wave}. To obtain physically reasonable solutions we stipulate that the scattered wave obeys the \emph{Sommerfeld radiation condition}, see e.g. \cite{ColK},
\[
\frac{\partial u^s}{\partial |x|} = i k_0 u^s(x) + O(|x|^{-\frac{1}{2}}) \text{ for } |x| \to \infty.
\]
For a given $k_0>0$, and contrast function $f\in L^2(\mathbb{R}^2)$ with compact support and incident wave $u^{\textrm{inc}}$, the \emph{acoustic scattering problem} then is to find $u \in H^2_{loc}(\mathbb{R}^2)$ such that
\begin{eqnarray} \nonumber
\Delta u + k_0^2 (1-f) u &=& 0,\\ \nonumber
u &=& u^s + u^{\textrm{inc}},\\ \nonumber
\frac{\partial u^s}{\partial |x|} &=& i k_0 u^s(x) + O(|x|^{-\frac{1}{2}}).
\end{eqnarray}
To obtain an equivalent formulation, we introduce the \emph{fundamental solution $G_{k_0}$ to the Helmholtz equation}, %
\begin{equation} \label{eq:defi_G}
G_{t}(x,y) = \frac{i}{4}H_0^{(1)}(t|x-y|), \quad t > 0, x,y \in \mathbb{R}^2,
\end{equation}
where $H_0^{(1)}$ is a \emph{Hankel function}, see e.g. \cite{abramowitz+stegun}. Let $B_R$ denote the open ball of radius $R > 0$ centered at $0$ and let $R$ be chosen such that $\suppp f \subset B_R$, then the \emph{volume potential} is
defined by
\[
V(f)(x): = \int \limits_{B_R} G_{k_0}(x,y) f(y)\, dy, \quad x\in \mathbb{R}^2.
\]
Using this potential we can reformulate the acoustic scattering problem as the solution of the \emph{Lippmann-Schwinger integral equation} given by
\begin{equation}
u^s(x) = - k_0^2 V(f (u^s + u^{\textrm{inc}})) \text{ in } B_R \label{eq:LippmannSchwinger}
\end{equation}
for $f\in L^2(\mathbb{R}^2)$ with $\suppp f \subset B_R$. Any solution $u^s \in H^2_{loc}(B_R)$ of \eqref{eq:LippmannSchwinger} indeed solves the acoustic scattering problem in $B_R$ and can, by the unique continuation principle \cite{JerK}, be uniquely extended to a global solution of the acoustic scattering problem, see e.g. \cite{ColK}.
Letting $L^2(B_R)$ denote the square-integrable functions defined on $B_R$, which are in particular compactly
supported, we now define the \emph{solution operator} of the acoustic scattering problem by
\[
\mathcal{S} : L^2(B_R) \times L^2(B_R) \to H^2_{loc}(B_R), \quad \mathcal{S}(f, u^{\textrm{inc}}) = u,
\]
and the Lippmann-Schwinger
equation \eqref{eq:LippmannSchwinger} allows to compute this operator for a given scatterer $f$ and
incident wave $u^{\textrm{inc}}$.
\subsection{The Inverse Problem}
In the associated inverse problem, we assume that we know
the incident wave $u^{\textrm{inc}}$ as well as measurements of the scattered wave $u^{s}$ and we aim to compute
information about the scatterer $f$. Following \cite{LKKLpRegularization2013}, we model these measurements as $u^s|_{\Gamma_{\mathrm{meas}}}$,
where $\Gamma_{\mathrm{meas}}$ is the trace of a closed locally Lipschitz continuous curve with $\Gamma_{\mathrm{meas}} \cap \overline{B_R} = \emptyset$.
In the case that we just have one incident
wave $u^{\textrm{inc}}$, then the map $(f, u^{\textrm{inc}})\mapsto u^s|_{\Gamma_{\mathrm{meas}}}$, is called
\emph{mono-static contrast-to-measurement operator} in \cite{LKKLpRegularization2013}. For multiple incident waves, and multi-static measurements, a closed set $\Gamma_{\textrm{inc}}$ is introduced, which is again the trace of a closed locally Lipschitz curve enclosing $B_R$, such that $\Gamma_{\textrm{inc}} \cap \overline{B_R}= \emptyset$. The set $\Gamma_{\textrm{inc}}$ serves to construct \emph{single layer potentials}, which take the role of
the incident waves. For $\varphi \in L^2(\Gamma_{\textrm{inc}})$, these single layer potentials are
\[
SL_{\Gamma_{\textrm{inc}}}\varphi := \int \limits_{\Gamma_{\textrm{inc}}} G_{k_0}(\cdot, y) \varphi(y)\, dy \in L^2(B_R),
\]
see Figure \ref{fig:acousticmodel} for an illustration.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\centering
\includegraphics[height=4.5cm]{singleLayerPotUnrestricted-eps-converted-to.pdf}
\put(3,20){{\small $B_R$}}
\put(-12,99){{\small Scatterer modeled by a}}
\put(-12,87){{\small cartoon-like function}}
\put(-225,38){{\small $\Gamma_{\mathrm{meas}} = \Gamma_{\textrm{inc}}$}}
\put(-200,100){{\small $SL_{\Gamma_{\textrm{inc}}}\varphi = u^{\textrm{inc}}$}}
\caption{Model for the acoustic inverse scattering problem in which $\Gamma_{\mathrm{meas}} = \Gamma_{\textrm{inc}}$.}
\label{fig:acousticmodel}
\end{figure}
Let $L^p_{\mathrm{Im}\geq 0}(B_R)$
denote the set of $L^p(B_R)$-functions with nonnegative imaginary part, and let $\mathrm{HS}(\cdot, \cdot)$ denote the space of Hilbert Schmidt operators \cite{LinearOperators1980}. Then the \emph{multi-static measurement operator} $\mathcal{N}$, which
assigns to each contrast function a Hilbert-Schmidt operator, maps a single layer potential to the associated
solution of the acoustic scattering problem. Formally, $\mathcal{N}$ is defined by
\[
\mathcal{N}: \ L^2_{\textrm{Im}\geq 0} (B_R) \to \mathrm{HS}(L^2(\Gamma_{\mathrm{inc}}), L^2(\Gamma_{\mathrm{meas}})),
\quad f \mapsto N_f,
\]
where
\[
N_f: L^2(\Gamma_{\mathrm{inc}}) \to L^2(\Gamma_{\mathrm{meas}}), \quad \varphi \mapsto \mathcal{S}(f, SL_{\Gamma_{\textrm{inc}}}\varphi)_{|\Gamma_{\mathrm{meas}}}.
\]
Note that indeed $N_f \in \mathrm{HS}(L^2(\Gamma_{\mathrm{inc}}), L^2(\Gamma_{\mathrm{meas}}))$, see \cite{LKKLpRegularization2013}, where it was also shown, even in a more general setting, that the operator $\mathcal{N}$ satisfies the following properties.
\begin{theorem}\cite{LKKLpRegularization2013}
The operator $\mathcal{N}$ is continuous, compact, and weakly sequentially closed from $L^2_{\mathrm{Im}\geq 0}(B_R)$ into $\mathrm{HS}(L^2(\Gamma_{\mathrm{inc}}), L^2(\Gamma_{\mathrm{meas}}))$.
\end{theorem}
Since in realistic applications the signals always contain noise, we consider
the \emph{inverse acoustic scattering problem} with noisy data, which
for a noise level $\varepsilon > 0$, and noisy measurements $N^{\varepsilon}_{\mathrm{meas}} \in \mathrm{HS}(L^2(\Gamma_{\mathrm{inc}}), L^2(\Gamma_{\mathrm{meas}}))$ satisfying
\begin{equation}
\| N^{\varepsilon}_{\mathrm{meas}} - N_{f^\dagger} \|_{\mathrm{HS}(L^2(\Gamma_{\textrm{inc}}), L^2(\Gamma_{\mathrm{meas}}))} \leq \varepsilon \label{eq:noisyMeasurementsObeyThis},
\end{equation}
is to recover the scatterer $f^\dagger$.
This inverse problem is ill-posed and requires careful regularization which is discussed in the next subsection.
\subsection{Regularization by Frames} \label{subsec:reg_frames}
A classical regularization approach to solve inverse problems is to minimize an appropriate Tikhonov functional. If $X$ is a Hilbert space and $Y$ a Banach spaces and $F:X \to Y$ a possibly nonlinear operator, $\mathcal{R}:X\to \mathbb{R}$ a convex functional, $\alpha>0$ a regularization parameter and $y^\varepsilon$ a noisy datum, then the Tikhonov functionals under consideration are of the form:
$$T(x) = \frac{1}{2}\|F(x) - y^\varepsilon\|_Y^2 + \alpha \mathcal{R}(x), \text{ for }x\in X.$$
This methodology was introduced by Tikhonov, who used this method to solve linear inverse problems and employed a Sobolev norm as penalty term, \cite{Tikhonov1963}. Later, sparsity promoting regularizations where used, where for instance for $0\leq p\leq 2$, $\mathcal{R}(x)=\sum_i|\left \langle x, \varphi_i \right \rangle|^p$, with an orthonormal basis $(\varphi_i)$ of $X$, \cite{DauDD,GraHS2008}.
Further extensions of this concept to nonlinear operators $F$ and penalty terms $\mathcal{R} = \sum_i|\left \langle x, \varphi_i \right \rangle|^p$ with some frame $(\varphi_i)_i$ have been described in various flavors in e.g. \cite{JinM2012,RamT2005,TecB2010}.
In \cite{LKKLpRegularization2013} it was suggested to minimize
\begin{equation}
\tilde{\mathfrak{T}}_\alpha^{\varepsilon}(f) : = \frac{1}{2}\left\|N_f - N^{\varepsilon}_{\mathrm{meas}} \right\|^2_{\mathrm{HS}(L^2(\Gamma_{\textrm{inc}}), L^2(\Gamma_{\mathrm{meas}}))} + \frac{\alpha}{p} \|f\|^p_{L^p(B_R)}, \quad f \in L^p(B_R). \label{eq:LechleiterFunctional}
\end{equation}
for fixed $p>1$ and $\alpha> 0$.
For $p$ close to $1$, the regularization term in this functional promotes sparsity in the representation of the scatterer. Regularization techniques of this sort have been studied comprehensively, see e.g. \cite{SchGG2009}.
Here we suggest a different regularization, which exploits that
the scatterer $f$ is modeled as a cartoon-like function $\mathcal{E}^2(\mathbb{R}^2)$ and that
shearlet systems are used to obtain sparse approximations of the scatterer $f$. Let $\Phi :=
\mathcal{SH}(\varphi, \psi, \tilde{\psi}, c)$ be a shearlet frame satisfying the hypotheses of Theorem \ref{thm:ShearletOptimallySparseApproximation}, and let
$T_\Phi$ denote the analysis operator of the shearlet frame $\Phi$, then the proof of Theorem \ref{thm:ShearletOptimallySparseApproximation} yields the decay behavior of the associated shearlet coefficients $T_\Phi(f)$.
It has been shown in \cite{KLcmptShearSparse2011} that $T_\Phi(f)$ is in $\ell^p$
for every $p>\frac23$.
We propose to regularize the acoustic inverse scattering problem by adapting the data
fidelity term appropriately and by imposing a constraint on the $\ell^p$-norm of the coefficient sequence $T_\Phi(f)$. More precisely, for fixed
$1 \le p \le 2$ and $\alpha> 0$, we consider the Tikhonov functional
\begin{equation}\label{eq:shearMin}
\mathfrak{T}_\alpha^{\varepsilon}(f) : = \frac{1}{2}\left\|\mathcal{N}( f ) - N^{\varepsilon}_{\mathrm{meas}}
\right\|^2_{\mathrm{HS}(L^2(\Gamma_{\textrm{inc}}), L^2(\Gamma_{\mathrm{meas}}))} + \frac{\alpha}{p} \|T_\Phi(f)\|^p_{\ell^p}, \quad f \in L^{2}(B_R).
\end{equation}
Note that the case of $p=1$ is not excluded in our analysis in contrast to the situation in \cite{LKKLpRegularization2013}.
Having introduced the Tikhonov regularization, we now describe the convergence of the minimization process. For this we are particularly interested in
convergence to a \emph{norm minimizing solution} $f^* \in L^2(B_R)$, i.e.,
\[
\mathcal{N}(f^*) = N_{f} \quad \text{and} \quad \|T_\Phi(f^*)\|_p \leq \|T_\Phi(f)\|_p \text{ for all } f \mbox{ such that }
\mathcal{N}(f) = N_{f^\dagger}.
\]
Such convergence properties have been extensively studied. Let us give the following result, which combines results from \cite{JinM2012} directly for our setting.
\begin{theorem}
Let $\Phi$ be a shearlet frame, $\mathcal{N}$ the multistatic measurement operator, $\varepsilon >0$, and $1\leq p\leq 2$.
Then the following assertions hold.
\begin{compactenum}
\item For every $\alpha>0$ there exists a minimizer of $\mathfrak{T}_\alpha^{\varepsilon}$.
\item If $\alpha(\delta) \to 0$ and $\frac{\delta^2}{\alpha(\delta)}\to 0$ for $\delta \to 0$, then every sequence of minimizers $f^\delta_{\alpha(\delta)}$ has a subsequence, that converges in $L^2(\mathbb{R}^2)$ to a norm minimizing solution.
\end{compactenum}
\end{theorem}
Having introduced the necessary theoretical tools, we can now give numerical examples to compare the regularization by shearlet frames to that of \cite{LKKLpRegularization2013}.
\subsection{Numerical Methods for the Acoustic Inverse Scattering Problem}
\label{sec:numEx}
In this section, we will analyze numerical approaches to solve the acoustic scattering problem of Section \ref{sec:acoustic}. After discussing an algorithmic realization of our approach \eqref{eq:shearMin}, we briefly present the other numerical methods that we compare with, followed by a detailed description of the numerical experiments. It will turn out that our new method is advantageous to the other methods in the situation that the scatterer is a body consisting of a more or less homogeneous medium, whose density is significantly different from the surrounding medium.
\subsubsection{The New Algorithmic Approach} \label{subsec:algorithmicapproach}
As suggested in Subsection \ref{subsec:reg_frames}, we aim to solve the minimization problem, compare also \eqref{eq:shearMin},
\[
\min_{f \in L^2(B_R)} \left( \frac{1}{2}\left\|\mathcal{N}(f) - N^{\varepsilon}_{\mathrm{meas}}
\right\|^2_{\mathrm{HS}(L^2(\Gamma_{\textrm{inc}}), L^2(\Gamma_{\mathrm{meas}}))} + \frac{\alpha}{p} \|T_{\Phi}(f)\|_{\ell^p}^p\right),
\]
where $\Phi$ is a shearlet frame for $L^2(\mathbb{R}^2)$, and $\tilde{\Phi}$ denotes the associated canonical dual frame. Employing the sign function, the mapping
\[
J_q: B_R \to \mathbb{C}, \quad x \mapsto [J_p(q)](x) := |q(x)|^{p-1}\mathrm{sign}(q(x)),
\]
and the operator $\mathcal{S}_{\alpha\mu, p}: = (I+\alpha\mu J_p)^{-1}$, it has been shown in \cite{LKKLpRegularization2013} that the solution via the standard Tikhonov functional \eqref{eq:LechleiterFunctional} can be obtained as the limit of the \emph{Landweber iteration}
\begin{equation} \label{eq:l1reg_solver}
f_{n+1} = \mathcal{S}_{\alpha\mu_n, p}\left[ f_n - \mu_n [ \mathcal{N}'(f_n)]^*(\mathcal{N}(f_n)-N^{\varepsilon}_{\mathrm{meas}})\right]
\quad \mbox{for } (\mu_n)_n \subset \mathbb{R}^+.
\end{equation}
By \cite{NonlinearTikhonovSparsityConstrains}, the solution to \eqref{eq:shearMin} with a frame based
regularization term can be computed as a limit of the iteration
\begin{equation}
f_{n+1} = T_{\tilde{\Phi}^*}\mathcal{S}_{\alpha\mu_n, p}\left[T_{\Phi}( f_n - \mu_n [ \mathcal{N}'(f_n)]^*(\mathcal{N}(f_n)-N^{\varepsilon}_{\mathrm{meas}}))\right]
\quad \mbox{for } (\mu_n)_n \subset \mathbb{R}^+,\label{eq:theIteration}
\end{equation}
see \cite{LKKLpRegularization2013} for an explicit construction of $\mathcal{N}'$ and $[\mathcal{N}']^*$.
Since the $\ell_1$-norm promotes sparsity, in our experiments we will choose $p=1$. In this case,
$\mathcal{S}_{\alpha\mu, 1}$ is the soft-thresholding operator, which for a scalar $\omega$, is defined as
\[
\mathcal{S}_{\alpha, 1}(\omega) = \left\{ \begin{array}{l l l}
\omega-\alpha, \quad &\text{ if } \ \omega &\geq \alpha,\\
0, \quad & \text{ if } |\omega| &< \alpha,\\
\omega + \alpha, \quad &\text{ if } \ -\omega &\leq -\alpha,\\
\end{array}\right.
\]
with element-wise application for sequences.
The general setup of the numerical experiments, whose results will be described in Subsection \ref{subsec:exp_results}, follows that for similar experiments presented in \cite{LKKLpRegularization2013}.
We chose the stepsize $\mu_n$ according to the Barzilai-Borwein rule \cite{BarB1988}, and stop the iteration when
\begin{equation}
\| \mathcal{N}(f_n) - N^{\varepsilon}_{\mathrm{meas}}\|_{\mathrm{HS}(L^2(\Gamma_i), L^2(\Gamma_m))} \leq \tau \varepsilon, \label{eq:eq:theDiscrPrinciple}
\end{equation}
with $\tau = 1.6$ and $\varepsilon$ being a fixed parameter chosen according to the noise level. For an analysis of this stopping rule see, e.g. \cite{kaltenbacher2008iterative}.
Furthermore, we choose the regularization parameter $\alpha$ so that it determines the optimal value for a low noise level and then decrease it proportionally to the noise level $\varepsilon$. Although other parameter choice rules have been proposed, as for instance the Morozov discrepancy principle \cite{AnzR2010}, we prefer this simpler a-priori choice, since this has also been used in the comparison results \cite{LKKLpRegularization2013}.
In each step of \eqref{eq:theIteration}, one shearlet decomposition and reconstruction step needs to be performed for which \emph{Shearlab} \cite{shearlab}
is used. In all experiments, a discretization of the domain with a $512 \times 512$ grid is used and the shearlet system of Shearlab using $5$ scales. \hl{We subsample the shearlet system according to Definition \ref{def:shearletSystem} using a mask.}
We select as domain $[-1,1]^2$, and let the scatterer be supported in $B_R$ with $R = 0.75$. We then pick $T$ transmitter-receiver pairs equidistributed
on the circle of radius $0.9$, \hl{where $T = 18$ in the first experiment and $T = 32$ in the second experiment}. Thus \hl{$2T$} Lippmann-Schwinger equations need to be solved in every step, \hl{$T$} for the evaluation of $\mathcal{N}(f_n)$
for the different single layer potentials, and \hl{$T$} for the evaluation of $[\mathcal{N}'(f_n)]^*$.
We then solve these equations with a simple, and admittedly slower, method than \cite{LKKLpRegularization2013}, by discretizing, and then solve the resulting linear system using a GMRES
iteration without preconditioning. The results in Subsection \ref{subsec:exp_results} show that even with this simple approach the advantage of the shearlet
regularization over other regularization methods can be observed. The increased runtime per step does not affect the overall runtime significantly, since we require less
iterations. However, using the method of \cite{LKKLpRegularization2013} to solve the Lippmann-Schwinger equations should provide a significant further speed-up in our algorithm, when aiming for higher numerical efficiency and not only for the accuracy of the reconstruction.
As scatterers $f$, we consider prototypes of cartoon-like functions, as in Figures~\ref{fig:Experiment1} and \ref{fig:Experiment2}.
\subsubsection{Comparison Results}
\label{subsec:exp_results}
We compare our approach with two other approaches, first the method introduced in \cite{LKKLpRegularization2013},
which is based on the assumption that the scatterer is itself sparse and hence an $L^1$ regularization is used, solving
\[
\min_{f \in L^2(B_R)} \left( \frac{1}{2}\left\|N_f - N^{\varepsilon}_{\mathrm{meas}} \right\|^2_{\mathrm{HS}(L^2(\Gamma_{\textrm{inc}}), L^2(\Gamma_{\mathrm{meas}}))} + \alpha \|f\|_{L^1(B_R)}\right)
\]
via the Landweber iteration \eqref{eq:l1reg_solver}, and second
\[
\min_{f \in L^2(B_R)} \left\|N_f - N^{\varepsilon}_{\mathrm{meas}} \right\|_{\mathrm{HS}(L^2(\Gamma_{\textrm{inc}}), L^2(\Gamma_{\mathrm{meas}}))},
\]
which does not contain a regularization term, hence does not exploit sparsity in any way. We stop the iteration when \eqref{eq:eq:theDiscrPrinciple} is achieved. This method with the regularization term based on the $L^1(B_R)$ is not covered by the theoretical results in \cite{LKKLpRegularization2013} which only yield convergence results for $L^p$ norms with $p>1$. Since this approach is used for the numerical results in \cite{LKKLpRegularization2013}, we also compare with this method rather than with an $L^p$ penalty for $p>1$.
In the first set of experiments we choose a wave number of $k_0 = 20$ and compute reconstructions with our approach, see Subsection
\ref{subsec:algorithmicapproach}.
The different noise levels that we impose are described in Table~\ref{tab:1} and Figure~\ref{fig:Experiment1}. In Table \ref{tab:1}, for each of the three regularization methods, we provide the relative error measured in the discrete $L^2$-norm as well as the number of iterations until \eqref{eq:eq:theDiscrPrinciple} is achieved for different noise levels.
\begin{figure}[htb]
\centering
\centering
\quad \ \includegraphics[width=0.345\textwidth]{Scatterer-eps-converted-to.pdf}
\\
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.30\textwidth]{Rev1SH002-eps-converted-to.pdf}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.30\textwidth]{Rev1SH0005-eps-converted-to.pdf}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.30\textwidth]{Rev1SH0001-eps-converted-to.pdf}
\\
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.30\textwidth]{Rev1TI002-eps-converted-to.pdf}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.30\textwidth]{Rev1TI0005-eps-converted-to.pdf}
\centering
\includegraphics[width = 0.30\textwidth]{Rev1TI0001-eps-converted-to.pdf}
\caption{\textbf{Top:} \hl{Cartoon-like} scatterer. \textbf{Second Row:} Reconstructed scatterers using the shearlet regularization, \hl{relative noise levels from left to right: $\varepsilon = 0.08, 0.02, 0.005$}. \textbf{Third Row:} Reconstructed scatterers using the $L^1$ regularization, \hl{relative noise levels from left to right: $\varepsilon = 0.08, 0.02, 0.005$}. \hl{The colormaps in all images coincide with that of the top image.}}
\label{fig:Experiment1}
\end{figure}
\begin{table}[!h]
\scriptsize \centering
\begin{tabular}{ | c | l |r | r| r | }
\hline
$\mathbf{k_0 = 20}$ & \ Regularization method \ & \ rel.Noise lvl \ & \ Relative error \ & \ \#iterations \ \\ \hline
1. \quad \ & \ $L^1$ Tikhonov & 0.08 \ & 0.2153 & 7 \ \\
2. \quad \ & \ Shearlets & 0.08 \ & \textbf{0.1274} & 7 \ \\
3. \quad \ & \ No Penalty & 0.08 \ & 0.2188 & \ 9 \ \\ \hline
4. \quad \ & \ $L^1$ Tikhonov & 0.04 \ & 0.1435 & 13 \ \\
5. \quad \ & \ Shearlets & 0.04 \ & \textbf{0.0920} & \ 12 \ \\
6. \quad \ & \ No Penalty & 0.04 \ & 0.1567 & \ 12 \ \\ \hline
7. \quad \ & \ $L^1$ Tikhonov & 0.02 \ & 0.1162 & \ 19 \ \\
8. \quad \ & \ Shearlets & 0.02 \ & \textbf{0.0723} & \ 19 \ \\
9. \quad \ & \ No Penalty & 0.02 \ & 0.1161 & \ 19 \ \\ \hline
10. \quad \ & \ $L^1$ Tikhonov & 0.005 \ & 0.0848 & \ 96 \ \\
11. \quad \ & \ Shearlets & 0.005 \ & \textbf{0.0665} & \ 48 \ \\
12. \quad \ & \ No Penalty & 0.005 \ & 0.0930 & \ 83 \ \\% \hline
\hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{Numerical results of the three regularization methods for different noise levels with the scatterer chosen as in Figure \ref{fig:Experiment1}.}
\label{tab:1}
\end{table}
The shearlet scheme shows the best performance both visually and with respect to the relative error. The inferior performance of the $L^1$ regularization from \cite{LKKLpRegularization2013} is due to the fact that the scatterer is not sparse itself in the sense of having a relatively small support. Certainly, if no penalty term is used, then the solution is not at all adapted to the specific structure and expectedly, the performance is worse.
\begin{figure}[!h]
\centering \ \hspace{0.25cm}
\includegraphics[width=0.375\textwidth]{Rev2Original-eps-converted-to.pdf}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.325\textwidth]{Rev2ShearletError-eps-converted-to.pdf}~\includegraphics[width=0.325\textwidth]{Rev2NoRegError-eps-converted-to.pdf}~\includegraphics[width=0.378\textwidth]{Rev2TikError-eps-converted-to.pdf}
\caption{\hl{\textbf{Top:} Cartoon-like scatterer with piecewise smooth jump curve, \textbf{Second Row:(from left to right)}
Error of the reconstruction of the cartoon-like scatterer from the top row using the shearlet regularization, using no penalty term, and using $L^1$ Tikhonov Regularization. The relative noise level is 0.001. }}
\label{fig:Experiment2}
\end{figure}
Top: Cartoon-like scatterer with piecewise smooth jump curve,
Second Row: (from left to right) Error of the reconstruction of the cartoon-like scatterer using the shearlet regularization, using no penalty term, and using L1 Tikhonov Regularization. The relative noise level is 0.001.
\begin{table}[h!]
\scriptsize \centering
\begin{tabular}{ | c | l |r | r| r | }
\hline
$\mathbf{k_0 = 25}$ & \ Regularization method \ & \ rel. Noise level \ & \ Relative error \ & \ \#iterations \ \\ \hline
1. \quad \ & \ $L^1$ Tikhonov & 0.02 \ & 0.0714 & 14 \ \\
2. \quad \ & \ Shearlets & 0.02 \ & \textbf{0.0426} & 14 \ \\
3. \quad \ & \ No Penalty & 0.02 \ & 0.0717 & \ 16 \ \\ \hline
4. \quad \ & \ $L^1$ Tikhonov & 0.01 \ & 0.0587 & 23 \ \\
5. \quad \ & \ Shearlets & 0.01 \ & \textbf{0.0383} & \ 19 \ \\
6. \quad \ & \ No Penalty & 0.01 \ & 0.0620 & \ 23 \ \\ \hline
7. \quad \ & \ $L^1$ Tikhonov & 0.005 \ & 0.0561 & \ 32 \ \\
8. \quad \ & \ Shearlets & 0.005 \ & \textbf{0.0346} & \ 33 \ \\
9. \quad \ & \ No Penalty & 0.005 \ & 0.0577 & \ 42 \ \\ \hline
10. \quad \ & \ $L^1$ Tikhonov & 0.001 \ & 0.0420 & \ 271 \ \\
11. \quad \ & \ Shearlets & 0.001 \ & \textbf{0.0334} & \ 72 \ \\
12. \quad \ & \ No Penalty & 0.001 \ & 0.0429 & \ 277 \ \\\hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{Numerical results of the three regularization methods for different noise levels with the scatterer chosen as in \ref{fig:Experiment2}.}
\label{tab:2}
\end{table}
We also conducted a second set of experiments with a different wave number, i.e., $k_0=25$ and display the results in Table \ref{tab:2}.
Furthermore, the reconstruction error is depicted in Figure \ref{fig:Experiment2}, where we observe that the shearlet regularization produces satisfying results. Most importantly, the singularity curve of the scatterer, which is the most prominent feature of the cartoon model, is obtained with decent precision. Interestingly, the shearlet regularization also requires the least number of iterations in this example.
The reason for the superior performance of the regularization by the shearlet transform is also visible in Figure \ref{fig:Experiment2}.
All three methods handle the singularity curve fairly well, although, naturally, the error is the largest at points where the singularity
is most pronounced, i.e., the upper and lower right corners as well as the middle of the left edge of the centered square. Away from the
singularities, the shearlet regularization yields a far better approximation than the other two approaches, since it is designed to deal very well with smooth regions.
\section{The Linearized Scattering Problem of the Schr\"{o}dinger equation}\label{sec:electro}
The second numerical approach to inverse scattering problems which we consider is that of first linearizing the problem. This
technique is commonly known as Born approximation.
The inverse problem we will study with this method is \emph{quantum mechanical scattering}. After introducing the
inverse problem, our goal will be to provide a theoretical basis for the application of shearlet frames. As before,
we base our considerations on the premise that edges, i.e., curve-like singularities, are the governing features
of the scatterer leading to the cartoon model as appropriate choice.
Once we step away from the nonlinear situation and introduce a linearization, then this argument may, however, not be valid anymore. It could be possible, that linearizing the inverse problem introduces a smoothing that erases all edge-like structures. Fortunately, it has been shown, see, e.g., \cite{OlaPS2001,Serov2013}, that when using a linearization via the inverse Born approximation, certain singularities of the scatterer prevail.
It turns out, that finding the inverse Born approximation is a problem of reconstructing functions from possibly corrupted and maybe limited Fourier data. Problems of this sort have been studied when the object under consideration is sparse in some basis or frame, see \cite{Adcock13breakingthe, 2DWaveletRec}.
This gives a first indication, that methods involving shearlets may be appropriate in a regularization of the inverse scattering problem with the Schr\"{o}dinger equation. However, all results on the
regularity of the inverse Born approximation in the literature describe the global regularity in the sense of weak
differentiability. In the case of cartoon-like functions, however, we have strong local, but poor global regularity. To be able to exploit shearlets in the context of this problem, in this section, we will prove a local regularity result for the inverse Born approximation.
\subsection{The Inverse Problem}\label{sec:TheInverseProblem}
The \emph{time-independent Schr\"odinger equation}, for $f \in L^2(\mathbb{R}^2)$, a wave number $k>0$, and with $u = u^s + u^{\textrm{inc}}_d$ as in \eqref{eq:solution_ud}, is given by
\begin{eqnarray} \label{eq:SchrEq}
\Delta u + (f + k^2) u &=& 0,\\
\lim \limits_{r\to \infty} r^{\frac{1}{2}}\left(\frac{\partial u^s(x)}{\partial r} - ik u^s(x) \right) &=& 0.
\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
This equation describes the motion of a single particle moving in an electric field with potential $f$. Therefore $f$ should be smooth, whenever the permittivity of the medium does not change drastically, and the solution can jump when the medium and the permittivity changes.
For $\theta \in [0,\pi]$ and $\tau_\theta = (\cos(\theta), \sin(\theta))$, the associated \emph{backscattering amplitude} is defined by
\[
A(k,-\theta,\theta) = \int_{\mathbb{R}^2} e^{i k \left \langle \tau_\theta, y \right \rangle} f(y) u(y)\, dy,
\]
and the inverse problem is to reconstruct the potential $f$ from $A$.
Using $|\xi| \tau_\theta := \xi$ to denote polar
coordinates, the \emph{Born approximation} of the solution $f$ is defined as the inverse Fourier transform of
the function $\xi \mapsto A(k,-\theta,\theta)$, given by
\begin{equation}
f_B(x) = \int_{\mathbb{R}^2} e^{-i\left \langle \xi, x \right \rangle} A(\frac{|\xi|}{2}, \theta, -\theta) \, d\xi.\label{eq:DefOfFB}
\end{equation}
Applying the Lippmann-Schwinger integral equation \eqref{eq:LippmannSchwinger} iteratively as in \cite{OlaPS2001}, yields that
\begin{equation}
f_B(x) = \sum_{j=1}^m q_j(x) + q_{m+1}^R(x),\label{eq:iteration}
\end{equation}
with
\begin{eqnarray}
q_j(x) &=& \frac{1}{4\pi^2} \int \limits_{\R^2} \int \limits_{\R^2} e^{i\left \langle \xi, x + \frac{y}{2}\right \rangle} f(y)
(\mathcal{G}_{|\xi|})^j(e^{i\left \langle \xi, \cdot \right \rangle})(y)\, dy\, d\xi, \quad 1 \le j \le m,\nonumber\\
q_{m+1}^R(x) &=& \frac{1}{4\pi^2} \int \limits_{\R^2} \int \limits_{\R^2} e^{i\left \langle \xi, x + \frac{y}{2}\right \rangle} f(y)
(\mathcal{G}_{|\xi|})^{m+1}(u(\cdot, |\xi|, \hat{\xi}))(y)\, dy\, d\xi,\label{qj}
\end{eqnarray}
where $\mathcal{G}_{|\xi|}: L^2_{loc}(\mathbb{R}^2) \to L^2_{loc}(\mathbb{R}^2)$ is the integral operator with kernel
$G_{\frac{{|\xi|}}{2}}(x,y)f(y)$ as defined in \eqref{eq:defi_G}.
\subsection{Local Regularity of the inverse Born Approximation}\label{subsec:Schr_Thr}
To determine the local regularity of the Born approximation $f_B$ from a given potential $f$, we invoke the
representation \eqref{eq:iteration} and observe that we can equally well examine the regularity of the
functions $q_1, \ldots, q_m$, and $ q_{m+1}^R$. To analyze the regularity of the functions $q_j$, we will make use
of the \emph{Radon transform} and the \emph{Projection Slice Theorem}, see e.g. \hl{\cite{GelGV1966genFunctRadonTrafo}}.
\begin{definition}
Let $\theta \in [0, \pi)$. Then the \emph{Radon transform} $\mathcal{R}_\theta$ of a function $f\in L^2(\mathbb{R}^2)$ along a ray $\Delta_{t, \theta} =
\{x \in \mathbb{R}^2: x_1 \cos(\theta) + x_2 \sin(\theta) = t \}$ for $t \in \mathbb{R}$ is defined as
\[
\mathcal{R}_\theta f(t) := \int_{\Delta_{t, \theta}} f(x)\, ds = \int \int f(x)\delta_0(\left \langle x, \tau_\theta\right \rangle - t)\, dx.
\]
\end{definition}
\begin{theorem}[Projection Slice Theorem]
\label{theo:projectionslice}
Let $f\in L^2(\mathbb{R}^2)$. Then, for all $\theta \in [0, \pi)$ and $\xi \in \mathbb{R}$,
\[
\widehat{\mathcal{R}_\theta f}(\xi) = \widehat{f}(\xi \cos(\theta), \xi \sin(\theta)).
\]
Here $\widehat f$ denotes the Fourier transform.
\end{theorem}
Before we state and prove the local regularity of the functions $q_j$, $j = 1, \ldots, m$, we fix some notation. We will denote the Sobolev spaces of functions with $s$ weak derivatives in $L^2(\mathbb{R}^2)$ by $H^s(\mathbb{R}^2)$ and the functions that are locally in $H^s(\mathbb{R}^2)$ by $H^s_{loc}(\mathbb{R}^2)$. Furthermore, $H^s(x)$ is the local Sobolev space of $s$ times weakly differentiable functions with weak derivatives in $L^2(x)$, and $L^2(x)$ the space of distributions that are $L^2$ on a neighborhood of $x$, see \cite{BeaR1984}. Finally,
we denote by $C^{k,\alpha}(\mathbb{R}^2)$ the $k$ times differentiable functions with a H\"older continuous $k$-th derivative with H\"older coefficient $\alpha$, writing $C^{k}(\mathbb{R}^2)$ if the $k$-th derivative is simply continuous.
Then we have the following regularity result.
\begin{theorem}\label{thm:MainSchroedinger}
Let $\varepsilon >0$, let $s \in \mathbb{N}, s \geq 2$, and let, for some $x_0\in \mathbb{R}^2$, $f\in L^2(\mathbb{R}^2) \cap H^{s+\varepsilon}(x_0)$ be compactly supported and real valued. Then the $q_j$ defined in (\ref{qj}) satisfy $q_j\in H^s(x_0)$ for all $j\in \mathbb{N}$, and, in particular, $f_B \in H^s(x_0)$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
We start by proving the local regularity of $q_1$.
Let $x_0 \in \mathbb{R}^2$ be such that $f \in H^s_{\mathrm{loc}}(x_0)$, then we aim to prove that
\[
q_1(x) = \frac{1}{4\pi^2} \int \limits_{\R^2} \int \limits_{\R^2} \int \limits_{\R^2} e^{i\left \langle \xi, x + \frac{y}{2} + \frac{z}{2}\right \rangle} f(y)
\mathcal{G}_{|\xi|}(y,z) f(z)\, dz\, dy\, d\xi \in H^s(x_0).
\]
For this, we introduce a smooth cutoff function $\varphi$ supported in a neighborhood $U_{x_0}$ of $x_0$, where $f$ is $H^{s+\varepsilon}$ such that $\varphi \equiv 1$ on a strictly smaller neighborhood of $x_0$. For $x \in U_{x_0}$, the function $\varphi$ is now used to decompose $q_1$ as
\begin{align*}
q_1(x) = & \ \frac{1}{4\pi^2} \int \limits_{\R^2} \int \limits_{\R^2} \int \limits_{\R^2} e^{i\left \langle \xi, x + \frac{y}{2} + \frac{z}{2}\right \rangle} \varphi(y) f(y) \mathcal{G}_{|\xi|}(y,z) f(z)\, dz\, dy\, d\xi\\
+&\ \frac{1}{4\pi^2} \int \limits_{\R^2} \int \limits_{\R^2} \int \limits_{\R^2} e^{i\left \langle \xi, x + \frac{y}{2} + \frac{z}{2}\right \rangle} (1-\varphi)(y) f(y) \mathcal{G}_{|\xi|}(y,z) f(z)\, dz\, dy\, d\xi\\
=: & \ \mathcal{I}_1(x) + \mathcal{I}_2(x).
\end{align*}
We further decompose $\mathcal{I}_2$ as
\begin{align*}
\mathcal{I}_2(x) =&\ \frac{1}{4\pi^2} \int \limits_{\R^2} \int \limits_{\R^2} \int \limits_{\R^2} e^{i\left \langle \xi, x + \frac{y}{2} + \frac{z}{2}\right \rangle} (1-\varphi)(y) f(y) \mathcal{G}_{|\xi|}(y,z) \varphi(z)f(z)\, dz\, dy \, d\xi\\
+ &\ \frac{1}{4\pi^2} \int \limits_{\R^2} \int \limits_{\R^2} \int \limits_{\R^2} e^{i\left \langle \xi, x + \frac{y}{2} + \frac{z}{2}\right \rangle} (1-\varphi)(y) f(y) \mathcal{G}_{|\xi|}(y,z) (1-\varphi)(z)f(z)\, dz\, dy\, d\xi\\
= :& \ \mathcal{I}_{2,1}(x) + \mathcal{I}_{2,2}(x).
\end{align*}
and study each of the integrals $\mathcal{I}_1$, $\mathcal{I}_{2,1}$, and $\mathcal{I}_{2,2}$
separately.
\emph{Regularity of $\mathcal{I}_1$}: We use a representation from \cite[Lem. 1.1]{OlaPS2001}, which yields, for $x \in U_{x_0}$,
\begin{align}
\mathcal{I}_{1}(x) &= \int \limits_{\R^2} \int \limits_{\R^2} \frac{\mathcal{F}(f)(\xi) \mathcal{F}(\varphi f)(\eta)}{\left \langle \eta, \xi \right \rangle - i0}
e^{ i \left \langle x, \xi + \eta \right \rangle}\, d\eta\, d\xi \nonumber\\
&=:\int \limits_{|\xi|\geq 1}\int \limits_{\R^2} \frac{\mathcal{F}(f)(\xi) \mathcal{F}(\varphi f)(\eta)}{\left \langle \eta, \xi \right \rangle - i0}
e^{ i \left \langle x, \xi + \eta \right \rangle}\, d\eta\, d\xi + \nu_1(x), \label{eq:noLowFrequencies}
\end{align}
where
\begin{equation} \label{eq:pv}
\left(\left \langle \xi, \eta \right \rangle -i0 \right)^{-1} = \textsf{p.v.}(\left \langle \xi, \eta \right \rangle)^{-1}-\pi i
\delta_0(\left \langle \xi, \eta \right \rangle),
\end{equation}
with $\textsf{p.v.}$ denoting the Cauchy principal value as stated in \cite[Lem. 1.2]{OlaPS2001}.
We obtain that $\nu_1\in C^\infty(\mathbb{R}^2)$ by the following argument. Since
$$\nu_1 = \frac{1}{4\pi^2} \int \limits_{|\xi|\leq 1} \int \limits_{\R^2} \int \limits_{\R^2} e^{i\left \langle \xi, x + \frac{y}{2} + \frac{z}{2}\right \rangle} f(y) \mathcal{G}_{|\xi|}(y,z) \varphi(z)f(z)\, dz\, dy \, d\xi$$
we can employ the compact support of $f$ and an estimate of the form:
$$\| \mathcal{G}_{|\xi|}(f)\|_{L^p} \leq C_p |\xi|^{2(1/q-1/p)-2}\|f\|_{L^q},$$
with $p=6, q=5/6$, which can be found in \cite{Syl2009}, to obtain that
$$\xi \mapsto \int \limits_{\R^2} \int \limits_{\R^2} e^{i\left \langle \xi, x + \frac{y}{2} + \frac{z}{2}\right \rangle} f(y) \mathcal{G}_{|\xi|}(y,z) \varphi(z)f(z)\, dz\, dy \in L^1(\mathbb{R}^2).$$
Since we only take the Fourier transform over a bounded frequency part, we obtain that $\nu_1$ is analytic.
To show the local regularity of \eqref{eq:noLowFrequencies} as a function of $x$, we introduce the symbol
\[
a(x, \xi): = \int \limits_{\R^2} \frac{\mathcal{F}(\varphi f)(\eta)}{\left \langle \eta, \xi \right \rangle - i0} e^{i \left \langle x, \eta \right \rangle} d\eta,
\quad (x ,\xi) \in \mathbb{R}^2 \times \mathbb{R}^2.
\]
It follows from \cite[Thm. 1.3]{BeaR1984}, that if the function
\[
g_\xi : U_{x_0} \to \mathbb{C}, \quad g_\xi(x) := a(x, \xi), \quad \xi \in \mathbb{R}^2,
\]
is in $H^s(x)$ for some $s\in \mathbb{N}$, $s >1$ and if $\|g_\xi\|_{H^s(x_0)}$ is independent of $\xi$, then the corresponding pseudo-differential operator $a(x,D)$ is a bounded operator from $H^s(x_0)$ to $H^s(x_0)$. By definition, we have
\begin{equation}\label{eq:aInu}
a(x,D)(f) = \mathcal{I}_{1}(x) - \nu_1(x).
\end{equation}
Thus it remains to prove that, for any $|\xi|\geq 1$, we have $g_\xi \in H^s(x_0)$ and $\|g_\xi\|_{H^s(x_0)}$ is independent of $\xi$. By \eqref{eq:pv}, we obtain
\begin{equation}
a(x, \xi) = \textsf{p.v.}\int \limits_{\R^2} \frac{\mathcal{F}(\varphi f)(\eta)}{\left \langle \eta, \xi \right \rangle} e^{i \left \langle x, \eta \right \rangle}\, d\eta - \pi i \int \limits_{\left \langle \eta, \xi \right \rangle = 0} \mathcal{F}(\varphi f)(\eta) e^{i \left \langle x, \eta \right \rangle}\, d\eta. \label{eq:TheSplittingOfi0}
\end{equation}
Since $\varphi f \in H^{s+\varepsilon}(\mathbb{R}^2)$ is compactly supported, it follows that $\mathcal{F}(\varphi f) \in C^\infty(\mathbb{R}^2)$ and
\[
\int_{\mathbb{R}^2} (1+|\xi|^2)^{s+\varepsilon}|\mathcal{F}(\varphi f)(\eta)|^2 d\eta < \infty.
\]
Passing to polar coordinates yields
\[
\int_{0}^{2 \pi} \int_{\mathbb{R}^+} r(1+|r|^2)^{s+\varepsilon}|\mathcal{F}(\varphi f)(r \tau_\theta)|^2 \,dr \,d\theta < \infty,
\]
and by the smoothness of
\begin{equation}\label{eq:theta_function}
\theta \mapsto \int_{\mathbb{R}} r(1+|r|^2)^{s+\varepsilon}|\mathcal{F}(\varphi f)(r \tau_\theta)|^2 d r,
\end{equation}
the terms $\int_{\mathbb{R}} |r|(1+|r|^2)^{s+\varepsilon}|\mathcal{F}(\varphi f)(r \tau_\theta)|^2 d r$ are uniformly bounded with
respect to $\theta$. This implies the desired regularity of the second term of $\eqref{eq:TheSplittingOfi0}$ as a
function of $x$.
We continue with the first term of \eqref{eq:TheSplittingOfi0}, i.e., with
\[
\textsf{p.v.}\int \limits_{\R^2} \frac{\mathcal{F}(\varphi f)(\eta)}{\left \langle \eta, \xi \right \rangle} e^{i \left \langle x, \eta \right \rangle}\, d\eta
= \textsf{p.v.} \int \limits_{0}^{\pi} \frac{1}{\left \langle \tau_\theta, \xi \right \rangle} \int\limits_{\mathbb{R}} \mathcal{F}(\varphi f)(r \tau_\theta )
e^{i r \left \langle x, \tau_\theta \right \rangle } \,dr \,d\theta. \label{eq:ApplyFourierSliceHere}
\]
By substitution, w.l.o.g. we may assume that $\xi = (1,0)$. Application of Theorem~\ref{theo:projectionslice}
shows that \eqref{eq:ApplyFourierSliceHere} equals
\[
\textsf{p.v.} \int \limits_{0}^{\pi} \frac{1}{\left \langle \tau_\theta, \xi \right \rangle} \mathcal{R}_\theta (\varphi f)(\left \langle x, \tau_\theta \right \rangle)\, d\theta
= \lim \limits_{\varepsilon \downarrow 0} \int \limits_{[0,\frac{\pi}{2}-\varepsilon] \cup [\frac{\pi}{2}+\varepsilon,\pi]} \frac{1}{\cos(\theta)}
\mathcal{R}_\theta (\varphi f)(\left \langle \cdot, \tau_\theta \right \rangle)\, d\theta.
\]
For a given sequence $\varepsilon_n \to 0$ as $n \to \infty$, we set ${E}_n:=[0,\frac{\pi}{2}-\varepsilon_n] \cup [\frac{\pi}{2}+\varepsilon_n,\pi]$
and show that the sequence
\begin{equation}
\left(\,\,\int \limits_{{E}_n} \frac{1}{\cos(\theta)} \mathcal{R}_\theta (\varphi f)(\left \langle \cdot, \tau_\theta \right \rangle)\, d\theta\right)_{n \in \mathbb{N}} \label{eq:theCauchySequence}
\end{equation}
is a Cauchy sequence in $H^s(x_0)$.
We first observe that by Theorem \ref{theo:projectionslice}, the finiteness of the integral in
\eqref{eq:theta_function} implies that
\[
\xi \mapsto |\xi|^{s+\frac{1}{2}+\varepsilon} \cdot \widehat{\mathcal{R}_\theta (\varphi f)}(\xi) \in L^2(\mathbb{R}).
\]
This yields $\mathcal{R}_\theta (\varphi f) \in H^{s+\frac{1}{2}+\varepsilon}(\mathbb{R})$. By the Sobolev embedding theorem, \cite[Thm 5.4]{Adams1975} we have $H^{s+\frac{1}{2}+\varepsilon}(\mathbb{R}) \hookrightarrow C^{s,\varepsilon}(\mathbb{R})$,
which implies that $\mathcal{R}_\theta (\varphi f) (\left \langle \cdot, \tau_\theta\right \rangle) \in C^{s,\varepsilon}(\mathbb{R}^2)$. Hence for a multi-index $\gamma$ with
$|\gamma| \leq s$, taking the $\gamma$th derivative of each element of \eqref{eq:theCauchySequence} yields
\begin{equation} \label{eq:Cauchy2}
\left(\,\,\int \limits_{\mathcal{E}_n} \frac{1}{\cos(\theta)} D^{\gamma} (\mathcal{R}_\theta (\varphi f))(\left \langle \cdot, \tau_\theta \right \rangle) d\theta\right)_{n \in \mathbb{N}}.
\end{equation}
To prove that this sequence is a Cauchy sequence in $L^2(x_0)$ we show that $\theta \mapsto D^{\gamma}\mathcal{R}_\theta (\varphi f)(\left \langle \cdot, \tau_\theta \right \rangle)$
is H\"older continuous on $[0,\pi)$. In fact, by the chain rule and Theorem \ref{theo:projectionslice}, for
$\theta, \theta' \in [0,\pi)$, we have
\begin{eqnarray}\nonumber
\lefteqn{\left|D^\gamma (\mathcal{R}_\theta (\varphi f))(\left \langle \cdot, \tau_\theta \right \rangle)
- D^\gamma (\mathcal{R}_{\theta'} (\varphi f))(\left \langle \cdot, \tau_{\theta'} \right \rangle) \right|}\\ \nonumber
& \leq & C \cdot \left(\left|(\mathcal{R}_{\theta'} (\varphi f))^{(|\gamma|)}(\left \langle \cdot, \tau_{\theta'} \right \rangle)
- (\mathcal{R}_{\theta'} (\varphi f))^{(|\gamma|)}(\left \langle \cdot, \tau_{\theta}\right \rangle)\right|\right.\\
& & \hspace*{0.7cm}+ \left.\left|(\mathcal{R}_{\theta'} (\varphi f))^{(|\gamma|)}(\left \langle \cdot, \tau_{\theta} \right \rangle)
- (\mathcal{R}_\theta (\varphi f))^{(|\gamma|)}(\left \langle \cdot, \tau_{\theta}\right \rangle)\right|\right).\label{eq:twoTypesOfHoelderCont}
\end{eqnarray}
Since $\mathcal{R}_\theta (\varphi f) \in C^{s,\varepsilon}(\mathbb{R})$, we obtain that the first term of \eqref{eq:twoTypesOfHoelderCont} is bounded by
$C_0 |\tau_\theta-\tau_{\theta'}|^{\alpha}$ for some $\alpha \leq \varepsilon$ and $C_0 > 0$. Hence also the local $L^2(x_0)$-norm
of the first term is bounded by $C_1 |\tau_\theta-\tau_{\theta'}|^{\alpha}$ with a possibly different constant $C_1$. In the sequel, $C_\nu$, $\nu \in \mathbb{N}$
will always denote a positive constant.
To estimate the $L^2(x_0)$-norm of the second term of \eqref{eq:twoTypesOfHoelderCont}, it suffices to show
\begin{equation} \label{eq:longproof1}
\|(\mathcal{R}_\theta (\varphi f))^{(|\gamma|)} - (\mathcal{R}_{\theta'} (\varphi f))^{(|\gamma|)}\|_{L^2(\mathbb{R})} \leq C_2 |\tau_\theta - \tau_{\theta'}|^\alpha \quad \mbox{for some } 0< \alpha < 1/2.
\end{equation}
Using the Plancherel identity \cite{Mall2009SignalProcessing} and Theorem~\ref{theo:projectionslice}, we obtain
\begin{eqnarray}\nonumber
\lefteqn{\frac{1}{|\tau_\theta -\tau_{\theta'} |^\alpha} \left\| \left((\mathcal{R}_\theta (\varphi f))^{(|\gamma|)} - (\mathcal{R}_{\theta'} (\varphi f))^{(|\gamma|)}\right) \right\|_{L^2(\mathbb{R})}}\\
&=& \frac{1}{2\pi}\left\|\frac{(i \, \cdot)^{|\gamma|}}{|\tau_\theta -\tau_{\theta'} |^\alpha}
\left(\mathcal{F}(\varphi f)(\cdot \, \tau_{\theta})-\mathcal{F}(\varphi f)(\cdot \, \tau_{\theta'}) \right)\right\|_{L^2(\mathbb{R})}\nonumber\\
&\leq& \frac{1}{2\pi}\left\|(i \, \cdot)^{|\gamma|+\alpha} \frac{\mathcal{F}(\varphi f)(\cdot \, \tau_{\theta})
-\mathcal{F}(\varphi f)(\cdot \, \tau_{\theta'})}{|\cdot \, \tau_\theta - \cdot \, \tau_{\theta'} |^\alpha} \right\|_{L^2(\mathbb{R})}. \label{eq:HoelderEstimateA}
\end{eqnarray}
For $|\tau_\theta - \tau_{\theta'}|$ small enough, we now pick any multiindex $\rho$ with $|\rho|= |\gamma|$ and $|\tau_\theta^\rho|, |\tau_{\theta'}^\rho|\geq \left(\frac{1}{2}\right)^{|\gamma|}$. Thus, by \eqref{eq:HoelderEstimateA},
\begin{eqnarray}\nonumber
\lefteqn{\frac{1}{|\tau_\theta -\tau_{\theta'} |^\alpha} \left\| \left((\mathcal{R}_\theta (\varphi f))^{(|\gamma|)} - (\mathcal{R}_{\theta'} (\varphi f))^{(|\gamma|)}\right) \right\|_{L^2(\mathbb{R})}}\\
& \le & \frac{1}{2\pi}\left\|(i\, \cdot )^{\alpha} \frac{\tau_\theta^{-\rho}\mathcal{F}(D^\rho(\varphi f))(\cdot \, \tau_{\theta})- \tau_{\theta'}^{-\rho}
\mathcal{F}(D^\rho (\varphi f))(\cdot \, \tau_{\theta'})}{|\cdot \, \tau_\theta - \cdot \, \tau_{\theta'} |^\alpha} \right\|_{L^2(\mathbb{R})}\nonumber\\
& \leq &\frac{1}{2\pi}\left\|(i\, \cdot)^{\alpha} \tau_\theta^{-\rho} \frac{\mathcal{F}(D^\rho(\varphi f))(\cdot \, \tau_{\theta})
- \mathcal{F}(D^\rho (\varphi f))(\cdot \, \tau_{\theta'})}{|\cdot \, \tau_\theta - \cdot \, \tau_{\theta'} |^\alpha} \right\|_{L^2(\mathbb{R})} \nonumber\\
& &\qquad + \frac{1}{2\pi}\left\|(i \, \cdot)^{\alpha} \frac{\tau_\theta^{-\rho}\mathcal{F}(D^\rho(\varphi f))(\cdot \, \tau_{\theta'})
- \tau_{\theta'}^{-\rho}\mathcal{F}(D^\rho (\varphi f))(\cdot \, \tau_{\theta'})}{|\cdot \, \tau_\theta - \cdot \, \tau_{\theta'} |^\alpha}
\right\|_{L^2(\mathbb{R})}\nonumber\\
&=:& {\mathcal M}_1+{\mathcal M}_2\label{eq:theSecondPartForHoelder}.
\end{eqnarray}
Since $\varphi f$ has compact support, also $D^\rho(\varphi f)$ is compactly supported. Hence, its Fourier transform is H\"older continuous and obeys
\[
\frac{\mathcal{F}(D^\rho(\varphi f))(r \tau_{\theta})- \mathcal{F}(D^\rho (\varphi f))(r \tau_{\theta'})}{|r \tau_\theta - r \tau_{\theta'} |^\alpha} < h(r \tau_\theta),
\quad\mbox{for all } r \in \mathbb{R}, \, \theta \in [0,\pi),
\]
for a function $h\in L^2(\mathbb{R}^2)$. Thus, the first term $\mathcal M_1$ in \eqref{eq:theSecondPartForHoelder} is bounded, if $\alpha < \frac{1}{2}$. To estimate the second term $\mathcal M_2$ in \eqref{eq:theSecondPartForHoelder}, we
observe, that
\[
\frac{1}{\tau_\theta^\rho} - \frac{1}{\tau_{\theta'}^\rho} = \frac{\tau_\theta^\rho-\tau_{\theta'}^\rho}{\tau_\theta^\rho \tau_{\theta'}^\rho} \leq C_3 |\tau_\theta - \tau_{\theta'}|.
\]
Thus, the term $\mathcal M_2$ is bounded by $C_4 | \tau_\theta - \tau_{\theta'}|^{1-\alpha}$, and we have proved \eqref{eq:longproof1}. Using the estimates for the two terms in \eqref{eq:twoTypesOfHoelderCont} yields that
\[
\|D^\gamma (\mathcal{R}_\theta (\varphi f))(\left \langle \cdot, \tau_\theta \right \rangle)
- D^\gamma (\mathcal{R}_{\theta'} (\varphi f))(\left \langle \cdot, \tau_{\theta'} \right \rangle) \|_{H^s(x_0)}
< C_5 |\tau_\theta - \tau_{\theta'}|^\alpha.
\]
Returning to the sequence in \eqref{eq:Cauchy2}, for $m>n$, we have the estimate
{\allowdisplaybreaks
\begin{align}\nonumber
&\|\int \limits_{\frac{\pi}{2}-\varepsilon_n}^{\frac{\pi}{2}-\varepsilon_m} \frac{1}{\cos(\theta)} (\mathcal{R}_\theta (\varphi f))(\left \langle \cdot, \tau_\theta \right \rangle) d\theta
+ \int \limits_{\frac{\pi}{2}+\varepsilon_m}^{\frac{\pi}{2}+\varepsilon_n} \frac{1}{\cos(\theta)} (\mathcal{R}_\theta (\varphi f))(\left \langle \cdot, \tau_{\theta} \right \rangle) d\theta\|_{H^s(x_0)}\\
\nonumber
=& \|\int \limits_{\frac{\pi}{2}-\varepsilon_n}^{\frac{\pi}{2}-\varepsilon_m} \frac{1}{\cos(\theta)} (\mathcal{R}_\theta (\varphi f))(\left \langle \cdot, \tau_{\theta} \right \rangle) d\theta
- \int \limits_{\frac{\pi}{2}-\varepsilon_n}^{\frac{\pi}{2}-\varepsilon_m} \frac{1}{\cos(\theta)} (\mathcal{R}_{\pi-\theta}(\varphi f))(\left \langle \cdot, \tau_{\pi-\theta} \right \rangle) d\theta\|_{H^s(x_0)}\\ \nonumber
=& \int \limits_{\frac{\pi}{2}-\varepsilon_n}^{\frac{\pi}{2}-\varepsilon_m} \frac{1}{\cos(\theta)} \left\|(\mathcal{R}_\theta (\varphi f))(\left \langle \cdot, \tau_{\theta} \right \rangle)
- (\mathcal{R}_{\pi-\theta}(\varphi f))(\left \langle \cdot, \tau_{\pi-\theta} \right \rangle)\right\|_{H^s(x_0)} d\theta \\
\leq& \ C_5 \int \limits_{\varepsilon_m}^{\varepsilon_n} \frac{|\tau_\theta - \tau_{\pi-\theta}|^{\alpha}}{\cos(\theta)} d\theta\leq C_6 \int \limits_{\varepsilon_m}^{\varepsilon_n} \frac{|\pi -2\theta|^{\alpha}}{\cos(\theta)} d\theta. \label{eq:thisconvergesTozero}
\end{align}
}
Since $\int_{0}^{\pi} |\pi-2\theta|^{\alpha}/\cos(\theta)\, d\theta < \infty$, \eqref{eq:thisconvergesTozero} converges to $0$ for $m>n$ and as $n \to \infty$ and hence
\eqref{eq:theCauchySequence} is a Cauchy sequence in $H^s(x_0)$, which implies the required regularity of $g_\xi$. Thus, $a(\cdot,D)(f)$ is
$s-$times weakly differentiable and using \eqref{eq:aInu}, we obtain the required differentiability of $\mathcal{I}_1$.
\emph{Regularity of $\mathcal{I}_{2,1}$}: The proof of local regularity of $\mathcal{I}_{1}$ can be applied in a similar way to also prove local regularity
of $\mathcal{I}_{2,1}$.
\emph{Regularity of $\mathcal{I}_{2,2}$}: Using the same argument as for $\mathcal{I}_{1}(x)$, we obtain
\begin{align*}
\mathcal{I}_{2,2}(x) &= \int \limits_{\R^2} \int \limits_{\R^2} \frac{\mathcal{F}((1-\varphi)f)(\xi) \mathcal{F}((1-\varphi) f)(\eta)}{\left \langle \eta, \xi \right \rangle - i0}
e^{ i \left \langle x, \xi + \eta \right \rangle} \,d\eta \,d\xi\\
&=\int \limits_{|\xi|\geq 1}\int \limits_{\R^2} \frac{\mathcal{F}((1-\varphi)f)(\xi) \mathcal{F}((1-\varphi) f)(\eta)}{\left \langle \eta, \xi \right \rangle - i0}
e^{ i \left \langle x, \xi + \eta \right \rangle} \,d\eta \,d\xi +\nu_2(x),
\end{align*}
for $x \in U_{x_0}$, where $\nu_2 \in C^\infty(\mathbb{R}^2)$. In this case the approach as for $\mathcal{I}_{1}(x)$ is not applicable anymore, since $(1-\varphi) f$ is not globally $s$-times differentiable and, consequently, its Radon transform does not need to be as well. Thus, it is not
possible to construct a pseudo-differential operator, which is bounded from $H^s(x_0)$ to $H^s(x_0)$.
However, since $(1-\varphi) f \in L^2(\mathbb{R}^2)$, using the argument of \eqref{eq:thisconvergesTozero} with $s = 0$ and considering the Radon
transform $\mathcal{R}_\theta((1-\varphi)f)$ instead of $\mathcal{R}_\theta(\varphi f)$ yields that with the symbol $b$ being defined as
\[
b(x, \xi): = \int \limits_{\R^2} \frac{\mathcal{F}((1-\varphi) f)(\eta)}{\left \langle \eta, \xi \right \rangle - i0} e^{i \left \langle x, \eta \right \rangle} d\eta,
\quad (x ,\xi) \in \mathbb{R}^2 \times \mathbb{R}^2,
\]
the function
\[
h_\xi : U_{x_0} \to \mathbb{C}, \quad h_\xi(x) := b(x, \xi), \quad \xi \in \mathbb{R}^2,
\]
is an $L^2(\mathbb{R}^2)$ function with $\|h_\xi\|_{L^2(\mathbb{R}^2)}$ independent of $\xi$.
Approximating $b$ via a sequence
\[
b^M(x, \xi): = \int \limits_{|\eta| \leq M} \frac{\mathcal{F}((1-\varphi) f)(\eta)}{\left \langle \eta, \xi \right \rangle - i0}
e^{i \left \langle x, \eta \right \rangle} d\eta, \quad \text{for } M\in \mathbb{N},
\]
we have that for fixed $\xi$, the function $x \mapsto b^M(x, \xi)$ is $C^{\infty}$ on a neighborhood of $x_0$. Hence, $b^M(x, D)$ is a
bounded operator from $H^t(x_0)$ to $H^t(x_0)$ for all $t\geq 0$. In particular, since $(1-\varphi)f \equiv 0$ on a neighborhood of $x_0$, we obtain
\[
b^M(x, D)((1-\varphi)f) \equiv 0 \quad \mbox{on a neighborhood of }x_0,
\]
which can be chosen to be the same for all $M$. Then
\[
\|b^M(\cdot, \xi) - b(\cdot, \xi)\|_{L^2(\mathbb{R}^2)} \to 0 \quad \mbox{as } M\to \infty \mbox{ uniformly in }\xi,
\]
and hence
\[
\|b^M(x, D)((1-\varphi)f) - b(x, D)((1-\varphi)f)\|_{L^2(\mathbb{R}^2)} \to 0 \quad \mbox{as }M\to \infty.
\]
In particular, since $b^M(x, D)((1-\varphi)f) = 0$ on a neighborhood of $x_0$, also $b(x, D)((1-\varphi)f) = 0$ on a neighborhood
of $x_0$. Since $\mathcal{I}_2$ equals $b(x, D)((1-\varphi)f)$ up to a smooth function, this yields the claimed regularity of $\mathcal{I}_{2,2}$.
Combining all the terms $\mathcal{I}_{1}$, $\mathcal{I}_{2,1}$, and $\mathcal{I}_{2,2}$ finishes the proof that $q_1 \in H^s(x_0)$.
For the functions $q_2, \ldots, q_{m}$, using a similar computation as in the proof
of the main theorem of~\cite{Serov2013}, we obtain for $1 \le j \le m-1$ that
\[
q_{j+1}(x) = \frac{1}{4\pi^2} \int \limits_{\R^2} \int \limits_{\R^2} \int \limits_{\R^2} e^{i\left \langle \xi, x + \frac{y}{2} + \frac{z}{2}\right \rangle} f(y) \mathcal{G}_{|\xi|}(y,z) q_j(z)\, dz\, dy \, d\xi,
\quad x \in \mathbb{R}^2.
\]
Now we can apply similar arguments as in the proof for $q_1 \in H^s(x_0)$, in particular, splitting $f$ and $q_j$ into two parts and estimating the resulting terms in the same fashion as before.
Finally, to show that $f_B \in H^s(x_0)$, the decomposition \eqref{eq:iteration} indicates that it remains to analyze the regularity
of $q_{m+1}^R$. It has been shown in \cite[Prop. 4.1]{OlaPS2001}, that $q_{m+1}^R\in H^t(\mathbb{R}^2)$ for all $t<(m+1/2)/2-1$.
Hence choosing $m$ large enough yields the final claim.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}{\rm
Observe that in Theorem \eqref{thm:MainSchroedinger} we locally lose an $\varepsilon$ in the derivative for arbitrarily small $\varepsilon>0$,
when going from $f\in L^2(\mathbb{R}^2) \cap H^{s+\varepsilon}(x_0)$ to $f_B \in H^s(x_0)$. Certainly, one might ask whether this is in fact necessary.
The examination of $\mathcal{I}_{2,2}$ in the proof of Theorem \eqref{thm:MainSchroedinger} suggests that the regularity of $f_B$ depends only on the term
\[
\int \limits_{\R^2} \int \limits_{\R^2} \int \limits_{\R^2} e^{i\left \langle \xi, x + \frac{y}{2} + \frac{z}{2}\right \rangle} \varphi(y) f(y) \mathcal{G}_{|\xi|}(y,z) \varphi(z)f(z) \,dz \,dy\, d\xi.
\]
A careful review of the methods of \cite{OlaPS2001} and \cite{Serov2013} seems to indicate that this term should be even smoother
than $\varphi(y) f(y)$. Hence we believe that Theorem \ref{thm:MainSchroedinger} can be improved in the sense that locally the regularity
of the Born approximation $f_B$ is higher than the regularity of the contrast function $f$.}
\end{remark}
We now turn to the question of how the Born approximation affects the regularity of a function $f$
that is modeled as a cartoon-like
function. It would certainly be highly desirable that $f_B$ is again a cartoon-like function, and we show next that this is indeed almost the case when posing some weak additional conditions to $f$.
The proof will use both the known results that the inverse Born approximation does not introduce a global smoothing, see \cite{OlaPS2001,ReyGlobalBorn2007,Serov2013}, as well as Theorem~\ref{thm:MainSchroedinger}, which proves that locally the smoothness does not decrease.
The key point will be that for a scatterer, which is smooth except for some singularity curve, this curve will still be present in the inverse Born approximation. For this result, we introduce the notion of a neighborhood $N_\delta(X)$ of a subset $X \subset \mathbb{R}^2$ defined by $N_\delta(X): = \{x\in \mathbb{R}^2: \inf_{y\in X}\|x-y\|_2 <\delta\}$, where $\delta > 0$.
\begin{corollary}
\label{cor:cartoon}
Let $\varepsilon>0$, let $f_0, f_1 \in H^{3+\varepsilon}(\mathbb{R}^2)$ be compactly supported, let $D$ be some compact domain with piecewise $C^2$ boundary $\partial D$, and set
\[
f = f_0 + f_1 \chi_D.
\]
Then, for every $\delta>0$, there exist $\tilde{f}_0^\delta, \tilde{f}_1^\delta \in H^3(\mathbb{R}^2)$ with compact support, $h^\delta \in H^r(\mathbb{R}^2)$
for every $r<\frac{1}{2}$ with $\suppp h^\delta \subset N_\delta(\partial D)$, and $\nu^\delta\in C^\infty(\mathbb{R}^2)$ such that the inverse Born
approximation $f_B$ of $f$ can be written as
\[
f_B = \tilde{f}_0^\delta + \tilde{f}_1^\delta \chi_D + h^\delta + \nu^\delta.
\]
In particular, $f_B$ is a cartoon-like function up to a $C^\infty$ function and an arbitrarily well localized correction term at the boundary.
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}
Let $f_0, f_1,B$ be as assumed. For a fixed $\delta > 0$, choose $\varphi_1,\varphi_2, \varphi_3 \in C^\infty(\mathbb{R}^2)$ such
that $\varphi_1 + \varphi_2 + \varphi_3 \equiv 1$, $\varphi_i \geq 0$ for $i = 1,2,3$, and
\begin{eqnarray*}
\varphi_1 &\equiv& 1 \text{ on } N_\frac{\delta}{2}(\partial D), \quad \suppp \varphi_1 \subset N_\delta(\partial D),\\
\varphi_2 &\equiv& 1 \text{ on } (\suppp f_0 \cup \suppp f_1) \setminus N_\delta(\partial D),\\
\suppp \varphi_2 &\subset& N_\delta(\suppp f_0
\cup \suppp f_1) \setminus N_\frac{\delta}{2}(\partial D).
\end{eqnarray*}
By Theorem \ref{thm:MainSchroedinger}, it follows that $\varphi_2 f_B \in H^3(\mathbb{R}^2)$ and $\varphi_3 f_B \in C^\infty(\mathbb{R}^2)$. Then \eqref{eq:iteration} implies that
\[
\varphi_i f_B = \varphi_i f + \varphi_i q_1^R, \quad \text{ for } i= 1,2,3,
\]
and thus $\varphi_2 q_1^R \in H^3(\mathbb{R}^2)$ and $\varphi_3 q_1^R \in C^\infty(\mathbb{R}^2)$.
Defining
\[
\tilde{f}_0^\delta := f_0 + \varphi_2 q_1^R,\quad \tilde{f}_1^\delta := f_1,\quad h^\delta := \varphi_1 q_1^R,\quad \mbox{and} \quad \nu^\delta := \varphi_3 q_1^R,
\]
then the Sobolev embedding theorem~\cite{Adams1975}, implies that $\tilde{f}_0^\delta, \tilde{f}_1^\delta\in C^2(\mathbb{R}^2)$. Then by \cite[Prop. 4.1]{OlaPS2001} it follows that
$q_1^R \in H^r(\mathbb{R}^2)$ for all $r<\frac{1}{2}$, and hence $h^\delta \in H^r(\mathbb{R}^2)$, and $\suppp h^\delta \subset N_\delta(\partial B)$ follows
by construction. The function $\nu^\delta$ is $C^\infty$, since $\varphi_3 q_1^R \in C^\infty(\mathbb{R}^2)$. Thus the main assertion is proved and the 'in particular' part follows immediately.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Numerical Examples}\label{subsec:Schr_Num}
The previously derived results, in particular, Corollary \ref{cor:cartoon} now enable the utilization of common numerical approaches for the linearized problem.
In fact, Corollary \ref{cor:cartoon} implies that the inverse Born approximation of a cartoon-like function will indeed be almost a cartoon-like function. It
thus seems conceivable to assume that the inverse Born approximation can again be sparsely approximated by shearlets, i.e., the sparsity of the expansion -- which
is key to most regularization approaches -- is maintained during the linearization process. To illustrate why this is indeed the case, let us consider the following
numerical example.
\subsubsection{Sparse Approximation of the Inverse Born Approximation by Shearlets}
For this, we consider the cartoon-like function $f$ given in the top left of Figure \ref{fig:BornExp1}.
Denoting by $ [l;m]$ the vector with entries $l, m \in \mathbb{Z}$, we compute the discrete backscattering amplitude of $f$ from full scattering data:
$$
A(l,m) = \int_{\mathbb{R}^2} e^{ i \cdot ( [l;m], y) } f(y) u_{l,m}(y)\, dy \quad \mbox{for all } l, m \in [-1,1]\cap \frac{1}{128}\mathbb{Z},
$$
where $u_{l,m}$ is the solution of \eqref{eq:SchrEq} with incident wave $u^{inc}(y) = e^{ i \cdot ( [l;m]/\|[l;m]\|, y) }$ and wavenumber $k = \|[l;m]\|$. By taking the discrete inverse Fourier transform of $A$, we obtain the inverse Born approximation $f_B$ depicted in the top right of Figure \ref{fig:BornExp1}.
It is immediately visually evident, that the reconstruction exhibits the same singularity curve with a smooth distortion, as predicted by Corollary \ref{cor:cartoon}.
\begin{figure}[htb!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width = 0.32\textwidth]{OriginalFunction-eps-converted-to.pdf} \includegraphics[width = 0.32\textwidth]{InvBorn-eps-converted-to.pdf} \includegraphics[width = 0.31\textwidth]{CoeffsDecay-eps-converted-to.pdf}
\medskip
\includegraphics[width = 0.24\textwidth]{BornLvl0-eps-converted-to.pdf} \includegraphics[width = 0.24\textwidth]{BornLvl1-eps-converted-to.pdf} \includegraphics[width = 0.24\textwidth]{BornLvl2-eps-converted-to.pdf} \includegraphics[width = 0.24\textwidth]{BornLvl3-eps-converted-to.pdf}
\caption{\textbf{Top (from left to right):} \hl{A cartoon-like function $f$, the corresponding inverse Born approximation $f_B$, $N$-term approximation error with the shearlet frame for the original $f$ and its Born approximation $f_B$. The decay is asymptotically of order $O(N^{-1})$.}\\
\textbf{Bottom (from left to right):} Absolute values of the reconstruction of the inverse Born approximation $f_B$ using only shearlet coefficients on levels $J = 0,1,2,3$. The energy of the higher level shearlet coefficients is clearly concentrated along the jump singularity of the original cartoon-like function.}\label{fig:BornExp1}
\end{figure}
To examine the sparsity structure of $f_B$, we now compute reconstructions of $f_B$ using only shearlet coefficients on a fixed level. The results are depicted
in Figure~\ref{fig:BornExp1} and show that the energy of the reconstruction using higher levels is concentrated along the discontinuity curve. This provides
us with the first (qualitative) indication that the inverse Born approximation $f_B$ can again be sparsely approximated by shearlets.
Aiming also for quantitative evidence of the ability of shearlets to sparsely approximate $f_B$, we next analyze the \hl{$N-$ term approximation rate by the shearlet system of $f$ and $f_B$} in \hl{the top right of Figure \ref{fig:BornExp1}}.
We observe that both expansions have the same order of decay \hl{of} $O(N^{-1})$ as $N\to \infty$. Thus, the rate of approximation of the
original cartoon-like function and its inverse Born approximation coincide asymptotically with the \hl{optimal rate for cartoon-like functions}. Hence, concluding,
our theoretical analysis (Corollary \ref{cor:cartoon}) that the sparsity structure of cartoon-like functions in the shearlet expansion prevails after
taking the inverse Born approximation becomes also evident in numerical experiments.
\subsubsection{Solution of the Linearized Problem}
Having settled the question of sparse approximation of the inverse Born approximation by shearlets both theoretically and numerically allows us to then
utilize one of the numerous approaches to incorporate sparse regularization in linear inverse problems, see \cite{CandD2002CurveletsInIllPosedProblems,ColEGL2010ShearletsRadon,PEHShearDoconv2009} as well as \cite{KL2012}.
Let us take a closer look at the linearized problem that we face in the case of the inverse scattering problem of the Schr\"{o}dinger equation.
For a given backscattering amplitude $A$, the inverse Born approximation can be obtained by simply taking the inverse Fourier transform of $A$ as described
in \eqref{eq:DefOfFB}. In real world applications the inversion will be more involved, since the whole backscattering amplitude might not be accessible and only
partial measurements can be used. Furthermore, these measurements are likely to be corrupted by noise. At this point the problem becomes a problem of reconstructing
functions exhibiting a known sparsity structure from given partial noisy Fourier measurements.
Now assume that samples of the backscattering amplitude $(A(k_i, \theta_i))_{i = 1}^n =: \mathbf{A}\in \mathbb{R}^n$ are given. Using the synthesis operator $T_{\tilde{\Phi}}$
of the dual of a shearlet frame and the notation of Subsection \ref{sec:TheInverseProblem}, we can then define
\[
K: \mathbb{R}^m \to \mathbb{R}^n, \quad c \mapsto K c := \left(\int_{\mathbb{R}^2} e^{i k_i \left \langle \tau_{\theta_i}, y \right \rangle} \left(T_{\tilde{\Phi}}(c)\right)(y) dy \right)_{i = 1}^n.
\]
Since, due to the limited amount of measurements, this problem is typically underdetermined, the sparsity introduced by the shearlet expansion and guaranteed by
Corollary \ref{cor:cartoon} will be used, and the inversion of $K$ will be casted as the regularized minimization problem
\[
\argmin_{c\in \mathbb{R}^m} \|K c - \mathbf{A}\|_{\mathbb{R}^n} + \Xi(c),
\]
where $\Xi: \mathbb{R}^m \to \mathbb{R}$ is a suitable sparsity promoting functional. Traditionally, if $\Xi$ is chosen as $\lambda \|. \|_1$ for some $\lambda >0$, this
problem can be solved by an iterative shrinkage thresholding algorithm, \cite{DauDD}. Along these lines, reconstruction problems from Fourier data have
been studied under the premise of sparse representations in \cite{Adcock13breakingthe, 2DWaveletRec} for wavelets and with some numerical examples also
for shearlets in \cite{RomAH2014}. A full analysis of the reconstruction problem with shearlet systems as well as numerical examples is given in \cite{JackMa}.
\section*{Acknowledgements}
The first author acknowledges support by the Einstein Foundation Berlin, by the Einstein Center for Mathematics Berlin
(ECMath), by Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG) Grant KU 1446/14, by the DFG Collaborative Research Center TRR 109
``Discretization in Geometry and Dynamics'', and by the DFG Research Center {\sc Matheon} ``Mathematics for key technologies''
in Berlin. The second author also acknowledges support by {\sc Matheon}, and the third author thanks the DFG Collaborative Research Center TRR 109
``Discretization in Geometry and Dynamics'' for its support.
\small
\bibliographystyle{plain}
|
\section{Introduction}
\lbl{sec.intro}
\subsection{Overview}
\lbl{sub.overview}
Intersection theory on a nonsingular algebraic variety provides a natural intersection product of cycles modulo rational equivalence. One might wonder in what circumstances there is a reasonable lifting of this product to the level of cycles, so that any two cycles on $X$ on can be multiplied to produce a well-defined cycle on $X$ in a natural way that respects rational equivalence. If the cycles intersect properly, there is a natural product, but if the intersection is not proper, then one must settle for knowing the product only as a cycle modulo rational equivalence. More generally, for arbitrary (possibly singular) algebraic varieties, intersection theory provides an action of the Picard group of an arbitrary algebraic variety on the Chow groups of the variety. One can ask if there is a natural lifting of the action of the Picard group to the level of algebraic cycles. For toric varieties, such an action was constructed in \cite{Th}. The action depends on the choice
of a complement map, which is a certain global choice of linear subspaces. (See Section \ref{sub.statementofresults} for details.)
One of the motivations for a cycle-level intersection theory is that it leads naturally to a cycle expression for the Todd class of a toric variety. Indeed, the Todd class of a nonsingular toric variety has a well-known expression as a product of torus-invariant cycles, so given the cycle-level multiplication derived from a complement map, one obtains a natural expression for the Todd class of a toric variety. This is worked out in \cite{PT}, where one finds a cycle expression for the Todd class of an arbitrary toric variety with rational coefficents depending only on the local information in the fan, giving an answer to a question of Danilov. From this Todd class formula, via a well-known application of Riemann-Roch, one obtains a local formula for the number of lattice points in a integral polytope.
The purpose of this paper is to extend the results of \cite{Th} and \cite{PT} to equivariant cohomology. In particular, given a complement map, we produce a natural action of the equivariant divisor group on the equivariant cycle group. In the simplicial case, we obtain a natural ring structure on the group of equivariant cycles tensored with $\Q$. As a consequence of these results, for any choice of complement map, we obtain a natural local and computable expression for the equivariant Todd class of an arbitrary toric variety. We show that the expression for the equivariant Todd class so obtained, in the special case of a complement map arising from an inner product, is equivalent to that obtained by \cite{BV2} by an entirely different, purely combinatorial recipe.
Finally, we relate our expression of the Todd class to the Euler-Maclaurin formulas of \cite{GP}. In that paper, it is shown that a complement map naturally gives rise to a function $\mu$ on cones that interpolates between exponential sums and integrals, and hence gives rise to a local Euler-Maclaurin formula. In this paper, we show that the functions $\mu$ arising from our Todd class construction are identical to the functions $\mu$ constructed in \cite{GP} through a different inductive combinatorial method. As a corollary, we prove a conjecture of \cite{GP} which asserts that the constant term of the power series constructed in \cite{BV2} and \cite{GP} agree with the Todd class coefficients constructed in \cite{PT}.
\subsection{Definition of the action and basic properties}
\lbl{sub.statementofresults}
We now give the details of our construction. Let $X = X_{\Sigma}$ be a toric variety defined by a fan $\Sigma$ in a lattice $N$, with associated torus $T$. We follow notation that is standard in the theory of toric varieties (cf. \cite{Fu}.) Let $M=\Hom(N,\BZ)$ denote the lattice dual to $N$, and let $\Lambda=\Z[M]$. For each cone $\sigma\in\Sigma$, let $N_{\sigma}$ denote the lattice $L_{\sigma} \cap N$, where $L_{\sigma}$ is the linear span of $\sigma$, and let $N(\sigma)= N/N_{\sigma}$. Dual to $N(\sigma)$ and $N_{\sigma}$ are the lattices $M(\sigma)= M\cap \sigma^\perp$ and $M_{\sigma} = M/M(\sigma)$. We will use $\ip{\cdot}{\cdot}$ to denote the natural pairing $M\times N\rightarrow \BZ$ or indeed $M(\sigma)\times N(\sigma)\rightarrow \BZ$ for any $\sigma\in\Sigma$.
For any abelian group $L$ (such as $M$, $N$, $\Lambda$, etc.), we denote $L_\Q := L \otimes \Q$.
If a cone $\tau\in\Sigma$ contains $\sigma$ as a maximal proper face, we will write $\tau\rightarrow\sigma$. In this case, the image of $\tau$ in $N(\sigma)$ is a 1-dimensional cone, and we use $n_{\tau,\sigma}$ to denote the unique primitive element of $N(\sigma)$ contained in this cone.
Recall that for each $\sigma\in\Sigma$ there is a $T$-invariant subvariety $V(\sigma)\subset X$.
We wish to define a cycle-level action of the group $\Div_T(X)$ of equivariant $\Q$-Cartier divisors on the equivariant cycle groups $Z^T_*(X)$.
\begin{definition} Let $X$ be the toric variety associated to a fan $\Sigma$. The {\it cycle group} of $X$, denoted $Z_*(X)$, is the free abelian group generated by $ \{ V(\sigma) \ |\ \sigma \in\Sigma\}$. The {\it equivariant cycle group (with rational coefficients)} $Z^T_*(X)$ is defined as $Z^T_*(X) := Z_*(X) \otimes \Lambda_\Q$.
\end{definition}
Since the classes of invariant cycles generate the Chow groups of $X$, there is a natural surjection $Z_*(X)\rightarrow A_*(X)$.
Similarly, there is a natural surjection $Z_*^T(X)\rightarrow A_*^T(X)_\Q$; indeed, \cite{Br2} gives a presentation of the equivariant Chow groups $A_*^T(X)$ as a quotient of $Z_*^T(X)$. For $\sigma\in\Sigma$, we use $V_{\sigma}$ to denote the cycle $V(\sigma)$ considered as an element of $Z^T_*(X)$.
Denote by $\Div(X)$ the group of $T$-invariant $\Q$-Cartier divisors. Recall that a $T$-invariant $\Q$-Cartier divisor on $X$ is given by local equations $\{d_{\sigma}\}_{\sigma\in\Sigma}$, where each $d_{\sigma}\in M_{\sigma, \Q}$. These local equations are compatible in the sense that if $\sigma,\tau\in\Sigma$ with $\sigma\subset\tau$, then $d_{\sigma}$ is the image of $d_{\tau}$ under the natural map $M_{\tau, \Q} \rightarrow M_{\sigma, \Q}$. Let $\Div_T(X)=\Div(X)\otimes\Lambda_\Q$. This is the $\Lambda_\Q$-module that acts on $Z_*^T(X)_\Q$, as we assert below.
The idea of a {\it complement map} was introduced in \cite{Th}. We give here a quick definition which is easily seen to be equivalent to the notion of rigid complement map used in \cite{Th}.
\begin{definition}
Let $\calL$ be a set of $\Q$-subspaces of $N_\Q$ which contains $N_\Q$. Then a {\it complement map} $\Psi$ assigns, to each $L_1,L_2 \in \calL$ such that $L_1 \subset L_2$, a section $i^\Psi: L_1^* \rightarrow L_2^*$ of the natural (restriction) map $L_2^* \rightarrow L_1^*$. The sections are assumed to be transitive with respect to inclusion. Given a fan $\Sigma$ in $N$, we say that $\Sigma$ is {\it $\Psi$-generic} if $\{N_{\sigma, \Q} \}_{\sigma\in\Sigma}$ is a subset of $\calL$.
\end{definition}
In particular, if $\Sigma$ is $\Psi$-generic, then we obtain a section $i^\Psi: M_{\sigma, \Q} \rightarrow M_\Q$ for each $\sigma \in \Sigma$. If $d\in M_{\sigma, \Q}$, denote its image $i^{\Psi}(d) \in M_\Q$ by $d^{\Psi}$. Denote the $\Q$-subspace of $M_\Q$ generated by $i^\Psi(\sigma)$ as $\Psi(\sigma)$. One easily checks that $\Psi(\sigma) \oplus M(\sigma)_\Q = M_\Q$. In this sense, we may say that a complement map is a choice of complementary spaces.
The following theorem asserts that a complement map gives rise to a natural action of $\Div_T(X)$ on $Z^T_*(X)$. In the formula that defines this action, it is useful to note that if $D$ is a Cartier divisor with local equations $\{d_{\sigma}\}_{\sigma\in\Sigma}$ and $\tau\rightarrow\sigma$, then $d_\tau$ and $d_\sigma^\Psi$ have the same image in $M_{\sigma, \Q}$. Thus we can consider the difference $d_\tau-d_\sigma^\Psi$ to be an element of $M(\sigma)_\Q$. As such the expression $\ip{d_\tau-d_\sigma^\Psi}{n_{\tau,\sigma}}$ is well-defined.
\begin{theorem}
\lbl{thm.action}
Let $X=X(\Sigma)$ be the toric variety associated to a fan $\Sigma$ in $N$. Given a generic complement map $\Psi$ on $N$, there is a natural action of the group $\Div_T(X)$ on $Z^T_*(X)$, given as follows: for $D\in \Div(X)$ with local equations $\{d_{\sigma}\}_{\sigma\in\Sigma}$:
\begin{equation}
\lbl{eq.action}
D \cdot V_{\sigma} = \sum_{\tau:\tau \rightarrow \sigma} \ip{d_\tau-d_\sigma^\Psi}{n_{\tau,\sigma}} V_{\tau} + d_\sigma^\Psi V_{\sigma}.
\end{equation}
The action satisfies the following properties:
\begin{itemize}
\item (Lifting) The action defined above is a lifting of the action of the Picard group of $X$ on the equivariant Chow groups $A_*^T(X)_\Q$.
\item (Commutativity) For any $D, E \in \Div_T(X)$ and $C \in Z_*^T(X)_\Q$, we have $D \cdot (E \cdot C) = E \cdot (D \cdot C)$.
\item (Compatibility with non-equivariant cycle-level intersection) The action defined above is a lifting of the cycle-level action of $\Div(X)$ on $Z(X)_\Q$ defined in \cite{Th}.
\end{itemize}
\end{theorem}
\subsection{Ring structure in the simplicial case}
\lbl{sub.simplicialresults}
In the case when $X$ is a simplicial toric variety, the action defined above provides a ring structure on $Z^T_*(X)$. As we show in Section \ref{sec.simplicial}, this is a consequence of Theorem \ref{thm.action} together with the well-known fact that every Weil divisor on $X$ is represented by a Cartier divisor. The ring structure obtained is a lifting of the product structure on the equivariant cohomology ring $A^*_T(X)_\Q$, which is described (over $\Z$) in \cite{Fu2}. We now describe the ring stucture on $Z^T_*(X)$ explicitly.
\begin{theorem}
\lbl{thm.ringstructure}
Let $\Sigma$ be a simplicial fan and let $X$ be the associated toric variety. Let $\Psi$ be a generic complement map. Then the action of Theorem \ref{thm.action} induces a commutative ring structure on $Z^T_*(X)$. This product is a lifting of the product on the equivariant cohomology ring $A^*_T(X)_{\BQ}$ under the natural surjection $Z_*^T(X)_{\BQ}\rightarrow A^*_T(X)_{\BQ}$.
Furthermore, the ring structure on $Z^T_*(X)$ is described explicitly as follows. Let $\Sigma_{(1)} = \{\rho_1, \dots, \rho_s\}$ be the $1$-dimensional cones of $\Sigma$, and let $D_i:=V_{\rho_i}\in Z^T_*(X)$ be the corresponding cycles. Denote by $n_i$ the primitive element of $N \cap\rho_i$. Then
$$Z^T_*(X) \cong \frac{\Lambda_\BQ[D_1,\dots, D_s]}{I + J^\Psi}$$
where $I$ is the Stanley-Reisner ideal
$$I = \langle D_{i_1} D_{i_2} \dots D_{i_k} : \rho_{i_1} + \rho_{i_2}+ \dots + \rho_{i_k} \notin \Sigma \rangle $$
and
$$J^\Psi = \biggl\langle D_{i_1} D_{i_2} \dots D_{i_k}\biggr(\sum_{j=1}^s \ip{m}{n_j} D_j - m\biggl) : \rho_{i_1} + \rho_{i_2} + \dots + \rho_{i_k} = \sigma \in \Sigma, m \in \Psi( \sigma) \biggr\rangle . $$
\end{theorem}
If we modify the definition of $J^\Psi$ above by allowing all $m\in M_\Q$ (eliminating the restriction $m \in \Psi( \sigma)$), we create a larger ideal $J'$. The equivariant cohomology ring over $\Q$, denoted $A_T^*(X)_\Q$, then has a natural presentation as ${\Lambda_\Q[D_1,\dots, D_s]}/(I + J')$, as explained in \cite{Fu2}. Note the equivariant cohomology ring can be defined over $\Z$ in the nonsingular case. However, the ring structure in Theorem \ref{thm.ringstructure} cannot, since our complement maps are in general only well-defined over $\Q$.
\subsection{A Cycle Equivariant Todd class }
\lbl{sub.toddresults}
We now show how Theorem \ref{thm.ringstructure} can be used to obtain a cycle expression for the equivariant Todd class of an arbitrary toric variety, given the choice of a complement map. Recall that for a nonsingular toric variety $X$, the equivariant Todd class, denoted $\Td^T(X)$, which naturally lives in the equivariant cohomology ring $A_T^*(X)_{\BQ}$, can be expressed as
\begin{equation}
\lbl{eq.toddprod}
\Td^T(X) := \prod_{i=1}^s \frac{D_i}{1-e^{-D_i}} .
\end{equation}
(See \cite{BV3} for a proof.) Using Theorem 2, we can multiply out the above product, and the result is a cycle expression for the equivariant Todd class, living in the completion $\hat{Z}^T_*(X)_{\BQ}$ of $Z^T_*(X)$. This gives us an expression for $\Td^T(X)$ in terms of the cycles $V_{\sigma}$:
$$
\Td^T(X) = \sum_{\sigma\in\Sigma} r^{\Psi}(\sigma) V_{\sigma},
$$
where the coefficients $r^{\Psi}(\sigma)$ live in $\hat{\Lambda}_{\BQ} := \widehat{\Q[M]}$, the completion of $\Lambda_\Q$. As we show, these coefficients depend only on the complement map $\Psi$ and on the nonsingular cone $\sigma$, and are independent of the rest of $\Sigma$. Every cone $\sigma$ has a subdivision into nonsingular cones, allowing $\sigma$ to be written as the union of a finite collection of cones $\{\sigma_1,\dots\sigma_t\}$ all of the same dimension, which intersect only along boundaries. In this case, we define
\begin{equation}
\lbl{eq.additivity}
r^{\Psi}(\sigma) = \sum_i r^{\Psi}(\sigma_i).
\end{equation}
It turns out, as asserted by our next theorem, that this sum is independent of the chosen subdivision, and thus we obtain a local formula for the equivariant Todd class of a toric variety.
\begin{theorem}
\lbl{thm.rsigma}
Let $\Psi$ be a complement map on a lattice $N$. The above construction produces a well-defined map
$$
r^{\Psi} : \{ \Psi\textrm{-generic\ cones\ in\ }N \} \longrightarrow \hat{\Lambda}_{\BQ}.
$$
This function satisfies the following properties
\begin{itemize}
\item (Local expression for $\Td^T(X)$) For every $\Psi$-generic fan $\Sigma$, we have
\begin{equation}
\lbl{eq.cycletodd}
\Td^T(X) = \sum_{\sigma\in\Sigma} r^{\Psi}(\sigma) V_{\sigma},
\end{equation}
\item (Additivity) If $\sigma=\cup_{i=1}^t \sigma_i $ is a subdivision of a $\Psi$-generic cone $\sigma$ in $N$ into cones $\sigma_i$, all of the same dimension, which intersect only along boundaries, then
$$
r^{\Psi}(\sigma) = \sum_i r^{\Psi}(\sigma_i).
$$
\item (Analytic properties)
For any $\Psi$-generic cone $\sigma$, the power series $r^{\Psi}(\sigma)\in \hat{\Lambda}_{\BQ}$ represents a meromorphic function on $N\otimes\BC$, regular at the origin.
\item (Agreement with nonequivariant cycle Todd class) The constant term $r^{\Psi}(\sigma)(0)$ agrees with cycle Todd class coefficients $\mu(\sigma)$ constructed in \cite{PT}.
\end{itemize}
\end{theorem}
\subsection{SI-Interpolators and Euler-Maclaurin formulas for polyhedra }
\lbl{sub.interpolator}
Finally, we indicate some connections with sum-integral interpolation and Euler-Maclaurin formulas for polyhedra. A cycle expression for the Todd class allows one, via Riemann-Roch, to express exponential sums (S) over a polyhedron $P$ in terms of exponential integrals (I) over the faces $F$ of $P$.
To make this connection explicit, suppose that $P$ is a rational polyhedron in $M$.
One can associate to $P$ two meromorphic functions, the {\em exponential sum}
$S(P) \in \calM(N)$ and the {\em exponential integral} $I(P) \in \calM(N)$
where $\calM(N)$ is the algebra of
meromorphic functions on $N\otimes \BC$. These functions are given by the equations
\begin{equation}
\lbl{eq.SandI}
S(P)(\xi)=\sum_{x \in P \cap M} e^{\ip{\xi}{x}},
\qquad
I(P)(\xi)=\int_{P} e^{\ip{\xi}{x}} dx
\end{equation}
for $\xi\in N\otimes \BC$ provided $|e^{\ip{\xi}{x}}|$ is summable (resp.
integrable) over $P$.
The fact that the equations define meromorphic functions,
as well as the precise characterization and properties of the functions
$S$ and $I$, is essentially the content of Lawrence's theorem \cite{La}.
The fact that the functions $r^{\Psi}$ defined above satisfy equation (\ref{eq.cycletodd}) implies that they interpolate between exponential sums and integrals, as stated in the following corollary. If $F$ is a face of a lattice polyhedron $P$ in $M$, we use $\sigma_{P,F}$ to denote the cone in $N$ dual to the tangent cone to $P$ along $F$; the cone $\sigma_{P,F}$ is the cone in the inner normal fan $\Sigma$ corresponding to $F$. (See Section \ref{sub.todd} for detailed definitions.)
\begin{corollary}
\lbl{thm.rinterpolates}
Let $\Psi$ be a complement map on $N$. Then for any $\Psi$-generic integral polyhedron $P$ in $M$ we have
$$
S(P)(\xi)= \sum_F r^{\Psi}(\sigma_{P,F})(-\xi)\cdot I(F)(\xi),
$$
where the sum is taken over all faces $F$ of $P$.
\end{corollary}
Finally, we note that these results connect with existing results in \cite{PT,BV1,GP} and strengthen the connections between those results. In the theorem below, we show that our interpolators $r^{\Psi}$ agree with those constructed in \cite{GP} for general $\Psi$, and for $\Psi$ arising from an inner product, our $r^{\Psi}$ coincides with the $\mu$ constructed in \cite{BV1, BV2}. Note, however, that both \cite{BV1} and \cite{GP} allow rational polyhedra, while in the current case we are restricted to integral polyhedra.
\begin{theorem}
\lbl{thm.gpagree}
Let $\Psi$ be a complement map on a lattice $N$, and let $\mu^{\Psi}$ be the SI-interpolator defined in \cite{GP}. Let $\sigma$ be a cone in $N$ and $\check{\sigma}$ be its dual in $M$. We then have
$$
r^{\Psi}(\sigma)(\xi)=\mu^{\Psi}(\check{\sigma})(-\xi).
$$
\end{theorem}
Note that for $\Psi$ derived from an inner product, the above theorem relates our $r^{\Psi}$ to the $\mu$ defined in \cite{BV2} restricted to lattice cones.
As a corollary of the above theorem, using the last part of Theorem \ref{thm.rsigma}, we see that the constant term of the \cite{GP} construction coincides with the rational numbers $\mu$ from the \cite{PT} construction. In particular, the constant term of the \cite{BV1} construction is the $\mu$ from \cite{PT} in the case of complement maps arising from inner products. This gives a positive answer to Conjecture 1 in \cite{GP}.
\begin{corollary}
Suppose $\Psi$ is a complement map on a lattice $N$. Let $\mu_0^{\Psi}$ denote the cycle Todd class coefficients constructed in \cite[Corollary 1]{PT}, and let $\mu^{\Psi}$ be the SI-interpolator defined in \cite{GP} . Let $\sigma$ be a cone in $N$ and $\check{\sigma}$ be its dual in $M$. We then have
$$
\mu_0^{\Psi}(\sigma) = \mu^{\Psi}(\check{\sigma})(0).
$$
\end{corollary}
\vskip0.25in
\noindent{\bf Acknowledgement.} We would like to thank William Fulton for useful conversations and for the inspiration he has provided over the years.
\vskip0.25in
\section{Details and Proofs}
\subsection{Constructing the Group Action}
\lbl{sec.action}
The following section is included in order to provide motivation for the unusual formula for the group action given in Theorem $\ref{thm.action}$. In the process, we will prove why the action is a lift of the action of the Picard group on the equivariant Chow groups. We also explain why the choice of a complement map appears to be necessary.
We require an action of $\Div_T(X)$ on $Z_*^T(X)$ that respects $\Lambda_\Q$-multiplication. Since, as $\Lambda_\Q$-modules, $\Div_T(X)$ is generated by $\Div(X)$, and $Z_*^T(X)$ is generated by $\{V_\sigma: \sigma \in \Sigma\}$, it is enough to describe how $\Div(X)$ acts on each $V_\sigma$. We first recall the natural map from divisors to cycles. Let $D \in \Div(X)$ be a divisor with local equations $d_\sigma$. Let $\rho_1, \dots, \rho_s $ be the one-dimensional cones in $\Sigma $. For simplicity, we notate $V_i := V_{\rho_i}$. Associated to $D$, we define the cycle
$$[D] := \sum_{i=1}^s \ip{d_{\rho_i}}{n_i} V_i,$$
where $n_i$ is the primitive generator of $\rho_i$ (the first lattice point along $\rho_i$). The map $D \mapsto [D]$ clearly induces a $\Lambda$-module homomorphism from $\Div_T(X)$ to $Z_*^T(X)$.
Let $\sigma \in \Sigma$. We wish to consider the action of $D$ on $V_\sigma$ as an intersection product of $[D]$ and $V_\sigma$. Formally, we consider
$$[D] \cdot V_\sigma = \sum_{i=1}^s \ip{d_{\rho_i}}{n_i} V_i \cdot V_\sigma$$
Now we break up the summation and use the mapping property of local equations:
$$[D] \cdot V_\sigma = \sum_{\rho_i \not \prec \sigma} \ip{d_{\rho_i}}{n_i} V_i \cdot V_\sigma + \sum_{\rho_i \prec \sigma} \ip{d_{\sigma}}{n_i} V_i \cdot V_\sigma$$
We have separated the terms so that the left-hand summation contains only terms that intersect properly, so that their intersection product is natural and well-defined. However, the right-hand summation contains terms that do not intersect properly. We recall that the intersection product is always well-defined in the equivariant Chow ring $A_*^T(X)_\Q$, so we consider $[D]$ as an element of this ring. As described in \cite{Fu2} (over $\Z$), $A_*^T(X)_\Q \cong \Lambda_\Q[V_1,\dots,V_s] / J'$, where
$$J' = \biggl\langle \sum_{\tau: \tau \rightarrow \sigma} \ip{m}{n_{\tau,\sigma}}V_i - mV_\sigma : \sigma \in \Sigma, m \in M_\Q \biggr\rangle $$
The solution is to shift $[D]$ by an element of $J'$ in order to eliminate the terms that do not intersect properly with $\sigma$, thus preserving the intersection product in the Chow ring. We would like to pick an element $E \in J'$:
$$E = \sum_{i=1}^s \ip{m}{n_i} V_i - mV_{\{0\}}$$
where $m \mapsto d_\sigma$ under the quotient map $M_\Q \rightarrow M_{\sigma, \Q}$. It is clear that $[D] - E$ would then only contain terms that intersect properly with $D_\sigma$. However, we run into some ambiguity: there is no natural choice of $m$, since there is no natural section $M_{\sigma, \Q} \rightarrow M_\Q$. This is why we must choose a complement map.
Let $\Psi$ be a complement map on $V$ with each cone in $\Sigma$ included in the domain. Recall that we write $d_\sigma^\Psi$ as the image of $d_\sigma$ in $M_\Q$, under $\Psi$. Define the cycle
$$E_\sigma^\Psi := \sum_{i=1}^s \ip{d_\sigma^\Psi}{n_i} V_i - d_\sigma^\Psi V_{\{0\}}$$
Note that $E_\sigma^\Psi$ is in $J'$ as required. Thus the product $([D] - [E_\sigma^\Psi])\cdot V_\sigma$ is a product of cycles that intersect properly, and furthermore, each term in the product corresponds either to $\sigma$ or to a cone $\tau$ that contains $\sigma$ as a maximal proper face. Then we define
$$D \cdot V_\sigma = ([D]-[E_\sigma^\Psi])\cdot V_\sigma$$.
When we work this out explicitly, we recover the formula in Theorem $\ref{thm.action}$:
\begin{equation}
D \cdot V_\sigma = \sum_{\tau: \tau \rightarrow \sigma} \ip{d_\tau - d_\sigma^\Psi}{n_{\tau,\sigma}} V_\tau + d_\sigma^\Psi V_\sigma.
\end{equation}
\subsection{Welldefinedness and Properties}
\lbl{sec.thm1proof}
We now begin the proof of Theorem 1.
\begin{proof}
The fact that the map respects the properties of a group action follows immediately from the additivity of all maps involved in the definition. The characterization of the map in the previous section proves that the action on $Z^T_*(X)$ is a lifting of the action on $A_*^T(X)_\Q$.
In order to prove that the action generalizes the cycle-level action defined in \cite{Th}, we must reconcile our definition with his. Let $D \in \Div^T(X), C \in Z^T_*(X)$. Let $\odot$ be the action of $\Div(X)$ on $Z_*(X)_\Q$ as defined in \cite{Th}. Finally, let $\phi$ be the natural homomorphism from equivariant divisors (or cycles) to basic divisors (or cycles) that maps $M_\Q$ to $0$. Then we wish to prove that
$$\phi(D \cdot C) = \phi(D) \odot \phi(C)$$.
Since $\phi$ is a module homomorphism, it suffices to assume $C = V_\sigma$ and $D \in \Div(X)$. Let $\{d_\sigma\}$ be the local equations for $\phi(D)$. For this proof, we briefly introduce notation from \cite{Th}. As defined in \cite{Th},
$$\phi(D) \odot V_\sigma = \sum_{\tau: \tau \rightarrow \sigma} \ip{\pi_\sigma(m_\tau)}{n_{\tau,\sigma}} V_\tau$$
where $\pi_\sigma: M_\tau \rightarrow M(\sigma)_\tau$ is the projection map derived from $\Psi$. Using the above definition,
$$\phi(D \cdot V_\sigma) = \sum_{\tau: \tau \rightarrow \sigma} \ip{m_\tau - m_\sigma^\Psi}{n_{\tau,\sigma}} V_\tau$$.
It suffices to show that for $\tau \rightarrow \sigma$,
$$\ip{m_\tau - m_\sigma^\Psi}{n_{\tau,\sigma}} = \ip{\pi_\sigma(m_\tau)}{n_{\tau,\sigma}}$$
Following through the definitions of each term makes the statement clear. For purely aesthetic reasons, the authors have chosen to define the action using the embedding map $i^\Psi$ rather than the projection map $\pi_\sigma$, although they are certainly equivalent.
Since the basic cycle-level action was proven to be commutative in \cite{Th}, most of the work in proving the commutativity of the equivariant-level action is done. Let $D, E \in \Div^T(X)$, $C \in Z^T_*(X)$. We wish to show that $D \cdot (E \cdot C) = E \cdot (D \cdot C)$. Once again, it suffices to assume $D, E \in \Div(X)$, $C = V_\sigma$. Expanding upon the definition, we see that
$$D \cdot (E \cdot V_\sigma) = \sum_{\delta: \delta \rightarrow \sigma} \sum_{\tau: \tau \rightarrow \delta} \ip{e_\delta - e_\sigma^\Psi}{n_{\delta, \sigma}}\ip{d_\tau - d_\delta^\Psi}{n_{\tau, \delta}} V_\tau $$
$$+ \sum_{\delta: \delta \rightarrow \sigma} \bigl{(} \ip{e_\delta - e_\sigma^\Psi}{n_{\delta, \sigma}} d_\delta^\Psi + \ip{d_\delta - d_\sigma^\Psi}{n_{\delta, \sigma}} e_\sigma^\Psi \bigr{)} V_\delta + d_\sigma^\Psi e_\sigma^\Psi V_\sigma $$
$E \cdot (D \cdot D_\sigma)$ is of course the same expression with $e$ and $d$ switched. Notice that the top row of the expression, by itself, is the basic cycle-level action. Since the commutativity of that action was shown in \cite{Th}, it suffices to focus exclusively on the bottom half. By the symmetry of the last term, it suffices to show that for $\delta \rightarrow \sigma$,
$$\ip{e_\delta - e_\sigma^\Psi}{n_{\sigma,\delta}} d_\delta^\Psi + \ip{d_\delta - d_\sigma^\Psi}{n_{\sigma,\delta}} e_\sigma^\Psi = \ip{d_\delta - d_\sigma^\Psi}{n_{\sigma,\delta}} e_\delta^\Psi + \ip{e_\delta - e_\sigma^\Psi}{n_{\sigma,\delta}} d_\sigma^\Psi$$
or equivalently,
$$\ip{d_\delta - d_\sigma^\Psi}{n_{\sigma,\delta}}(e_\delta^\Psi - e_\sigma^\Psi) = \ip{e_\delta - e_\sigma^\Psi}{n_{\sigma,\delta}}(d_\delta^\Psi - d_\sigma^\Psi)$$
Since $\delta \rightarrow \sigma$, $e_\delta^\Psi - e_\sigma^\Psi$ and $d_\delta^\Psi - d_\sigma^\Psi$ both lie in the one-dimensional space $\Psi(\delta)\cap M(\sigma)$. The result follows immediately.
\end{proof}
\subsection{A Ring Structure on $Z(X)$ for Simplicial Fans}
\lbl{sec.simplicial}
Our goal in this section is to prove Theorem 2, which gives a ring stucture on the equivariant cycle group $Z_*^T(X)$ in the simplicial case. This generalizes a similar result for the action on $Z_*(X)_\Q$ found in \cite{Th}. We note that the (nonequivariant) cycle ring $Z_*(X)$ has a similar presentation as a quotient of a polynomial ring; however, this presentation does not appear in full generality in \cite{Th} or \cite{PT}.
For this section, suppose that $\Sigma$ is simplicial,. This implies that the group of divisors $\Div(X)$ is isomorphic to $Z_{n-1}(X)$, the group of cycles of codimension 1. Then clearly $\Div_T(X)$ and $Z_{n-1}^T(X)$ are also isomorphic as $\Lambda_\Q$-modules. Under this isomorphism, the action of $\Div_T(X)$ on $Z_*^T(X)$ translates to a binary operation on $Z_*^T(X)$.
\begin{proof}
The first part of the proof is identical to the argument in \cite{Th}. Since $\Sigma$ is simplicial, the cycles $\{D_i\}$ correspond to $\Q$-Cartier divisors. Then, by the commutativity of the action, $Z_*^T(X)$ is a module over $\Lambda_\BQ[D_1,\dots, D_s]$. In fact, $Z_*^T(X)$ is a cyclic module generated by $V_{\{0\}}$. Indeed, let $\sigma \in \Sigma$, $\sigma = \rho_{i_1} + \rho_{i_2} + \dots + \rho_{i_k}$. Then
$$D_{i_1} \cdot D_{i_2} \cdot \dots \cdot D_{i_k} \cdot V_{\{0\}} = rV_\sigma$$
where $r$ is a non-zero rational number, since the divisors $D_i$ intersect properly. (Note that if $X$ is non-singular, $r$ is always $1$.)
Since $Z_*^T(X)$ is a cyclic module over $\Lambda_\BQ[D_1,\dots,D_s]$, $Z_*^T(X) \cong \Lambda_\BQ[D_1,\dots, D_s] / K$ for some ideal $K$. It remains to show that $K = I + J^\Psi$. We first prove $I \subset K$. Let $D_{i_1} D_{i_2} \dots D_{i_k} \in I$. Since the set $\{D_i\}$ intersects properly, this product must be a linear combination of $\{D_\tau: \rho_{i_1} + \rho_{i_2} + \dots + \rho_{i_k} \subset \tau\}$. Since there are no such $\tau \in \Sigma$, the product is $0$.
Next we show $J^\Psi \subset K$. Given any $m \in M_\sigma$, we consider the principal divisor $D$ with local equations $m_\tau = m$ for all $\tau \in \Sigma$. Then
$$D_i D_j \dots D_k(\sum_{j=1}^s \ip{m^\Psi}{n_j} D_j - m^\Psi) = rV_\sigma \cdot ([D] - m^\Psi) = 0$$
by (\ref{eq.action}).
In order to prove $K \subset I + J^\Psi$, it must be shown that any polynomial $F \in \Lambda_\Q[D_1,\dots,D_s] / (I + J^\Psi)$ can be written as a linear combination of $\{V_\sigma : \sigma \in \Sigma \}$. By the definition of $I$, this is equivalent to expressing $F$ as a square-free polynomial in $\Lambda[D_1,\dots,D_s]$. Since square-free polynomials are closed under addition and multiplication by $\Lambda_\BQ$, we may assume without loss of generality that $F$ is a monomial term with coefficient $1$ such that $F \notin I$.
Renumbering the cones of $\Sigma$, we can assume that $F = D_1^{a_1} D_2^{a_2} \dots D_k^{a_k}$, where $\rho_1 + \rho_2 + \dots + \rho_k = \sigma \in \Sigma$, and $a_1 > 1$. Our goal is to shift by an element of $J^\Psi$ so as to decrease the exponent $a_1$ without increasing any of the other non-zero exponents. Then, by induction, we are done. Since $\sigma$ is a simplicial cone, we can choose $m \in M_{\sigma, \Q}$ such that $\ip{m}{n_1} = 1$, and $\ip{m}{n_i} = 0$ for $2 \leq i \leq k$. Then set
$$E = D_1^{a_1 - 1} D_2^{a_2} \dots D_k^{a_k} (\sum_{j=1}^s \ip{m^\Psi}{n_j} D_j - m^\Psi).$$
Clearly $E \in J^\Psi$, and $F - E$ is a sum of terms that all satisfy our requirement. Thus $K = I + J^\Psi$, and the theorem is proven.
\end{proof}
It is easy to show that under the surjective homomorphism $Z_*^T(X) \rightarrow Z_*(X)_\Q$, $Z_*(X)_\Q \cong \Q[D_1,\dots,D_s] / I^\circ + (J^\psi)^\circ$, where $I^\circ$ and $(J^\psi)^\circ$ are the images of $I$ and $J^\Psi$, respectively. This gives another characterization of the ring structure on $Z_*(X)_\Q$ of \cite{Th}. In the case that $\Psi$ is induced from an inner product or a complete flag, there are more concrete descriptions of the ideal $J^\Psi$. See \cite{Th} and [PT] for details in the basic case.
\subsection{Todd Class Expressions and SI-Interpolators}
\lbl{sub.todd}
In this section we prove Theorems 3, Theorem 4, and Corollary 1.4. To this end, it will be useful to recall a few definitions and theorems regarding exponential sums and integrals over polyhedra.
Let $P$ be a polyhedron in $V := M_\Q$, with outer normal fan $\Sigma$. Let $F$ be a face of $P$. Let $\aff(F)$ be the affine span of $F$, or the smallest affine subspace of $V$ that contains $F$. Let $\lin(F)$ be the linear subspace parallel to $\aff(F)$. Since $P$ is rational, there is a natural lattice on $\lin(F)$. By translation, there is a lattice measure $dm_F$ on $\aff(F)$.
Let $x$ be an interior point in $F$. The tangent cone $\Tan(P,F) := \{v \in V | x + \epsilon v \in P \text{\ for\ some\ }x \in F^{\circ}, \epsilon > 0 \}$ is the cone of directions that one can go from any point $x$ in the interior of $F$ and stay in $P$. The supporting cone $\Supp(P,F) := \Tan(P,F) + x$. Both cones are independent of $x$.
The following theorem is a version of Lawrence's Theorem \cite{La}.
\begin{lawrence}
Let $P$ be a polyhedron in $V := M_\Q$. Then there exist meromorphic functions $S(P)$ and $I(P)$ on $V^*$ (i.e. elements of $\hat{\Lambda}_\Q$) with the following properties:
\begin{itemize}
\item
If $P$ contains a straight line, then $S(P)=I(P)=0$.
\item
$S$ (resp. $I$) is a {\em valuation} (resp. a {\em solid valuation}). That is,
if the characteristic functions of a family of polyhedra satisfy a relation
$\sum_i r_i \chi(P_i)=0$, then the functions $S(P_i)$ satisfy
the relation
$\sum_i r_i S(P_i)=0$ (resp. restrict the sum to those $P_i$ that do
not lie in a proper affine subspace of $V$.)
\item
For every $v \in V$, we have
\begin{equation}
I(v+P)=e^v I(P),
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
S(v+P) = e^v S(P), \qquad v \in \La.
\end{equation}
\item
If $\xi \in V^*$ is such that $|e^{\la \xi,x \ra}|$ is integrable (resp.
absolutely summable) over $P$, then
$$I(P)(\xi)=\int_{P} e^{\la \xi,x \ra} dm_P(x),
\qquad
S(P)(\xi)=\sum_{x \in P \cap \Lambda} e^{\la \xi,x \ra}$$
where $dm_P$ denotes the relative Lebesgue measure on $\aff(P)$. The use of this measure prevents $I$ from being trivial on polyhedra that are not full-dimensional.
\end{itemize}
\end{lawrence}
Let $K$ be a non-singular cone in $V$ with primitive generators $v_1,\dots,v_k$. Then a straightforward computation shows that
\begin{equation}
I(K)= \frac{(-1)^k}{\prod_{i=1}^k v_i},
\qquad
S(K)= \prod_{i=1}^k \frac{1}{1-e^{v_i}},
\end{equation}
We also recall the notion of $SI$-interpolator from \cite{GP}.
\begin{definition}
Let $V$ be a real vector space, and let $\calM(V^*)$ be the set of meromorphic functions on $V^*$. Let $\calC$ be a set of cones in $V$. An {\it SI-interpolator} is a map
$$\mu:\calC \rightarrow \calM(V^*)$$
such that given any rational polyhedron $P$ with $\Supp(P,F) \in \calC$ for all $F \subset P$,
$$S(P) = \sum_{F \subset P} \mu(\Supp(P,F))I(F)$$.
\end{definition}
We are now ready for the proofs of Theorems 3 and 4.
Let $\widehat {Z_*^T(X)}$ be the ring of power series in $Z_*^T(X)$. Recall that for nonsingular toric varieties, the {\it equivariant Todd class} of $X$, denoted $\Td^T(X)$, has a product expression in $A_T^*(X)_\Q$. (See \cite{BV3}.) Letting $\{B_i\}$ be the Bernoulli numbers for $1 \leq i < \infty$, then
$$\Td^T(X) = \prod_{i=1}^s (1 + \sum_{j=1}^\infty \frac{B_j}{j!} D_i^j) .$$
Using the induced ring structure on $Z_*^T(X)$, we can express $\Td^T(X)$ as a polynomial in $\{D_\sigma : \sigma \in \Sigma \}$ with coefficients in $\hat{\Lambda_\BQ}$. The following lemma will show that the coefficient of $D_\sigma$ in this expression, which we will denote $r^\Psi(\sigma)$, is independent of the other cones in $\Sigma$. Thus we can consider $\rsigma$ as a function of $\sigma$, independent of any fan that contains it.
\begin{lemma}
Let $F$ be any power series in $\Lambda_\Q[[D_1,\dots, D_s]]$, and let $\sigma \subset N$ be contained in two fans $\Sigma$ and $\Sigma'$, both generic with respect to $\Psi$, corresponding to toric varieties $X,X'$. Let $F_\Sigma$, $F_{\Sigma'}$ be the images of $F$ in $Z_*(X)$, $Z_*(X')$ respectively. Then the coefficient of $D_\sigma$ is the same in $F_\Sigma$ and $F_{\Sigma'}$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
By $\ref{eq.action}$, $D_\tau * D_\sigma$ is a sum of cycles corresponding to cones containing $\sigma$. By commutativity, it is also a sum of cycles corresponding to cones containing $\tau$. Thus the coefficient of $D_\sigma$ in $F_\Sigma$ or $F_{\Sigma'}$ only depends on the terms of $F$ corresponding to faces of $\sigma$. Thus in calculating that coefficient, we may restrict $\Sigma$ or $\Sigma'$ to the fan consisting of $\sigma$ itself and all its faces. Then the coefficient must be the same in both cases.
\end{proof}
We will use the following lemma, a version of equivariant Riemann-Roch, which says that if one replaces cycles by the corresponding exponential integrals, then the Todd class is carried to the exponential sum. (Note this is only true for nonsingular cones.) A version of this idea first appeared in \cite{KP}; see \cite{BR} for an elementary argument.
We will use $\stilde$, $\itilde$, and $\mutilde$ to denote $S$, $I$, and $\mu$ with the substitution $\xi\mapsto -\xi$.
\begin{lemma}
Let $K=\Cone(m_1,\dots,m_n)$ be a full-dimensional nonsingular cone in $M$ and let $\sigma=\check{K}=\Cone(v_1,...,v_n)$, with $\{v_i\}$ denoting the basis of $N$ dual to $\{m_i\}$. Let
$$
R_{\sigma} = \frac{\Lambda_\Q[D_1,...D_n]}{J}, \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ J=\biggl\langle \sum\ip{m}{v_i}D_i - m \ : \ m\in M \biggr\rangle .
$$
Let $\hat{R}_\sigma$ denote the completion of $R_\sigma$, and let $\hat{\Lambda_\Q}$ be the field of Laurent series over $M$. Then there is a $\Lambda_\Q$-linear map
$\Phi: \hat{R}_\sigma \rightarrow \hat{\Lambda_\Q}$ such that
\begin{itemize}
\item For any subset $T\subset \{1,\dots,n\}$, with $K_T=\{ m\in K | \ip{m}{v_i} = 0, i\in T\}$, we have
$$
\Phi\bigl(\prod_{i\in T} D_i\bigr) = \itilde(K_T)
$$
\item and
$$
\Phi\biggl(\prod\frac{D_i}{1-e^{-D_i}}\biggr) = \stilde(K)
$$
\end{itemize}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof} For any power series $\gamma$,
map $\gamma(D_1, \dots, D_n)$ to $P^{-1}\gamma(m_1, \dots, m_n)$, where $P=\prod_{i=1}^n m_i$ and extend by $\Lambda_\Q$-linearity.
We check that $J$ maps to 0:
$$
\Phi\bigl(\sum\ip{m}{v_i}D_i - m\bigr) = P^{-1}\bigl(\sum\ip{m}{v_i}m_i - m\bigr) = 0.
$$
Additionally,
$$
\Phi\bigl(\prod_{i\in T} D_i\bigr)=\prod_{i\notin T} m_i^{-1} = \itilde(K_T),
$$
the last equality using the fact that $K_T=\Cone(\{m_i | i\notin T \})$.
Finally,
$$
\Phi\biggl(\prod\frac{D_i}{1-e^{-D_i}}\biggr) = \prod \frac1{1-e^{-m_i}} = \stilde(K).
$$
\end{proof}
We now prove Theorem 3, Theorem 4 and Corollary 1.3 together. We will first see that the interpolator equation of Corollary 1.3 holds for nonsingular cones. This will enable us to argue inductively that the equation of Theorem 4 holds for nonsingular cones. Once this relation between $r$ and $\mu$ is established in the nonsingular case, the fact that $r$ extends to a well-defined additive map on singular cones follows from the corresponding property of $\mu$.
We now proceed to use Lemma 2.2 to prove the equation of Corollary 1.3 in the case that $K$ is a nonsingular $n$-dimensional cone. We use the notation of the lemma. Note that by construction of the $\r(\sigma)$, it follows that we have the following equation in $Z_*^T(X)$:
$$
\prod\frac{D_i}{1-e^{-D_i}} = \sum_{\tau} r^\Psi (\tau) D_{\tau}.
$$
Applying the natural map $Z_*^T(X)\rightarrow R_\sigma$ followed by $\Phi$, we get
$$
\stilde(K) = \sum_{\tau\faceof\sigma} r^\Psi(\tau) \itilde(K_\tau),
$$
where $K_\tau=K\cap\tau^\bot$ is the face of $K$ dual to $\tau$. For this face $F=K_\tau$, we have that the dual to the supporting cone $\Supp(K,F)$ is $\sigma_{K,F} = \tau$. Thus we see that the equation of Corollary 1.3 holds in the case that $K$ is a full-dimensional nonsingular cone.
Our next lemma states that for cones $\sigma$ which are not necessarily of maximum dimension, $r^\Psi(\sigma)$ can be computed by viewing $\sigma$ as a top-dimensional cone in the subspace $N_{\sigma}$ and then applying the inclusion $i^\Psi:M_{\sigma, \Q}\rightarrow M_\Q$. We note that a complement map on $N$ induces a complement map on all $\Psi$-generic sublattices, including $N_\sigma$.
\begin{lemma}
\lbl{lemma.lowerdim}
Let $\Psi$ be a complement map on $N$ and suppose that $\sigma$ is a $\Psi$-generic nonsingular cone in $N$. Let $\Psibar$ be the induced complement map on $N_\sigma$. Let
$\tilde{\sigma}=\sigma$, but considered as a cone in $N_{\sigma}$. Then
$$
r^\Psi(\sigma) = i^\Psi(r^{\Psibar}(\sigma_0)).
$$
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let $X$ be the toric variety corresponding to the fan given by $\sigma$, and all of its faces, in $N$, and let $X_\sigma$ correspond similarly to $\sigma_0 \subset N_\sigma$. Extend the inclusion map $i^\Psi: M_{\sigma, \Q} \rightarrow M_\Q$ to a map from $\Lambda_{\sigma, \Q} := \Q[M_\sigma]$ to $\Lambda_\Q := \Q[M]$. This extends further to a natural map from $Z^T_*(X_\sigma)$ to $Z^T_*(X)$, using the characterization in Theorem \ref{thm.ringstructure}. The well-definedness of this map hinges on the transitivity of the inclusions $i^\Psi$, which is part of the definition of a complement map. This ensures that the ideal $J^\Psi_\sigma$ is sent to $J^\Psi$.
It is easy to see that this map preserves the product expression of the Todd class, and since the squarefree expression of the Todd class is unique in each ring, the map must preserve these expressions as well. In particular, the coefficient of $V_{\tilde{\sigma}}$ is taken to the coefficient of $V_{\sigma}$.
\end{proof}
We now show that $r^\Psi(\sigma) = \mutilde^\Psi(\check{\sigma})$ holds for non-singular cones, which we argue by inducting both on $\dim M$ and $\dim \sigma$. If $\sigma$ is full-dimensional, then we have seen that
$$
\stilde(K) = \sum_{\tau\faceof\sigma} r^\Psi(\tau) \itilde(K_\tau),
$$
where $K=\check{\sigma}$, and $K_\tau= K \cap\tau^\bot$. Since $\mu$ is an interpolator, we also have
$$
\stilde(K) = \sum_{\tau\faceof\sigma} \mutilde^\Psi(\check{\tau}) \itilde(K_\tau).
$$
For proper faces $\tau$ of $\sigma$, we may assume by induction, that $r^\Psi(\tau) = \mutilde^\Psi(\check{\tau})$, and it follows that $r^\Psi(\sigma) = \mutilde^\Psi(\check{\sigma})$ as well.
Now suppose that $\sigma$ is non-singular but not full-dimensional. We apply Lemma \ref{lemma.lowerdim}. With the notation of that lemma, we have
$$
r^\Psi(\sigma) = i^\Psi(r^{\Psibar}(\sigma_0)).
$$
Since the interpolator $\mu^\Psi$ is $\Psi$-hereditary (see \cite{GP}), we also have
$$
\mutilde^\Psi(\check{\sigma}) = i^\Psi(\mutilde^{\Psibar}(\check{\sigma_0})).
$$
But by induction, $r^{\Psibar}(\sigma_0)=\mutilde^{\Psibar}(\check{\sigma_0})$. Thus it follows that $r^\Psi(\sigma) = \mutilde^\Psi(\check{\sigma})$.
At this point, we have established that $r^\Psi(\sigma) = \mutilde^\Psi(\check{\sigma})$ holds for nonsingular cones. By the additive property of $\mutilde$, it follows that $\r$ may be extended to a well-defined additive function on all cones (independent of subdivision), such that $r^\Psi(\sigma) = \mutilde^\Psi(\check{\sigma})$ for all $\sigma$. The analytic and interpolator properties of $\r$ follow from those of $\mu^\Psi$. This completes the proof of Theorems 3 and 4 and Corollary 1.3.
Finally Corollary 1.4 follows directly from Theorem 4 together with the final assertion of Theorem 3.
\section{Examples}
In this section, we illustrate theorems of this paper by computing explicit formulas for $r^{\Psi}(\sigma)$ for nonsingular cones of dimension 2 or less with an arbitrary complement map $\Psi$. We also match these formulas with those of \cite{GP}.
Our first two propositions concern cones of dimensions $0$ and $1$ in an arbitrary lattice.
\begin{proposition}
\lbl{prop.0d}
For any complement map $\Psi$ on $N$, we have $r^\Psi({0}) = 1$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
The constant term in the expansion of Equation (\ref{eq.toddprod}) is 1. All other terms in this expansion are divisible by some $D_i$, which will remain true when the term is evaluated in $Z_*^T(X)$. Thus these terms do not contribute to $r^\Psi({0})$.
\end{proof}
To state the formula for $r^\Psi({\sigma})$ where $\sigma$ is a cone of dimension greater than $0$, it will be useful to introduce notation for the meromorphic function
$$
B(z) = \frac{1}{1-exp(z)} + \frac1z.
$$
Note that if we let $g(z) = \frac{z}{1-\exp(-z)}$ be the analytic function that defines the Todd class, then we have
\begin{equation}
\lbl{eq.gB}
g(z) = 1+ z B(-z)
\end{equation}
\begin{proposition}
\lbl{prop.1d}
Let $\Psi$ be a complement map on a lattice $N$, and suppose $\sigma = \cone(\rho)$ is a one-dimensional cone generated by a primitive element $\rho\in N$. Assume that $\sigma$ is in the domain of $\Psi$ and let $c\in M$ be a generator of the one-dimensional space $\Psi(\sigma)$. Then
$$
r^\Psi(\sigma)= B\biggl(-\frac{c}{\ip{c}{\rho}}\biggr)
$$
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
Taking $\rho=\rho_1$, we expand Equation (\ref{eq.toddprod}) to find the coefficient of $D_1$, working modulo $D_j, j>1$. According to Theorem 2, we find the relation:
$$
D_1 (\ip{c}{\rho} D_1 - c) = 0,
$$
from which it follows that $D_1^2=\frac{c}{\ip{c}{\rho}} D_1$, and hence
$$
D_1^i = \biggl(\frac{c}{\ip{c}{\rho}}\biggr)^{i-1} D_1
$$
for all $i\geq 1$. Hence, using Equation (\ref{eq.gB}), we find that
$$
g(D_1) =1+ B\biggl(-\frac{c}{\ip{c}{\rho}}\biggr) D_1.
$$
The proposition follows.
\end{proof}
\begin{proposition}
\lbl{prop.2d}
Let $\Psi$ be a complement map on a two-dimensional lattice $N$, and suppose $\sigma = \cone(\rho_1, \rho_2)$ is a two-dimensional non-singular cone generated by a primitive elements $\rho_1, \rho_2\in N$. Let $m_1, m_2$ be the dual basis of $M$, so that $\ip{m_i}{\rho_j}=\delta_{i,j}$ Assume that $\sigma$ is in the domain of $\Psi$ and for $i=1,2$, let $c_i\in M$ be a generator of the one-dimensional space $\Psi(\rho_i)$. Then
$$
r^\Psi(\sigma)= B(-m_1) B(-m_2) -\frac1{m_2} \biggl( B\biggl(-\frac{c_1}{\ip{c_1}{\rho_1}} \biggr)- B(-m_1) \biggr)
-\frac1{m_1} \biggl( B\biggl(-\frac{c_2}{\ip{c_2}{\rho_2}} \biggr)- B(-m_2) \biggr)
$$
\end{proposition}
In the equation above, note that in spite of the appearance of fractions $\frac1{m_i}$ on the right hand side, the expression given is actually a power series. Indeed, using the fact that $B(z) - B(w)$ is divisible by $z-w$, one easily sees that these denominators cancel.
\begin{proof}
We wish find the coefficient of $D_1D_2$ in $g(D_1) g(D_2)$ working in the ring $Z_*^T(X)$ modulo $D_j, j>2$. We have the relations
$$
D_1(\ip{c_1}{\rho_1} D_1 + \ip{c_1}{\rho_2} D_2 - c_1) = 0, \ \ \ \ \ D_2(\ip{c_2}{\rho_1} D_1 + \ip{c_2}{\rho_2} D_2 -c_2) = 0,
$$
and
$$
D_1D_2(D_1- m_1) = 0 \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ D_1D_2(D_2- m_2) = 0.
$$
These imply, for $i,j>0$, that
$$
D_1^i D_2^j = m_1^{i-1} m_2^{j-1} D_1 D_2
$$
We also get
$$
D_1^2 = -\frac{\ip{c_1}{\rho_2}}{\ip{c_1}{\rho_1}} D_1 D_2 + L_1 D_1 \ \ \ \ \
$$
where $L_j$ is defined as $\frac1{\ip{c_j}{\rho_j}} c_j$. By induction, it follows that for $i\geq 2$,
$$
D_1^i = -\frac{\ip{c_1}{\rho_2}}{\ip{c_1}{\rho_1}} ( m_1^{i-2} + m_1^{i-3} L_1+ \cdots + L_1^{i-2} ) D_1 D_2 + L_1^{i-1} D_1 \ \ \ \ \
$$
Now using $ m_1^{i-2} + m_1^{i-3} L_1+ \cdots + L_1^{i-2}= \frac{L_1^{i-1}-m_1^{i-1}}{L_1-m_1}$ and $L_1-m_1=\frac{\ip{c_1}{\rho_2}}{\ip{c_1}{\rho_1}} m_2$,
$$
D_1^i = - \frac{1}{m_2} ( L_1^{i-1}-m_1^{i-1} ) D_1 D_2 + L_1^{i-1} D_1,
$$
which holds also for $i=1$.
Hence
$$
D_1 B(-D_1) =- \frac{1}{m_2} ( B(-L_1)-B(-m_1)) D_1 D_2 + B(-L_1) D_1,
$$
with a similar formula for $D_2 B(-D_2)$. Thus
the coefficient of $D_1 D_2$ in $ g(D_1) g(D_2) = (1 + D_1 B(-D_1)) ((1 + D_2 B(-D_2))$ is given by
$$
-\frac{1}{m_2}(B(-L_1)-B(-m_1)) - \frac{1}{m_1}(B(-L_2)-B(-m_2)) + B(-m_1)B(-m_2),
$$
as desired.
\end{proof}
We note that Propositions \ref{prop.1d} and \ref{prop.2d} allow one to check directly, for nonsingular cones $\sigma$ of dimension at most 2, the agreement of this paper's $r^\Psi$ with the $\mu^\Psi$ of \cite{GP}, as asserted in Theorem \ref{thm.gpagree}. Indeed, with the substitution of $\xi$ for $-\xi$, one finds exact agreement of Proposition $\ref{prop.1d}$ above with \cite{GP}, Propostion 5.3, in both the complete flag and inner product cases. Similarly, in dimension 2, one sees agreement between Proposition \ref{prop.2d} and \cite{GP}, Proposition 5.4.
\begin{example}
We consider a nonsimplicial fan $\Sigma$ in $N=\BZ^3$ as follows. Let $\rho_1=(1,0,0),\rho_2=(0,1,0),\rho_3=(0,0,1),\rho_4=(1,1,-1)$, and $\rho_5=(-1,-1,0)$. The cone generated by $\rho_i,\rho_j, \dots, \rho_k$ will be denoted $\sigma_{i,j,\dots,k}$, with $\sigma_\emptyset = \{0\}.$ Consider the fan $\Sigma$ with rays $\rho_i, i=1,\dots, 5$, whose maximal cones are $\sigma_{1234}, \sigma_{135}, \sigma_{145}, \sigma_{235}$, and $\sigma_{245}$. Then $\Sigma$ is complete fan with eight two-dimensional cones $\sigma_{13}$, $\sigma_{14}$, $\sigma_{15}$, $\sigma_{23}$, $\sigma_{24}$, $\sigma_{25}$, $\sigma_{35}$, $\sigma_{45}$. Let $X=X_{\Sigma}$, and for each cone $\sigma_{i,j,\dots,k}\in\Sigma$, let $V_{i,j,\dots,k}$ denote the corresponding cycle on $X$. Note that affine toric variety corresponding to $\sigma_{1234}$ is the affine cone on $\P^1\times\P^1$.
Let $\Psi$ denote the complement map obtained from the standard inner product on $\BQ^3$. We will illustrate the action of $\Div_T(X)$ on $Z^T_*(X)$ given in Theorem 1. First note that for $D\in \Div(X)$, the local equations $\{d_\sigma\}_{\sigma\in\Sigma}$ specify a continuous piecewise $\BQ$-linear function on $\Sigma$ that is determined by its values on $\rho_i, i=1,\dots, 5$. Denote these values by $\alpha_i, i=1,\dots, 5$. The $\alpha_i$ are any rational numbers that satisfy $\alpha_1+\alpha_2=\alpha_3+\alpha_4.$ For such $D$, we compute the $D\cdot V_{\sigma}$ for various $\sigma\in\Sigma$.
First, let $\sigma=\sigma_{\emptyset}=\{0\}$. Then $d_\sigma^\Psi= 0$, and the formula in Theorem 1 gives
$$
D\cdot V_{\emptyset} = \alpha_1 V_1 + \alpha_2 V_2 +\alpha_3 V_3 +\alpha_4 V_4 +\alpha_5 V_5.
$$
This is simply the Weil divisor determined by the Cartier divisor $D$.
Next, let $\sigma=\sigma_1=\rho_1$. Then using $\{m_1, m_2, m_3\}$ to denote the standard basis of $M=\BZ_3^*$, we have $d_\sigma^\Psi= \alpha_1 m_1$, and the formula in Theorem 1 gives
$$
D\cdot V_1 = \alpha_3 V_{13} + (\alpha_4-\alpha_1) V_{14} + (\alpha_1+\alpha_5) V_{15} + \alpha_1 m_1 V_1.
$$
For $i\ne 1$, $D\cdot V_i$ may be computed similarly.
Turning to a $2$-dimensional cone, say $\sigma=\sigma_{13}$, we find $d_\sigma^\Psi= \alpha_1 m_1 + \alpha_3 m_3$, and
$$
D\cdot V_{13} = \alpha_2 V_{1234} + (\alpha_5 + \alpha_1) V_{135} + (\alpha_1 m_1 + \alpha_3 m_3) V_{13}.
$$
Finally, take $\sigma=\sigma_{1234}.$ Then $d_\sigma^\Psi= \alpha_1 m_1 + \alpha_2 m_2 + \alpha_3 m_3$,
and
$$
D\cdot V_{1234} = ( \alpha_1 m_1 + \alpha_2 m_2 + \alpha_3 m_3) V_{1234}.
$$
\end{example}
\begin{example}
As a final example, we consider the two-dimensional nonsingular triangle in $M=\Z^2$ with vertices $v_0=(0,0), v_1=(1,0), v_2=(0,1).$ The corresponding inner normal fan $\Sigma$ in $N=\Z^2$ has rays generated by $\rho_0=(-1,-1), \rho_1=(0,1), \rho_2=(1,0)$. The two-dimensional cones of this fan are
$\sigma_0=\Cone((0,1),(1,0))$, $\sigma_1=\Cone((-1,-1),(0,1))$, $\sigma_2=\Cone((0,1),(-1,-1))$.
Let $\Psi$ be the complement map induced by the standard inner product on $\Z^2$. We take $\{x=(1,0), y=(0,1)\}$, to be the standard basis of $M$, so that $\Lambda=\Z[x,y]$. Then one calculates according to Theorem \ref{thm.ringstructure} that the ring structure on the equivariant cycle groups is given by
$$Z^T_*(X) \cong \frac{\Lambda_\BQ[D_0,D_1,D_2]}{I + J^\Psi}$$
where $I = \langle D_0D_1D_2 \rangle $, and
$$J^\Psi = \biggl\langle D_1(D_1-D_0-x), \ D_2(D_2-D_0-y), \ D_0(2D_0-D_1-D_2+x+y)
\biggr\rangle.
$$
To compute the equivariant Todd class of $X_\Sigma$, one multiplies out the expression $\Pi_{i=0}^2 \frac{D_i} {1-\exp(-D_i)}$ in the completion of the above ring. Either working directly with the relations above, or using Proposition \ref{prop.2d}, one finds that the coefficient $r(\sigma_0)$ of $D_1D_2$ is given by
$$
r(\sigma_0)=B(-x)B(-y).
$$
Likewise, the coefficient $r(\sigma_1)$ of $D_0D_2$ is
$$
r(\sigma_1) = B(x-y)B(x)- \frac1{x}\biggl[ B(-y ) -B(x-y) \biggr] - \frac1{y-x}\biggl[ B(\frac12 (x+y) ) -B(x) \biggr],
$$
and the coefficient of $D_0D_1$ is
$$
r(\sigma_2) = B(y)B(y-x)- \frac1{x-y}\biggl[ B(\frac12 (x+y) ) -B(y) \biggr] + \frac1{y}\biggl[ B(-x ) -B(y-x) \biggr].
$$
One notes that the $r(\sigma_i)$ may be expanded in power series about the origin (shown here to order 2):
\begin{align*}
r(\sigma_0) &= \frac14 + \frac1{24} x + \frac1{24} y + \frac1{144} xy +\cdots
\\ r(\sigma_1) &= \frac38 - \frac1{12} x + \frac1{24} y + \frac5{1152} x^2 - \frac1{288} xy - \frac5{1152} y^2 + \cdots
\\ r(\sigma_2) &= \frac38 + \frac1{24} x - \frac1{12} y - \frac5{1152} x^2 - \frac1{288} xy + \frac5{1152} y^2 + \cdots
\end{align*}
and one recovers the constant terms from the local lattice point formula of \cite{PT}, namely $\mu_0(\sigma_0)=\frac14,\mu_0(\sigma_1)=\frac38,\mu_0(\sigma_2)=\frac38$. (cf. \cite{GP}, Example 5.7).
Finally, one can verify by direct computation that $r(\sigma_0)+r(\sigma_1)+r(\sigma_2)=1$, in agreement with Theorem \ref{thm.rsigma}. One can also use the above expressions for the $r(\sigma_i)$ to verify the $SI$-interpolator property of Corollary \ref{thm.rinterpolates}:
$$
\sum_F r^{\Psi}(\sigma_{P,F})(-\xi)\cdot I(F)(\xi)=S(P)(\xi)=1+e^x+e^y.
$$
\end{example}
\ifx\undefined\bysame
\newcommand{\bysame}{\leavevmode\hbox
to3em{\hrulefill}\,}
\fi
|
\section{Introduction} \label{section1}
In optimal transport theory, a displacement interpolation is a
one-parameter family of measures that represents the most efficient
way of displacing mass between two given probability measures.
Finding a displacement interpolation between two
probability measures
is the same as finding a
minimizing geodesic in the space of probability
measures, equipped with the Wasserstein metric $W_2$
\cite[Proposition 2.10]{Lott-Villani (2009)}.
For background on optimal transport and Wasserstein space, we refer
to Villani's book \cite{Villani (2009)}.
If $M$ is a compact connected Riemannian manifold with
nonnegative sectional curvature
then $P(M)$ is a compact length space with nonnegative curvature
in the sense of Alexandrov
\cite[Theorem A.8]{Lott-Villani (2009)},
\cite[Proposition 2.10]{Sturm (2006)}.
Hence one can define the tangent cone $T_{\mu} P(M)$
of $P(M)$ at a measure $\mu \in P(M)$.
If $\mu$ is absolutely continuous with respect to the volume form
$\dvol_M$ then $T_{\mu} P(M)$ is a Hilbert space
\cite[Proposition A.33]{Lott-Villani (2009)}. More generally,
one can define tangent cones of $P(M)$ without any curvature assumption
on $M$,
using Ohta's $2$-uniform structure on $P(M)$ \cite{Ohta (2009)}.
Gigli showed that
$T_{\mu} P(M)$ is a Hilbert space if and only if $\mu$ is a ``regular''
measure, meaning that it gives zero measure to any hypersurface which,
locally, is the graph of the difference of two convex functions
\cite[Corollary 6.6]{Gigli (2011)}.
It is natural to ask
what the tangent cones are at other measures.
A wide class of tractable measures comes from submanifolds.
Suppose that $S$ is a smooth embedded submanifold of a
compact connected Riemannian manifold $M$. Suppose that
$\mu$ is an absolutely continuous probability measure on $S$. We can
also view $\mu$ as an element of $P(M)$. For simplicity, we assume that
$\supp(\mu) = S$.
\begin{theorem} \label{theorem1.1}
We have
\begin{equation} \label{1.2}
T_{\mu} P(M) = H \oplus \int_{s \in S} P_2(N_sM) \: d\mu(s),
\end{equation}
where
\begin{itemize}
\item $H$ is the Hilbert space of gradient vector fields
$\overline{\Image(\nabla)} \subset L^2(TS, d\mu)$,
\item $N_sM$ is the normal space to $S \subset M$ at $s \in S$ and
\item $P_2(N_sM)$ is the metric cone of probability measures on $N_sM$
with finite second moment, equipped with the $2$-Wasserstein metric.
\end{itemize}
\end{theorem}
The homotheties in the metric cone structure on $P_2(N_sM)$ arise from
radial rescalings of $N_sM$. The direct sum and integral in (\ref{1.2}) refer
to computing square distances.
The proof of Theorem \ref{theorem1.1}
amounts to understanding optimal transport
starting from a measure supported on a submanifold. This seems to be a
natural question in its own right which has not been considered much.
Gangbo and McCann proved results about
optimal transport between measures supported on hypersurfaces in
Euclidean space \cite{Gangbo-McCann (2000)}.
McCann-Sosio and Kitagawa-Warren gave more refined results about optimal
transport between two measures supported on a sphere
\cite{Kitagawa-Warren (2012),McCann-Sosio (2011)}.
Castillon considered optimal transport between a measure supported on a
submanifold of Euclidean space and a measure supported on a linear subspace
\cite{Castillon (2010)}.
In the setting of Theorem \ref{theorem1.1},
a Wasserstein geodesic $\{\mu_t\}_{t \in [0,
\epsilon]}$ starting from $\mu$ consists of a family of geodesics shooting
off from $S$ in various directions.
The geometric meaning of Theorem \ref{theorem1.1}
is that the tangential component
of these directions is the gradient of a function on $S$. To motivate
this statement, in Section \ref{section2} we give a Benamou-Brenier-type
variational approach to the problem of optimally tranporting a
measure supported on one hypersurface to a measure supported on a disjoint
hypersurface, through a family of measures supported on hypersurfaces.
One finds that the only constraint is the aforementioned tangentiality
constraint. The rigorous proof of Theorem \ref{theorem1.1} is in
Section \ref{section3}.
If $\gamma \: : \: [0,1] \rightarrow M$ is a smooth curve in a
Riemannian manifold then one can define the (reverse) parallel transport
along $\gamma$ as a linear isometry from $T_{\gamma(1)}M$ to $T_{\gamma(0)}M$.
If $X$ is a finite-dimensional Alexandrov space then the replacement
of a tangent space is a tangent cone. If one wants to define a
parallel transport along a curve $c : [0,1] \rightarrow X$, as a
map from $T_{c(1)} X$ to $T_{c(0)} X$, then there is the problem that
the tangent cones along $c$ may not look much alike.
For example, the curve $c$ may pass through various strata of $X$.
One can deal with
this problem by assuming that $c$ is in the interior of a minimizing
geodesic. In this case, Petrunin proved the tangent cones along
$c$ are mutually isometric, by constructing a parallel transport
map \cite{Petrunin (1998)}. His construction of the
parallel transport map was based on passing to a subsequential limit in an
iterative construction along $c$. It is not known whether the
ensuing parallel transport is uniquely defined, although this is
irrelevant for Petrunin's result.
In the case of a smooth curve
$c \: : \: [0,1] \rightarrow P^\infty(M)$ in the space of
smooth probability measures, one can do formal
Riemannian geometry calculations on $P^\infty(M)$ to write down an equation
for parallel transport along $c$ \cite[Proposition 3]{Lott (2008)}. It is a
partial differential equation in terms of a family of functions
$\{\eta_t\}_{t \in [0,1]}$. Ambrosio and Gigli noted that there
is a weak version of this partial differential equation
\cite[(5.9)]{Ambrosio-Gigli (2008)}. By a slight extension,
we will define weak solutions to the formal parallel transport
equation; see Definition \ref{definition4.13}.
Petrunin's construction of parallel transport cannot work in full
generality on $P(M)$, since Juillet showed that there is
a minimizing
Wasserstein geodesic $c$ with the property that the tangent cones
at measures on the interior of $c$ are not all mutually isometric
\cite{Juillet (2011)}.
However one can consider applying the construction on certain
convex subsets of $P(M)$. We illustrate this in two cases.
The first and easier case is when $c$ is a Wasserstein geodesic
of $\delta$-measures (Proposition \ref{deltaprop}).
The corresponding tangent cone at a point of $c$
comes from Theorem \ref{theorem1.1} when $S$ is a point.
The second case is when $c$ is a Wasserstein
geodesic of absolutely continuous measures, lying in the interior of a
minimizing Wasserstein geodesic, and satisfying a
regularity condition. The corresponding tangent cone at a point of $c$
comes from Theorem \ref{theorem1.1} when $S = M$. Suppose that
$\nabla \eta_1 \in T_{c(1)} P(M)$ is an element of the tangent cone at
the endpoint. Here $\nabla \eta_1 \in L^2(TM, dc(1))$ is a square-integrable
gradient vector field on $M$ and $\eta_1$ is in the Sobolev space
$H^1(M, dc(1))$. For each sufficiently large
integer $Q$, we
construct a triple
\begin{equation}
(\nabla \eta_Q, \nabla \eta_Q(0), \nabla \eta_Q(1)) \in
L^2([0,1]; L^2(TM, dc(t))) \oplus L^2(TM, dc(0)) \oplus L^2(TM, dc(1))
\end{equation}
with $\nabla \eta_Q(1) = \nabla \eta_1$,
which represents an approximate parallel
transport along $c$.
\begin{theorem} \label{theorem1.3}
Suppose that $M$ has nonnegative sectional curvature.
A subsequence of
$\{ (\nabla \eta_Q, \nabla \eta_Q(0), \nabla \eta_Q(1))\}_{Q=1}^\infty$
converges weakly to a weak
solution $(\nabla \eta_\infty, \nabla \eta_{\infty,0},
\nabla \eta_{\infty, 1})$ of the parallel transport equation with
$\nabla \eta_{\infty, 1} = \nabla \eta_1$.
If $c$ is a smooth geodesic in $P^\infty(M)$,
$\eta_1$ is smooth, and there is a
smooth solution $\eta$ to the parallel transport equation
(\ref{4.6}) with
$\eta(1) = \eta_1$, then
$\lim_{Q \rightarrow \infty} (\nabla \eta_Q, \nabla \eta_Q(0), \nabla
\eta_Q(1)) =
(\nabla \eta, \nabla \eta(0), \nabla \eta(1))$ in norm.
\end{theorem}
\begin{remark} \label{remark1.4} In the setting of
Theorem \ref{theorem1.3}, we can say that
$\nabla \eta_{\infty, 0}$ is the parallel transport of $\nabla \eta_1$
along $c$ to $T_{c(0)} P(M)$.
\end{remark}
\begin{remark} \label{remark1.5} We are assuming that $M$ has nonnegative sectional curvature
in order to apply some geometric results from \cite{Petrunin (1998)}.
It is likely that this assumption could be removed.
\end{remark}
\begin{remark} \label{remark1.6} Based on Theorems \ref{theorem1.1} and
\ref{theorem1.3}, it seems likely that
Petrunin's construction could be extended to define parallel transport
along Wasserstein geodesics
of absolutely continuous measures on submanifolds of $M$. We have done this
in the extreme cases when the submanifolds have dimension zero
or codimension zero.
\end{remark}
\begin{remark} \label{remark1.7} A result related to
Theorem \ref{theorem1.3} was proven by
Ambrosio and Gigli when $M = \R^n$ \cite[Theorem 5.14]{Ambrosio-Gigli (2008)},
and extended to general $M$ by Gigli \cite[Theorem 4.9]{Gigli (2012)}.
As explained in \cite{Ambrosio-Gigli (2008),Gigli (2012)},
the construction of parallel transport there can be considered to be
extrinsic, in that it is based on embedding the (linear) tangent cones
into a Hilbert space and applying projection operators to form the
approximate parallel transports. Although we instead use Petrunin's intrinsic
construction, there are some similarities between the two constructions; see
Remark \ref{added}. We use some techniques from \cite{Ambrosio-Gigli (2008)},
especially the idea of a weak solution to the parallel transport equation.
\end{remark}
The structure of this paper is as follows. In Section \ref{section2} we
give a formal derivation of the equation for optimal transport between
two measures supported on disjoint hypersurfaces of a Riemannian manifold.
The derivation is based on a variational method. In Section \ref{section3}
we prove Theorem \ref{theorem1.1}. In Section \ref{section4}
we discuss weak solutions to the
parallel transport equation. In Section \ref{section5} we prove Theorem
\ref{theorem1.3}.
I thank C\'edric Villani and Takumi Yokota for helpful comments, and
Nicola Gigli and Robert McCann for references to the literature.
\section{Variational approach} \label{section2}
Let $M$ be a smooth closed Riemannian manifold. Let
$S$ be a smooth closed manifold and let $S_0, S_1$ be
disjoint codimension-one submanifolds of $M$ diffeomorphic to $S$.
Let $\rho_0 \dvol_{S_0}$ and $\rho_1 \dvol_{S_1}$ be smooth
probability measures on $S_0$ and $S_1$, respectively.
We consider the problem of optimally transporting
$\rho_0 \dvol_{S_0}$ to $\rho_1 \dvol_{S_1}$ through
a family of measures supported on codimension-one
submanifolds $\{S_t\}_{t \in [0,1]}$.
We will specify the intermediate submanifolds to be level sets of
a function $T$, which in turn will become one of the
variables in the optimization problem.
We assume that there is a
codimension-zero submanifold-with-boundary $U$ of $M$,
with $\partial U = S_0 \cup S_1$.
We also assume that there is a smooth submersion $T : U \rightarrow [0,1]$
so that $T^{-1}(0) = S_0$ and $T^{-1}(1) = S_1$.
For $t \in [0,1]$, put $S_t = T^{-1}(t)$.
These are the intermediate hypersurfaces.
We now want to describe a family of measures
$\{\mu_t\}_{t \in [0,1]}$ that live
on the hypersurfaces
$\{S_t\}_{t \in [0,1]}$. It is convenient to think of these
measures as fitting together to form a measure on $U$.
Let $\mu$ be a
smooth measure on $U$.
In terms of the fibering $T : U \rightarrow [0,1]$, decompose
$\mu$ as
$\mu = \mu_t dt$ with $\mu_t$ a measure on $S_t$.
We assume that $\mu_0 = \rho_0 \dvol_{S_0}$ and
$\mu_1 = \rho_1\dvol_{S_1}$.
Let $V$ be a vector field on $U$.
We want the flow $\{\phi_s\}$ of $V$ to send level sets
of $T$ to level sets.
Imagining that there is an external clock, it's convenient
to think of $S_t$ as the evolving hypersurface at time $t$.
Correlating the flow of $V$ with the clock gives the constraint
\begin{equation} \label{2.1}
VT=1.
\end{equation}
Then
$\phi_s$ maps $S_t$ to $S_{t+s}$.
We also want the flow to be compatible with the measures
$\{\mu_t\}_{t \in [0,1]}$ in the sense that $\phi_s^* \mu_{t+s} = \mu_t$.
Now $\phi_s^* dT = d \phi_s^* T = d(T+s) = dT$, so it is equivalent
to require that $\phi_s^*$ preserves the measure $\mu =
\mu_t dt$. This gives the constraint
\begin{equation} \label{2.2}
{\mathcal L}_V \mu = 0.
\end{equation}
In particular, each $\mu_t$ is a probability measure.
To define a functional along the lines of Benamou and Brenier
\cite{Benamou-Brenier (2000)},
put
\begin{equation} \label{2.3}
E = \frac12 \int_U |V|^2 \: d\mu =
\frac12 \int_0^1 \int_{S_t} |V|^2 \: d\mu_t \: dt.
\end{equation}
We want to minimize $E$ under the constraints
${\mathcal L}_V \mu = 0$, $VT = 1$,
$\mu_0 = \rho_0 \dvol_{S_0}$ and
$\mu_1 = \rho_1 \dvol_{S_1}$.
Let
$\phi$ and $\eta$ be new functions on $U$, which
will be Lagrange multipliers for the constraints.
Then we want to extremize
\begin{equation} \label{2.4}
{\mathcal E} = \int_U \left[ \frac12 |V|^2 \: d\mu
+ \phi {\mathcal L}_V d\mu + \eta (VT-1) d\mu \right]
\end{equation}
with respect to $V$, $\mu$, $\phi$ and $\eta$.
We will use the equations
\begin{align} \label{2.5}
\int_U \phi {\mathcal L}_V d\mu
= & \int_U \left[
{\mathcal L}_V(\phi d\mu)
- ({\mathcal L}_V \phi) d\mu
\right] \\
= & - \int_U
(V \phi) d\mu
+ \int_{S_1} \phi(1) d\mu_1 -
\int_{S_0} \phi(0) d\mu_0 \notag
\end{align}
and
\begin{align} \label{2.6}
\int_U \eta VT d\mu = &
\int_U \left[ {\mathcal L}_V (T \eta d\mu) -
T {\mathcal L}_V (\eta d\mu) \right] \\
= &- \int_U T {\mathcal L}_V (\eta d\mu)
+ \int_{S_1} \eta(1) d\mu_1. \notag
\end{align}
The Euler-Lagrange equation for $V$ is
\begin{equation} \label{2.7}
V - \nabla \phi + \eta \nabla T = 0.
\end{equation}
The Euler-Lagrange equation for $\mu$ is
\begin{equation} \label{2.8}
\frac12 |V|^2 - V\phi = 0.
\end{equation}
Varying $T$ gives
\begin{equation} \label{2.9}
0 = {\mathcal L}_V(\eta d\mu) = (V\eta) d\mu,
\end{equation}
so the Euler-Lagrange equation for $T$ is
\begin{equation} \label{2.10}
V\eta = 0.
\end{equation}
One finds that $\phi$ and $T$ must satisfy
\begin{equation} \label{2.11}
\langle \nabla \phi, \nabla T \rangle = 1 - |\nabla \phi| \cdot
|\nabla T|.
\end{equation}
Then $V$ is given in terms of $\phi$ and $T$ by
\begin{equation} \label{2.12}
V = \nabla \phi + \frac{|\nabla \phi|}{|\nabla T|} \nabla T
\end{equation}
and must satisfy
\begin{equation} \label{2.13}
V \frac{|\nabla \phi|}{|\nabla T|} = 0,
\end{equation}
which is equivalent to
\begin{equation} \label{2.14}
\frac12 V |V|^2 = 0.
\end{equation}
Equation (\ref{2.14}) says that $V$ has constant
length along its flowlines.
The function $\eta$ is expressed in terms of $\phi$ and $T$ by
\begin{equation} \label{2.15}
\eta \: = \: - \: \frac{|\nabla \phi|}{|\nabla T|}.
\end{equation}
The measure $\mu$ must still satisfy the conservation law (\ref{2.2}).
From (\ref{2.8}), the evolution of $\phi$ between level sets
is given by
\begin{equation} \label{2.16}
V\phi = \frac12 |V|^2 = \frac12 \frac{|\nabla \phi|}{|\nabla T|}.
\end{equation}
The normal line to a level set $S_t$ is spanned by $\nabla T$.
It follows from (\ref{2.7}) that the tangential part of $V$
is the gradient of a function on $S_t$ :
\begin{equation} \label{2.17}
V_{tan} = \nabla_{S_t} \left( \phi \Big|_{S_t} \right).
\end{equation}
The normal part of $V$ is
\begin{equation} \label{2.18}
V_{norm} =
\frac{\langle V, \nabla T \rangle}{|\nabla T|^2} \nabla T =
\frac{1}{|\nabla T|^2} \nabla T,
\end{equation}
as must be the case from (\ref{2.1}).
The conclusion is that the tangential part of $V$ on $S_t$ is a gradient
vector field on $S_t$, while the normal part of $V$ on $S_t$ is unconstrained.
\section{Tangent cones} \label{section3}
\subsection{Optimal transport from submanifolds}
Let $M$ be a smooth closed Riemannian
manifold. Let $i : S \rightarrow M$ be an
embedding.
Let $\pi : TM \rightarrow M$ be the projection map.
Given $\epsilon > 0$, define
$E_\epsilon : TM \rightarrow TM$ by
$E_\epsilon(m,v) = \left( \exp_m (\epsilon v),
d(\exp_m)_{\epsilon v} \epsilon v \right)$.
We define $\pi^S$ and $E^S_\epsilon$ similarly, replacing $M$ by $S$.
Put $T_S M = i^* TM$, a vector bundle on $S$ with projection map
$\pi_{T_SM} : T_S M \rightarrow S$. There is an orthogonal
splitting $T_S M = TS \oplus N_S M$ into the tangential part and
the normal part. Let
$\pi_{N_SM} : N_S M \rightarrow S$
be the projection to the base of $N_SM$.
Given
$v \in TS$, let $v^T \in TS$ denote its tangential part and let
$v^\perp \in NS$ denote its normal part. Let
$p^T : T_SM \rightarrow TS$ be orthogonal projection.
A function $F : S \rightarrow \R \cup \{\infty\}$ is {\it semiconvex}
if there is some $\lambda \in \R$ so that for all minimizing
constant-speed geodesics $\gamma : [0,1] \rightarrow S$, we have
\begin{equation} \label{3.1}
F(\gamma(t)) \le t F(\gamma(1)) + (1-t) F(\gamma(0)) - \frac12
\lambda t (1-t) d(\gamma(0), \gamma(1))^2
\end{equation}
for all $t \in [0,1]$.
Suppose that $F$ is a semiconvex function on $S$. Then $(s, w) \in TS$
lies in the {\em subdifferential set}
$\nabla^- F$ if for all $w^\prime \in T_sS$,
\begin{equation} \label{3.2}
F(s) + \langle w, w^\prime \rangle \le F(\exp_s w^\prime) +
o(|w^\prime|).
\end{equation}
Define the cost function $c : S \times M \rightarrow \R$ by $c(s,x) = \frac12
d(s,x)^2$. Given $\eta : M \rightarrow \R \cup \{ - \infty \}$, its
$c$-transform is the function
$\eta^c : S \rightarrow \R \cup \{\infty\}$ given by
\begin{equation} \label{3.3}
\eta^c(s) = \sup_{x \in M} \left( \eta(x) - \frac12 d^2(s,x) \right).
\end{equation}
Given $\psi : S \rightarrow \R \cup \{ \infty \}$, its
$c$-transform is the function
$\psi^c : M \rightarrow \R \cup \{ - \infty\}$ given by
\begin{equation} \label{3.4}
\psi^c(x) = \inf_{s \in S} \left( \psi(s) + \frac12 d^2(s,x) \right).
\end{equation}
A function $\psi : S \rightarrow \R \cup \{ \infty \}$ is
{\em $c$-convex}
if $\psi = \eta^c$ for some
$\eta : M \rightarrow \R \cup \{ - \infty \}$.
A function $\eta : M \rightarrow \R \cup \{ -\infty \}$ is
{\em $c$-concave}
if $\eta = \psi^c$ for some
$\psi : S \rightarrow \R \cup \{ \infty \}$.
From \cite[Proposition 5.8]{Villani (2009)},
a function $F : S \rightarrow \R \cup \{- \infty\}$ is
$c$-convex if and only if $F = (F^c)^c$, i.e. for all $s \in S$,
\begin{equation} \label{3.5}
F(s) = \sup_{x \in M} \inf_{s^\prime \in S}
\left( F(s^\prime) + \frac12 d^2(s^\prime,x) -
\frac12 d^2(s,x) \right).
\end{equation}
The next lemma appears in \cite[Lemma 2.9]{Gigli (2011)} when $S=M$.
\begin{lemma} \label{lemma3.6}
If $F : S \rightarrow \R \cup \{\infty\}$ is a semiconvex function
then there is some $\epsilon > 0$ so that $\epsilon F$ is
$c$-convex.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Clearly
\begin{equation} \label{3.7}
\epsilon F(s) \ge \sup_{x \in M} \inf_{s^\prime \in S}
\left( \epsilon F(s^\prime) + \frac12 d^2(s^\prime,x) -
\frac12 d^2(s,x) \right),
\end{equation}
as is seen by taking $s^\prime = s$ on the right-hand side of (\ref{3.7}).
Hence we must show that for suitable $\epsilon > 0$, for all $s \in S$
we have
\begin{equation} \label{3.8}
\epsilon F(s) \le \sup_{x \in M} \inf_{s^\prime \in S}
\left( \epsilon F(s^\prime) + \frac12 d^2(s^\prime,x) -
\frac12 d^2(s,x) \right).
\end{equation}
For this, it suffices to show that for each $s \in S$, there is
some $x \in M$ so that
\begin{equation} \label{3.9}
\epsilon F(s) \le
\inf_{s^\prime \in S}
\left( \epsilon F(s^\prime) + \frac12 d^2(s^\prime,x) -
\frac12 d^2(s,x) \right).
\end{equation}
That is, it suffices to show that for each $s \in S$, there is
some $x \in M$ so that for all $s^\prime \in S$, we have
\begin{equation} \label{3.10}
\epsilon F(s) \le
\epsilon F(s^\prime) + \frac12 d^2(s^\prime,x) -
\frac12 d^2(s,x),
\end{equation}
i.e.
\begin{equation} \label{3.11}
\epsilon F(s) + \frac12 d^2(s,x) \le
\epsilon F(s^\prime) + \frac12 d^2(s^\prime,x).
\end{equation}
We know that $F$ is $K$-Lipschitz for some $K < \infty$
\cite[Theorem 10.8 and Proposition 10.12]{Villani (2009)}.
Hence if $v \in \nabla^-_s F$ then $|v| \le K$.
Given $s$, choose $v \in \nabla^-_s F$ and put $x = \exp_s (
\epsilon v) \in M$. Then $d(s,x) \le \epsilon K$.
Put $G(s^\prime) =
\epsilon F(s^\prime) + \frac12 d^2( s^\prime,x)$.
We want to show that $G(s) \le G(s^\prime)$ for all $s^\prime \in S$.
Suppose not.
Let $s^\prime$ be a minimum point for $G$; then
$G(s^\prime) < G(s)$.
We claim first that $s^\prime \in B_{4 \epsilon K}(s)$.
To see this, if $d(s,s^\prime) \ge 4 \epsilon K$ then since
\begin{equation} \label{3.12}
d(s^\prime,x) \ge d(s,s^\prime) - d(s,x) \ge
d(s,s^\prime) - \epsilon K,
\end{equation}
we have
\begin{align} \label{3.13}
\frac12 d^2(s^\prime,x) - \frac12 d^2(s,x) & \ge
\frac12 \left( d(s,s^\prime) - \epsilon K \right)^2 -
\frac12 \left( \epsilon K \right)^2 \\
& = \frac12
(d(s,s^\prime) - 2 \epsilon K) \cdot d(s,s^\prime) \notag \\
& \ge \epsilon K d(s,s^\prime) \ge \epsilon(F(s) - F(s^\prime)), \notag
\end{align}
which contradicts that $G(s^\prime) < G(s)$. This proves the claim.
If $10 \epsilon K$ is less than the injectivity radius of $M$ then there is a
unique minimizing geodesic from $s$ to $x$, and its tangent
vector at $s$ is $\epsilon v$.
It follows that $0 \in \nabla_s^- G$.
Finally, since $d(s,x) \le
\epsilon K$, we can choose an $\epsilon$ (depending on $K$, $S$ and $M$)
to ensure that $G$ is strictly
convex on $B_{4\epsilon K}(s)$, with the latter being a totally convex set.
Considering the function $G$ along a minimizing geodesic from
$s$ to $s^\prime$, we obtain a contradiction to the assumed strict
convexity of $G$, along with the facts that $0 \in \nabla_s^- G$ and
$0 \in \nabla_{s^\prime}^- G$.
Thus $G$ is minimized at $s$, which
implies (\ref{3.11}).
\end{proof}
Let $\nu$ be a compactly-supported probability measure on $T_S M
\subset TM$.
Let $L < \infty$ be such that the support of $\nu$ is contained in
$\{v \in T_SM \: : \: |v| \le L \}$.
Put $\mu_\epsilon = \pi_* (E_\epsilon)_* \nu$.
\begin{proposition} \label{proposition3.14}
a. Let $f$ be a semiconvex function on $S$. Suppose that
$\nu$ is supported on $\{v \in T_SM \: : \: v^T \in \nabla^- f \}$.
Then there is some $\epsilon > 0$ so that the $1$-parameter family of
measures $\{\mu_t\}_{t \in [0, \epsilon]}$ is
a Wasserstein geodesic. \\
b. Given $\nu$, suppose that
for some $\epsilon > 0$, the $1$-parameter family of
measures $\{\mu_t\}_{t \in [0, \epsilon]}$ is
a Wasserstein geodesic. Then there is a
semiconvex function $f$ on $S$ so that
$\nu$ is supported on $\{v \in T_SM \: : \: v^T \in \nabla^- f \}$.\\
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
a. For $t > 0$, define $\eta_t : M \rightarrow \R$ by
$\eta_t = (tf)^c$. From Lemma \ref{lemma3.6}, if $t$ is small enough then
$tf$ is $c$-convex. It follows from
\cite[Proposition 5.8]{Villani (2009)} that
$(\eta_t)^c = tf$.
From \cite[Theorem 5.10]{Villani (2009)},
if a set $\Gamma_t \subset S \times M$
is such that $\eta_t(x) = tf(s) + \frac12 d^2(s,x)$ for all
$(x,s) \in M \times S$ then any
probability measure $\Pi_t$ with support in $\Gamma_t$ is an optimal
transport plan.
We take
\begin{equation} \label{3.15}
\Gamma_t = \{(s,x) \in S \times M \: : \: \eta_t(x) = tf(s) + \frac12 d^2(s,x) \}.
\end{equation}
Now $\eta_t(x) = tf(s) + \frac12 d^2(s,x)$ if
for all $s^\prime \in S$, we have
\begin{equation} \label{3.16}
t f(s) + \frac12
d^2(s,x) \le t f(s^\prime) + \frac12
d^2(s^\prime,x).
\end{equation}
To prove part a. of the proposition,
it suffices to show that for all sufficiently
small $t$, equation (\ref{3.16}) is satisfied for
$s,s^\prime \in S$ and $x = \exp_s (tv)$, where
$v \in T_sM$ lies in the support of $\nu$ and
satisfies $v^T \in \nabla^- f$.
Given $s$ and $v$, we know that $d(s,x) \le tL$. Put
$G(s^\prime) = t f(s^\prime) +
\frac12 d^2(s^\prime, x)$. Let $s^\prime$ be a minimum point of
$G$ and suppose, to get a contradiction, that $G(s^\prime) < G(s)$.
Let $K < \infty$ be the Lipschitz constant of $f$.
We claim first that
$s^\prime \in B_{t(2K+2L)}(s)$.
To see this, if $d(s,s^\prime) \ge t(2K+2L)$ then
\begin{equation} \label{3.17}
d(s^\prime,x) \ge d(s,s^\prime) - d(s,x) \ge
d(s,s^\prime) - tL
\end{equation}
and
\begin{align} \label{3.18}
\frac12 d^2(s^\prime,x) - \frac12 d^2(s,x) & \ge
\frac12 \left( d(s,s^\prime) - tL \right)^2 - (tL)^2 \\
& = \frac12 (d(s,s^\prime) - 2tL) \cdot d(s,s^\prime) \notag \\
& \ge tK d(s,s^\prime) \ge t(f(s) - f(s^\prime)), \notag
\end{align}
which is a contradiction and proves the claim.
There is some $\epsilon > 0$ (depending on $L$, $S$ and $M$)
so that if $t \in [0, \epsilon]$ then we are ensured that
there is a unique minimizing geodesic from $s$ to $x$, and its
tangent vector at $s$ is $tv$. It follows that $0 \in \nabla_s^- G$.
Finally, since $d(s,x) \le \epsilon L$, we can choose $\epsilon$
(depending on $K$, $L$, $S$ and $M$) to ensure that $G$ is strictly
convex on $B_{t(2K+2L)}(s)$, the latter being totally convex.
Considering the function $G$ along a
minimizing geodesic from $s$ to $s^\prime$, we obtain a contradiction
to the assumed strict convexity of $G$, along with the facts that
$0 \in \nabla_s^- G$ and $0 \in \nabla_{s^\prime}^- G$.
This proves part (a) of the proposition.
Now suppose that $\{\mu_t\}_{t \in [0,\epsilon]}$ is a Wasserstein
geodesic. From \cite[Theorem 5.10]{Villani (2009)}, there is a $c$-convex
function $\epsilon f$ on $S$ so that if we define
its conjugate $(\epsilon f)^c$ using (\ref{3.4}) then
$\{(s, \exp_s(\epsilon v)\}_{(s,v) \in \supp(\nu)}$
is contained in
\begin{equation} \label{3.19}
\Gamma_\epsilon =
\left\{(s,x) \in S \times M \: : \: (\epsilon f)^c(x) =
\epsilon f(s) + \frac12 d^2(s,x) \right\}.
\end{equation}
That is, for all $s^\prime \in S$,
\begin{equation} \label{3.20}
\epsilon f(s) + \frac12 d^2(s,\exp_s(\epsilon v))
\le \epsilon f(s^\prime) +
\frac12 d^2(s^\prime,\exp_s(\epsilon v)).
\end{equation}
Without loss of generality, we can shrink $\epsilon$ as desired.
Define a curve in $S$ by $s^\prime(u) = \exp_s(- u w^\prime)$ where
$w^\prime \in T_sS$, $u$ varies over
a small interval $(-\delta, \delta)$ and $\exp_s$ denotes here the
exponential map for the submanifold $S$.
Let $\{\gamma_u : [0, \epsilon] \rightarrow M \}_{u \in
(- \delta, \delta)}$ be a smooth
$1$-parameter family with $\gamma_0(t) = \exp_s(tv)$,
$\gamma_u(0) = s^\prime(u)$ and $\gamma_u(\epsilon) =
\exp_s(\epsilon v)$. Let $L(u)$ be the length of $\gamma_u$.
Then
\begin{equation} \label{3.21}
\epsilon f(s^\prime(u)) + \frac12 d^2(s^\prime(u),\exp_s(\epsilon v))
\le \epsilon f(s^\prime(u)) +
\frac12 L^2(u).
\end{equation}
By the first variation formula,
\begin{equation} \label{3.22}
\frac{d}{du} \Big|_{u=0} \frac12 L^2(u) = \epsilon \langle v^T,
w^\prime \rangle.
\end{equation}
It follows that $\epsilon v^T \in \nabla_s^- (\epsilon f)$, so
$v^T \in \nabla_s^- f$.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}
The phenomenon of possible nonuniqueness,
in the normal component of the optimal transport between two measures supported
on convex hypersurfaces in Euclidean space, was recognized in
\cite[Proposition 4.3]{Gangbo-McCann (2000)}.
\end{remark}
\begin{example} \label{example3.23} Put $M = S^1 \times \R$. (It is noncompact, but this will
be irrelevant for the example.) Let $F \in C^\infty(S^1)$ be a positive
function. Put $S = \{(x, F(x)) : x \in S^1\}$.
Define $p : S \rightarrow S^1 \times \{0\}$ by
$p(x, F(x)) = (x,0)$.
Let $\mu_0$ be a
smooth measure on $S$. Put $\mu_1 = p_* \mu_0$. The Wasserstein
geodesic from $\mu_0$ to $\mu_1$ moves the measure down along
vertical lines. Defining $f$ on $S$ by
$f(x, F(x)) = - \frac12 \left( F(x) \right)^2$, one finds that
$v^T = \nabla f$. Compare with \cite[Corollary 2.6]{Castillon (2010)}.
\end{example}
\subsection{Tangent cones}
If $X$ is a complete length space with Alexandrov curvature bounded below
then one can define the tangent cone $T_xX$ at $x \in X$ as follows.
Let $\Sigma_x^\prime$ be the space of equivalence classes of minimal geodesic
segments emanating from $x$, with the equivalence relation identifying
two segments if they form a zero angle at $x$ (which means that one
segment is contained in the other). The metric on $\Sigma_x^\prime$ is
the angle. By definition, the space of directions $\Sigma_x$ is the
metric completion of $\Sigma_x^\prime$. The tangent cone $T_xX$ is the
union of $\R^+ \times \Sigma_x$ and a ``vertex'' point, with the metric
described in \cite[\S 10.9]{Burago-Burago-Ivanov (2001)}.
If $X$ is finite-dimensional then one can also describe $T_x X$ as the
pointed Gromov-Hausdorff limit $\lim_{\lambda \rightarrow \infty}
\left( \lambda X, x \right)$. This latter description doesn't make sense
if $X$ is infinite-dimensional, whereas the preceding definition does.
If $M$ is a smooth compact connected Riemannian manifold, and it has
nonnegative sectional curvature, then $P(M)$ has nonnegative Alexandrov
curvature and one can talk about a tangent cone $T_{\mu} P(M)$
\cite[Appendix A]{Lott-Villani (2009)}. If
$M$ does not have nonnegative sectional curvature then $P(M)$ will not
have Alexandrov curvature bounded below. Nevertheless, one can still
define $T_{\mu} P(M)$ in the same way \cite[Section 3]{Ohta (2009)}.
As a point of terminology, what is called a tangent cone here, and in
\cite{Lott-Villani (2009)},
is called the ``abstract tangent space'' in
\cite{Gigli (2011)}. The linear part of the tangent cone is called the
``tangent space'' in \cite{Ambrosio-Gigli (2008)} and the
``space of gradients'' or ``tangent vector fields'' in \cite{Gigli (2011)}
A minimal geodesic segment emanating from $\mu \in P(M)$ is determined by
a probability measure $\Pi$ on the space of constant-speed minimizing geodesics
\begin{equation}
\Gamma = \{ \gamma : [0,1] \rightarrow M \: : \: L(\gamma) =
d_M(\gamma(0), \gamma(1)) \},
\end{equation}
which has the property that under the time-zero
evaluation $e_0 : \Gamma \rightarrow M$,
we have $(e_0)_* \Gamma = \mu$
\cite[Section 2]{Lott-Villani (2009)}. The corresponding geodesic segment
is given by $\mu_t = (e_t)_* \Pi$, where $e_t : \Gamma \rightarrow M$
is time-$t$ evaluation.
Using this characterization of minimizing geodesic segments, one can
describe $T_{\mu} P(M)$ as follows. With $\pi : TM \rightarrow M$ being
projection to the base, put
\begin{equation}
P_2(TM)_{\mu} = \{ \nu \in P_2(TM) \: : \: \pi_* \nu = \mu \},
\end{equation}
where $P_2$ refers to measures with finite second moment.
Given $\nu^1, \nu^2 \in P_2(TM)_\mu$, decompose them as
\begin{equation}
\nu^i = \int_M \nu^i_m \: d\mu(m),
\end{equation}
with $\nu^i_m \in P_2(T_mM)$. Define $W_{\mu} (\nu^1, \nu^2)$ by
\begin{equation}
W_{\mu}^2 (\nu^1, \nu^2) = \int_M W_2^2(\nu^1_m, \nu^2_m) \: d\mu(m).
\end{equation}
Let $\Dir_\mu$ be the set of elements $\nu \in P_2(TM)_\mu$ with the
property that $\{\pi_* (E_t)_* \nu \}_{t \in [0, \epsilon]}$ describes
a minimizing Wasserstein geodesic for some $\epsilon$. Then
$T_{\mu} P(M)$ is isometric to the metric completion of $\Dir_{\mu}$
with respect to $W_\mu$ \cite[Theorem 5.5]{Gigli (2011)}.
We note that since $M$ is compact, any element of $\Dir_\mu$ has compact
support. This is because for $\nu$-almost all $v \in TM$, the
geodesic $\{\exp_{\pi(v)} tv \}_{t \in [0, \epsilon]}$ must be
minimizing \cite[Proposition 2.10]{Lott-Villani (2009)}, so
$|v| \le \epsilon^{-1} \diam(M)$. \\ \\
{\it Proof of Theorem \ref{theorem1.1} : } From Proposition
\ref{proposition3.14},
$\Dir_{\mu}$ is the set of compactly-supported measures
$\nu \in P(T_SM) \subset P(TM)$ so that $\pi_* \nu = \mu$ and
there is a semiconvex function $f$ on $S$ such that
$\nu$ has support on $\{v \in T_SM \: : \: v^T \in \nabla^- f\}$.
Because $\mu$ has full support on $S$ by assumption, $\nabla^- f$ is
single-valued at $\mu$-almost all $s \in S$. Equivalently, there is a
compactly-supported $\nu^N \in P(N_SM)$, which decomposes under
$\pi_{N_SM} \: : \: N_SM \rightarrow S$ as
$\nu^N = \int_S \nu^N_s \: d\mu(s)$ with
$\nu^N_s \in P_2(N_sM)$, so that for all
$F \in C(T_SM) = C(TS \oplus N_SM)$,
we have
\begin{equation}
\int_{T_SM} F \: d\nu = \int_S \int_{N_sM} F(\nabla^-f(s), w) \:
d\nu^N_s(w) \: d\mu(s).
\end{equation}
Given two such measures $\nu^1, \nu^2$, it follows that
\begin{equation} \label{w2}
W^2_{\mu}(\nu^1, \nu^2) = \int_S \langle \nabla^-f^1, \nabla^-f^2 \rangle
\: d\mu + \int_S W_2^2(\nu^{1,N}_s, \nu^{2,N}_s) \: d\mu(s).
\end{equation}
Upon taking the metric completion of $\Dir_{\mu}$, the tangential term
in (\ref{w2}) gives
the closure of the space of gradient vector fields
in the Hilbert space $L^2(TS, d\mu)$ of
square-integrable sections of $TS$
\cite[Proposition A.33]{Lott-Villani (2009)}.
The normal term gives
$\int_{s \in S} P_2(N_sM) \: d\mu(s)$, where the metric comes from
the last term in (\ref{w2}). This proves the theorem. \qed
\begin{remark}
In Section 2 we considered transports in which the intermediate
measures were supported on hypersurfaces. This corresponds to
Wasserstein geodesics starting from $\mu$ for which the initial
velocity, as an element of $T_\mu P(M)$, comes from a section of
$T_SM$. In terms of Theorem \ref{theorem1.1}, this means that the data
for the initial velocity consisted of a gradient vector field
$\nabla \phi$ on $S$
and a section ${\mathcal N}$ of $N_SM$, with the element of
$P_2(N_sM)$ being the delta measure at ${\mathcal N}(s)$.
\end{remark}
\section{Weak solutions to the parallel transport equation} \label{section4}
Let $M$ be a compact connnected Riemannian manifold.
Put
\begin{equation} \label{4.1}
P^\infty(M) = \{ \rho \: \dvol_M \: : \: \rho \in C^\infty(M),
\rho> 0, \int_M \rho \: \dvol_M \: = \: 1 \}.
\end{equation}
Given $\phi \in C^\infty(M)$, define a vector field $V_\phi$ on
$P^\infty(M)$ by saying that for $F \in C^\infty(P^\infty(M))$,
\begin{equation} \label{4.2}
(V_\phi F)(\rho \dvol_M) \: = \:
\frac{d}{d\epsilon} \Big|_{\epsilon = 0}
F \left( \rho \dvol_M \: - \: \epsilon \: \nabla^i ( \rho \nabla_i \phi) \dvol_M \right).
\end{equation}
The map $\phi \rightarrow V_\phi$ passes to an isomorphism
$C^\infty(M)/\R \rightarrow T_{\rho \dvol_M} P^\infty(M)$.
Otto's Riemannian metric on $P^\infty(M)$ is given \cite{Otto (2001)} by
\begin{align} \label{4.3}
\langle V_{\phi_1}, V_{\phi_2} \rangle (\rho \dvol_M) \: & = \:
\int_M \langle \nabla \phi_1, \nabla \phi_2 \rangle \: \rho \: \dvol_M \\
& = \: - \:
\int_M \phi_1 \nabla^i ( \rho \nabla_i \phi_2) \: \dvol_M. \notag
\end{align}
In view of (\ref{4.2}), we write $\delta_{V_{\phi}} \rho \: = \: - \: \nabla^i ( \rho \nabla_i \phi)$.
Then
\begin{equation} \label{4.4}
\langle V_{\phi_1}, V_{\phi_2} \rangle (\rho \dvol_M) \: = \:
\int_M \phi_1 \: \delta_{V_{\phi_2}} \rho \: \dvol_M
\: = \: \int_M \phi_2 \: \delta_{V_{\phi_1}} \rho \: \dvol_M.
\end{equation}
To write the equation for parallel transport, let
$c \: : \: [0,1] \rightarrow P^\infty(M)$ be a smooth curve. We write
$c(t) \: = \: \mu_t \: = \: \rho(t) \: \dvol_M$
and define $\phi(t) \in C^\infty(M)$, up to a constant,
by $\frac{dc}{dt} \: = \: V_{\phi(t)}$.
This is the same as saying
\begin{equation} \label{4.5}
\frac{\partial \rho}{\partial t} +
\nabla^j \left( \rho \nabla_j \phi \right) = 0.
\end{equation}
Let $V_{\eta(t)}$ be a vector field along $c$,
with $\eta(t) \in C^\infty(M)$.
The equation for $V_{\eta}$ to be parallel along $c$
\cite[Proposition 3]{Lott (2008)} is
\begin{equation} \label{4.6}
\nabla_i \left( \rho \left( \nabla^i \frac{\partial \eta}{\partial t} \: + \:
\nabla_j \phi \: \nabla^i \nabla^j \eta \right) \right) \: = \: 0.
\end{equation}
\begin{lemma} \label{lemma4.7}
\cite[Lemma 5]{Lott (2008)} If $\eta, \overline{\eta}$
are solutions of (\ref{4.6}) then
$\int_M \langle \nabla \eta, \nabla \overline{\eta} \rangle \: d\mu_t$
is constant in $t$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{lemma} \label{lemma4.8}
Given $\eta_1 \in C^\infty(M)$, there is at most one solution of
(\ref{4.6}) with $\eta(1) = \eta_1$, up to time-dependent additive
constants.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
By linearity, it suffices to consider the case when $\eta_1 = 0$.
From Lemma \ref{lemma4.7},
$\nabla \eta(t) = 0$ and so $\eta(t)$ is spatially constant.
\end{proof}
For consistency with later notation, we will write
$C^\infty([0,1]; C^\infty(M))$ for $C^\infty([0,1] \times M)$.
\begin{lemma} (c.f. \cite[(5.8)]{Ambrosio-Gigli (2008)}) \label{lemma4.9}
Given $f \in C^\infty([0,1]; C^\infty(M))$, if $\eta$ satisfies (\ref{4.6})
then
\begin{equation} \label{4.10}
\frac{d}{dt} \int_M \langle \nabla f, \nabla \eta \rangle \: d\mu_t =
\int_M \langle \nabla \frac{\partial f}{\partial t},
\nabla \eta \rangle \: d\mu_t +
\int_M \Hess_f(\nabla \eta, \nabla \phi) \: d\mu_t.
\end{equation}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
We have
\begin{align} \label{4.11}
\frac{d}{dt} \int_M \langle \nabla f, \nabla \eta \rangle \: d\mu_t = &
\frac{d}{dt} \int_M \langle \nabla f, \nabla \eta \rangle \: \rho \:
\dvol_M \\ = &
\int_M \langle \nabla \frac{\partial f}{\partial t},
\nabla \eta \rangle \: \rho \:
\dvol_M +
\int_M \langle \nabla f, \nabla \frac{\partial \eta}{\partial t}
\rangle \: \rho \:
\dvol_M + \notag \\
& \int_M \langle \nabla f, \nabla \eta \rangle \:
\frac{\partial \rho}{\partial t}
\:
\dvol_M \notag
\end{align}
Then
\begin{align} \label{4.12}
& \frac{d}{dt} \int_M \langle \nabla f, \nabla \eta \rangle \: d\mu_t
- \int_M \langle \nabla \frac{\partial f}{\partial t},
\nabla \eta \rangle \: d\mu_t \\
& = \int_M (\nabla_i f) \:
\left( \nabla^i \frac{\partial \eta}{\partial t} \right)
\: \rho \:
\dvol_M -
\int_M (\nabla_i f) \: (\nabla^i \eta) \:
\nabla^j \left( \rho \nabla_j \phi \right) \:
\dvol_M \notag \\
& = - \int_M f \: \nabla_i
\left( \rho \nabla^i \frac{\partial \eta}{\partial t} \right)
\: \dvol_M -
\int_M (\nabla_i f) \: (\nabla^i \eta) \:
\nabla^j \left( \rho \nabla_j \phi \right) \:
\dvol_M \notag \\
& = \int_M f
\nabla_i \left( \rho
(\nabla_j \phi) \: (\nabla^i \nabla^j \eta) \right) \:
\dvol_M +
\int_M \nabla^j ((\nabla_i f) \: (\nabla^i \eta)) \:
(\nabla_j \phi) \: \rho \: \dvol_M \notag \\
& = - \int_M (\nabla_i f) \:
(\nabla_j \phi) \: (\nabla^i \nabla^j \eta) \: \rho \:
\dvol_M \notag \\
& + \int_M \nabla^j ((\nabla_i f) \: (\nabla^i \eta)) \:
(\nabla_j \phi) \: \rho \: \dvol_M \notag \\
& =
\int_M ( \nabla^j \nabla_i f) \: (\nabla^i \eta) \:
(\nabla_j \phi) \: \rho \: \dvol_M \notag \\
& =
\int_M \Hess_f(
\nabla \eta,
\nabla \phi) \: d\mu_t. \notag
\end{align}
This proves the lemma.
\end{proof}
We now weaken the regularity assumptions.
Let $P^{ac}(M)$ denote the absolutely continuous
probability measures on $M$ with
full support. Suppose that $c \: : \: [0,1] \rightarrow P^{ac}(M)$ is a
Lipschitz curve whose derivative $c^\prime(t) \in T_{c(t)} P(M)$
exists for almost all $t$. We can write $c^\prime(t) = V_{\phi(t)}$
with $\nabla \phi(t) \in L^2(TM, dc(t))$. By the Lipschitz assumption,
the essential supremum over $t \in [0,1]$ of
$\| \nabla \phi(t) \|_{L^2(TM, dc(t))}$ is finite. As before, we write
$c(t) = \mu_t$.
\begin{definition} \label{definition4.13}
Let $c \: : \: [0,1] \rightarrow P^{ac}(M)$ be a
Lipschitz curve whose derivative $c^\prime(t) \in T_{c(t)} P(M)$
exists for almost all $t$.
Given $\nabla \eta_0 \in L^2(TM, d\mu_0)$, $\nabla
\eta_1 \in L^2(TM, d\mu_1)$ and
$\nabla \eta \in L^2([0,1]; L^2(TM, d\mu_t))$, we say that
$(\nabla \eta, \nabla \eta_0, \nabla \eta_1)$
is a weak solution of the parallel transport equation if
\begin{align} \label{4.14}
& \int_M \langle \nabla f(1), \nabla \eta_1 \rangle \: d\mu_1 -
\int_M \langle \nabla f(0), \nabla \eta_0 \rangle \: d\mu_0 = \\
& \int_0^1
\int_M \left( \left\langle \nabla \frac{\partial f}{\partial t},
\nabla \eta \right\rangle \: + \:
\Hess_f(\nabla \eta, \nabla \phi) \right) \: d\mu_t\: dt \notag
\end{align}
for all $f \in C^\infty([0,1]; C^\infty(M))$.
\end{definition}
\begin{remark}
In what follows, there would be analogous results if we replaced
$C^\infty([0,1]; C^\infty(M))$ everywhere
by $C^0([0,1]; C^2(M)) \cap C^1([0,1]; C^1(M))$.
We will stick with $C^\infty([0,1]; C^\infty(M))$
for concreteness.
\end{remark}
From Lemma \ref{lemma4.9}, if
$c$ is a smooth curve in $P^\infty(M)$ and
$\eta \in C^\infty([0,1]; C^\infty(M))$ is a solution
of (\ref{4.6}) then
$(\nabla \eta, \nabla \eta(0), \nabla \eta(1))$ is a weak solution of the
parallel transport equation. We now prove the converse.
\begin{lemma} \label{lemma4.15}
Suppose that $c$ is a smooth curve in $P^\infty(M)$.
Given $\eta_0, \eta_1 \in C^\infty(M)$ and $\eta \in C^\infty([0,1];
C^\infty(M))$, if $(\nabla \eta, \nabla \eta_0, \nabla \eta_1)$
is a weak solution of the parallel transport equation then
$\eta$ satisfies (\ref{4.6}), $\eta(0) = \eta_0$ and $\eta(1) = \eta_1$
(modulo constants).
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
In this case,
equation (\ref{4.14}) is equivalent to
\begin{align} \label{4.16}
& \int_M \langle \nabla f(1), \nabla \eta_1 \rangle \: d\mu_1 -
\int_M \langle \nabla f(0), \nabla \eta_0 \rangle \: d\mu_0 = \\
& \int_M \langle \nabla f(1), \nabla \eta(1) \rangle \: d\mu_1 -
\int_M \langle \nabla f(0), \nabla \eta(0) \rangle \: d\mu_0
+ \notag \\
& \int_0^1 \int_M f
\nabla_i \left(
\nabla^i \frac{\partial \eta}{\partial t}
+ \nabla_j \phi \nabla^i \nabla^j \eta \right)
\: d\mu_t\: dt. \notag
\end{align}
Taking $f \in C^\infty([0,1]; C^\infty(M))$ with $f(0) = f(1) = 0$,
it follows that (\ref{4.6}) must hold. Then taking all
$f \in C^\infty([0,1]; C^\infty(M))$, it follows that
$\nabla \eta_0 = \nabla \eta(0)$ and $\nabla \eta_1 = \nabla \eta(1)$.
Hence $\eta(0) = \eta_0$ and
$\eta(1) = \eta_1$ (modulo constants).
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma} \label{lemma4.17}
Suppose that $c$ is a smooth curve in $P^\infty(M)$.
Given $\nabla \eta_0 \in L^2(TM, d\mu_0)$,
$\nabla \eta_1 \in L^2(TM, d\mu_1)$,
$\nabla \eta \in L^2([0,1]; L^2(TM, d\mu_t))$ and
$f \in C^\infty([0,1]; C^\infty(M))$,
suppose that
\begin{enumerate}
\item $(\nabla \eta, \nabla \eta_0, \nabla \eta_1)$
is a weak solution to the parallel
transport equation,
\item $f$ satisfies (\ref{4.6}),
\item $\nabla f(1) = \nabla \eta_1$,
\item
\begin{equation} \label{4.18}
\int_M | \nabla \eta_0 |^2 \: d\mu_0 \le
\int_M | \nabla \eta_1 |^2 \: d\mu_1
\end{equation}
and
\item
\begin{equation} \label{4.19}
\int_0^1 \int_M | \nabla \eta |^2 \: d\mu_t \: dt \le
\int_M | \nabla \eta_1 |^2 \: d\mu_1
\end{equation}
\end{enumerate}
Then $\nabla f(0) = \nabla \eta_0$, and $\nabla f(t) = \nabla \eta(t)$
for almost all $t$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
From (\ref{4.6}) (applied to $f$) and (\ref{4.14}), we have
\begin{equation} \label{4.20}
\int_M \langle \nabla f(0), \nabla \eta_0 \rangle \: d\mu_0 \: = \:
\int_M \langle \nabla f(1), \nabla \eta_1 \rangle \: d\mu_1 =
\int_M \langle \nabla \eta_1, \nabla \eta_1 \rangle \: d\mu_1.
\end{equation}
From Lemma \ref{lemma4.7},
\begin{equation} \label{4.21}
\int_M \langle \nabla f(0), \nabla f(0) \rangle \: d\mu_0 \: = \:
\int_M \langle \nabla f(1), \nabla f(1) \rangle \: d\mu_1 \: = \:
\int_M \langle \nabla \eta_1, \nabla \eta_1 \rangle \: d\mu_1.
\end{equation}
Then
\begin{equation} \label{4.22}
\int_M | \nabla (\eta_0 - f(0)) |^2 \: d\mu_0 \: = \:
\int_M |\nabla \eta_0|^2 \: d\mu_0 - \int_M |\nabla \eta_1|^2 \: d\mu_1
\le 0.
\end{equation}
Thus $\nabla f(0) = \nabla \eta_0$ in $L^2(TM, d\mu_0)$.
Next, replacing $f$ by $tf$ in (\ref{4.14}) gives
\begin{equation} \label{4.23}
\int_0^1 \int_M
\langle \nabla f, \nabla \eta \rangle \: d\mu_t \: dt \: = \:
\int_M \langle \nabla f(1), \nabla \eta_1 \rangle \: d\mu_1 \: = \:
\int_M \langle \nabla \eta_1, \nabla \eta_1 \rangle \: d\mu_1.
\end{equation}
Then
\begin{align} \label{4.24}
& \int_0^1 \int_M |\nabla f - \nabla \eta|^2 \: d\mu_t \: dt \: = \\
& \int_0^1 \int_M |\nabla f|^2 \: d\mu_t \: dt \: - \: 2
\int_0^1 \int_M \langle \nabla f, \nabla \eta \rangle \: d\mu_t \: dt \: + \:
\int_0^1 \int_M |\nabla \eta|^2 \: d\mu_t \: dt \: = \notag \\
& \int_M |\nabla f(1)|^2 \: d\mu_1 \: - \: 2
\int_M | \nabla \eta_1|^2 \: d\mu_1 \: + \:
\int_0^1 \int_M |\nabla \eta|^2 \: d\mu_t \: dt \: = \notag \\
& \int_0^1 \int_M |\nabla \eta|^2 \: d\mu_t \: dt \: - \:
\int_M |\nabla \eta_1|^2 \: d\mu_1 \: \le \: 0. \notag
\end{align}
Thus $\nabla f(t) = \nabla \eta(t)$ in $L^2(TM, d\mu_t)$, for almost all $t$.
\end{proof}
\section{Parallel transport along Wasserstein geodesics} \label{section5}
\subsection{Parallel transport in a finite-dimensional Alexandrov space}
\label{subsection5.1}
We recall the construction of parallel transport in a finite-dimensional
Alexandrov space $X$.
Let $c : [0,1] \rightarrow X$ be a geodesic segment that lies in the
interior of a minimizing geodesic. Then $T_{c(t)} X$ is an isometric
product of $\R$ with the normal cone $N_{c(t)} X$.
We want to construct a parallel transport map from
$N_{c(1)} X$ to $N_{c(0)} X$.
Given $Q \in \Z^+$ and $0 \le i \le Q-1$, define
${c}_i : [0,1] \rightarrow X$ by
${c}_i(u) = c \left( \frac{i + u}{Q} \right)$.
We define an approximate parallel transport $P_i : N_{{c}_i(1)} X
\rightarrow N_{{c}_i(0)} X$ as follows. Given
$v \in N_{{c}_i(1)} X$, let $\gamma : [0, \epsilon] \rightarrow X$
be a minimizing geodesic segment with $\gamma(0) = {c}_i(1)$ and
$\gamma^\prime(0) = v$. For each $s \in (0, \epsilon]$, let
$\mu_s : [0, 1] \rightarrow X$ be a minimizing geodesic with
$\mu_s(0) = {c}_i(0)$ and $\mu_s(1) = \gamma(s)$.
Let $w_s \in N_{{c}_i(0)} X$
be the normal projection of $\frac{1}{s} \mu_s^\prime(0) \in T_{{c}_i(0)} X$.
After passing to a sequence $s_i \rightarrow 0$, we can assume that
$\lim_{i \rightarrow \infty} w_{s_i} = w \in N_{{c}_i(0)} X$.
Then $P_i(v) = w$. If $X$ has nonnegative Alexandrov curvature then
$|w| \ge |v|$.
In \cite{Petrunin (1998)},
the approximate parallel transport from an appropriate dense subset
$L_Q \subset N_{c(1)} X$ to $N_{c(0)} X$ was defined to be
$P_0 \circ P_1 \circ \ldots \circ P_{Q-1}$. It was shown that by
taking $Q \rightarrow \infty$ and applying a diagonal argument,
in the limit one obtains an isometry from a dense subset of
$N_{c(1)} X$ to $N_{c(0)} X$. This extends by continuity to an
isometry from $N_{c(1)} X$ to $N_{c(0)} X$.
If $X$ is a smooth Riemannian manifold then $P_i$ is independent of
the choices and can be described as follows. Given
$v \in N_{{c}_i(1)} X$, let $j_v(u)$ be the Jacobi field along
$c$ with $j_v(0) = 0$ and $j_v(1) = v$. (It is unique since $c$ is in
the interior of a minimizing geodesic.) Then
$P_i(v) = j_v^\prime(0)$.
\subsection{Construction of parallel transport along a
Wasserstein geodesic of delta measures}
\label{subsection5.1.5}
Let $M$ be a compact connected Riemannian manifold. Let
$\gamma : [0, 1] \rightarrow M$ be a geodesic segment that
lies in the interior of a minimizing geodesic. Let
$\Pi : T_{\gamma(1)} M \rightarrow T_{\gamma(0)} M$ be
(reverse) parallel transport along $\gamma$. Put
$c(t) = \delta_{\gamma(t)} \in P(M)$. Then
$\{c(t)\}_{t \in [0,1]}$ is a Wasserstein geodesic that
lies in the interior of a minimizing geodesic.
We apply Petrunin's construction to define parallel transport directly
from the tangent cone $T_{c(1)} P(M)$ to the tangent cone
$T_{c(0)} P(M)$ (instead of the normal cones).
\begin{proposition} \label{deltaprop} The parallel
transport map from $T_{c(1)} P(M) \cong P_2(T_{\gamma(1)} M)$ to
$T_{c(0)} P(M) \cong P_2(T_{\gamma(0)} M)$ is the map
$\mu \rightarrow \Pi_* \mu$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
Given $Q \in \Z^+$ and $0 \le i \le Q-1$, define
$\gamma_i : [0,1] \rightarrow M$ by
$\gamma_i(u) = \gamma \left( \frac{i + u}{Q} \right)$ and
${c}_i : [0,1] \rightarrow P(M)$ by
${c}_i(u) =
\delta_{\gamma_i(u)}$.
We define an approximate parallel transport $P_i : T_{{c}_i(1)} P(M)
\rightarrow T_{{c}_i(0)} P(M)$ as follows.
Given $s \in \R^+$ and a real vector space $V$, let $R_s : V \rightarrow V$
be multiplication by $s$.
Let $\nu$ be a compactly-supported element of $P(T_{\gamma_i(1)} M)$.
For small $\epsilon > 0$, there is a Wasserstein geodesic
$\sigma \: : \: {[0, \epsilon]} \rightarrow P(M)$, with $\sigma(0) = c_i(1)$
and $\sigma^\prime(0)$ corresponding to $\nu \in T_{c_i(1)}PM$, given
by $\sigma(s) = (\exp_{\gamma_i(1)} \circ R_s)_* \nu$. Given
$s \in (0, \epsilon]$, let $\mu_s : [0,1] \rightarrow P(M)$ be a
minimizing geodesic with $\mu_s(0) = c_i(0) =
\delta_{\gamma_i(0)}$
and $\mu_s(1) = \sigma(s)$. There is a compactly-supported measure
$\tau_s \in P_2(T_{\gamma_i(0)}M) = T_{c_i(0)} P(M)$
so that for $v \in [0,1]$, we have
$\mu_s(v) = (\exp_{\gamma_i(0)} \circ R_v)_* \tau_s$. If
$Q$ is large and $\epsilon$ is small then all of the constructions take
place well inside a totally convex ball, so $\tau_s$ is unique and can
be written as $\tau_s = \left(
\exp_{\gamma_i(0)}^{-1} \circ \exp_{\gamma_i(1)} \circ R_s \right)_* \nu$.
Then $\lim_{s \rightarrow 0} \frac{1}{s} \tau_s$ exists and equals
$(d\exp_{\gamma_i(0)})^{-1}_* \nu$.
Thus $P_i = (d\exp_{\gamma_i(0)})^{-1}_*$.
Now
\begin{equation}
P_0 \circ P_1 \circ \ldots \circ P_{Q-1} =
\left( (d\exp_{\gamma_0(0)})^{-1} \circ (d\exp_{\gamma_1(0)})^{-1}
\circ \ldots \circ (d\exp_{\gamma_{Q-1}(0)})^{-1} \right)_*.
\end{equation}
Taking $Q \rightarrow \infty$, this approaches $\Pi_*$.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Construction of parallel transport along a
Wasserstein geodesic of absolutely continuous measures}
\label{subsection5.2}
Let $M$ be a compact connected Riemannian manifold
with nonnegative sectional curvature.
Then $(P(M), W_2)$ has nonnegative Alexandrov curvature.
Let $c : [0,1] \rightarrow P^{ac}(M)$ be a geodesic segment that lies in the
interior of a minimizing geodesic.
Write $c^\prime(t) = V_{\phi(t)}$. Since $\phi(t)$ is defined up to a
constant, it will be convenient to normalize it by
$\int_M \phi(t) \: d\mu_t = 0$.
We assume that
\begin{equation} \label{5.1}
\sup_{t \in [0,1]} \| \phi(t) \|_{C^2(M)} \: < \: \infty.
\end{equation}
In particular, this is satisfied if $c$ lies in $P^\infty(M)$.
Let $N_{c(t)} P(M)$ denote the
normal cone to $c$ at $c(t)$.
We want to construct a parallel transport map from
$N_{c(1)} P(M)$ to $N_{c(0)} P(M)$.
Given $Q \in \Z^+$ and $0 \le i \le Q-1$, define
${c}_i : [0,1] \rightarrow P(M)$ by
${c}_i(u) = c \left( \frac{i + u}{Q} \right)$.
Correspondingly, write ${\mu}_{i,u} = \mu_{\frac{i + u}{Q}}$.
We define an approximate parallel transport $P_i : N_{{c}_i(1)} P(M)
\rightarrow N_{{c}_i(0)} P(M)$, using Jacobi fields, as follows.
Let us write ${c}_i^\prime(u) = V_{\phi_i(u)}$,
i.e. $\phi_i(u) = \frac{1}{Q} \phi \left( \frac{i + u}{Q} \right)$.
The curve ${c}_i$ is given by
${c}_i(u) = (F_{i,u})_* {c}_i(0)$, where
$F_{i,u}(x) = \exp_x (u \nabla_x \phi_i(0))$.
That is, for any $f \in C^\infty(M)$,
\begin{equation} \label{5.2}
\int_M f \: d{c}_i(u) = \int_M f(F_{i,u}(x)) \: d\mu_{i,0}(x).
\end{equation}
If $\sigma_i$ is a variation of $\phi_i(0)$, i.e. $\delta
\phi_i(0) =\sigma_i$, then taking the variation of (\ref{5.2}) gives
\begin{align} \label{5.3}
\int_M f \: d \delta {c}_i(u) & =
\int_M \langle \nabla f, d\exp_{u \nabla_x \phi_i(0)}
(u \nabla_x \sigma_i)
\rangle_{F_{i,u}(x)} \: d\mu_{i,0}(x) \\
& = u \int_M \langle \nabla f, W_{\sigma_i}(u)
\rangle \: d\mu_{i,u}. \notag
\end{align}
Here
\begin{equation} \label{5.4}
(W_{\sigma_i}(u))_y = d \exp_{u \nabla_x \phi_i(0)}
(\nabla_x \sigma_i),
\end{equation}
with $y = F_{i,u}(x)$.
The corresponding tangent vector at ${c}_i(u)$ is
represented by
$L_{\sigma_i}(u) = \Pi_{{c}_i(u)} W_{\sigma_i}(u)$, where
$\Pi_{{c}_i(u)}$ is orthogonal projection on
$\overline{\Image \nabla} \subset L^2(TM, d\mu_{i,u})$.
We can think of $J_{\sigma_i}(u) = u L_{\sigma_{i}}(u)$ as a Jacobi
field along ${c}_i$.
If $v = J_{\sigma_i}(1) =
L_{\sigma_i}(1) = \Pi_{{c}_i(1)} W_{\sigma_i}(1)$ then
its approximate parallel transport along ${c}_i$ is represented by
$w = J_{\sigma_i}^\prime(0) = L_{\sigma_i}(0) = \nabla \sigma_i \in
\overline{\Image \nabla} \subset L^2(TM, d\mu_{i,0})$.
Next, using (\ref{5.4}), for $f \in C^\infty(M)$ we have
\begin{align} \label{5.5}
\frac{d}{du}
\int_M \langle V_f, L_{\sigma_i} \rangle \: d\mu_{i,u} = &
\frac{d}{du}
\int_M \langle V_f, W_{\sigma_i} \rangle \: d\mu_{i,u} =
\frac{d}{du}
\int_M \langle \nabla f, d\exp_{u \nabla_x \phi_i(0)}
(\nabla_x \sigma_i)
\rangle_{F_{i,u}(x)} \: d\mu_{i,0}(x) \\
= &
\int_M \Hess_{F_{i,u}(x)}(f) \left(
d\exp_{u \nabla_x \phi_i(0)}
(\nabla_x \phi_i(0)),
d \exp_{u \nabla_x \phi_i(0)}
(\nabla_x \sigma_i)
\right) \: d{\mu}_{i,0}(x) + \notag \\
& \int_M \langle \nabla f, D_{\partial_u}
d \exp_{u \nabla_x \phi_i(0)}
(\nabla_x \sigma_i)
\rangle_{F_{i,u}(x)} \: d{\mu}_{i,0}(x) \notag \\
= &
\int_M \Hess(f) \left( \nabla \phi_i(u),
W_{\sigma_i}(u)
\right) \: d{\mu}_{i,u} + \notag \\
& \int_M \langle \nabla f, D_{\partial_u} W_{\sigma_i}(u)
\rangle \: d{\mu}_{i,u}. \notag
\end{align}
Here $\partial_{u}$ is the vector at $F_{i,u}(x)$ given by
\begin{equation} \label{5.6}
\partial_u = \frac{d}{du} F_{i,u}(x) =
d\exp_{u \nabla_x \phi_i(0)} (\nabla_x \phi_i(0)).
\end{equation}
If instead $f \in C^\infty([0,1]; C^\infty(M))$ then
\begin{align} \label{5.7}
\frac{d}{du} \int_M \langle V_f, L_{\sigma_i} \rangle \: d\mu_{i,u} \: = &
\int_M \left\langle \nabla
\frac{\partial f}{\partial u}, L_{\sigma_i} \right\rangle \: d\mu_{i,u} \:
+ \\
& \int_M \Hess(f) \left( \nabla \phi_i(u),
W_{\sigma_i}(u)
\right) \: d{\mu}_{i,u} + \notag \\
& \int_M \langle \nabla f, D_{\partial_u} W_{\sigma_i}(u)
\rangle \: d{\mu}_{i,u}. \notag
\end{align}
We will need to estimate $\int_M | W_{\sigma_i}(u) - L_{\sigma_i}(u) |^2
\: d{\mu}_{i,u}$.
\begin{lemma} \label{lemest}
For large $Q$, there is an estimate
\begin{align} \label{5.11}
& \int_M | W_{\sigma_i}(u) - L_{\sigma_i}(u) |^2
\: d{\mu}_{i,u} \le \\
& \const
\|\Hess(\phi_i(\cdot)) \|_{L^\infty([0,1] \times M)}^2
\| L_{\sigma_i}(0) \|_{L^2(TM, d{\mu}_{i,0})}^2.\notag
\end{align}
Here, and hereafter, $\const$ denotes a constant that can depend on
the fixed Riemannian manifold $(M, g)$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Since $\Pi_{c_i(u)}$ is projection onto
$\overline{\Image(\nabla)} \subset L^2(TM, d\mu_{i,u})$, and
$\nabla (\sigma_i \circ F_{i,u}^{-1}) \in
\Image(\nabla)$, we have
\begin{align} \label{5.8}
\int_M | W_{\sigma_i}(u) - L_{\sigma_i}(u) |^2
\: d{\mu}_{i,u} \le &
\int_M | W_{\sigma_i}(u) - \nabla (\sigma_i \circ F_{i,u}^{-1}) |_g^2
\: d{\mu}_{i,u} \\
= & \int_M | (dF_{i,u})^{-1}_*
W_{\sigma_i}(u) - \nabla \sigma_i |_{F_{i,u}^* g}^2
\: d{\mu}_{i,0}. \notag
\end{align}
(Compare with \cite[Proposition 4.3]{Ambrosio-Gigli (2008)}.)
Defining $T_{i,t,x} \: : \: T_xM \rightarrow T_xM$ by
\begin{equation} \label{5.9}
T_{i,t,x}(z) = (dF_{i,u})_*^{-1} \left( d \exp_{u \nabla_x \phi_i(0)}
(z) \right),
\end{equation}
we obtain
\begin{align} \label{5.10}
& \int_M | W_{\sigma_i}(u) - L_{\sigma_i}(u) |^2
\: d{\mu}_{i,u} \le \\
& \left(
\sup_{x \in M} \| dF_{i,u}^* dF_{i,u}(x) \| \cdot
\| T_{i,u,x} - I \|^2 \right)
\| L_{\sigma_i}(0) \|_{L^2(TM, d{\mu}_{i,0})}^2. \notag
\end{align}
Since $\sup_{t \in [0,1]} \| \nabla \phi(t) \|_{C^0(M)} < \infty$,
if $Q$ is large then $\| \nabla \phi_i(0) \|_{C^0(M)}$
is much smaller than the injectivity radius of $M$. In particular,
the curve $\{F_{i,u}(x)\}_{u \in [0,1]}$ lies well within a normal ball
around $x$. Now $T_{i,t,x}$ can be estimated in terms of $\Hess(\phi_i)$.
In general, if a function $h$ on a complete Riemannian manifold satisfies
$\Hess(h) = 0$ then the manifold isometrically splits off an $\R$-factor
and the optimal transport path generated by $\nabla h$ is translation
along the $\R$-factor. In such a case, the analog of $T_{i,t,x}$ is
the identity map. If $\Hess(h) \neq 0$ then the divergence of
a short optimal transport path from being a
translation can be estimated in terms
of $\Hess(h)$. Putting in the estimates gives (\ref{5.11}).
\end{proof}
Using Lemma \ref{lemest}, we have
\begin{align} \label{5.12}
& \left| \int_M \Hess(f) \left( \nabla \phi_i(u),
W_{\sigma_i}(u)
\right) \: d{\mu}_{i,u} - \int_M \Hess(f) \left( \nabla \phi_i(u),
L_{\sigma_i}(u)
\right) \: d{\mu}_{i,u} \right| \le \\
& \const \| \Hess(f) \|_{C^0(M)}
\|\Hess(\phi_i(\cdot)) \|_{L^\infty([0,1] \times M)}
\| \nabla \phi_i(u) \|_{L^2(TM, d{\mu}_{i,0})}
\| L_{\sigma_i}(0) \|_{L^2(TM, d{\mu}_{i,0})}. \notag
\end{align}
Next, given $x \in M$, consider the geodesic
\begin{equation} \label{5.13}
\gamma_{i,x}(u) = F_{i,u}(x).
\end{equation}
Put
\begin{equation} \label{5.14}
j_{\sigma_i,x}(u) = u (W_{\sigma_i}(u))_{\gamma_{i,x}(u)} \in
T_{\gamma_{i,x}(u)}M.
\end{equation}
Then $j_{\sigma_i,x}$ is a Jacobi field along $\gamma_{i,x}$, with
$j_{\sigma_i, x}(0) = 0$ and $j_{\sigma_i, x}^\prime(0) =
\nabla_x \sigma_i$. Jacobi field estimates give
\begin{equation} \label{5.15}
\| D_{\partial_u} W_{\sigma_i}(u) \|_{L^2(TM, d\mu_{i,u})} \le
\const \| \nabla \sigma_i \|_{L^2(TM, d\mu_{i,u})}
\| \nabla \phi_i(\cdot) \|^2_{L^\infty([0,1] \times M)},
\end{equation}
again for $Q$ large.
\begin{lemma} \label{lemma5.16}
Define $A_i : \left( \overline{\Image(\nabla)} \subset L^2(TM, d\mu_{i,0})
\right)
\rightarrow \left( \overline{\Image(\nabla)} \subset L^2(TM, d\mu_{i,1})
\right)$ by
\begin{equation} \label{5.17}
A_i (\nabla \sigma_i) = L_{\sigma_i}(1).
\end{equation}
Then for large $Q$, the map $A_i$ is invertible for all
$i \in \{0, \ldots, Q-1\}$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Define $B_i : \left( \overline{\Image(\nabla)} \subset L^2(TM, d\mu_{i,1})
\right)
\rightarrow \left( \overline{\Image(\nabla)} \subset L^2(TM, d\mu_{i,0})
\right)$
by
\begin{equation} \label{5.18}
B_i(\nabla f) = \nabla (f \circ F_{i,1}).
\end{equation}
Then whenever $\nabla f \in L^2(TM, d\mu_{i,1})$, we have
\begin{equation} \label{5.19}
(A_i B_i)(\nabla f) = A_i(\nabla(f\circ F_{i,1})) = L_{f \circ F_{i,1}}(1),
\end{equation}
so whenever $\nabla f^\prime \in L^2(TM, d\mu_{i,1})$, for large $Q$ we have
\begin{align} \label{5.20}
&
\langle \nabla f^\prime, (A_i B_i - I)(\nabla f) \rangle_{L^2(TM, d\mu_{i,1})}
= \\
& \langle \nabla f^\prime, W_{f \circ F_{i,1}}(1) - \nabla f
\rangle_{L^2(TM, d\mu_{i,1})} \le \notag \\
& \const
\|\Hess(\phi_i(\cdot)) \|_{L^\infty([0,1] \times M)}
\| \nabla f^\prime \|_{ L^2(TM, d\mu_{i,1})}
\| \nabla f \|_{ L^2(TM, d\mu_{i,1})}. \notag
\end{align}
Hence $\| A_i B_i - I \| = o(Q)$, so for large $Q$ the map
$A_i B_i$ is invertible and a
right inverse for $A_i$ is given by $B_i (A_i B_i)^{-1}$. This implies that
$A_i$ is surjective.
Now suppose that $\nabla \sigma \in \Ker(A_i)$ is nonzero,
with $\sigma \in H^1(M, d\mu_{i,0})$. After normalizing,
we may assume that $\nabla \sigma$ has unit length. Then
\begin{align} \label{5.21}
0 = & \langle \nabla (\sigma \circ F_{i,1}), A_i(\nabla \sigma)
\rangle_{L^2(TM, d\mu_{i,1})} =
\langle \nabla (\sigma \circ F_{i,1}), L_{\sigma}(1)
\rangle_{L^2(TM, d\mu_{i,1})} \\
= & \langle \nabla (\sigma \circ F_{i,1}), W_{\sigma}(1)
\rangle_{L^2(TM, d\mu_{i,1})} =
\langle \nabla \sigma, (dF_{i,1})^{-1} W_{\sigma}(1)
\rangle_{L^2(TM, d\mu_{i,0})} \notag \\
= &
1 - \langle \nabla \sigma, \nabla \sigma - (dF_{i,1})^{-1} W_{\sigma}(1)
\rangle_{L^2(TM, d\mu_{i,0})}
\ge 1 - \const \|\Hess(\phi_i(\cdot)) \|_{L^\infty([0,1] \times M)}, \notag
\end{align}
for large $Q$. If $Q$ is sufficiently
large then this is a contradiction, so $A_i$ is injective.
\end{proof}
Fix ${\mathcal V}_1 \in N_{c(1)} P(M)$. If ${\mathcal V}_1 \neq 0$ then
after normalizing,
we may assume that it has unit length.
For $Q \in \Z^+$ large and $t \in [0,1]$,
define ${\mathcal V}_Q(t) \in N_{c(t)} P(M)$ as follows.
First, using Lemma \ref{lemma5.16},
find $\sigma_{Q-1}$ so that ${\mathcal V}_1 = L_{\sigma_{Q-1}}(1)$.
For $t \in \left[ \frac{Q-1}{Q}, 1 \right]$, put
\begin{equation} \label{5.22}
{\mathcal V}_Q(t) = L_{\sigma_{Q-1}}(Qt - (Q-1)).
\end{equation}
Doing backward recursion, starting with $i = Q-2$, using Lemma \ref{lemma5.16}
we find $\sigma_i$ so that $L_{\sigma_i}(1) = L_{\sigma_{i+1}}(0)
= \nabla \sigma_{i+1}$. For
$t \in \left[ \frac{i}{Q}, \frac{i+1}{Q} \right]$, put
\begin{equation} \label{5.23}
{\mathcal V}_Q(t) = L_{\sigma_i}(Qt-i).
\end{equation}
Decrease $i$ by one and repeat. The last step is when $i = 0$.
From the argument in \cite[Lemma 1.8]{Petrunin (1998)},
\begin{equation} \label{5.24}
\lim_{Q \rightarrow \infty}
\sup_{t \in [0,1]} | \|{\mathcal V}_Q(t)\| - 1 | = 0.
\end{equation}
We note that the proof of \cite[Lemma 1.8]{Petrunin (1998)} only uses
results about geodesics in Alexandrov spaces, it so applies to our
infinite-dimensional setting. It also uses the assumption that
$c$ lies in the interior of a minimizing geodesic.
After passing
to a subsequence, we can assume that
\begin{equation} \label{5.25}
\lim_{Q \rightarrow \infty}
\left( {\mathcal V}_Q, {\mathcal V}_Q(0),
{\mathcal V}_Q(1) \right) =
\left( {\mathcal V}_\infty, {\mathcal V}_{\infty,0},
{\mathcal V}_{\infty,1} \right)
\end{equation}
in the weak topology on
$L^2([0,1]; L^2(TM, d\mu_t)) \oplus L^2(TM, d\mu_0) \oplus L^2(TM, d\mu_1)$.
Note that ${\mathcal V}_{\infty,1} = {\mathcal V}_{1}$.
From (\ref{5.7}), (\ref{5.12}) and (\ref{5.15}), for a fixed
$f \in C^\infty([0,1]; C^\infty(M))$, on each interval
$\left[ \frac{i}{Q}, \frac{i+1}{Q} \right]$ we have
\begin{align} \label{5.27}
\frac{d}{dt} \int_M \left\langle V_f, {\mathcal V}_Q \right\rangle
\: d\mu_t = & \int_M
\left\langle \nabla \frac{\partial f}{\partial t},
{\mathcal V}_Q(t) \right\rangle \: d\mu_t \: + \\
& \int_M \Hess(f)(\nabla \phi(t), {\mathcal V}_Q(t)) \: d\mu_t + o(Q). \notag
\end{align}
It follows that
$\left( {\mathcal V}_\infty, {\mathcal V}_{\infty, 0},
{\mathcal V}_{\infty,1} \right)$ is
a weak solution of the parallel transport equation.
As the limiting vector fields are gradient vector fields, we can write
$\left( {\mathcal V}_\infty, {\mathcal V}_{\infty, 0},
{\mathcal V}_{\infty,1} \right) =
\left( \nabla \eta_{\infty}, \nabla \eta_{\infty, 0},
\nabla \eta_{\infty,1} \right)$ for some
$\left(\eta_{\infty}, \eta_{\infty, 0},
\eta_{\infty,1} \right) \in
L^2([0,1]; H^1(M, d\mu_t)) \oplus H^1(M, d\mu_0) \oplus H^1(M, d\mu_1))$.
Suppose that $c$ is a smooth geodesic in $P^\infty(M)$,
that ${\mathcal V}_1$ (and hence
$\eta_{\infty, 1}$) is smooth and that
there is a smooth solution $\eta$ to the parallel transport
equation (\ref{4.6}) with $\nabla \eta(1) = \nabla \eta_{\infty, 1}$.
By Lemma \ref{lemma4.7}, $\| \nabla \eta(t)\|$ is independent of $t$.
By Lemma \ref{lemma4.17},
$\left( \nabla \eta_{\infty}, \nabla \eta_{\infty, 0},
\nabla \eta_{\infty,1} \right) =
\left( \nabla \eta, \nabla \eta(0), \nabla \eta(1) \right)$.
We claim that
\begin{equation} \label{5.28}
\lim_{Q \rightarrow \infty} (\nabla \eta_Q, \nabla \eta_Q(0),
\nabla \eta_Q(1)) =
\left( \nabla \eta, \nabla \eta(0), \nabla \eta_{\infty,1} \right)
\end{equation}
in the norm topology on $L^2([0,1]; L^2(TM, d\mu_t)) \oplus
L^2(TM, d\mu_0) \oplus L^2(TM, d\mu_1)$.
This is because of the general fact that if
$\{x_i\}_{i=1}^\infty$ is a sequence in a Hilbert space $H$
with $\lim_{i \rightarrow \infty} |x_i| = 1$, and
there is some unit vector $x_\infty \in H$ so that every weakly convergent
subsequence of $\{x_i\}_{i=1}^\infty$ has weak limit $x_\infty$,
then $\lim_{i \rightarrow \infty} x_i = x_\infty$ in the norm
topology.
In particular,
\begin{equation} \label{5.29}
\lim_{Q \rightarrow \infty} \nabla \eta_Q(0) = \nabla \eta(0)
\end{equation}
in the norm topology on $L^2(TM, d\mu_0)$.
This proves Theorem \ref{theorem1.3}.
\begin{remark} \label{added}
The construction of parallel transport in
\cite[Section 5]{Ambrosio-Gigli (2008)} and \cite[Section 4]{Gigli (2012)}
is also by taking the limit of an iterative
procedure. The underlying logic in
\cite{Ambrosio-Gigli (2008),Gigli (2012)} is
different than what we use, which results in a different algorithm.
The iterative
construction in \cite{Ambrosio-Gigli (2008),Gigli (2012)}
amounts to going forward along the curve $c$ applying certain
maps ${\mathcal P}_i$, instead of going backward along $c$ using the
inverses of the $A_i$'s as we do. In the case of $\R^n$, the map
${\mathcal P}_i$ is the same as
$A_i$, but this is not the case in general. The map
${\mathcal P}_i$ is nonexpanding, which helps the construction in
\cite{Ambrosio-Gigli (2008),Gigli (2012)}.
In contrast, $A_i^{-1}$ is not nonexpanding. In order to
control its products, we use the result
(\ref{5.24}) from \cite{Petrunin (1998)}.
\end{remark}
|
\section{Introduction}
Relativistic hydrodynamics has been quite successful in explaining a
wide range of collective phenomena observed in astrophysics,
cosmology, and the physics of high-energy heavy-ion collisions. The
theory of relativistic hydrodynamics is formulated as a gradient
expansion where ideal hydrodynamics is the zeroth order. The
first-order relativistic Navier-Stokes (NS) theory \cite
{Eckart:1940zz, Landau} leads to acausal signal propagation which is
rectified in the second-order Israel-Stewart (IS) theory \cite
{Israel:1979wp}. The derivation of IS equations proceeds in a
variety of ways \cite {Romatschke:2009im}. For instance, in the
derivations based on the second law of thermodynamics ($\partial_\mu
S^\mu \geq 0$), where $S^\mu$ is the generalized entropy
four-current, the transport coefficients related to relaxation times
for shear and bulk viscous pressures remain undetermined, and have
to be obtained from kinetic theory \cite
{Israel:1979wp,Muronga:2003ta}. On the other hand, the derivations
based on kinetic theory require the non-equilibrium phase-space
distribution function, $f(x,p)$, to be specified. Consistent and
accurate determination of the form of the dissipative equations and
the associated transport coefficients is currently an active
research area \cite{York:2008rr,El:2009vj,Denicol:2012cn,
Denicol:2010xn,Jaiswal:2012qm,Jaiswal:2013fc,Bhalerao:2013aha,
Denicol:2014vaa,Jaiswal:2013npa,Jaiswal:2013vta,Bhalerao:2013pza,
Romatschke:2003ms,Martinez:2010sc,Martinez:2012tu,Florkowski:2013lza,
Bazow:2013ifa,Nopoush:2014pfa,Florkowski:2014bba,Florkowski:2014sfa}.
The existence of thermodynamic gradients in a non-equilibrium system
gives rise to thermodynamic forces which in turn results in various
transport phenomena. In order to calculate the associated transport
coefficients, it is convenient to first specify the non-equilibrium
single particle phase-space distribution function $f(x,p)$. The two most
commonly used methods to determine the form of $f(x,p)$ when the
system is close to local thermodynamic equilibrium are (1) Grad's
14-moment approximation \cite{Grad} and (2) the Chapman-Enskog
method \cite{Chapman}. While Grad's moment method has been widely
used in the formulation of causal relativistic dissipative
hydrodynamics from kinetic theory \cite{Israel:1979wp,
Muronga:2003ta,El:2009vj,Denicol:2010xn,Denicol:2012cn,
Jaiswal:2012qm,Jaiswal:2013fc,Bhalerao:2013aha,Denicol:2014vaa,
Romatschke:2009im}, the Chapman-Enskog method remains less explored
\cite{York:2008rr,Jaiswal:2013npa, Jaiswal:2013vta}. Although both
the methods involve expanding $f(x,p)$ around the equilibrium
distribution function $f_0(x,p)$, in Refs.~\cite
{Jaiswal:2013npa,Jaiswal:2013vta} it was demonstrated that the
Chapman-Enskog method in the relaxation-time approximation (RTA)
gives better agreement with both microscopic Boltzmann simulations
and exact solutions of the RTA Boltzmann equation. This seems to
stem from the fact that the Chapman-Enskog method does not require a
fixed-order Grad's-moment expansion.
Relativistic viscous hydrodynamics has been used extensively to
study and understand the evolution of the strongly interacting, hot
and dense matter created in high-energy heavy-ion collisions; see
Ref. \cite{Heinz:2013th} for a recent review. While much of the
research on this topic is devoted to the extraction of the shear
viscosity to entropy density ratio $\eta/s$ from the analysis of the
flow data \cite{Romatschke:2007mq,Song:2010mg,Schenke:2011bn}, a
systematic and self-consistent study of the effect of bulk viscosity
in numerical simulations of heavy-ion collisions has not been
performed. The relative lack of effort in this direction may be
attributed to the fact that the bulk viscosity of hot QCD matter is
estimated to be much smaller compared to the shear viscosity.
However, it is important to note that for the range of temperature
probed experimentally in heavy-ion collisions, the magnitude and
temperature dependence of bulk viscosity is unknown \cite
{Moore:2008ws,Noronha-Hostler:2014dqa} and could be large enough to
affect the spatio-temporal evolution of the QCD matter. Moreover,
since QCD is a non-conformal field theory, bulk viscous corrections
to the energy momentum tensor should not be neglected in order to
correctly understand the dynamics of a QCD system.
From a theoretical perspective, the second-order transport
coefficients that appear in the evolution equation for the bulk viscous
pressure are less understood compared to those of the shear stress
tensor. In Refs. \cite{Jaiswal:2013fc,Bhalerao:2013aha}, it was
shown that the relaxation time for bulk viscous evolution can be
obtained by employing the second law of thermodynamics in a kinetic
theory set up. While for finite masses, the transport coefficients
corresponding to bulk viscous pressure and shear stress tensor have
been explicitly obtained by employing the 14-moment approximation
\cite{Denicol:2014vaa,Denicol:2014mca}, they still remain to be
determined using the Chapman-Enskog method. In this paper, we calculate
the transport coefficients appearing in the second-order viscous
evolution equations for non-vanishing masses using the method of
Chapman-Enskog expansion. We compare the mass dependence of these
coefficients with those obtained using the 14-moment approximation. In
the case of one-dimensional scaling expansion of the viscous medium,
we demonstrate that our results are in better agreement with the
exact solution of the massive (0+1)-dimensional Boltzmann equation in the relaxation
time approximation \cite{Florkowski:2014sfa} than to those obtained using
the 14-moment approximation. We also confirm that generation of bulk
viscous pressure is affected more by its coupling to the shear stress
tensor than the first-order expansion rate of the system, in agreement
with Ref.~\cite{Denicol:2014mca}.
\section{Relativistic hydrodynamics}
The hydrodynamic evolution of a system having no net conserved
charges (vanishing chemical potential) is governed by the local
conservation of energy and momentum, $\partial_\mu T^{\mu\nu}=0$.
The energy-momentum tensor, $T^{\mu\nu}$, characterizing the
macroscopic state of a system, can be expressed in terms of a
single-particle phase-space distribution function and tensor
decomposed into hydrodynamic degrees of freedom \cite{deGroot},
\begin{equation}\label{NTD}
T^{\mu\nu} = \!\int\! dP \, p^\mu p^\nu f(x,p) = \epsilon u^\mu u^\nu
- (P+\Pi)\Delta^{\mu\nu} + \pi^{\mu\nu}.
\end{equation}
Here $dP\equiv g d^3p/[(2 \pi)^3p^0]$ is the invariant momentum-space
integration measure, where $g$ is the
degeneracy factor, $p^\mu$ is the particle four-momentum, and
$f(x,p)$ is the phase-space distribution function. In the tensor
decomposition, $\epsilon$, $P$, $\Pi$, and $\pi^{\mu\nu}$ are energy
density, thermodynamic pressure, bulk viscous pressure, and shear
stress tensor, respectively. The projection operator
$\Delta^{\mu\nu}\equiv g^{\mu\nu}-u^\mu u^\nu$ is orthogonal to the
hydrodynamic four-velocity $u^\mu$ defined in the Landau frame:
$T^{\mu\nu} u_\nu=\epsilon u^\mu$. The metric tensor is Minkowskian,
$g^{\mu\nu}\equiv\mathrm{diag}({+}1,{-}1,{-}1,{-}1)$.
The projection of $\partial_\mu T^{\mu\nu}=0$ along and orthogonal
to $u^\mu$ leads to the evolution equations for $\epsilon$ and
$u^\mu$,
\begin{align}\label{evol}
\dot\epsilon + (\epsilon+P+\Pi)\theta - \pi^{\mu\nu}\sigma_{\mu\nu} &= 0, \\
(\epsilon+P+\Pi)\dot u^\alpha - \nabla^\alpha (P+\Pi) + \Delta^\alpha_\nu \partial_\mu \pi^{\mu\nu} &= 0.
\end{align}
Here we have used the standard notation $\dot A\equiv
u^\mu\partial_\mu A$ for the co-moving derivative,
$\theta\equiv\partial_\mu u^\mu$ for the expansion scalar,
$\sigma^{\mu\nu}\equiv \frac{1}{2}(\nabla^\mu u^\nu + \nabla^\nu u^\mu)
-\frac{1}{3} \theta \Delta^{\mu\nu}$ for the velocity stress tensor, and
$\nabla^\alpha\equiv\Delta^{\mu\alpha}\partial_\mu$ for space-like
derivatives. The inverse temperature, $\beta\equiv1/T$, is
determined by the matching condition $\epsilon=\epsilon_0$ where
$\epsilon_0$ is the equilibrium energy density. In terms of the
equilibrium distribution function $f_0$, the energy density and the
thermodynamic pressure can be written as
\begin{eqnarray}\label{EDTP1}
\epsilon_0 &=& u_\mu u_\nu \!\int\! dP \, p^\mu p^\nu f_0,
\\ \label{EDTP2}
P_0 &=& -\frac{1}{3}\Delta_{\mu\nu} \!\int\! dP \, p^\mu p^\nu f_0,
\end{eqnarray}
respectively.
For a classical Boltzmann gas with vanishing chemical
potential, the equilibrium distribution function is given by
$f_0=\exp(-\beta\,u\cdot p)$ where $u \cdot p \equiv u_\mu p^\mu$.
From Eqs.~(\ref{EDTP1}) and (\ref{EDTP2}) one obtains $\dot\epsilon$ and $\nabla^\alpha P$
in terms of derivatives of $\beta$ as
\begin{equation}\label{DEdP}
\dot\epsilon = -I_{30}^{(0)}\dot\beta, \quad
\nabla^\alpha P = I_{31}^{(0)}\nabla^\alpha\beta,
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}\label{IC}
I_{nq}^{(r)} \equiv \frac{1}{(2q+1)!!}\!\int\! dP\,
(u\cdot p)^{n-2q-r}\,(\Delta_{\mu\nu}p^\mu p^\nu)^q f_0.
\end{equation}
Here we readily identify $I_{20}^{(0)}=\epsilon$ and
$I_{21}^{(0)}=-P$. The integrals $I_{nq}^{(r)}$ satisfy the
following relations
\begin{align}
I_{nq}^{(r)}& = I_{n-1,q}^{(r-1)} ~~{\rm for}~ n>2q, \label{prop1} \\
I_{nq}^{(r)} & = \frac{1}{(2q+1)}\left[m^2 I_{n-2,q-1}^{(r)} - I_{n,q-1}^{(r)}\right], \label{prop2} \\
I_{nq}^{(0)}&= \frac{1}{\beta}\left[-I_{n-1,q-1}^{(0)} + (n-2q)I_{n-1,q}^{(0)} \right]. \label{prop3}
\end{align}
The above relations lead to the following identities
\begin{eqnarray}\label{identities1}
I_{31}^{(0)}&=&-\frac{1}{\beta}(\epsilon+P),
\\\label{identities11}
I_{30}^{(0)}&=&\frac{1}{\beta}[3\epsilon+(3+z^2)P],
\end{eqnarray}
where $z\equiv\beta m$ with $m$ being the mass of the particle.
Substituting the expressions for $\dot\epsilon$ and $\nabla^\alpha P$
from Eq. (\ref{DEdP}) in Eq. (\ref{evol}), one obtains
\begin{align}
\dot\beta &= \frac{\beta(\epsilon+P)}{3\epsilon+(3+z^2)P}\theta
+ \frac{\beta(\Pi\theta - \pi^{\rho\gamma}\sigma_{\rho\gamma})}{3\epsilon+(3+z^2)P}, \label{evol1} \\
\nabla^\alpha\beta &= -\beta\dot u^\alpha - \frac{\beta}{\epsilon+P}
\left(\Pi\dot u^\alpha - \nabla^\alpha\Pi + \Delta^\alpha_\nu\partial_\mu\pi^{\mu\nu}\right). \label{evol2}
\end{align}
The above identities are used later to obtain the form of viscous
corrections to the distribution function and derive evolution
equations for shear and bulk viscous pressures.
Close to local thermodynamic equilibrium, the phase-space
distribution function can be written as $f=f_0+\delta f$, where
$\delta f\ll f$. From Eq. (\ref {NTD}), the bulk viscous pressure
$\Pi$ and the shear stress tensor $\pi^{\mu\nu}$ can be expressed in
terms of the non-equilibrium part of the distribution function
$\delta f$ as \cite{deGroot}
\begin{align}
\Pi &= -\frac{1}{3}\Delta_{\alpha\beta} \!\int\! dP \, p^\alpha p^\beta\, \delta f, \label{BVP}\\
\pi^{\mu\nu} &= \Delta^{\mu\nu}_{\alpha\beta} \!\int\! dP \, p^\alpha p^\beta\, \delta f, \label{SST}
\end{align}
where $\Delta^{\mu\nu}_{\alpha\beta}\equiv \frac{1}{2}
(\Delta^{\mu}_{\alpha}\Delta^{\nu}_{\beta} +
\Delta^{\mu}_{\beta}\Delta^{\nu}_{\alpha}) -
\frac{1}{3} \Delta^{\mu\nu}\Delta_{\alpha\beta}$ is a traceless symmetric
projection operator orthogonal to $u^\mu$. In the following, we
iteratively solve the RTA Boltzmann equation to obtain $\delta f$ up to first order.
\section{Viscous evolution equations}
The relativistic Boltzmann equation in the RTA is given by \cite{Anderson_Witting},
\begin{equation}\label{RBE}
p^\mu\partial_\mu f = -\left(u\cdot p\right) \frac{\delta f}{\tau_{\rm eq}},
\end{equation}
where $\tau_{\rm eq}$ is the relaxation time. To ensure the straightforward
conservation of particle current and energy-momentum tensor,
$\tau_{\rm eq}$ should be independent of momenta and $u^\mu$ should
be defined in the Landau frame \cite{Anderson_Witting}. Rewriting
Eq.~(\ref{RBE}) in the form $f=f_0-(\tau_{\rm eq}/u\cdot
p)\,p^\mu\partial_\mu f$ and solving iteratively, one obtains \cite
{Romatschke:2011qp,Jaiswal:2013npa}
\begin{eqnarray}\label{F1F21}
f_1 &=& f_0 -\frac{\tau_{\rm eq}}{u\cdot p} \, p^\mu \partial_\mu f_0,
\\ \label{F1F22}
f_2 &=& f_0 -\frac{\tau_{\rm eq}}{u\cdot p} \, p^\mu \partial_\mu f_1,
\\ \nonumber
&\vdots&
\end{eqnarray}
where $f_n=f_0+\delta f^{(1)}+\delta f^{(2)}+\cdots+\delta f^{(n)}$.
To first-order in derivatives, we have
\begin{equation}\label{FOC1}
\delta f^{(1)} = -\frac{\tau_{\rm eq}}{u\cdot p} \, p^\mu \partial_\mu f_0.
\end{equation}
Using Eqs. (\ref{evol1}) and (\ref{evol2}) and consistently ignoring
higher order gradient correction terms, one obtains \cite{Romatschke:2011qp}
\begin{equation}\label{FOC}
\delta f = \frac{\beta\tau_{\rm eq}}{u\cdot p}\left[ \frac{1}{3}\left\{m^2-(1-3c_s^2)(u\cdot p)^2\right\}\theta
+ p^\mu p^\nu\sigma_{\mu\nu} \right]f_0.
\end{equation}
Here, the velocity of sound squared $c_s^2\equiv dP/d\epsilon$ can
be expressed as
\begin{equation}\label{cs2}
c_s^2 = \frac{\epsilon+P}{3\epsilon+(3+z^2)P}.
\end{equation}
We observe that the above expression reduces to $c_s^2=1/3$ in the
ultra-relativistic ($z\to0$) limit.
Substituting Eq. (\ref{FOC1}) in Eqs. (\ref{BVP}) and (\ref{SST}),
one obtains
\begin{eqnarray}\label{FOE1}
\Pi &=& -\tau_{\rm eq}\beta_\Pi\theta ,
\\\label{FOE2}
\pi^{\mu\nu} &=& 2\tau_{\rm eq}\beta_\pi\sigma^{\mu\nu} ,
\end{eqnarray}
where
\begin{eqnarray}\label{FOTC1}
\beta_\Pi &=& \frac{5}{3}\beta\, I_{42}^{(1)} - (\epsilon+P)c_s^2,
\\ \label{FOTC2}
\beta_\pi &=& \beta\, I_{42}^{(1)}.
\end{eqnarray}
Replacing the velocity gradients appearing in Eq. (\ref{FOC}) with viscous
pressures using Eqs. (\ref{FOE1}) and (\ref{FOE2}), one obtains
\begin{align}\label{deltaf}
\delta f =\,& - \frac{\beta f_0}{3(u\cdot p)\beta_\Pi}\left[m^2-(1-3c_s^2)(u\cdot p)^2\right]\Pi \nonumber\\
&\,+ \frac{\beta f_0}{2(u\cdot p)\beta_\pi}\;p^\mu p^\nu\pi_{\mu\nu}.
\end{align}
The above form of $\delta f$ is analogous to the 14-moment
approximation and can be used in Cooper-Frye prescription for
particle production \cite{Cooper:1974mv}.
To obtain second-order evolution equations for the bulk viscous pressure
and the shear stress tensor, we follow the methodology discussed in Ref.
\cite{Denicol:2010xn}. We express the evolution of bulk viscous
pressure and shear stress tensor given in Eqs. (\ref {BVP}) and (\ref
{SST}) as
\begin{align}
\dot\Pi &= -\frac{1}{3}\Delta_{\alpha\beta} \!\int\! dP \, p^\alpha p^\beta \delta\dot f, \label{SBE}\\
\dot\pi^{\langle\mu\nu\rangle} &= \Delta^{\mu\nu}_{\alpha\beta} \!\int\! dP \, p^\alpha p^\beta \delta\dot f , \label{SSE}
\end{align}
respectively.
The comoving derivative $\delta\dot f$ can be obtained by
rewriting Eq. (\ref{RBE}) in the form
\begin{equation}\label{DFD}
\delta\dot f = -\dot f_0 - \frac{1}{u\cdot p}p^\gamma\nabla_\gamma f - \frac{\delta f}{\tau_{\rm eq}}.
\end{equation}
Using the above expression for $\delta\dot f$ in Eqs. (\ref{SBE})
and (\ref{SSE}), one obtains
\begin{align}
\dot\Pi =& - \frac{\Pi}{\tau_{\rm eq}}
+ \frac{\Delta_{\alpha\beta}}{3}\!\int\! dP \, p^\alpha p^\beta\!\left(\dot f_0 + \frac{1}{u\cdot p}\,
p^\gamma\nabla_\gamma f\right), \label{SOBE}\\
\dot\pi^{\langle\mu\nu\rangle} =& - \frac{\pi^{\mu\nu}}{\tau_{\rm eq}}
- \Delta^{\mu\nu}_{\alpha\beta}\!\int\! dP \, p^\alpha p^\beta\!\left(\dot f_0 + \frac{1}{u\cdot p}\,
p^\gamma\nabla_\gamma f\right). \label{SOSE}
\end{align}
It is clear from Eqs.~(\ref{SOBE}) and (\ref{SOSE}) that there is
only one time scale to describe the relaxation of the viscous
evolution equations, i.e., $\tau_{\rm eq}=\tau_\Pi=\tau_\pi$. This
stems from the fact that the RTA collision term in the Boltzmann
equation (\ref{RBE}) does not entirely
capture the microscopic interactions. However, comparing the
first-order equation, Eqs. (\ref {FOE1}) and (\ref {FOE2}) with the relativistic
Navier-Stokes equations for bulk and shear pressures,
$\Pi=-\zeta\theta$ and $\pi^{\mu\nu}=2\eta\sigma^{\mu\nu}$, we
obtain $\tau_\Pi=\zeta/\beta_\Pi$ and $\tau_\pi=\eta/\beta_\pi$. The
first-order transport coefficients $\zeta$ and $\eta$ can be
calculated independently, by taking into account the full microscopic
behavior of the system.
Substituting $\delta f$ from Eq. (\ref{deltaf}) in Eqs. (\ref{SOBE})
and (\ref{SOSE}) and performing the integrations, one obtains the
second-order evolution equations for the bulk viscous pressure and shear
stress tensor
\begin{align}
\dot{\Pi} =& -\frac{\Pi}{\tau_{\Pi}}
-\beta_{\Pi}\theta
-\delta_{\Pi\Pi}\Pi\theta
+\lambda_{\Pi\pi}\pi^{\mu\nu}\sigma_{\mu \nu }, \label{BULK}\\
\dot{\pi}^{\langle\mu\nu\rangle} =& -\frac{\pi^{\mu\nu}}{\tau_{\pi}}
+2\beta_{\pi}\sigma^{\mu\nu}
+2\pi_{\gamma}^{\langle\mu}\omega^{\nu\rangle\gamma}
-\tau_{\pi\pi}\pi_{\gamma}^{\langle\mu}\sigma^{\nu\rangle\gamma} \nonumber \\
&-\delta_{\pi\pi}\pi^{\mu\nu}\theta
+\lambda_{\pi\Pi}\Pi\sigma^{\mu\nu}, \label{SHEAR}
\end{align}
where $\omega ^{\mu \nu }\equiv \frac{1}{2}(\nabla^{\mu}u^{\nu }-\nabla^{\nu }u^{\mu })$
is the vorticity tensor. The transport coefficients appearing above are
\begin{align}\label{coeff1}
\delta_{\Pi\Pi} &= -\frac{5}{9}\,\chi - c_s^2,
\\\label{coeff2}
\lambda_{\Pi\pi} &=
\frac{\beta}{3\beta_\pi}\!\left(7I_{63}^{(3)}+2I_{42}^{(1)}\right) - c_s^2,
\\\label{coeff3}
\tau_{\pi\pi} &= 2 + \frac{4\beta}{\beta_\pi}\,I_{63}^{(3)},
\\\label{coeff4}
\delta_{\pi\pi} &= \frac{5}{3} + \frac{7\beta}{3\beta_\pi}\,I_{63}^{(3)},
\\\label{coeff5}
\lambda_{\pi\Pi} &= -\frac{2}{3}\chi,
\end{align}
where
\begin{equation}
\chi = \frac{\beta}{\beta_\Pi}\!\left[(1-3c_s^2)\!\left(I_{42}^{(1)}+I_{31}^{(0)}\right)
- m^2\!\left(I_{42}^{(3)}+I_{31}^{(2)}\right)\right].
\end{equation}
Apart from $I_{31}^{(0)}=-(\epsilon+P)/\beta$, see Eq. (\ref
{identities1}), we need to determine the integrals
$I_{63}^{(3)}$, $I_{42}^{(1)}$, $I_{42}^{(3)}$, and $I_{31}^{(2)}$.
In the following, we obtain expressions for these quantities in
terms of modified Bessel functions of the second kind.
\section{Transport coefficients}
The transport coefficients obtained in the previous section can be
expressed in terms of modified Bessel functions of the second kind.
We start from the integral representation of the corresponding
Bessel function,
\begin{equation}\label{Bessel}
K_n(z) = \!\int_0^\infty\! d\theta \cosh(n\theta)\, \exp(-z\cosh\theta).
\end{equation}
Using the above form of the Bessel
function, one obtains the following identities
\begin{align}\label{identities2}
\int_0^\infty\! d\theta \cosh^5\theta\, \exp(-z\cosh\theta) &=
\frac{1}{16}\left[K_5+5K_3+10K_1\right], \\
\int_0^\infty\! d\theta \cosh^3\theta\, \exp(-z\cosh\theta) &=
\frac{1}{4}\left[K_3+3K_1\right],\label{identities22}
\end{align}
where the $z$-dependence of $K_n$ is implicitly understood.
\begin{figure}[t]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{fig_coef.pdf}
\end{center}
\vspace{-0.8cm}
\caption{(Color online) Comparison of the exact transport
coefficients obtained herein using the Chapman-Enskog method
(blue dashed line) with those calculated using the 14-moment
approximation (brown dotted line). The two panels correspond to
the transport coefficients which enter (a) the bulk viscous
pressure and (b) the shear stress tensor evolution equations, as
a function of the ratio of mass and temperature. The inset in
panel (a) shows the $m/T$-dependence of the transport
coefficients $\delta_{\Pi\Pi}$ and $\lambda_{\Pi\pi}$ obtained
using the two methods on a linear scale. Here $P_{(0)}$ is the
pressure at vanishing mass, i.e., $P_{(0)} \equiv P(m=0,T)$.}
\label{fig_coef}
\end{figure}
The thermodynamic integrals $I_{nq}^{(r)}$ can be cast in a similar
form,
\begin{align}\label{Inqr}
I_{nq}^{(r)} =&\ \frac{g\,T^{n+2-r}z^{n+2-r}}{2\pi^2(2q+1)!!}(-1)^q\!\int_0^\infty\! d\theta\,
(\cosh\theta)^{n-2q-r}\nonumber\\
&\qquad\qquad\quad\times(\sinh\theta)^{2q+2}\,\exp(-z\cosh\theta).
\end{align}
By using the identity $\cosh^2\theta-\sinh^2\theta=1$, the integral
in $I_{nq}^{(r)}$ can be expressed in terms of
$\cosh\theta$ only. Employing Eqs. (\ref{identities2}) and (\ref{identities22}), one obtains
\begin{align}\label{relint}
I_{63}^{(3)} &= -\frac{gT^5z^5}{210\pi^2}\!\left[\!\frac{1}{16}(K_5\!-11K_3+58K_1)-4K_{i,1}+K_{i,3}\!\right]\!, \\
I_{42}^{(1)} &= \frac{gT^5z^5}{30\pi^2}\left[\frac{1}{16}(K_5-7K_3+22K_1)-K_{i,1}\right], \\
I_{42}^{(3)} &= \frac{gT^3z^3}{30\pi^2}\left[\frac{1}{4}(K_3-9K_1)+3K_{i,1}-K_{i,3}\right], \\
I_{31}^{(2)} &= -\frac{gT^3z^3}{6\pi^2}\left[\frac{1}{4}(K_3-5K_1)+K_{i,1}\right].
\end{align}
Here the function $K_{i,n}$ is defined by the integral
\begin{equation}\label{kin}
K_{i,n}(z) = \!\int_0^\infty\! \frac{d\theta}{(\cosh\theta)^n}\,\exp(-z\cosh\theta),
\end{equation}
which has the following property
\begin{equation}\label{kinkn1}
\frac{d}{dz}K_{i,n}(z) = -K_{i,n-1}(z).
\end{equation}
This identity can also be written in integral form as
\begin{equation}\label{kinkn2}
K_{i,n}(z) = K_{i,n}(0) - \!\int_0^z\! K_{i,n-1}(z') dz'.
\end{equation}
We observe that, by using the series expansion of $K_{i,0}(z)=K_0(z)$,
the above recursion relation can be employed to evaluate $K_{i,n}(z)$
up to any given order in $z$.
\begin{figure}[t]
\begin{center}
~~~~~~\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{fig_0_03.pdf}
\end{center}
\vspace{-0.8cm}
\caption{(Color online) Time evolution of the pressure anisotropy
${\cal P}_L/{\cal P}_T$ (top) and the bulk viscous pressure
times $\tau$ (bottom) for three different calculations: the
exact solution of the RTA Boltzmann equation \cite
{Florkowski:2014sfa} (red solid line), second-order viscous
hydrodynamics using the 14-moment method \cite{Denicol:2014vaa}
(brown dotted line), and the Chapman-Enskog method used herein
(blue dashed line). For both panels we use $T_0=600$ MeV at
$\tau_0=0.5$ fm/$c$, $m=300$ MeV, and $\tau_{\rm
eq}=\tau_\pi=\tau_\Pi=0.5$ fm/$c$. The initial spheroidal
anisotropy in the distribution function, $\xi_0=0$, corresponds
to isotropic initial pressures with $\pi_0=0$ and $\Pi_0=0$.}
\label{fig_0_03}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[t]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{fig_100_03.pdf}
\end{center}
\vspace{-0.8cm}
\caption{(Color online) Same as Fig. \ref{fig_0_03} except here we
take $\xi_0=100$ corresponding to $\pi_0=51.11$ GeV/fm$^3$ and $\Pi_0=0.85$ GeV/fm$^3$.}
\label{fig_100_03}
\end{figure}
In the results section, we will use the exact expressions for the
various transport coefficients. However, before proceeding to the
numerical results it is possible to compare the analytic small-mass
expansions of the transport coefficients with the results obtained
using the 14-moment approximation. With this in mind, we now present
small-mass expansions of the kinetic coefficients obtained in Eqs.
(\ref{FOTC1}), (\ref{FOTC2}), and (\ref{coeff1})-(\ref{coeff5}). We
begin by noting that the quantity $\chi$ that appears in the
transport coefficients (\ref{coeff1})-(\ref{coeff5}) has the
following small-mass expansion
\begin{equation}\label{chiz}
\chi = -\frac{9}{5} - \frac{9\pi z}{50} + {\cal O}(z^2\ln z).
\end{equation}
The small-mass expansions of the transport coefficients entering the bulk evolution equation are
\begin{align}\label{bulkz}
\frac{\beta_\Pi}{\epsilon+P} &= \frac{5z^4}{432} + {\cal O}(z^5), \nonumber\\
\delta_{\Pi\Pi} &= \frac{2}{3} + \frac{\pi z}{10} + {\cal O}(z^2\ln z), \nonumber\\
\lambda_{\Pi\pi} &= \frac{z^2}{18} - \frac{5z^4}{144} + {\cal O}(z^5).
\end{align}
Similarly, the small-mass expansions of the transport coefficients entering the shear tensor evolution equation
are
\begin{align}\label{shearz}
\frac{\beta_\pi}{\epsilon+P} &= \frac{1}{5} - \frac{z^2}{60} + \frac{z^4}{96} + {\cal O}(z^5), \nonumber\\
\delta_{\pi\pi} &= \frac{4}{3} + \frac{z^2}{36} - \frac{25z^4}{864} + {\cal O}(z^5), \nonumber\\
\tau_{\pi\pi} &= \frac{10}{7} + \frac{z^2}{21} - \frac{25z^4}{504} + {\cal O}(z^5), \nonumber\\
\lambda_{\pi\Pi} &= \frac{6}{5} + \frac{3\pi z}{25} + {\cal O}(z^2\ln z).
\end{align}
We observe that while the expressions for $\beta_\Pi$ and $\beta_\pi$
in Eqs. (\ref{bulkz}) and (\ref{shearz}) are identical to those
obtained by using the 14-moment method \cite{Denicol:2014vaa,
Denicol:2014mca}, the other coefficients agree only up to the
constant term in their respective Taylor expansions in powers of $z$.
Having established that the Chapman-Enskog transport coefficients
are different than the 14-moment transport coefficients even for
small masses, we now turn to the exact numerical evaluation of the
transport coefficients for arbitrary mass. In Fig.~\ref{fig_coef} we
compare the exact transport coefficients obtained herein using the
Chapman-Enskog method (blue dashed line) with those calculated using
the 14-moment approximation (brown dotted line). Figure \ref
{fig_coef} (a) and (b) shows the transport coefficients entering the
evolution equations for the bulk viscous pressure and the shear
stress tensor, respectively. In the inset of Fig. \ref{fig_coef}
(a), we show the $m/T$ dependence of the transport coefficients
$\delta_{\Pi\Pi}$ and $\lambda_{\Pi\pi}$ (multiplied by a factor of
10) obtained using the two methods on a linear scale. We observe
that the two methods lead to very similar values of the transport
coefficients for small values of $z=m/T$. For large values of $z$,
the differences are significant for some transport coefficients. For
example, at $z=1$, the values of $\lambda_{\pi\Pi}$,
$\delta_{\Pi\Pi}$ and $\lambda_{\Pi\pi}$ in the two cases differ by
approximately $15\%$, $20\%$ and $25\%$, respectively.
Another quantity of interest is the square of the sound velocity
in the medium, $c_s^2$, which for small masses is approximately
\begin{equation}\label{cs2z}
\frac{1}{3} - c_s^2 = \frac{z^2}{36} - \frac{5z^4}{864} + {\cal O}(z^6\ln z).
\end{equation}
In the RTA, by comparing the relativistic NS equations,
$\Pi=-\zeta\theta$ and $\pi^{\mu\nu}= 2\eta\sigma^{\mu\nu}$, with
Eqs. (\ref{FOE1}) and (\ref{FOE2}), one obtains $\zeta/\eta=
\beta_\Pi/\beta_\pi$. Using the series expansion in $z$, one obtains
\begin{equation}\label{zetabyeta}
\frac{\zeta}{\eta} = 75\left(\frac{1}{3}-c_s^2\right)^2 + {\cal O}(z^5).
\end{equation}
The relation in Eq. (\ref{zetabyeta}) can also be obtained by using
the expressions for $\zeta$ and $\eta$ presented in Ref. \cite
{Florkowski:2014sfa}.\footnote{We note that the factor $75$ is different than
the value obtained in Ref. \cite{Denicol:2014vaa}, which was $72.75$.}
It is interesting to note that the form of the above expression is
similar to the well known relation, $\zeta/\eta=15(1/3-c_s^2)^2$,
derived by Weinberg \cite{Weinberg}. However, we find the proportionality
constant to be exactly five times larger than that obtained by Weinberg.
\begin{figure}[t]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{fig_0_1.pdf}
\end{center}
\vspace{-0.8cm}
\caption{(Color online) Same as Fig. \ref{fig_0_03} except here
we take $m=1$ GeV.}
\label{fig_0_1}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[t]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{fig_100_1.pdf}
\end{center}
\vspace{-0.8cm}
\caption{(Color online) Same as Fig. \ref{fig_100_03} except here
we take $m=1$ GeV which for $\xi_0 = 100$ implies
$\pi_0=35.12$ GeV/fm$^3$ and $\Pi_0=3.08$ GeV/fm$^3$.}
\label{fig_100_1}
\end{figure}
\section{Boost-invariant (0+1)-dimensional case}
In the case of transversely homogeneous and purely-longitudinal
boost-invariant expansion \cite{Bjorken:1982qr}, all scalar
functions of space and time depend only on the longitudinal proper
time $\tau=\sqrt{t^2-z^2}$. In terms of Milne coordinates,
$(\tau,x,y,\eta)$, the hydrodynamic four-velocity becomes
$u^\mu=(1,0,0,0)$. The energy-momentum conservation equation
together with equations (\ref {BULK}) and (\ref{SHEAR}) reduce to
\begin{align}
\dot\epsilon &= -\frac{1}{\tau}\left(\epsilon + P + \Pi -\pi\right) \, , \label{epsBj}\\
\dot\Pi + \frac{\Pi}{\tau_\Pi} &= -\frac{\beta_\Pi}{\tau} - \delta_{\Pi\Pi}\frac{\Pi}{\tau}
+\lambda_{\Pi\pi}\frac{\pi}{\tau} \, , \label{bulkBj}\\
\dot\pi + \frac{\pi}{\tau_\pi} &= \frac{4}{3}\frac{\beta_\pi}{\tau} - \left( \frac{1}{3}\tau_{\pi\pi}
+\delta_{\pi\pi}\right)\frac{\pi}{\tau} + \frac{2}{3}\lambda_{\pi\Pi}\frac{\Pi}{\tau} \, , \label{shearBj}
\end{align}
where $\pi\equiv-\tau^2\pi^{\eta\eta}$. We note that in this case
the term involving the vorticity tensor, $2\pi_{\gamma}^{\langle\mu}
\omega^{\nu\rangle\gamma}$, vanishes and hence has no effect on the
dynamics of the fluid. We also note that the first terms on the
right-hand side of Eqs.~(\ref{bulkBj}) and (\ref{shearBj}), are the
first-order terms $\beta_\Pi\theta$ and $2\beta_\pi \sigma^{\mu\nu}$,
respectively, whereas the rest are of second-order.
We solve Eqs.~(\ref{epsBj})-(\ref{shearBj}) simultaneously assuming
an initial temperature of $T_0=600$ MeV at the initial proper time
$\tau_0=0.5$ fm/$c$, with relaxation times $\tau_{\rm eq}=\tau_\Pi=
\tau_\pi=0.5$ fm/$c$ corresponding to $(\eta/s)_{\tau=\tau_0}=3/4\pi$.
We solve the equations
for two different initial pressure configurations, $\xi_0=0$,
corresponding to an isotropic pressure configuration $\pi_0=\Pi_0=0$
and $\xi_0=100$ corresponding to a highly oblate anisotropic
configuration. Here $\xi$ is the anisotropy parameter which is
related to the average transverse and longitudinal momentum in the
local rest frame via $\xi=\frac{1}{2} \langle p_T^2\rangle/\langle
p_L^2\rangle-1$. We consider two different masses, $m=300$ MeV
roughly corresponding to the constituent quark mass and $m=1$ GeV
representing the approximate thermal mass of a gluon or quark. For
comparison, we also solve Eqs. (\ref{epsBj})-(\ref{shearBj}) with
transport coefficients obtained by using the 14-moment method \cite
{Denicol:2014vaa, Denicol:2014mca}.
In Figs. \ref{fig_0_03} -- \ref{fig_100_1} we show the proper-time
evolution of the pressure anisotropy ${\cal P}_L/{\cal P}_T\equiv
(P+\Pi-\pi)/(P+\Pi+\pi/2)$ (top) and the bulk viscous pressure times
proper time (bottom) for three different calculations: the exact
solution of the RTA Boltzmann equation \cite {Florkowski:2014sfa}
(red solid line), second-order viscous hydrodynamics using the
14-moment method \cite {Denicol:2014vaa} (brown dotted line), and
the Chapman-Enskog method used herein (blue dashed line). Figures
\ref {fig_0_03} and \ref{fig_100_03} show the case that $m=300$ MeV,
while Figs. \ref{fig_0_1} and \ref {fig_100_1} show the case that
$m=1$ GeV. Figures \ref {fig_0_03} and \ref {fig_0_1} correspond to an
isotropic initial condition ($\xi_0=0$), while Figs. \ref
{fig_100_03} and \ref {fig_100_1} correspond to a highly oblate
anisotropic initial condition ($\xi_0=100$).
From Figs. \ref{fig_0_03} -- \ref{fig_100_1}, we see that ${\cal
P}_L/{\cal P}_T$ is quite insensitive to whether one uses the
14-moment or Chapman-Enskog transport coefficients obtained herein.
However, the result for $\tau\Pi$ using the Chapman-Enskog method is
in better agreement with the exact solution of the RTA Boltzmann
equation than the 14-moment method.
\begin{figure}[t]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{fig_rel.pdf}
\end{center}
\vspace{-0.45cm}
\caption{(Color online) Proper time evolution of the second-order terms
scaled by the first-order term in the evolution equation for
bulk viscous pressure, Eq. (\ref{bulkBj}). For both panels we
use $T_0=600$ MeV at $\tau_0=0.5$ fm/$c$, and $\tau_{\rm
eq}=\tau_\pi=\tau_\Pi=0.5$ fm/$c$. The initial spheroidal
anisotropy in the distribution function, $\xi_0=0$, corresponds
to an isotropic pressure configuration $\pi_0=0$ and $\Pi_0=0$. For
the top panel, we show results for $m=300$ MeV whereas the bottom
panel corresponds to $m=1$ GeV.}
\label{fig_rel}
\end{figure}
In Fig. \ref{fig_rel} we plot the proper-time evolution of the
second-order terms scaled by the first-order term in the evolution
equation for bulk viscous pressure, Eq. (\ref{bulkBj}). We observe
that for $m=300$ MeV (top panel), the relative magnitude of the
shear-bulk coupling term is greater than unity for the proper-time
interval $0.6\lesssim\tau\lesssim 3$ fm/$c$ indicating that the
evolution of bulk viscous pressure is dominated by its coupling to the
shear for a long time on the time scales relevant to hydrodynamic
evolution in relativistic heavy-ion collisions. For the case of
$m=1$ GeV (bottom panel), although the effect is not as
prominent, the shear-bulk coupling term is still almost as
important as the first-order expansion scalar.
\section{Conclusions and outlook}
In this paper we applied the iterative Chapman-Enskog method to the
derive second-order viscous hydrodynamical equations and the
associated transport coefficients for a massive gas in the relaxation-time approximation. The resulting dynamical equations (\ref{BULK})
and (\ref{SHEAR}) have precisely the same form as those obtained
using the 14-moment approximation \cite{Denicol:2014vaa}; however,
some of the transport coefficients are different than those obtained
in the 14-moment approximation when $m>0$. The equivalence or
in-equivalence of the various transport coefficients was established
analytically by using Taylor expansions in $m/T$ and also by direct
numerical evaluation of the necessary integrals.
Having obtained the full set of dynamical equations necessary to
self-consistently evolve both the bulk pressure and shear tensor, we
then specialized to the case of a transversally homogeneous and
longitudinally boost-invariant system. In this specific case it is
possible to solve the RTA Boltzmann equation exactly \cite
{Florkowski:2014sfa}. Using this solution as a benchmark, we
computed the pressure anisotropy and bulk pressure evolution using
both the Chapman-Enskog method presented herein and the 14-moment
method used in Ref.~\cite{Denicol:2014vaa}. We demonstrated that the
Chapman-Enskog method is able to reproduce the exact solution better
than the 14-moment method. For the pressure anisotropy both methods
give very similar results, but for the bulk pressure evolution the
Chapman-Enskog method better reproduces the exact solution.
Finally, we presented a comparison of the magnitude of the
shear-bulk coupling term in the dynamical equations for the bulk
pressure to the term proportional to the first-order expansion
scalar. We showed that, on the time scales relevant for relativistic
heavy ion collisions, the shear-bulk coupling in the bulk pressure
evolution equation is equally as important as the term involving the
expansion scalar, in agreement with previous findings \cite
{Denicol:2014mca}. We therefore conclude that once the second order
terms for the bulk pressure are taken into account, at least in the
relaxation time approximation, we obtain very good agreement with the
exact solution of the RTA Boltzmann equation. Since the latter does
not rely on order-by-order expansion of the distribution function
about equilibrium, this can be taken as evidence that, in the RTA, the
second-order terms capture the most important non-equilibrium
corrections.
At this point, we would like to clarify that we are using the exact
solution of the RTA Boltzmann equation as a benchmark to compare
different hydrodynamic formulations and that our minimal requirement
for a viable non-conformal hydrodynamic theory is that it should be
able to describe the dynamics in this simple case. It is true
that the dynamics becomes more complicated when
realistic scattering kernels are considered. These could, in fact, lead to a completely
different parametric behavior for bulk viscosity \cite{Jeon:1995zm,Lu:2011df}.
Looking forward, since the shear-bulk
coupling term is as important as the first-order term, we believe it would be
interesting to determine its impact in higher dimensional
simulations. Moreover, from a phenomenological perspective, a large
negative bulk viscous correction might lead to early onset of cavitation. It
would therefore be instructive to see how the second-order transport
coefficients obtained here influence cavitation. In addition, it
would also be interesting to see whether the second-order results derived
herein could be extended to third order. We leave these questions
for a future work.
\acknowledgments{
We thank G. Denicol for useful discussions. R.R. was supported by
Polish National Science Center Grant No.~DEC-2012/07/D/ST2/02125 and
U.S.~DOE Grant No.~DE-SC0004104. M.S. was supported in part by
U.S.~DOE Grant No.~DE-SC0004104.
}
|
\subsection*{\arabic{section}.\arabic{section}.\arabic{subsection}\hspace{1em}{#1}}
}
\newcommand{\note}[1]{\emph{\textcolor{red}{}}}
\newcommand{\code}[1]{{\tt{#1}}}
\newcommand{{\ensuremath{\mathrm{M}_{\odot}}}}{{\ensuremath{\mathrm{M}_{\odot}}}}
\newcommand{\ensuremath{Z_\odot}}{\ensuremath{Z_\odot}}
\newcommand{{\ensuremath{\mathrm{R}_{\odot}}}}{{\ensuremath{\mathrm{R}_{\odot}}}}
\newcommand{{\ensuremath{\mathrm{L}_{\odot}}}}{{\ensuremath{\mathrm{L}_{\odot}}}}
\newcommand{\ensuremath{\mathrm{sec}}}{\ensuremath{\mathrm{sec}}}
\newcommand{\ensuremath{\mathrm{yr}}}{\ensuremath{\mathrm{yr}}}
\newcommand{\ensuremath{\mathrm{kpc}}}{\ensuremath{\mathrm{kpc}}}
\newcommand{\ensuremath{\mathrm{km}\,\mathrm{s}^{-1}}}{\ensuremath{\mathrm{km}\,\mathrm{s}^{-1}}}
\newcommand{\ensuremath{\mathrm{Myr}}}{\ensuremath{\mathrm{Myr}}}
\newcommand{\ensuremath{\mathrm{K}}}{\ensuremath{\mathrm{K}}}
\newcommand{\ensuremath{\mathrm{B}}}{\ensuremath{\mathrm{B}}}
\newcommand{\ensuremath{\mathrm{e\!V}}}{\ensuremath{\mathrm{e\!V}}}
\newcommand{\ensuremath{\mathrm{ke\!V}}}{\ensuremath{\mathrm{ke\!V}}}
\newcommand{\ensuremath{\mathrm{g}\,\mathrm{cm}^{-3}}}{\ensuremath{\mathrm{g}\,\mathrm{cm}^{-3}}}
\newcommand{\ensuremath{\gamma_{\mathrm{ad}}}}{\ensuremath{\gamma_{\mathrm{ad}}}}
\newcommand{H~I}{H~I}
\newcommand{He~I}{He~I}
\newcommand{H~II}{H~II}
\newcommand{He~II}{He~II}
\newcommand{He~III}{He~III}
\newcommand{{\ensuremath{^{56}\mathrm{Ni}}}}{{\ensuremath{^{56}\mathrm{Ni}}}}
\newcommand{{\ensuremath{^{56}\mathrm{Fe}}}}{{\ensuremath{^{56}\mathrm{Fe}}}}
\newcommand{{\ensuremath{^{54}\mathrm{Fe}}}}{{\ensuremath{^{54}\mathrm{Fe}}}}
\newcommand{{\ensuremath{^{52}\mathrm{Fe}}}}{{\ensuremath{^{52}\mathrm{Fe}}}}
\newcommand{{\ensuremath{^{56}\mathrm{Co}}}}{{\ensuremath{^{56}\mathrm{Co}}}}
\newcommand{{\ensuremath{^{4} \mathrm{He}}}}{{\ensuremath{^{4} \mathrm{He}}}}
\newcommand{{\ensuremath{^{3} \mathrm{He}}}}{{\ensuremath{^{3} \mathrm{He}}}}
\newcommand{{\ensuremath{^{4} \mathrm{He}}}}{{\ensuremath{^{4} \mathrm{He}}}}
\newcommand{{\ensuremath{^{1} \mathrm{H}}} }{{\ensuremath{^{1} \mathrm{H}}} }
\newcommand{{\ensuremath{^{16}\mathrm{O}}}}{{\ensuremath{^{16}\mathrm{O}}}}
\newcommand{{\ensuremath{^{44}\mathrm{Ti}}}}{{\ensuremath{^{44}\mathrm{Ti}}}}
\newcommand{{\ensuremath{^{28}\mathrm{Si}}}}{{\ensuremath{^{28}\mathrm{Si}}}}
\newcommand{{\ensuremath{^{24}\mathrm{Mg}}}}{{\ensuremath{^{24}\mathrm{Mg}}}}
\newcommand{{\ensuremath{^{23}\mathrm{Mg}}}}{{\ensuremath{^{23}\mathrm{Mg}}}}
\newcommand{{\ensuremath{^{24}\mathrm{Mg}}}}{{\ensuremath{^{24}\mathrm{Mg}}}}
\newcommand{{\ensuremath{^{31}\mathrm{P}}}}{{\ensuremath{^{31}\mathrm{P}}}}
\newcommand{{\ensuremath{^{12}\mathrm{C}}}}{{\ensuremath{^{12}\mathrm{C}}}}
\newcommand{{\ensuremath{^{8}\mathrm{Be}}}}{{\ensuremath{^{8}\mathrm{Be}}}}
\newcommand{{\ensuremath{^{1}\mathrm{P}}}}{{\ensuremath{^{1}\mathrm{P}}}}
\newcommand{{\ensuremath{^{48}\mathrm{Cr}}}}{{\ensuremath{^{48}\mathrm{Cr}}}}
\newcommand{{\ensuremath{^{40}\mathrm{Ca}}}}{{\ensuremath{^{40}\mathrm{Ca}}}}
\newcommand{{\ensuremath{^{23}\mathrm{Na}}}}{{\ensuremath{^{23}\mathrm{Na}}}}
\newcommand{{\ensuremath{^{36}\mathrm{Ar}}}}{{\ensuremath{^{36}\mathrm{Ar}}}}
\newcommand{{\ensuremath{^{32}\mathrm{S}}}}{{\ensuremath{^{32}\mathrm{S}}}}
\newcommand{{\ensuremath{^{14}\mathrm{N}}}}{{\ensuremath{^{14}\mathrm{N}}}}
\newcommand{{\ensuremath{^{20}\mathrm{Ne}}}}{{\ensuremath{^{20}\mathrm{Ne}}}}
\newcommand{{\ensuremath{^{} \mathrm{H}}} }{{\ensuremath{^{} \mathrm{H}}} }
\newcommand{{\ensuremath{^{} \mathrm{H}_2}}}{{\ensuremath{^{} \mathrm{H}_2}}}
\newcommand{{\ensuremath{^{} \mathrm{e}^-}}}{{\ensuremath{^{} \mathrm{e}^-}}}
\newcommand{{\ensuremath{M_*}}}{{\ensuremath{M_*}}}
\newcommand{{\ensuremath{M_{\mathrm{He}}}}}{{\ensuremath{M_{\mathrm{He}}}}}
\newcommand{{\ensuremath{\rho_{\mathrm{c}}}}}{{\ensuremath{\rho_{\mathrm{c}}}}}
\newcommand{{\ensuremath{T_{\mathrm{c}}}}}{{\ensuremath{T_{\mathrm{c}}}}}
\newcommand{{\ensuremath{M_{\mathrm{Ni}}}}}{{\ensuremath{M_{\mathrm{Ni}}}}}
\newcommand{\ensuremath{\mathrm{B}}}{\ensuremath{\mathrm{B}}}
\def\frac{1}{2} {\frac{1}{2}}
\def\sfrac{1}{2} {\sfrac{1}{2}}
\def{n+\myhalf} {{n+\sfrac{1}{2}}}
\def{n-\myhalf} {{n-\sfrac{1}{2}}}
\def\dot\omega {{\dot\omega}}
\def\Delta t {{\Delta t}}
\def{\bf A} {{\bf A}}
\def{\bf F} {{\bf F}}
\def{\bf g} {{\bf g}}
\def{\bf l} {{\bf l}}
\def{\bf L} {{\bf L}}
\def{\bf Q} {{\bf Q}}
\def{\bf R} {{\bf R}}
\def{\bf r} {{\bf r}}
\def{\bf S} {{\bf S}}
\def{\bf u} {{\bf u}}
\def{\bf U} {{\bf U}}
\def{\ell^\prime} {{\ell^\prime}}
\def{H_{\rm nuc}}{{H_{\rm nuc}}}
\newcommand{C \rightarrow E}{C \rightarrow E}
\newcommand{E \rightarrow C}{E \rightarrow C}
\newcommand{\Code}[1]{\texttt{#1}}
\newcommand{{\rmfamily C\raise.22ex\hbox{\small ++} }}{{\rmfamily C\raise.22ex\hbox{\small ++} }}
\def{\rm in} {{\rm in}}
\def{\rm out} {{\rm out}}
\newcommand\ione[2]{#1$\;${\scshape{#2}}}
\newcommand{\xFig}[1]{fig:#1}
\newcommand{\xSect}[1]{sec:#1}
\newcommand{\xEq}[1]{eq:#1}
\newcommand{\xTab}[1]{tab:#1}
\newcommand{\lSect}[1]{\label{#1}}
\newcommand{\lFig}[1]{\label{\xFig{#1}}}
\newcommand{\lEq}[1]{\label{\xEq{#1}}}
\newcommand{\lTab}[1]{\label{\xTab{#1}}}
\newcommand{\FIGFF}[2]{{\xFig{#2}{#1}}}
\newcommand{\Figff}[1]{{\FIGFF{}{#1}}}
\newcommand{Fig.\ }[2]{{Fig.~\FIGFF{#1}{#2}}}
\newcommand{\Fig}[1]{{Fig.\ {}{#1}}}
\newcommand{Figs.\ }[2]{{Figs.~\FIGFF{#1}{#2}}}
\newcommand{\Figs}[1]{{Figs.\ {}{#1}}}
\newcommand{\Figure}[1]{{Figure~\FIGFF{}{#1}}}
\newcommand{\Figures}[1]{{figures~\FIGFF{}{#1}}}
\newcommand{\Sectff}[1]{{\xSect{#1}}}
\newcommand{\Sect}[1]{{\S~\ref{#1}}}
\newcommand{\Sects}[1]{{\S\S~\Sectff{#1}}}
\newcommand{\Section}[1]{{Section~\Sectff{#1}}}
\newcommand{\Sections}[1]{{Sections~\Sectff{#1}}}
\newcommand{\Tabff}[1]{{\xTab{#1}}}
\newcommand{\Table}[1]{{Table~\Tabff{#1}}}
\newcommand{\Tab}[1]{{Tab.~\Tabff{#1}}}
\newcommand{\Tables}[2]{{Tables~\Tabff{#1} $-$ \Tabff{#2}}}
\newcommand{\Eqref}[1]{{\ref{eq:#1}}}
\newcommand{\Eqff}[1]{{(\Eqref{#1})}}
\newcommand{Eq.\ }[1]{{Equation~\Eqff{#1}}}
\newcommand{\Equation}[1]{{Equation~\Eqff{#1}}}
\newcommand{\Eq}[1]{{Equation~\Eqff{#1}}}
\newcommand{\Eqs}[1]{{eqs.~\Eqff{#1}}}
\newcommand{\Leg}[1]{{\textit{#1}}}
\newcommand{\Ep}[1]{{\ensuremath{10^{#1}}}}
\newcommand{\E}[1]{{\ensuremath{\powersep\Ep{#1}}}}
\newcommand{{\ensuremath{\mathrm{cm}}}}{{\ensuremath{\mathrm{cm}}}}
\newcommand{{\ensuremath{\mathrm{km}}}}{{\ensuremath{\mathrm{km}}}}
\newcommand{{\ensuremath{\mathrm{g}}}}{{\ensuremath{\mathrm{g}}}}
\newcommand{{\ensuremath{\mathrm{K}}}}{{\ensuremath{\mathrm{K}}}}
\newcommand{{\ensuremath{\mathrm{K}}}}{{\ensuremath{\mathrm{K}}}}
\newcommand{{\ensuremath{\mathrm{sec}}}}{{\ensuremath{\mathrm{sec}}}}
\newcommand{{\ensuremath{\mathrm{pc}}}}{{\ensuremath{\mathrm{pc}}}}
\newcommand{{\ensuremath{\mathrm{erg}}}}{{\ensuremath{\mathrm{erg}}}}
\newcommand{{\ensuremath{\varepsilon_{\mathrm{nuc}}}}}{{\ensuremath{\varepsilon_{\mathrm{nuc}}}}}
\newcommand{{\ensuremath{\mathrm{Mpc}}}}{{\ensuremath{\mathrm{Mpc}}}}
\newcommand{\texttt{GIFT}}{\texttt{GIFT}}
\newcommand{\texttt{MA28}}{\texttt{MA28}}
\newcommand{\texttt{CASTRO}}{\texttt{CASTRO}}
\newcommand{\texttt{KEPLER}}{\texttt{KEPLER}}
\newcommand{\texttt{GADGET}}{\texttt{GADGET}}
\newcommand{\texttt{VISIT}}{\texttt{VISIT}}
\newcommand{\texttt{Gadget-2}}{\texttt{Gadget-2}}
\newcommand{\texttt{FLASH}}{\texttt{FLASH}}
\newcommand{\texttt{MESA}}{\texttt{MESA}}
\newcommand{\aj}{AJ
\newcommand{ARA\&A}{ARA\&A
\newcommand{ApJ}{ApJ
\newcommand{ApJ}{{ApJ}
\newcommand{ApJS}{{ApJS}
\newcommand{\ao}{{Appl.~Opt.}
\newcommand{\apss}{{Ap\&SS}
\newcommand{A\&A}{{A\&A}
\newcommand{\aapr}{{A\&A~Rev.}
\newcommand{\aaps}{{A\&AS}
\newcommand{\azh}{{AZh}
\newcommand{\baas}{{BAAS}
\newcommand{\jrasc}{{JRASC}
\newcommand{\memras}{{MmRAS}
\newcommand{MNRAS}{{MNRAS}
\newcommand{\pra}{{Phys.~Rev.~A}
\newcommand{\prb}{{Phys.~Rev.~B}
\newcommand{\prc}{{Phys.~Rev.~C}
\newcommand{PRD}{{Phys.~Rev.~D}
\newcommand{Phys. Rev.}{{Phys.~Rev.~E}
\newcommand{\prl}{{Phys.~Rev.~Lett.}
\newcommand{PASP}{{PASP}
\newcommand{\pasj}{{PASJ}
\newcommand{\qjras}{{QJRAS}
\newcommand{\skytel}{{S\&T}
\newcommand{\solphys}{{Sol.~Phys.}
\newcommand{\sovast}{{Soviet~Ast.}
\newcommand{\ssr}{{Space~Sci.~Rev.}
\newcommand{\zap}{{ZAp}
\newcommand{Nat}{{Nature}
\newcommand{Nat}{{Nature}
\newcommand{\iaucirc}{{IAU~Circ.}
\newcommand{\aplett}{{Astrophys.~Lett.}
\newcommand{\apspr}{{Astrophys.~Space~Phys.~Res.}
\newcommand{\bain}{{Bull.~Astron.~Inst.~Netherlands}
\newcommand{\fcp}{{Fund.~Cosmic~Phys.}
\newcommand{\gca}{{Geochim.~Cosmochim.~Acta}
\newcommand{\grl}{{Geophys.~Res.~Lett.}
\newcommand{\jcp}{{J.~Chem.~Phys.}
\newcommand{\jgr}{{J.~Geophys.~Res.}
\newcommand{\jqsrt}{{J.~Quant.~Spec.~Radiat.~Transf.}
\newcommand{\memsai}{{Mem.~Soc.~Astron.~Italiana}
\newcommand{\nphysa}{{Nucl.~Phys.~A}
\newcommand{Phys. Rep.}{{Phys.~Rep.}
\newcommand{\physscr}{{Phys.~Scr}
\newcommand{\planss}{{Planet.~Space~Sci.}
\newcommand{\procspie}{{Proc.~SPIE}
\newcommand{\na}{{New Astronomy}
\let\astap=A\&A
\let\apjlett=ApJ
\let\apjsupp=ApJS
\let\applopt=\ao
\newcommand{\sfrac}[2]{\mathchoice
{\kern0em\raise.5ex\hbox{\the\scriptfont0 #1}\kern-.15em/
\kern-.15em\lower.25ex\hbox{\the\scriptfont0 #2}}
{\kern0em\raise.5ex\hbox{\the\scriptfont0 #1}\kern-.15em/
\kern-.15em\lower.25ex\hbox{\the\scriptfont0 #2}}
{\kern0em\raise.5ex\hbox{\the\scriptscriptfont0 #1}\kern-.2em/
\kern-.15em\lower.25ex\hbox{\the\scriptscriptfont0 #2}}
{#1\!/#2}}
\def{\bf A} {{\bf A}}
\def{\bf e} {{\bf e}}
\def{\bf F} {{\bf F}}
\def{\bf g} {{\bf g}}
\def{\bf H} {{\bf H}}
\def{\bf i} {{\bf i}}
\def{\bf I} {{\bf I}}
\def{\bf K} {{\bf K}}
\def{\bf l} {{\bf l}}
\def{\bf L} {{\bf L}}
\def{\bf n} {{\bf n}}
\def{\bf P} {{\bf P}}
\def{\bf Q} {{\bf Q}}
\def{\bf r} {{\bf r}}
\def{\bf R} {{\bf R}}
\def{\bf S} {{\bf S}}
\def{\bf u} {{\bf u}}
\def{\bf U} {{\bf U}}
\def{\bf x} {{\bf x}}
\def\Delta t {\Delta t}
\def\dot\omega {\dot\omega}
\def{\rm in} {{\rm in}}
\def{\rm out} {{\rm out}}
\def{\rm sync} {{\rm sync}}
\def\frac{1}{2} {\frac{1}{2}}
\def\sfrac{1}{2} {\sfrac{1}{2}}
\def{n+\myhalf} {{n+\sfrac{1}{2}}}
\def{\tt{\bf ADDNODE}} {{\tt{\bf ADDNODE}}}
\def{\tt{\bf ADVANCE}} {{\tt{\bf ADVANCE}}}
\def{\tt{\bf done}} {{\tt{\bf done}}}
\def{\tt{\bf EVAL}} {{\tt{\bf EVAL}}}
\def{\tt{\bf INITPHI}} {{\tt{\bf INITPHI}}}
\def{\tt{\bf FASTMARCH}} {{\tt{\bf FASTMARCH}}}
\def{\tt{\bf FINDINTRFCE}} {{\tt{\bf FINDINTRFCE}}}
\def{\tt{\bf heap}} {{\tt{\bf heap}}}
\def{\tt{\bf heaploc}} {{\tt{\bf heaploc}}}
\def{\tt{\bf intface}} {{\tt{\bf intface}}}
\def{\tt{\bf intfacen}} {{\tt{\bf intfacen}}}
\def{\tt{\bf intfacenum}} {{\tt{\bf intfacenum}}}
\def{\tt{\bf intfacenumn}} {{\tt{\bf intfacenumn}}}
\def{\tt{\bf intfacenump}} {{\tt{\bf intfacenump}}}
\def{\tt{\bf intfacep}} {{\tt{\bf intfacep}}}
\def{\tt{\bf isnew}} {{\tt{\bf isnew}}}
\def{\tt{\bf LARGEINT}} {{\tt{\bf LARGEINT}}}
\def{\tt{\bf lvlerr}} {{\tt{\bf lvlerr}}}
\def{\tt{\bf LSCFL}} {{\tt{\bf LSCFL}}}
\def{\tt{\bf LStype}} {{\tt{\bf LStype}}}
\def{\tt{\bf LSnband}} {{\tt{\bf LSnband}}}
\def{\tt{\bf LSmine}} {{\tt{\bf LSmine}}}
\def{\tt{\bf mine}} {{\tt{\bf mine}}}
\def{\tt{\bf MINE}} {{\tt{\bf MINE}}}
\def{\tt{\bf mineloc}} {{\tt{\bf mineloc}}}
\def{\tt{\bf NARROWBAND}} {{\tt{\bf NARROWBAND}}}
\def{\tt{\bf nband}} {{\tt{\bf nband}}}
\def{\tt{\bf nbandnum}} {{\tt{\bf nbandnum}}}
\def{\tt{\bf nbandwidth}} {{\tt{\bf nbandwidth}}}
\def{\tt{\bf numtent}} {{\tt{\bf numtent}}}
\def{\tt{\bf PHIUPD}} {{\tt{\bf PHIUPD}}}
\def{\tt{\bf REINIT}} {{\tt{\bf REINIT}}}
\def{\tt{\bf RETYPIFY}} {{\tt{\bf RETYPIFY}}}
\def{\tt{\bf RMVNODE}} {{\tt{\bf RMVNODE}}}
\def{\tt{\bf sign}} {{\tt{\bf sign}}}
\def{\tt{\bf type}} {{\tt{\bf type}}}
\def{\tt{\bf UPDATE}} {{\tt{\bf UPDATE}}}
\def{\tt{\bf UPDATEF}} {{\tt{\bf UPDATEF}}}
\def{\tt{\bf UPDATENODE}} {{\tt{\bf UPDATENODE}}}
\def{\rm new} {{\rm new}}
\def{\rm old} {{\rm old}}
\newcommand{\begin{equation}}{\begin{equation}}
\newcommand{\end{equation}}{\end{equation}}
\newcommand{\begin{eqnarray}}{\begin{eqnarray}}
\newcommand{\end{eqnarray}}{\end{eqnarray}}
\newcommand{\begin{center}}{\begin{center}}
\newcommand{\end{center}}{\end{center}}
\newcommand{\ol}[1]{ {\overline{#1}}}
\newcommand{\,h^{-1}{\rm kpc}}{\,h^{-1}{\rm kpc}}
\renewcommand{\vec}[1]{\textit{\textbf{#1}}}
\newcommand{{\rm e}}{{\rm e}}
\newcommand{{\rm d}}{{\rm d}}
\newcommand{\X}[1]{{\textbf{#1}}}
\newcommand{\ensuremath{\mathrm{cm}^{-3}}}{\ensuremath{\mathrm{cm}^{-3}}}
\newcommand{\RX}[1]{\textcolor{red}{\textbf{#1}}}
\begin{document}
\markboth{Chen}
{SUPERNOVAE AT THE COSMIC DAWN}
\catchline{}{}{}{}{}
\title{SUPERNOVAE AT THE COSMIC DAWN \footnote{}
}
\author{KE-JUNG CHEN }
\address{Department of Astronomy \& Astrophysics, University of California, 1156 High St.\\
Santa Cruz, California 95064, USA \\
School of Physics and Astronomy, University of Minnesota, 116 Church St. \\
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55455, USA \\
<EMAIL>
}
\maketitle
\begin{history}
\received{Day Month Year}
\revised{Day Month Year}
\end{history}
\begin{abstract}
Modern cosmological simulations predict that the first generation of stars formed with a mass scale
around $100\,{\ensuremath{\mathrm{M}_{\odot}}}$ about $300-400$ million years after the Big Bang. When the first
stars reached the end of their lives, many of them might have died as energetic supernovae that
could have significantly affected the early Universe via injecting large amounts of energy and metals
into the primordial intergalactic medium. In this paper, we review the current models of the first
supernovae by discussing on the relevant background physics, computational methods, and the latest results.
\keywords{Cosmology, Supernovae, The Early Universe, Pop~III Star}
\end{abstract}
\ccode{PACS Nos.: 97.60.Bw, 98.80.Bp, 98.80.Ft}
\section{Introduction}
One of the frontiers in modern cosmology is understanding the end of the cosmic dark ages,
when the first luminous objects (e.g., stars, supernovae (SNe), and galaxies) reshaped the
primordial Universe into the current Universe. The advancement of
supercomputing power in the last decade has allowed us to
start investigating the formation of the first stars by modeling the relevant physical processes.
The results of the first star formation suggested that these stars could have been very massive,
having a typical mass scale of about $100$ solar masses ({\ensuremath{\mathrm{M}_{\odot}}}). Some of them might
have died as energetic SN explosions. These first SNe could dump considerable energy and
spread the previously-forged elements to the inter-galactic medium (IGM) that significantly
impacted later star formation. The forthcoming observatories will soon probe these first SNe;
therefore, it is timely that we review the current theoretical models about the first SNe. In this review, we present a brief overview of modern cosmology in \S~\ref{earlyU} and the physics of
the first star formation and its stellar evolution in \S~\ref{firststar}. We then discuss the computational
approaches for simulating the first SNe in \S~\ref{sn_castro}.
We discuss the explosion mechanics of the first SNe by presenting some of latest results in \S~\ref{sn_result} . The yields and energetics of these first SNe might affect the early Universe, which then transformed into
the present Universe. We introduce the computational approaches for feedback simulations of the first stars and SNe in \S~\ref{feed_gadget} and present the results in \S~\ref{feed_result}. Finally, we give a summary and perspective in \S~\ref{summary}.
\section{The Early Universe}
\label{earlyU}
The creation and evolution of the Universe has been one of the most fascinating subjects
in modern cosmology. It is proper to provide the background of the early Universe, which hatched
the first stars and supernovae, which are the major topics of this review.
This section provides a brief overview of modern cosmology.
There are many excellent reviews about the early Universe; we list only some of them
for readers interested in having a more comprehensive understanding of
modern cosmology. The recommended entry-level textbooks about the early Universe are
[\refcite{liddle2003}] for undergraduate students and [\refcite{peacock1999}] for graduate students.
For more specific studies, [\refcite{kolb1990}] provides a comprehensive introduction to the Inflationary
model and the Big Bang Nucleosynthesis. [\refcite{dodelson2003}] discusses the quantum fluctuation from
Inflation and how it was seeded as initial perturbations for the large scale structure formation. Those
who are interested in the dynamics and evolution of the Universe can consult two classic
books: [\refcite{peebles1980,peebles1993}].
Our Universe is believed to have been born from the Big Bang at the time when the density and temperature
of the Universe were infinite. At the beginning of the Big Bang, all fundamental physical forces---such as
gravitational, electro-magnetic, strong, and weak forces---were united. Due to the rapid expansion of the Universe,
the temperature dropped quickly, and the fundamental forces became separated. At about $10^{-36}\,\sec$
after the Big Bang commenced, the Universe went through a very short and rapid expansion called Inflation \cite{guth1981,linde1982}{}. Inflation seeded the quantum fluctuations into space-time. These fluctuations later became the initial perturbations of the Universe, which led to the formation of large scale structures.
A few minutes later, atomic nuclei could start to form. Then protons and neutrons began to combine into atomic nuclei: helium (24\% in mass), hydrogen (76 \% in mass), and a trace amount of lithium. The Big Bang Nucleosynthesis lasted only until the temperatures and densities of baryons
became too low for further nucleosynthesis, which was about a few minutes. The elements
necessary for life, such as carbon and oxygen, had not been made at this moment.
About 300,000 years after the Big Bang, the temperature of Universe cooled below $10,000\,\ensuremath{\mathrm{K}}$.
At that time, protons and electrons could recombine into neutral hydrogen. Without the opacity from free electrons, the photons decoupled
from the matter and streamed freely. This radiation is called the cosmic microwave background radiation (CMB), and it was first detected by
[\refcite{penzias1965}]. It fits perfectly with a black-body temperature of about $2.73\,\ensuremath{\mathrm{K}}$. In 1992, the Cosmic Background Explorer (COBE)
detected the anisotropy of the CMB, which shed the light of understanding on the structure formation of the early Universe. More recent results
from the Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP) helped to confirm inflationary cosmology and determined the cosmological parameters
with an unprecedented precision. The success of the CMB observation confirmed that the Universe contains about
$5\,\%$ of baryon, $25\,\%$ of cold dark matter (CDM), and $70\%$ of dark energy ($\Lambda$). The intrinsic properties of cold dark matter and dark energy remain poorly understood. Significant experimental effort has
been made for studying the dark sectors of the Universe; promising progress should be made in the near future.
Nevertheless, the Big Bang Nucleosynthesis, inflationary models, and $\Lambda$CDM form the foundation of
modern cosmology.
The initial perturbation seeded by inflation began evolving through gravity. In Figure~\ref{LCDM_fig}, we show the formation
of a large scale structure from our cosmological simulation \cite{chen_phd} with \texttt{GADGET}. This example consists of $128^3$
dark matter particles, and $128^3$ gas particles, following structure formation in a periodic box of size $50\,h^{-1}\,{\ensuremath{\mathrm{Mpc}}}^3$
in a $\Lambda$CDM Universe. The simulation begins at the redshift of $z\sim10$ and ends at $z\sim0$. The initial
distribution of particles was homogeneous and isotopic with a very tiny gaussian fluctuation. At the end, the dark matter
particles (black dots) evolved into highly clustered structures hierarchically through gravity.
There was no star when the CMB was emitted because the density of primordial gas was
too low and could not condense to form stars. The Universe then entered the cosmic
dark ages when there was no light from stars. Several hundred million years after the
Big Bang, the dark matter collapsed into minihalos with masses of $10^5-10^6\,{\ensuremath{\mathrm{M}_{\odot}}}$,
which would become the birth sites for the first stars because such halos could provide gravitational wells
that retained the gas to form stars. The light from the first stars ended the dark ages, which had lasted for
several hundred million years. In addition, the first stars started to forge the first metals that became the
building blocks of later stars and galaxies. Thus, the first stars play a crucial role in the evolution of the Universe. Figure~\ref{timeline} shows a timeline of the Universe.
The observable Universe spans about 13.7 billion years, starting with the Big Bang and quickly expanding
during Inflation. After $380,000$ years, the CMB was emitted from the last scattering surface. Later,
the Universe entered the dark ages until the first stars were born. Hereafter, the planets, stars, and
galaxies started to form.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{ijmpc_pic/lcdm3}
\caption[]{ The formation of large scale structure of Universe: The black dots represent the
dark matter particles. The evolution follows from panel (a) $\rightarrow$ (b) $\rightarrow$ (c) $\rightarrow$ (d). Cold dark matter particles only interact with each others through gravity and eventually form into a clustered structure. }
\label{LCDM_fig}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[ht]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{ijmpc_pic/timeline}
\caption[]{Cosmic timeline: The illustration shows the evolution of cosmic structure from the Big Bang.
The first stars appeared about 400 million years after the Big Bang. Hereafter, the galaxies, stars, and planets
started to develop. Recent observations suggest that the expansion of the Universe is accelerating due to
dark energy.
(Credit: NASA/WMAP Science Team)\label{timeline}}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\section{The First Stars}
\label{firststar}
Formation of the first stars transformed the simple early Universe into a highly complicated
one. The first stars made from the hydrogen and helium left from the Big Bang are called the
Population~III (Pop~III) stars, which are ancestors of the current stars like our Sun. The study
of the first stars has recently received increasing attention because the tools for this study have
become available, including the forthcoming telescopes, which will probe the cosmic dark
ages, and the advancement of modern supercomputers, which allow us to carry out more sophisticated
simulations. In this section, we review the recent advancement of our understanding of the first star formation.
The $\Lambda$CDM model offers a fundamental theory for the large scale formation,
suggesting that the cosmic structure formed in a hierarchical manner. The first stars must form
along with the structural evolution of the Universe. The conditions for the star
formation are that the cooling time scale of halos must be smaller than their dynamical time scale.
According to [\refcite{bromm2004a}], the low-mass dark matter halos have a virial temperature of
$\propto M^{2/3}(1+z)$, where $M$ is the halo mass and $z$ is the redshift. Metal cooling was absent in the
early Universe, and the cooling of gas occurred primarily through molecular hydrogen, H$_2$. The
dominating H$_2$ formation goes through H $+\,e^-$ $\rightarrow$ H$^-+\,\gamma$
and H$^-$ + H $\rightarrow$ H$_2$ $+\,e^-$. Sources of free electrons, $e^-$, come from the recombination
or collision excitation of gas when dark matter halos merge. Pioneering work\cite{tegmark1997,
abel2002} suggests that the first star was born in the halos of $\sim 10^6\,{\ensuremath{\mathrm{M}_{\odot}}}$ at $z \sim 30$,
which reach a H$_2$ fraction of $10^{-4}$. The size of Pop~III star-forming clouds is comparable
to the virial radius of the halos, about 100~pc. The detailed shape of the cloud is determined by
its angular momentum, which depends on the resolution of the simulations. Now
there is no direct detection of Pop~III stars. Nevertheless, the observation of present-day stars
may provide us hints to study the Pop~III star formation. The present-day (Pop~I) stars are born
inside a giant molecular cloud of about 100~pc, supported by the pressure of turbulence flow
or magnetic field. About $1,000\,-\,1,000,000$ stars usually form inside the cloud
[\refcite{salpeter1955}], which suggests the observed initial mass function (IMF) of Pop~I stars to be
\begin{equation}
N(M_*)=N_0\,M_*^{-2.35},
\end{equation}
where $N$ is the number of stars, $M_*$ is the stellar mass, and $N_0$
is a constant. The characteristic mass scale of the Salpeter IMF is about $1\,{\ensuremath{\mathrm{M}_{\odot}}}$, which means
most of the Pop~I stars form with a mass similar to that of our Sun. It is extremely difficult to calculate the Pop~I
IMF from first principles because present-day star formation involves magneto-hydrodynamics, turbulent flow, and complex chemistry.
However, the initial conditions of the primordial Universe, such as the cosmological parameters, are better understood. In addition, the metal-free and
magnetic-free gas makes the simulation of Pop~III star formation more accessible. To simulate the Pop~III star formation, we need 3D cosmological
simulations of dark matter and gas, including cooling and chemistry for primordial gas. The initial conditions of simulations use the cosmological
parameters from the CMB measurement.
The key feature for cosmological simulation is handling a large dynamical range. Two popular setups for simulating
the first star formation are mesh-based [\refcite{abel2000,abel2002}] and Lagrangian techniques [\refcite{bromm2002,bromm2009}].
The mesh-based technique usually employs the
adaptive mesh refinement (AMR), which creates finer grids to resolve the structures of interests such as gas flow inside
the dark matter halos. The other approach is called smoothed particle hydrodynamics (SPH),
which uses particles to model the fluid elements. The mass distribution of particles is based on a kernel function.
The results of AMR and SPH simulations both agree on the characteristics of the first star-forming cloud; temperature of $T_c\approx200\,\ensuremath{\mathrm{K}}$, and gas density of $n_c\approx10^4\,{\ensuremath{\mathrm{cm}}}^{-3}$. The $T_c$ is determined by H$_2$ cooling, which is the dominating coolant at that time.
The lowest energy levels of H$_2$ are collisional excitation and subsequent rotational transitions with an energy gap of
$\Delta E/k_{\rm B}\,\simeq\,512\,\ensuremath{\mathrm{K}}$. Atomic hydrogen can cool down to several hundred K through collisions with H$_2$;
$n_c$ is explained by the saturation of H$_2$ cooling: below $n_c$, the cooling rate is $\propto n^2$;
above $n_c$, the cooling rate is $\propto n$. Once the gas reaches the characteristic status, the cooling then becomes
inefficient and the gas cloud becomes a quasi-hydrostatic. The cloud eventually collapses when the its mass is larger than its
Jeans mass\cite{bromm2004a}{},
\begin{equation}
M_{J} = 700\bigg(\frac{T}{200\,{\rm K}}\bigg)^{3/2} \bigg(\frac{n}{10^4\,{\rm cm^{-3}}}\bigg)
^{-1/2}\quad {\ensuremath{\mathrm{M}_{\odot}}}.
\end{equation}
The Jeans mass is determined by the balance between the gravity and pressure of gas. For the first star formation, the pressure is mainly
from the thermal pressure of the gas. However, it is unclear whether the cloud forms into a single star or fragments into multiple stars. To answer this question,
evolving the cloud to a higher density and following the subsequent accretion are required. The cloud mass at least sets up a maximum mass for the final
stellar mass. But the exact mass of the stars is determined by the accretion history when the star forms. [\refcite{bromm2004b}] suggested that the
first stars can be very massive, having a typical mass of $100\,{\ensuremath{\mathrm{M}_{\odot}}}$ with a broad spectrum of mass distribution.
\subsection{Stellar Evolution}
After the first star has formed, its core temperature increases due to Kelvin-Helmholtz contraction and eventually
ignites hydrogen burning. In contrast to the present-day stars, there was no metal present inside the first stars.
They first burn hydrogen into helium through p-p chains, then burn helium through the $3\alpha$ reaction. A detailed description
of hydrogen burning can be found in [\refcite{prian2000}]. After the first carbon and oxygen have been made, the
first stars can burn the hydrogen in a more effective way through the carbon-nitrogen-oxygen (CNO) cycle. Once stable hydrogen burning at the core of the star occurs, the first stars enter their main sequence. The lifespan of a star on the main sequence mainly depends on its initial mass and composition. The energy released from nuclear burning is used to power the luminosity of stars.
Once the hydrogen is depleted, the star completes the main sequence and starts to burn helium as well
as the resulting nuclei. In the following subsections, we introduce the advanced burning stages of stars before they die.
The luminosity of stars is powered by the nuclear fusion that occurs inside the stars.
Light elements are synthesized into heavy elements, and the accompanying energy is released.
We review the advanced burning stages based on [\refcite{kippen1990,arnett1996,prian2000,woosley2002}].
First, the helium burning consists of two steps,
\begin{equation}
{\ensuremath{^{4} \mathrm{He}}}\,+\,{\ensuremath{^{4} \mathrm{He}}}\,\rightarrow\,{\ensuremath{^{8}\mathrm{Be}}}, \quad
{\ensuremath{^{8}\mathrm{Be}}}\,+\,{\ensuremath{^{4} \mathrm{He}}}\,\rightarrow\,{\ensuremath{^{12}\mathrm{C}}}.
\end{equation}
The process is known as the $3\,\alpha$ reaction because three helium ($\alpha$) are involved. It yields
$5.8\,\times \,10^{17}\,{\ensuremath{\mathrm{erg}}}\,{\ensuremath{\mathrm{g}}}^{-1}$. {\ensuremath{^{8}\mathrm{Be}}}{} determines the overall reaction rate, and its production
is proportional to the square of the {\ensuremath{^{4} \mathrm{He}}}{} number density. So the energy generation rate is proportional to the density square.
The formula of the energy generation rate of the $3\,\alpha$ reaction \cite{prian2000} is
\begin{equation}
q_{3\alpha}\,\propto\,\rho^2 T^{40}.
\end{equation}
Some $\alpha$ capture reaction may occur, if sufficient amount of ${\ensuremath{^{12}\mathrm{C}}}$ are present. But at such a temperature, only
\begin{equation}
{\ensuremath{^{12}\mathrm{C}}}\,+\,{\ensuremath{^{4} \mathrm{He}}}\,\rightarrow\,{\ensuremath{^{16}\mathrm{O}}}
\end{equation}
is significant; other capture reaction rates are too low. So the major products of
helium burning are carbon and oxygen, and the ratio of ${\ensuremath{^{12}\mathrm{C}}}/{\ensuremath{^{16}\mathrm{O}}}$ depends
on temperature. After the helium burning, the star starts to burn carbon and oxygen, which
require higher temperatures to ignite. Carbon starts to burn when the temperatures reach
$5\,\times\,10^8\,{\ensuremath{\mathrm{K}}}$. There are several channels of carbon burning,
\begin{eqnarray*}
&& {\ensuremath{^{23}\mathrm{Mg}}}\quad + \quad \gamma \\
&& {\ensuremath{^{24}\mathrm{Mg}}} \quad +\quad n \\
{\ensuremath{^{12}\mathrm{C}}}\,+\,{\ensuremath{^{12}\mathrm{C}}} &\longrightarrow& {\ensuremath{^{23}\mathrm{Na}}} \quad\, + \quad p \\
&& {\ensuremath{^{20}\mathrm{Ne}}} \,\quad +\quad \alpha \\
&& \hphantom{0}{\ensuremath{^{16}\mathrm{O}}} \,\quad +\quad 2\alpha.
\end{eqnarray*}
The overall energy generation is about $5.2\,\times\,10^{17}\,{\ensuremath{\mathrm{erg}}}\,{\ensuremath{\mathrm{g}}}^{-1}$. The process of oxygen burning ignites at a temperature of $10^9\,\ensuremath{\mathrm{K}}$. Similar to ${\ensuremath{^{12}\mathrm{C}}}$, there are several channels available:
\begin{eqnarray*}
&& {\ensuremath{^{28}\mathrm{Si}}} \quad +\quad \gamma \\
&& {\ensuremath{^{32}\mathrm{S}}} \,\,\quad + \quad n \\
{\ensuremath{^{16}\mathrm{O}}}\,+\,{\ensuremath{^{16}\mathrm{O}}} &\longrightarrow& {\ensuremath{^{31}\mathrm{P}}} \,\quad +\quad p \\
&& {\ensuremath{^{28}\mathrm{Si}}} \,\quad + \quad \alpha \\
&& {\ensuremath{^{24}\mathrm{Mg}}} \!\!\quad + \quad 2\alpha.
\end{eqnarray*}
The average energy released is about $4.8\,\times,\,10^{17}\,{\ensuremath{\mathrm{erg}}}\,{\ensuremath{\mathrm{g}}}^{-1}$.
There is little interaction between carbon and oxygen for the intermediate
temperature that ignites carbon burning because the carbon can quickly burn
out by self interaction. The light elements produced from carbon
and oxygen burning are immediately captured by the existing heavy nuclei.
The major isotope produced after oxygen burning is {\ensuremath{^{28}\mathrm{Si}}}.
Silicon burning follows the oxygen burning and is the final advanced burning stage that releases energy.
The temperature of silicon burning is about $3\,\times\,10^9\,\ensuremath{\mathrm{K}}$. In such high temperatures, energetic
photons are able to disintegrate the heavy nuclei; this process is called photodisintegration. During
the silicon burning, part of the silicon is first photodisintegrated; the light isotopes are then recaptured
by the silicon, and the resulting isotopes are photodisintegrated recursively. Such reactions build up
a comprehensive reaction network and tend to reach a status called nuclear statistical equilibrium (NSE).
The forward and backward reaction rates in NSE are almost equal. However, a perfect NSE occurs only at temperatures
$>\,7\,\times\,10^9\,\ensuremath{\mathrm{K}}$. At the end, silicon burns into the iron group, including iron, cobalt, and nickel, and no more energy can
be released from burning these isotopes. The major nuclear-burning reactions inside a star are listed in Table~\ref{ta_burn}. However,
not every star goes through all of these burning processes; it depends on their initial masses.
\begin{table}[ht]
\tbl{Major burning processes: $T_{\rm min}$: the minimum temperature to ignite the burning \cite{prian2000}}
{\begin{tabular}{@{}cccc@{}} \toprule
Fuel & Reaction & $T_{min}$[$10^6\,\ensuremath{\mathrm{K}}$] & yields \\ \colrule
H & $p-p$ & 4 & He \\
H & CNO & 15 & He \\
He & $3\,\alpha$ & 100 & C,O \\
C & C+C & 600 & O, Ne, Na, Mg \\
O & O+O & 1000 & Mg, S, P, Si \\
Si & NSE to iron group & 3000 & Co, Fe, Ni \\ \botrule
\end{tabular} \label{ta_burn} }
\end{table}
Energetic photons may turn into electron-positron ($e^-/e^+$) pairs when they interact with the nucleus.
The threshold energy of a photon for pair-production is $h\nu\,\sim\,2m_ec^2$, where
$m_e$ is the rest mass of the electron, and $c$ is the speed of light. This energy
scale corresponds to a temperature of about $T\,\sim\,2m_ec^2/k_{\rm B}\sim10^{10}\,\ensuremath{\mathrm{K}}$.
At temperatures higher than $10^{9}\,\ensuremath{\mathrm{K}}$, photons in the tail of the Planck distribution
are energetic enough to create $e^+/e^{-}$ pairs. Pair production can lead to dynamical instabilities in the cores
of stars because the pressure-supporting photons have become
exhausted and turned into pairs. Pair-instabilities usually occur in very massive stars with
masses over $80\,{\ensuremath{\mathrm{M}_{\odot}}}$. If the temperature is sufficiently high, the stable iron
group elements can also be photodisintegrated and break into $\alpha$ particles and
neutrons. This process is called {\it iron photodisintegration}:
\begin{equation}
{\ensuremath{^{56}\mathrm{Fe}}}\,+\,\gamma\,\rightarrow\,13\,{\ensuremath{^{4} \mathrm{He}}}\,+\,4n.
\end{equation}
This reaction requires a photon energy over $100$~MeV. Helium becomes more abundant
than iron when the temperature rises over $7\times10^{9}\,\ensuremath{\mathrm{K}}$. Helium can be
disintegrated into neutrons and protons at even higher temperatures. In general,
the heavy nuclei are created at temperatures within $\sim10^6-5\times10^9\,\ensuremath{\mathrm{K}}$ through
nuclear fusion and destroyed by energetic photons when the temperature is over $5\times 10^9\,\ensuremath{\mathrm{K}}$.
Figure~\ref{trhoall_fig} summarizes the phase diagram of the stellar interior and burning and presents
the schematic evolution tracks of stars of different masses.
In the left panel, we show the density and the temperature phase diagram.
When the relative lower density is subjected to high temperature, the equation for the state of gas can be described
as ideal gas or radiation. For lower temperatures with a relatively higher density,
quantum effects need to be considered for describing the equation of state. The gas can
be degenerate or relativistic degenerate. In the middle panel, we show the different
burning phases that occur in the phase diagram. The black strips show the approximate
temperatures and densities when the burning occurs. We plot the evolution tracks
of central densities and temperatures of stars with different masses in
the right panel. The $0.15\,{\ensuremath{\mathrm{M}_{\odot}}}$ star may never reach the helium-burning stage before
its core becomes degenerate, and eventually it dies as a brown dwarf. The
$1.5\,{\ensuremath{\mathrm{M}_{\odot}}}$ star, which is similar to our Sun, dies as a white dwarf after it finishes
the central helium burning. Once the star becomes more massive than $10\,{\ensuremath{\mathrm{M}_{\odot}}}$,
such as the $15\,{\ensuremath{\mathrm{M}_{\odot}}}$ star, it can go through all the burning stages we have mentioned, and it dies
as an iron core$-$collapse supernovae (CCSNe). If the Pop~III stars were more massive than $80\,{\ensuremath{\mathrm{M}_{\odot}}}$,
they would encounter the pair-instabilities, which trigger a collapse of the stars,
and they die as pair-instability supernovae.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{ijmpc_pic/trho_all}
\caption[]{Temperature-Density phase diagram based on [\refcite{prian2000}]:
The x-axis and y-axis indicate the temperature and density, respectively. Colored patches show
the equation of state for matter (e.g., the radiation-dominated region (pink color) appears at a higher temperature with a lower density).
In the middle panel, the black strips indicate the threshold for ignition of different burning phases in the phase diagram. In the right panel,
the stellar evolution of stellar cores is shown in dashed lines. The red region shows the pair-instability region where the
adiabatic index $\gamma_{\rm a}$ is below $\frac{4}{3}$.} \label{trhoall_fig}
\end{figure}
We have mentioned several different fates of stars in the previous section.
One common occurrence is that before the stars die, they encounter an instability
that goes violent, the stars cannot restore it, and this leads to the catastrophic
collapse of stars. It is relevant to provide an example of dynamical instability.
Hydro$-$equilibrium means
that the motion of fluid is too slow to be observed. To verify whether the state is a
true equilibrium or not, we apply a perturbation to the equilibrium and
evaluate the resulting response. The force balance inside a star is between the
gravitational force and pressure gradient. In a simplified model,
we consider a gas sphere of mass $M$, which is in a hydrodynamic equilibrium,
\begin{equation}
\frac{dP}{dr}\,=\,-\rho\frac{Gm}{r^2},
\end{equation}
is equal to
\begin{equation}
\frac{dP}{dm}\,=\,-\frac{Gm}{4\pi\,r^4},
\end{equation}
in mass coordinate and its integration yields
\begin{equation}
P\,=\,-\int^{M}_{m}\frac{Gm}{4\pi\,r^4} dm.
\label{press_eq}
\end{equation}
Similar to [\refcite{prian2000}], we now perturb the system by compressing it by:
\begin{equation}
\delta r\,=\,\alpha\,r,
\end{equation}
$\alpha\,\ll\,1$. Now the new density, $\tilde{\rho}$ and radius, $\tilde{r}$ become
\begin{eqnarray*}
\tilde{r} = r-\alpha\,r = r(1\,-\,\alpha),\\
\tilde{\rho} = \frac{dm}{4\pi\,\tilde{r}^2 d\tilde{r}} \approx \rho(1\,+\,3\alpha).
\end{eqnarray*}
New pressure from hydrodynamics can be calculated by using the equation (\ref{press_eq})
\begin{equation}
\tilde{P}_h\,=\,\int^{M}_{m}\frac{Gm}{4\pi\,\tilde{r}^4} dm \,=\, \int^{M}_{m}\frac{Gm}{4\pi\,(1\,-\alpha\,)^4{r}^4} dm = (1\,+\,4\alpha)P.
\end{equation}
Assuming the contraction is adiabatic, the gas pressure can be expressed as
\begin{equation}
\tilde{P}_{\rm gas}\,=\,K_{\rm a}\tilde{\rho}^{\,\gamma_{\rm a}}\,=\,K_{\rm a}[\rho(1\,+\,3\alpha)]^{\gamma_{\rm a}}\,=\, (1\,+\,3\gamma_{\rm a}\alpha)P,
\end{equation}
where $K_{\rm a}$ is a constant. The contraction of the gas sphere can be restored when
\begin{equation}
\tilde{P}_{\rm gas}\,>\,\tilde{P}_h \quad \longrightarrow \quad (1\,+\,3\gamma_{\rm a}\alpha)P \,>\, (1\,+\,4\alpha)P.
\end{equation}
Therefore, the condition for dynamical stability is
\begin{equation}
\gamma_{\rm a}\,>\,4/3,
\end{equation}
which can be further extended to a global stability,
\begin{equation}
\int(\gamma_{\rm a}-4/3)\frac{P}{\rho}\,dm\,>\,4/3,
\end{equation}
which implies that the star can be stable if $\gamma_{\rm a}\,>\,4/3$ occurs in the region
where $P/\rho$ is dominated, e.g., the core of the star; even the outer envelope
may have $\gamma_{\rm a}\,<\,4/3$.
\subsection{Supernovae Explosions}
The fate of a massive star is determined by its initial mass,
composition, and history of mass loss. The mechanics of mass loss is poorly understood.
The explosion mechanism and remnant properties are thought to be determined by the
mass of the helium core at the time before the star dies. [\refcite{kudri2002}] suggests that
the mass loss rate of a star follows $\dot{m}\,\propto\,Z^{0.5}$, where $Z$ is the metallicity
of a star relative to the solar metallicity, $\ensuremath{Z_\odot}$. Since the
Pop~III stars have zero metallicity, it would favor the notion that Pop~III stars retain most
of their masses before they die. The Pop~III stars with initial masses of $10 - 80\,{\ensuremath{\mathrm{M}_{\odot}}}$
eventually forge an iron core with masses similar to those of our Sun\cite{kippen1990}{}.
Once the mass of the iron core is larger
than its Chandrasekhar mass\cite{chand1942}{}, the degenerate pressure of electrons can no longer support
the gravity from the mass of the core itself; these conditions trigger the dramatic implosion of the core and compress the core
to nucleon densities of
about $10^{14}\,\ensuremath{\mathrm{g}\,\mathrm{cm}^{-3}}$. Most of the gravitational energy is released in the form of energetic neutrinos, which eventually power
the CCSNe. The core of the star then collapses into a neutron star or a black hole, depending on the mass of the progenitor star
\cite{woosley1986,woosley2002,woosley2005}{}. The neutrino-driven explosion mechanism for CCSNe is still poorly understood
because it is complicated by issues of micro-physics, multi-scale, and multi-dimension [\refcite{burrows1995,janka1996,mezz1998,murphy2008,nordhaus2010}]. It is predicted that only about $1\%$ of the energy from neutrinos goes into the SN ejecta,
which shines as brightly as the galaxy for a few weeks before fading away.
In recent decades, theorists and observers have been
fascinated by many different aspects of CCSNe, such as the explosion mechanisms, nucleosynthesis, compact remnant, etc. The photons from CCSNe carry information about their progenitor stars as well as their host galaxies, which
makes CCSNe a powerful tool for studying the Universe.
If Pop~III stars are more massive than $80\,{\ensuremath{\mathrm{M}_{\odot}}}$, after the central carbon burning,
their cores encounter the $e^-/e^+$ pair production instabilities, in which large amounts of
pressure-supporting photons are turned into $e^-/e^+$ pairs, leading to dynamical instability
of the core. The central temperatures start to oscillate. If the stars are more massive than
$100\,{\ensuremath{\mathrm{M}_{\odot}}}$, the oscillation of temperatures becomes very violent. Several strong shocks may be
sent out from the core before the stars die as CCSNe \cite{woosley2007}{}. Those shocks are
inadequate to blow up the entire star, but they are strong enough to eject several solar masses
from the stellar envelope, as is illustrated in Figure~\ref{ppsn_cartoon}. The collisions of ejected mass
may power extremely luminous optical transients, the which are called pulsational pair-instability supernovae (PPSNe).
Once the stars are over $150\,{\ensuremath{\mathrm{M}_{\odot}}}$ but less than $260\,{\ensuremath{\mathrm{M}_{\odot}}}$, instabilities are so violent they trigger a runaway collapse
and eventually ignite the explosive oxygen and silicon burning, resulting in an energetic explosion and completely disrupting the star,
as shown in Figure~\ref{psn_cartoon}. This thermonuclear explosion is called a pair-instability supernova. A PSN can produce an explosion energy up to $\Ep{53}\,{\ensuremath{\mathrm{erg}}}$, about 100 times more energetic than the Type Ia SNe. Because of explosive silicon burning, a large amount of radioactive {\ensuremath{^{56}\mathrm{Ni}}}{} is synthesized. Such an energetic explosion
makes them very bright, and they can be visible at large distances, so they may function as good tools for probing the early Universe. For the
yields of PSNe, isotopes heavier than the iron group are completely absent because of a lack of neutron capture processes
(r- and s-process).
What happens to even more massive stars? Previous models suggest that non-rotating stars with initial masses over $260\,{\ensuremath{\mathrm{M}_{\odot}}}$
eventually die as BH without SN explosions. It is generally believed that the explosive burning is insufficient
to revert the implosion because the SN shock is dissipated by the photo-disintegration of the heavy nuclei; thus these stars
eventually die as BHs without SN explosions. However, [\refcite{chen_phd}] reported an unusual explosion of a super massive star with a mass
about $55,000\,{\ensuremath{\mathrm{M}_{\odot}}}$. This unexpected explosion may have caused the post-Newtonian correction in the gravity. We summarize the fate of massive Pop~III stars in Table~\ref{ta2} based on [\refcite{woosley2002,heger2010}].
In this review, we focus on the (pulsational) pair-instability supernovae and
possible explosions among the extremely massive stars. Most current theoretical
models of these are based on one-dimensional calculations.
Only very recently have results from multi-D models become available.
In the initial stages of a supernova, however, spherical symmetry may be broken by
fluid instabilities generated by burning that cannot be captured in 1D. The mixing
due to fluid instabilities may be able to affect the observational signatures of these
SNe. We will discuss some of the latest multidimensional models of these Pop~III
SNe.
\begin{table}[ht]
\tbl{Death of Massive Stars}
{\begin{tabular}{@{}lll@{}} \toprule
{\ensuremath{M_*}} [{\ensuremath{\mathrm{M}_{\odot}}}] & He core [{\ensuremath{\mathrm{M}_{\odot}}}] & Supernova Mechanism \\ \colrule
$10\hphantom{0} \quad\leftrightarrow\quad 85$ & $2\hphantom{00}\quad\leftrightarrow\quad32$ & CCSNe\\
$80\hphantom{0} \quad\leftrightarrow\quad 150$ & $35\hphantom{0}\quad\leftrightarrow\quad60$ & PPSNe\\
$150 \quad \leftrightarrow\quad 260$ & $60\hphantom{0}\quad\leftrightarrow\quad133$ & PSNe\\
$\hphantom{000} \quad \ge \quad \, 260$ & $\hphantom{000} \quad \ge \quad\,133$ & BHs (?) \\ \botrule
\end{tabular} \label{ta2}}
\end{table}
\begin{figure}[ht]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width = \columnwidth]{ijmpc_pic/ppsn_cartoon}
\caption[]{ Illustration of PPSNe: During the core collapsed trigger by pair-instability,
the energy released from central oxygen burning is not sufficient to disperse the star but can easily eject masses from its envelope. A few outbursts of mass
can occur before the star dies as a CCSN. The latter outbursts are more energetic than the earlier ones, that leads to the collision of ejecta. \label{ppsn_cartoon}}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[ht]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{ijmpc_pic/psn_cartoon}
\caption[]{ Illustration of PSNe: After central helium burning, pressure-supporting photons
of core are converted into $e^-/e^+$; the core becomes dynamically unstable, resulting
in an implosion that ignites the oxygen and silicon burning explosively. The energy released from
burning totally blows up the star, and some amounts of {\ensuremath{^{56}\mathrm{Ni}}}{} are synthesized. (Image credit: Dan Kasen)\label{psn_cartoon}}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\section{Supernova Explosions with \texttt{CASTRO}}
\label{sn_castro}
Multidimensional SN simulations are usually computationally expensive and
technically difficult, requiring a robust code and powerful supercomputers
to realize. In this section, we introduce our modified version of \texttt{CASTRO}{}
which is designed for such problems. \texttt{CASTRO}{} \cite{ann2010,zhang2011}{} is
a massively parallel, multidimensional Eulerian, adaptive mesh refinement (AMR),
hydrodynamics code for astrophysical applications. The code was originally developed at
the Lawrence Berkeley Lab, and it is designed to run effectively on supercomputers of
10,000+ CPUs. \texttt{CASTRO}{} provides a powerful platform for simulating hydrodynamics and gravity
for astrophysical gas dynamics. However, it still requires other physics to properly
model supernova explosions. We review some of the key physics and associated numerical
algorithms.
The structure of this section is as follows: we
first describe features of \texttt{CASTRO}{} in \S~\ref{castro_sec}, then
introduce the nuclear reaction network in \S~\ref{burning_sec}.
The algorithms for the 1D-to-MultiD Mapping are
presented in \S~\ref{mapping_sec}. We discuss post-Newtonian gravity in \S~\ref{gr_sec} and
an approach for resolving the large dynamic scale of simulations in
\S~\ref{resolve_sec}. At the end, we present the scaling performance of
\texttt{CASTRO}{} in \S~\ref{castro_mpi_sec} and introduce \texttt{VISIT}{}, the tool for visualizing
\texttt{CASTRO}{} output, in \S~\ref{visit_sec}.
\subsection{\texttt{CASTRO}}
\label{castro_sec}
\texttt{CASTRO}{} is a hydro code for solving compressible hydrodynamic equations of multi-components including self-gravity and
a general equation of state (EOS). The Eulerian grid of \texttt{CASTRO}{} uses adaptive mesh refinement (AMR), which constructs
rectangular refinement grids hierarchically. Different coordinate systems are available in \texttt{CASTRO}{}, including
spherical (1D), cylindrical (2D), and cartesian (3D). The flexible modules of \texttt{CASTRO}{} make it easy for users to implement
new physics associated with their simulations.
In \texttt{CASTRO}, the hydrodynamics are evolved by solving the conservation equations of mass, momentum, and energy [\refcite{ann2010}] :
\begin{eqnarray}
\frac{\partial \rho}{\partial t} &=& - \nabla \cdot (\rho {\bf u}), \\
\frac{\partial (\rho {\bf u})}{\partial t} &=& - \nabla \cdot (\rho {\bf u} {\bf u}) - \nabla p + \rho {\bf g}, \\
\frac{\partial (\rho E)}{\partial t} &=& - \nabla \cdot (\rho {\bf u} E + p {\bf u})
+ \rho \dot{\epsilon}_{\rm nuc}
+ \rho {\bf u} \cdot {\bf g}. \lEq{e2},
\end{eqnarray}
where $\rho$, ${\bf u}$, $e$, and $E$ are the mass density, velocity vector, internal energy per unit mass,
and total energy per unit mass $E = e + {\bf u} \cdot {\bf u} / 2$, respectively. The pressure, $p$, is calculated
from the equation of state (EOS), ${\bf g}$ is the gravity, and $\dot{\epsilon}_{\rm nuc}$ is the energy generation
rate per unit volume. \texttt{CASTRO}{} also evolves the reacting flow by considering the
advection equations of the mass abundances of isotopes, $X_i$ :
\begin{equation}
\frac{\partial (\rho X_i)}{\partial t} = - \nabla \cdot (\rho {\bf u} X_i) + \rho \dot\omega_i,
\lEq{sp1}
\end{equation}
where $\dot\omega_i$ is the production rate for the $i$-th isotope having the form:
\begin{equation}
\dot\omega_i(\rho,X_i,T)= \frac{dX_i}{dt},
\end{equation}
is given from the nuclear reaction network that we shall describe later.
Since masses are conservative quantities, the mass fractions are subject
to the constraint that $\sum\limits_{i} X_i = 1$.
\texttt{CASTRO}{} can support any general reaction network that takes as inputs the density, temperature,
and mass fractions of isotopes, and it returns updated mass fractions and the energy generation rates.
The input temperature is computed from the EOS before each call to the reaction network. At the end of
the burning step, the results of burning provide the rates of energy generation/loss and abundance change
to update \Eq{e2} and \Eq{sp1}. \texttt{CASTRO}{} also provides passively advected quantities; $A_j$, e.g., angular
momentum, which is used for rotation models,
\begin{equation}
\frac{\partial (\rho A_j)}{\partial t} = - \nabla \cdot (\rho {\bf u} A_j).
\end{equation}
\texttt{CASTRO}{} uses a sophisticated EOS for stellar matter: the Helmholtz
\cite{timmes2000}{}, which considers the (non)degenerate and (non)relativistic
electrons, electron-positron pair production, as well as ideal gas with radiation.
The Helmholtz EOS is a tabular EOS that reads in $\rho$, $T$, and $X_i$ of gas and
yields its derived thermodynamics quantities. \texttt{CASTRO}{} offers different types
of calculation for gravity, including Constant, Poisson, and Monopole.
At the early stage of a supernova explosion, spherical symmetry is still a good
approximation for the mass distribution of gas. Such an approximation creates a
great advantage in calculating the gravity by saving a lot of computational time,
so the monopole-type gravity is usually used in the simulations.
In multidimensional \texttt{CASTRO}{} simulations, we first calculate a 1D radial average profile of density.
We then compute the 1D profile of ${\bf g}$ and use it to calculate the gravity of the multidimensional
grid cells.
The AMR in \texttt{CASTRO}{} refines the simulation domain in both space and time.
Finer grids automatically replace coarse grids during the grid-refining process
until the solution satisfies the AMR criteria, which are specified by users.
These criteria can be the gradients of densities, velocities, or other physical
quantities in the adjacent grids. The grid generation procedures automatically create
or remove finer rectangular zones based on the refinement criteria.
The AMR technique of \texttt{CASTRO}{} allows us to address our supernova simulation, which deals
with a large dynamic scale. Simulating the mixing of supernova ejecta requires
catching the features of fluid instabilities early on. These instabilities occur
at much smaller scales compared with the overall simulation box. The uniform grid
approach requires numerous zones and becomes very computationally expensive. Instead,
AMR focuses on resolving the scale of interests and makes our simulations run more
efficiently. In Figure~\ref{amr_a_fig}, we show the layout of two levels of a
factor of two refinement. The refined grids are constructed hierarchically
in the form of rectangles. The choice of refinement criteria allows us to
resolve the structure we are most interested in. The most violent burning
and physical process occurs at the center of the star, so we usually apply
hierarchically-configured zones at the center of simulated domain, as shown in Figure~\ref{amr_b_fig}.
These pre-refined zones are fixed and do not change with AMR criteria.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\begin{center}
\subfigure[AMR cartoon]{\label{amr_a_fig}\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{ijmpc_pic/amr_cartoon}}
\subfigure[3D AMR]{\label{amr_b_fig} \includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{ijmpc_pic/3d_amr_level}}
\caption{(a) Schematic diagram of AMR: When the refinement criteria are met, new finer grids are automatically generated to replace previous coarse grids. Two levels of refinement are shown in
light-gray and dark-gray on the top of coarse grids (white). (b) 3 D nested grids: The hierarchical
grids are constructed from the center and the colors represent three different levels of refinement. It is
very useful for importing a 3D SN onto such layout of grids, where the core of SN can have the highest
spacial resolutions all the time.}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
Figure~\ref{amrp} shows the power of AMR in the simulations. This is a snapshot taken from
our 2D supernova simulation at the time when the fluid instabilities emerge. These fluid
instabilities are caused by Rayleigh--Taylor (RT) instability and are the main drivers of the mixing of SN ejecta.
The finest grids of AMR can resolve the detailed structure of fluid instabilities at minimal
computational expense. In our simulations, AMR criteria are based on density gradient, velocity gradient,
and pressure gradient.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{ijmpc_pic/cac_pamr2}
\caption[Power of AMR]{Ultra-high resolution with AMR: This is a snapshot of the density
from 2D \texttt{CASTRO}{} simulations\cite{chen_phd} at the time when the fluid instabilities emerge.
The images from left to right show the magnification of the instabilities. With AMR, the detailed
structures of fluid instabilities are fully resolved. \label{amrp}}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Nuclear Reaction Networks}
\label{burning_sec}
Modeling thermonuclear supernovae requires calculating the energy generation
rate from nuclear burning, which occurs over a large range of temperatures,
densities, and compositions. We have implemented the APPROX 7, 13, 19$-$ isotope
reaction networks\cite{kepler,timmes1999} into \texttt{CASTRO}. Here,
we introduce the 19 isotopes reaction network, which is the most comprehensive
network afforded for multidimensional simulations. This network includes
19 isotopes: {\ensuremath{^{1} \mathrm{H}}} , {\ensuremath{^{3} \mathrm{He}}}, {\ensuremath{^{4} \mathrm{He}}}, {\ensuremath{^{12}\mathrm{C}}}, {\ensuremath{^{14}\mathrm{N}}}, {\ensuremath{^{16}\mathrm{O}}}, {\ensuremath{^{20}\mathrm{Ne}}}, {\ensuremath{^{24}\mathrm{Mg}}}, {\ensuremath{^{28}\mathrm{Si}}}, {\ensuremath{^{32}\mathrm{S}}}, {\ensuremath{^{36}\mathrm{Ar}}}, {\ensuremath{^{40}\mathrm{Ca}}}, {\ensuremath{^{44}\mathrm{Ti}}},
{\ensuremath{^{48}\mathrm{Cr}}}, {\ensuremath{^{52}\mathrm{Fe}}}, {\ensuremath{^{54}\mathrm{Fe}}}, {\ensuremath{^{56}\mathrm{Ni}}}, protons (from photo-disintegration), and neutrons.
The 19$-$isotope network considers nuclear burning of alpha-chain reactions,
heavy-ion reactions, hot CNO cycles, photo-disintegration of heavy elements, and
neutrino energy loss. It is capable of
efficiently calculating accurate energy generation rates for nuclear processes
ranging from hydrogen to silicon burning.
The nuclear reaction networks are solved by means of integrating a system of ordinary differential
equations. Because the reaction rates for most of the burning are extremely sensitive to temperatures
to $\propto T^{15-40}$, it results in stiffness of the system of equations, which are usually solved by
an implicit time integration scheme. We first consider the gas containing $m$ isotopes with a density
$\rho$ and temperature $T$. The molar abundance of the $i$-th isotope is
\begin{equation}
Y_i = \frac{X_i} {A_i} = \frac{\rho_i}{\rho A_i} =\frac{n_i}{\rho N_A},
\end{equation}
where $A_i$ is mass number, $X_i$ is mass fraction, $\rho_i$ is mass density, and
$N_A$ is the Avogadro's number. In Lagrangian coordinates, the continuity equation
of the isotope has the form\cite{timmes1999}
\begin{equation}
\frac{dY_i}{dt}+\nabla\cdot(Y_i{\bf V}_i) = \dot{R_i},
\lEq{cont}
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
\dot{R_i} = \sum_{j,k} Y_l Y_k\lambda_{kj}(l) -Y_i Y_j\lambda_{jk}(i),
\lEq{rate}
\end{equation}
where $\dot{R_i}$ is the total reaction rate due to all binary reactions of the form $i(j,k)l$.
$\lambda_{jk}$ and $\lambda_{kj}$ are the forward and reverse nuclear reaction rates,
which usually have a strong temperature dependence.
${\bf V}_i$ are mass diffusion velocities due to pressure, temperature, and abundance gradients.
The value of ${\bf V}_i$ is often small compared with other transport processes,
so we can assume ${\bf V}_i = 0$, which allows us to decouple the reaction network
from the hydrodynamics by using operator splitting. \Eq{cont} now becomes
\begin{equation}
\frac{d { Y_i}}{dt} = \dot{R_i}.
\lEq{cont2}
\end{equation}
This set of ordinary differential equations may be written in the more compact and standard form\cite{timmes1999}
\begin{equation}
\frac{d{\bf y}}{dt} = {\bf f(y)};
\lEq{cont3}
\end{equation}
its implicit differentiation gives
\begin{equation}
{\bf y}_{n+1} = {\bf y}_{n} +h{\bf f(y}_{n+1}),
\lEq{s1}
\end{equation}
where $h$ is a small time step. We linearize \Eq{s1} by using Newton's method,
\begin{equation}
{\bf y}_{n+1} = {\bf y}_{n} +h\left[{\bf f(y}_{n})+{\frac{\bf \partial{f}}{\partial{\bf y}}}\bigg\vert_{\bf{y}_n}\cdot({\bf y}_{n+1} - {\bf y}_{n})\right].
\lEq{s2}
\end{equation}
The rearranged \Eq{s2} yields
\begin{equation}
{\bf y}_{n+1} = {\bf y}_{n} +h \left[{\bf 1}-h \frac{\partial{\bf f}}{\partial{\bf y}}\right]^{-1}\cdot {\bf f(y}_{n}).
\lEq{s3}
\end{equation}
By defining ${\Delta} = {\bf y}_{n+1} -{\bf y}_{n} $, $\tilde{\bf A} = \frac{\bf 1}{h}- \frac{\partial{\bf f}}{\partial{\bf y}}$,
$ {\bf b} = {\bf f(y}_{n})$, \Eq{s3} now is equivalent to a simple matrix equation
\begin{equation}
\tilde{\bf A} \cdot{\Delta} = {\bf b}.
\lEq{s4}
\end{equation}
If $h$ is small enough, only one iteration of Newton's method may be accurate
enough to solve \Eq{cont3} using \Eq{s3}. However, this method
provides no estimate of how accurate the integration step is. We also do not know
whether the time step is accurate enough. The Jacobian matrices
$\tilde{\bf J} = \frac{\partial{\bf f}}{\partial{\bf y}}$ from nuclear reaction networks are
neither positive-definite nor symmetric, and the magnitudes of the matrix elements are functions
$X(t)$, $T(t)$, and $\rho(t)$. More importantly, the nuclear reaction rates are extremely sensitive
to temperature, and $X$ of different isotopes can differ by many orders of magnitude. The coefficients in
\Eq{cont2} can vary significantly and cause nuclear reaction network equations
to become {\bf stiff}.
The integration method for our network is based on a variable-order Bader--Deuflhard method\cite{press2007}{}. [\refcite{bader1983}] found a semi-implicit discretization for stiff equation problems and obtained an implicit form of the midpoint rule,
\begin{equation}
{\bf y}_{n+1} - {\bf y}_{n-1} =2h{\bf f}(\frac{{\bf y}_{n+1} + {\bf y}_{n-1}}{2}).
\lEq{d1}
\end{equation}
We linearize the right-hand side about ${\bf f(y}_n)$ and obtain the semi-implicit midpoint rule
\begin{equation}
\left[{\bf 1}-h\frac{\partial{\bf f}}{\partial{\bf y}}\right]\cdot{\bf y}_{n+1} = \left[{\bf 1}+ h\frac{\partial{\bf f}}{\partial{\bf y}}\right]\cdot{\bf y}_{n-1}
+2h\left[{\bf f(y}_{n})- \frac{\partial{\bf f}}{\partial{\bf y}} \cdot \bf{y_n}\right].
\lEq{d2}
\end{equation}
Now the reaction network expressed in \Eq{cont3} is advanced over a large time step, $H=mh$ for ${\bf y}_{n}$ to
${\bf y}_{n+1}$, where $m$ is an integer. It is convenient to rewrite equations in terms of
$\Delta_k \equiv {\bf y}_{k+1} - {\bf y}_{k}$. We use it with the first step from \Eq{s3} and start by calculating\cite{press2007}
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{l}
{\bf y}_{1} = {\bf y}_{0} + \Delta_0, \\ \\
\Delta_0 = \left[{\bf 1}-h\frac{\partial{\bf f}}{\partial{\bf y}}\right]^{-1}\cdot h{\bf f(y}_{0}).
\end{array}
\lEq{d3}
\end{equation}
Then for $k = 1,...,m -1$, set
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{l}
{\bf y}_{k+1} = {\bf y}_{k} + \Delta_k, \\ \\
\Delta_k = \Delta_{k-1}+2 \left[{\bf 1}-h\frac{\partial{\bf f}}{\partial{\bf y}}\right]^{-1}\cdot [h{\bf f(y}_{k})-\Delta_{k-1}].
\end{array}
\lEq{d3}
\end{equation}
Finally, we calculate
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{l}
{\bf y}_{n+1} = {\bf y}_{m} + \Delta_m, \\ \\
\Delta_m = \left[{\bf 1}-h\frac{\partial{\bf f}}{\partial{\bf y}}\right]^{-1}\cdot [h{\bf f(y}_{m})-\Delta_{m-1}].
\end{array}
\lEq{d4}
\end{equation}
This sequence may be executed a maximum of $7$ times, which yields a 15th-order method.
The exact number of times the staged sequence is executed depends on the accuracy
requirements. The accuracy of an integration step is calculated by comparing the
solutions derived from different orders. The linear algebra package \texttt{GIFT}{}\cite{muller1998}
and the sparse storage package \texttt{MA28}{}\cite{duff1986} are used
to execute the semi-implicit time integration methods described above. After solving
the network equations, the average nuclear energy generated rate is calculated,
\begin{equation}
\dot{\epsilon}_{\rm nuc} = \sum_i \frac{\Delta Y_i}{\Delta t}B_iN_A-\dot{\epsilon}_{\nu},
\lEq{e1}
\end{equation}
where $B_i$ is the nuclear binding energy of the $i$-th isotope, and $\dot{\epsilon}_{\nu}$
is the energy loss rate due to neutrinos\cite{itoh1996}{}.
\subsection{Mapping}
\label{mapping_sec}
Computing fully self-consistent 3D stellar evolution models, from their formation to collapse
for the explosion setup is unavailable in terms of current supercomputer capability. One alternative approach
is to first evolve the main sequence star in 1D stellar evolution codes such as \texttt{KEPLER}{} \cite{kepler}
or \texttt{MESA}{} \cite{mesa}{}. Once the star reaches the pre-supernova phase, its 1D profiles can then be
mapped into multidimensional hydro codes such as \texttt{CASTRO}{} or \texttt{FLASH} \cite{flash} and
continue to be evolved until the star explodes, as shown in Figure~\ref{models_fig}.
Differences between codes in dimensionality and coordinate mesh can lead to numerical issues
such as violation of conservation of mass and energy when data are mapped from one code
to another. A first, simple approach could be to initialize multidimensional grids by linear
interpolation from corresponding mesh points on the 1D profiles. However, linear interpolation
becomes invalid when the new grid fails to resolve critical features in the original profile, such as
the inner core of a star. This is especially true when porting profiles from 1D Lagrangian codes,
which can easily resolve very small spatial features in mass coordinate, to a fixed or adaptive
Eulerian grid. In addition to conservation laws, some physical processes, such as nuclear burning, are
very sensitive to temperature, so errors in mapping can lead to very different outcomes for
the simulations, including altering the nucleosynthesis and energetics of SNe. [\refcite{zingale2002}] has
examined mapping 1D profiles to 2D or 3D meshes under a hydro equilibrium status and
[\refcite{mapping_chen}] has developed a new mapping scheme to conservatively map the 1D
initial conditions onto multidimensional zones.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{ijmpc_pic/models_show}
\caption[1D to multi-D]{Procedure of multi-D SN simulations: The 1D stellar models can be
generated by \texttt{KEPLER}{} on personal computers. The resulting 1D supernova-progenitor
models are mapped onto multidimensional grids of \texttt{CASTRO}{}. Due to the intensive computation
of multidimensional models, simulations require to run on supercomputers such as Franklin. Simulations usually stop after the star explodes.\label{models_fig}}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
Seeding the pre-supernova profile of the star with realistic perturbations may be important to
understanding how fluid instabilities later erupt and mix the star during the explosion. Massive
stars usually develop convective zones prior to exploding as SNe\cite{woosley2002}{}.
Multidimensional stellar evolution models suggest that the fluid inside the convective regions can
be highly turbulent\cite{porter2000,arnett2011}{}. However, in lieu of the 3D stellar evolution
calculations necessary to produce such perturbations from first principles, multidimensional
simulations are usually just seeded with random perturbations. In reality, if the star is convective
and the fluid in those zones is turbulent\cite{davidson2004}{}, a better approach is to imprint the
multidimensional profiles with velocity perturbations with a Kolmogorov energy spectrum \cite{frisch1995}{}. The scheme\cite{chen_phd} is the first attempt to model the initial
perturbations based on a more realistic setup. Figure~\ref{perb2} shows the initial velocity
perturbation by using the turbulent perturbation scheme.
We seed initial perturbations to trigger the fluid
instabilities on multidimensional simulations so we can study how they evolve with their surroundings.
When the fluid instabilities start to evolve nonlinearly, the initial imprint of perturbation would be
smeared out. The random perturbations and turbulent perturbations then give consistent results. Depending on the nature of the problems, the random perturbations might take a longer time to evolve
the fluid instabilities into turbulence because more relaxation time is required.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{ijmpc_pic/perbv_shm_multi}
\caption[3D perturbations]{ Turbulent perturbations: The sphere represents the convective core of the star. Red and blue
colors show the positive and radial perturbed velocities, respectively. \label{perb2}}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\subsection{GR Correction}
\label{gr_sec}
In the cases of very massive stars ($\ge 1000\,{\ensuremath{\mathrm{M}_{\odot}}}$), the general relativity (GR) effect starts to play a role
in the stellar evolution. First, we consider the hydrostatic equilibrium
due to the effects of GR, then derive GR-correction terms for Newtonian gravity.
The correction term would be applied to the monopole-type of gravity calculation.
The formulae of GR-correction here are based on [\refcite{kippen1990}]. For detailed physics, please refer
to [\refcite{grbk2}]. In a strong gravitational field, Einstein field equations are required to
describe the gravity:
\begin{equation}\label{field}
R_{ik}-\frac{1}{2}g_{ik}R=\frac{\kappa}{c^{2}}T_{ik}, \quad
\kappa=\frac{8\pi G}{c^{2}},
\end{equation}
where $R_{ik}$ is the Ricci tensor, $g_{ik}$ is the metric tensor, $R$ is the Riemann curvature, $c$ is
the speed of light, and $G$ is the gravitational constant. For ideal gas, the energy momentum tensor
$T_{ik}$ has the non-vanishing components $T_{00}$ = $\varrho c^2$ , $T_{11}$ = $T_{22}$ = $T_{33}$ = $P$
($\varrho$ contains rest mass and energy density; $P$ is pressure). We are interested in a spherically symmetric mass
distribution. The metric in a spherical coordinate $(r, \vartheta, \varphi)$ has the
general form
\begin{equation}\label{metric}
ds^{2} = e^{\nu}c^{2}dt^{2}-e^{\lambda}dr^{2}-r^{2}(d\vartheta^{2}+\sin^{2}
\vartheta d\varphi) ,
\end{equation}
with $\nu = \nu(r)$, $\lambda = \lambda(r)$. Now insert $T_{ik}$ and $ds$ into Equation~(\ref{field}),
then field equations can be reduced to three ordinary differential equations:
\begin{equation}\label{diff1}
\frac{\kappa P}{c^{2}} =
e^{-\lambda}(\frac{\nu^{\prime}}{r}+\frac{1}{r^{2}})-\frac{1}{r^{2}}
,
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}\label{diff2}
\frac{\kappa P}{c^{2}} =
\frac{1}{2}e^{-\lambda}(\nu^{\prime\prime}+\frac{1}{2}{\nu^{\prime}}^{2}+\frac{\nu^
{\prime}-\lambda^{\prime}}{r}
-\frac{\nu^{\prime}\lambda^{\prime}}{2}) ,
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}\label{diff3}
\kappa \varrho =
e^{-\lambda}(\frac{\lambda^{\prime}}{r}-\frac{1}{r^{2}})+\frac{1}{r^{2}} ,
\end{equation}
where primes means
the derivatives with respect to $r$. After multiplying with $4\pi r^2$, Equation~(\ref{diff3}) can
be integrated and yields
\begin{equation}\label{gmass1}
\kappa m = 4\pi r (1-e^{-\lambda}) ;
\end{equation}
$m$ is called the ``gravitational mass'' inside r defined as
\begin{equation}\label{gmass2}
m = \int_{0}^{r}4\pi r^{2} \varrho dr .
\end{equation}
For $r = R$, $m$ becomes the total mass $M$ of the star. $M$ here contains both the rest mass and
energy divided by $c^2$. So the $\varrho = \varrho_0 +U/c^2$ contains the energy density $U$ and rest
mass density $\varrho_0$. Differentiation of Equation~(\ref{diff1}) with respect to $r$ gives $P = P^{\prime}(\lambda,\lambda^{\prime},
\nu,\nu^{\prime},r)$, where $\lambda,\lambda^{\prime},\nu,\nu^{\prime}$ can be eliminated by Equations~(\ref{diff1}),
(\ref{diff2}), (\ref{diff3}). Finally we obtain the Tolman--Oppenheinmer--Volkoff (TOV) equation for
hydrostatic equilibrium in general relativity\cite{kippen1990}{}:
\begin{equation}\label{tov}
\frac{dP}{dr} = -\frac{Gm}{r^{2}}\varrho (1+\frac{P}{\varrho
c^{2}})(1+\frac{4\pi r^3 P}{m c^{2}}) (1-\frac{2Gm}{r c^{2}})^{-1} .
\end{equation}
For the Newtonian case $c^2 \rightarrow \infty $, it reverts to the usual form,
\begin{equation}\label{newton}
\frac{dP}{dr} = -\frac{Gm}{r^{2}}\varrho .
\end{equation}
Now we take effective monopole gravity as
\begin{equation}\label{tov2}
\tilde{g} = -\frac{Gm}{r^{2}} (1+\frac{P}{\varrho
c^{2}})(1+\frac{4\pi r^3 P}{m c^{2}}) (1-\frac{2Gm}{r c^{2}})^{-1} .
\end{equation}
For general situations, we neglect the $U/c^2$ and potential energy in $m$ because they are usually
much smaller than $\varrho_0$. Only when $T$ reaches $10^{13}\,\ensuremath{\mathrm{K}}$ (${\rm K}T \approx m_{p} c^2$,
$m_{\rm p}$ is proton mass) does it start to make a difference. Equation~(\ref{tov2}) can be expressed as
\begin{equation}\label{tov3}
\tilde{g} = -\frac{GM_{enc}}{r^{2}} (1+\frac{P}{\varrho
c^{2}})(1+\frac{4\pi r^3 P}{M_{enc} c^{2}}) (1-\frac{2GM_{enc}}{r c^{2}})^{-1} ,
\end{equation}
where $M_{enc}$ is the mass enclosure within $r$. Post-Newtonian correction of gravity is important
for SNe from super massive stars, which will be discussed in \S~\ref{sn_gsn_section}.
\subsection{Resolving the Explosion}
\label{resolve_sec}
In addition to implementing relevant physics for \texttt{CASTRO}, care must be taken to determine the
resolution of multidimensional simulations required to resolve the most important physical scales
and yield consistent results, given the computational resources that are available. We provide a
systematic approach for finding this resolution for multidimensional stellar explosions.
Simulations that include nuclear burning, which governs nucleosynthesis and the energetics of the
explosion, are very different from purely hydrodynamical models because of the more stringent
resolution required to resolve the scales of nuclear burning and the onset of fluid instabilities in
the simulations. Because energy generation rates due to burning are very sensitive to temperature,
errors in these rates as well as in nucleosynthesis can arise in zones that are not fully resolved.
We determine the optimal resolution with a grid of 1D models in \texttt{CASTRO}{}. Beginning with a
crude resolution, we evolve the pre-supernova star and its explosion until all burning is complete
and then calculate the total energy of the supernova, which is the sum of the gravitational energy,
internal energy, and kinetic energy. We then repeat the calculation with the same setup but with
a finer resolution and again calculate the total energy of the explosion. We repeat this process until the
total energy is converged. The time scales of burning (${\rm d}t_{\rm b}$) and hydrodynamics
(${\rm d}t_{\rm h}$) can be very disparate, so we adopt time steps of
$ min({\rm d}t_{\rm h},{\rm d}t_{\rm b})$ in our simulations, where
${\rm d}t_{\rm h}=\frac{{\rm d}x}{c_{\rm s}+|v|}$;
${\rm d}x$ is the grid resolution, $c_s$ is the local sound speed, $v$ is the fluid velocity, and
the time scale for burning is ${\rm d}t_{\rm b}$, which is determined by both the energy generation
rate and the rate of change of the abundances.
For simulating a thermonuclear SN, the spacial resolutions of $10^8\,{\ensuremath{\mathrm{cm}}}$ are usually
needed to fully resolve nuclear burning. However, the star can have a radius of up to several $10^{14}\,{\ensuremath{\mathrm{cm}}}$. This large dynamical range (10$^6$)
makes it impractical to simulate the entire star at once
while fully resolving all relevant physical processes. When the shock launches from the center of the star,
the shock's traveling time scale is about a few days, which is much shorter than the Kelvin--Helmholtz time
scale of the stars, about several million years. We can assume that when the shock propagates inside the
star, the stellar evolution of the outer envelope is frozen. This allows us to trace the shock propagation without
considering the overall stellar evolution. Instead beginning simulations with a coordinate mesh that encloses just
the core of the star with zones that are fine enough to resolve explosive burning. We then halt the
simulation as the SN shock approaches the grid boundaries, uniformly expand the simulation domain, and then restart the
calculation. In each expansion we retain the same number of grids. Although
the resolution decreases after each expansion, it does not affect the results at later times because burning
is complete before the first expansion and emergent fluid instabilities are well resolved in later expansions.
These uniform expansions are repeated until the fluid instabilities cease to evolve.
Most stellar explosion problems need to deal with a large dynamic scale such as the case discussed here.
It is computationally inefficient to simulate the entire star with a sufficient resolution. Because the
time scale of the explosion is much shorter than the dynamic time of stars, we can only follow the evolution
of the shock by starting from the center of the star and tracing it until the shock breaks out of the stellar surface.
\subsection{Parallel Performance of \texttt{CASTRO}}
\label{castro_mpi_sec}
A multi-D SN simulation may need from hundreds of thousands to millions of CPU hours to run.
The parallel efficiency of the code becomes a very critical issue.It is usually good to find out
how well the code parallels the jobs before we start burning tons of CPU hours.
To understand the parallel efficiency of \texttt{CASTRO}, a weak scaling study is performed,
so that for each run there is exactly one 64$^3$ grid per processor. We run the Sod problem on
$32 (1024\times256\times256)$, $256 (2048\times512\times512)$, $512 (2048\times1024\times512)$,
$1024 (2048\times1024\times1024)$, and $8192 (4096\times2048\times2048)$ CPU on Itasca at
the Minnesota Supercomputing Institute (MSI); the grid information is
inside the parentheses. Our collaborators also perform weak scaling tests on the Jaguar at the Oak Ridge Leadership
Computing Facility, which runs white dwarf 3D problems on 8, 64, 512, 1024, 2048, 4096 and 8192 processors.
Figure~\ref{scaling_b_fig} shows the weak scaling of \texttt{CASTRO}{} on Itasca and Jaguar.
For these scaling tests, we use only MPI-based parallelism with non-AMR grids. The results
suggest \texttt{CASTRO}{} demonstrates a satisfying scaling performance within the number of CPU
between $32-8192$ on both supercomputers. The scaling behavior of \texttt{CASTRO}{} may depend on the
calculations, especially while using AMR.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\begin{center}
\subfigure[{\bf Hopper} Supercomputer]{\label{scaling_a_fig}\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{ijmpc_pic/hopper}}
\subfigure[\texttt{CASTRO}{} scaling]{\label{scaling_b_fig} \includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{ijmpc_pic/scaling_itasca}}
\caption[\texttt{CASTRO}{} scaling]{(a) Hopper: \texttt{CASTRO}{} runs on some of the fastest supercomputers in the world, such as
{\bf Hopper} located at the Lawrence Berkeley Lab (Credit: NERSC website).
(b) The weak scaling of \texttt{CASTRO}{} on Itasca and Jaguar: The shock tube problem is used for
the benchmark in the scaling of \texttt{CASTRO}{}, and the number of processors is scaled to
the load of the job. The symbols are the data from our results, for the case of perfect scaling,
the curves should be flat. (Jaguar data provided by Ann Almgren and Andy Nonaka)}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Visualization with \texttt{VISIT}}
\label{visit_sec}
\texttt{CASTRO}{} uses Boxlib as its output format. Depending on the dimensionality and resolution
of simulations, the \texttt{CASTRO}{} outputs can be as massive as hundreds of Gigabytes. Analyzing
and visualizing such data sets becomes technically challenging. We visualize and analyze the data
generated from \texttt{CASTRO}{} by using custom software, \texttt{VISIT}{} \cite{visit}{}, an interactive parallel
visualization and graphical analysis tool. \texttt{VISIT}{} is developed by the DOE, Advanced Simulation and
Computing Initiative (ASCI), and it is designed to visualize and analyze the results from large-scale
simulations. \texttt{VISIT}{} contains a rich set of visualization features, and users can implement their tailored
functions on \texttt{VISIT}. Users can also animate visualizations through time, manipulate them, and save
the images in several different formats. For our simulations, we usually use a pseudocolor
plot for 2D visualization and a contour plot or volume plot for 3D visualization. The pseudocolor
plot maps the physical quantities to colors on the same planar and generates 2D images. The contour
maps 3D structures onto 2D iso-surfaces, and the volume plots fill 3D
volume with colors based on their magnitude. Visualizing data also requires the supercomputing
resources, especially for storage and memory. Most of SN images in this review were generated
using \texttt{VISIT}.
\section{Pop~III Supernovae - Explosions}
\label{sn_result}
In this section, we present the recent results of the Pop~III supernovae based on [\refcite{chen_phd}].
These SNe came from the thermonuclear SNe of very massive Pop~III stars above $80\,{\ensuremath{\mathrm{M}_{\odot}}}$.
We will discuss the physics of the formation of these fluid instabilities during the SN explosions.
\subsection{Fate of Very Massive Stars I $\mathbf{(80\,M_{\odot}\,\leq\,M_*\,<\,150\,M_{\odot})}$}
After the central carbon burning, the massive stars over $80\,{\ensuremath{\mathrm{M}_{\odot}}}$ become unstable because part of
energetic photons start to convert into $e^-/e^+$ inside their core. The removal of radiative pressure
softens the adiabatic index $\gamma_{\rm a}$ below $4/3$. Central temperatures
start to oscillate with a period about the dynamic time scale of $500\,\sec$. However these oscillations in
temperatures do not send shock into the envelope to produce any visible outburst. The star still goes
through all the advanced burnings before it dies as a CCSN. If the mass of the star is close to $100\,{\ensuremath{\mathrm{M}_{\odot}}}$, central
temperatures again fluctuate due to pair-instabilities right after carbon burning. The
amplitude of oscillation becomes larger. Several shocks incidentally are sent out from the core
before the stars die as CCSNe. The energy of a pulse is about $\Ep{50}\,{\ensuremath{\mathrm{erg}}}$
([\refcite{woosley2007}]; Woosley, priv. comm.), while the typical binding energy for the hydrogen
envelope of such massive stars is less than $\Ep{49}\,{\ensuremath{\mathrm{erg}}}$. These shocks are inadequate to blow up the
entire star, but they are strong enough to eject several solar masses from the stellar envelope.
We have performed the first 2D/3D simulations of the pulsational pair-instability supernovae
with \texttt{CASTRO}{}. In our 2D simulation of a PPSNe of a $110\,{\ensuremath{\mathrm{M}_{\odot}}}$ star, we found fluid instabilities occurred during
the fallback of ejecta and the collisions of ejected shells. Fallback of unsuccessful ejected shells caused
minor fluid instabilities that did not result in much mixing. However, the catastrophic collisions of pulses
produce many fluid instabilities. The heavy elements ejected from the star are mainly {\ensuremath{^{16}\mathrm{O}}}{} and {\ensuremath{^{12}\mathrm{C}}}.
The latter outbursts are more energetic than the earlier ones, that leads to the collision of ejecta.
When the ejecta from different eruptions collide, significant mixing
is caused by the fluid instabilities as shown in Figure~\ref{ppsn3d}. Collision of ejecta efficiently converts their kinetic energy into thermal
energy that releases in the form of photons. The clumped structure caused by fluid instabilities may trap the
thermal photons during the collision and affect the observational luminosity. The mixed region is very close to the photo-sphere of PPSNe, as shown in Figure~\ref{ppsn_collision} and
potentially alters their observational signatures. The mixture of the ejecta can also affect
the spectra by altering the order in which emission and absorption lines of particular
elements appear in the spectra over time. The radiation transport is required for modeling
such a complex process of radiation coupled with flow of gas before
obtaining the light curves and spectra for these transients.
We expect the mixing can intensify because the radiation cooling of
clumps is amplified by the growth of fluid instabilities.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width = \columnwidth]{ijmpc_pic/ppsn_3D}
\caption[]{Collision of PPSN shells: Colors show the densities of SN ejecta. Many fluid instabilities
occur in the purple-red regions where the shells collided. Because part of the kinetic ejecta is converted
into thermal energy, this kind of collision can result in a strong emission of thermal radiation. \label{ppsn3d}}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[ht]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{ijmpc_pic/shell_collision2}
\end{center}
\caption[]{Density and temperature of PPSN: The pink dashed line shows the location of the
shock front, and the white dashed line shows the photon sphere of star $\tau \sim 2/3$.
At this time, the shock is about to break the photosphere of the star; the thermal emission of
ejecta results in a very luminous optical transit.
\label{ppsn_collision}}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Fate of Very Massive Stars II ({ $\mathbf{{150}\,M_{\odot}\,\leq\,M_*\,\leq\,260\,M_{\odot}}$}) }
Pop~III stars with initial masses of $150-260\,{\ensuremath{\mathrm{M}_{\odot}}}$ develop oxygen cores of
$\gtrsim$ $50\,{\ensuremath{\mathrm{M}_{\odot}}}{}$ after central carbon burning \cite{barkat1967,glatzel1985,heger2002,heger2010}{}.
At this point, the core reaches sufficiently high temperatures ($\sim \Ep9\,\ensuremath{\mathrm{K}}$) and at relatively low
densities ($\sim\Ep6\,\ensuremath{\mathrm{g}\,\mathrm{cm}^{-3}}$) to favor the creation of $e^-/e^+$ (high-entropy hot
plasma). The pressure-supporting photons turn into the rest masses
for pairs and soften the adiabatic index $\ensuremath{\gamma_{\mathrm{ad}}}$ of the gas
below a critical value of $\nicefrac43$, which causes a dynamical
instability and triggers rapid contraction of the core. During
contraction, core temperatures and densities swiftly rise, and oxygen
and silicon ignite, burning rapidly. This reverses the preceding
contraction (enough entropy is generated so the equation of state
leaves the regime of pair instability), and a shock forms at the outer
edge of the core. This thermonuclear explosion, known as a
pair-instability supernova (PSN), completely disrupts the star with
explosion energies of up to $\Ep{53}\,{\ensuremath{\mathrm{erg}}}$, leaving no compact
remnant and producing up to $50\,{\ensuremath{\mathrm{M}_{\odot}}}$ of {\ensuremath{^{56}\mathrm{Ni}}}{}\cite{heger2002,kasen2011}{}.
Multidimensional simulations suggest that fluid instabilities occur at the different phases of explosion:
collapse, explosive burning, and shock propagation. The particular phase depends on the pre-SNe progenitors.
For blue supergiants, the fluid instabilities driven by nuclear burning occur at the very beginning of explosion.
Such instabilities only lead a minor mixing at the edges of the oxygen-burning shells
due to a short growth time, $\leq 100\,\sec$, as shown in Figure~\ref{3d_blue}.
The red supergiants show a strong mixing which breaks
the density shells of SN ejecta. Because when the shock enters into the hydrogen
envelope of red supergiants, it is decelerated by snowplowing mass that grows the Rayleigh-Taylor instabilities
\cite{chan1961}{}. Figure~\ref{3d_red} shows a visible mixing due to Rayleigh-Taylor instabilities inside
a red supergiant. However, mixing inside PSN is unable to dredge up {\ensuremath{^{56}\mathrm{Ni}}}{} before the shock breakout.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{ijmpc_pic/rt_3d_zoom}
\caption[]{3D fluid instabilities inside a PSN: Colors show the carbon abundance. Fluid instabilities driven by
nuclear burning occurred at the very early stage of explosion. Such fluid instabilities only cause a minor
mixing by dredging up a little of material.
\label{3d_blue}}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[ht]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width = \columnwidth]{ijmpc_pic/3d_psn2}
\caption[]{ 3D PSN from a red supergiant: Fluid instabilities driven by the reverse-shock are sufficient to
mix up the SN ejecta in a large scale. \label{3d_red}}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Fate of Extremely Massive Stars III ($\mathbf{M_* \gg 100\,M_{\odot}}$)}
\label{sn_gsn_section}
Results from observational and theoretical studies [\refcite{kormendy1995,ferra2000,ferra2005,gebh2000,beif2012,mcco2013}]
suggest that a supermassive black hole (SMBH) resides in each galaxy. These SMBHs play an important role in the
evolution of the Universe through their feedback. Like giant monsters, they swallow nearby stars and gas, and spit out strong x-rays
and powerful jets \cite{rees1984,matte2005} that impact scales from galactic star formation to host galaxy clusters.
Quasars \cite{fan2002,fan2006} detected at the redshift of $z \ge 6$ suggest that SMBHs had already formed when the Universe was
only several hundred million years old. But how did SMBHs form in such a short time?
Models for the formation of SMBHs in the early Universe have been extensively
discussed by many authors: [\refcite{loeb1994,madau2001,bromm2003,bege2006,johnson2007,bromm2011}].
[\refcite{rees1984}] first pointed out the pathways of forming SMBHs. One of the possibilities is through
the channel of super massive stars (SMS) with masses $\ge 10,000$ {\ensuremath{\mathrm{M}_{\odot}}}. They might
form in the center of the first galaxies through atomic hydrogen cooling [\refcite{johnson2012}]. If SMS
could form in the early Universe, they could facilitate SMBH formation by providing
promising seeds. Although the mechanism of SMS formation is not clear, the evolution of SMS
has been studied by theorists [\refcite{fowler1966,wheeler1977,bond1984,carr1984,fuller1986,fryer2001,ohkubo2006}] for three decades. Previous results of [\refcite{fryer2001,ohkubo2006}]
suggest that non-rotating stars with initial masses over $300\,{\ensuremath{\mathrm{M}_{\odot}}}$ eventually die as black holes without supernova explosions.
It is generally believed that the explosive burning is insufficient to revert the implosion because the SN shock is dissipated by the photo-disintegration
of the heavy nuclei; thus, these stars eventually die as BHs without SN explosions.
[\refcite{chen_phd}] found an unusual explosion of a SMS of $55,500\,{\ensuremath{\mathrm{M}_{\odot}}}$ that implies a narrow
mass window for exploding SMS, called
General-Relativity instability supernovae (GSNe). GSNe may be triggered by the general relativity instability that happens after
central helium burning and leads to a runaway collapse of the core, eventually igniting the
explosive helium burning and unbinding the star. The energy released from the burning is large enough to
reverse the implosion into an explosion and unbind the SMS without leaving a compact remnant as shown
in Figure~\ref{gsn}.
Energy released from the GSN explosion is about $10^{55}\,{\ensuremath{\mathrm{erg}}}$, which is about $10,000$ times
more energetic than is typical of supernovae. The main yields of SMS explosions are silicon
and oxygen; only less than $1\,{\ensuremath{\mathrm{M}_{\odot}}}$ {\ensuremath{^{56}\mathrm{Ni}}}{} is made. The ejecta mixes due to the fluid instabilities driven
by burning during the very early phase of the explosion. We list the characteristics of PPSNe, PSNe, and
GSNe in Table~\ref{sn_comp}.
\begin{table}[ht]
\tbl{Charactersitics of PPSNe, PSNe and GSNe}
{\begin{tabular}{@{}lccc@{}} \toprule
Characteristic Property & PPSNe & PSNe & GSNe \\ \colrule
Mass of Progenitor [${\ensuremath{\mathrm{M}_{\odot}}}$] & 80 -150 & $150 - 260$ & $55500\pm ??$ \\
Collapse Trigger & Pair Instabilities & Pair Instabilities & GR Instabilities \\
Burning Driver & {\ensuremath{^{16}\mathrm{O}}}{} & {\ensuremath{^{16}\mathrm{O}}}, {\ensuremath{^{28}\mathrm{Si}}} {} & {\ensuremath{^{4} \mathrm{He}}}{} \\
{\ensuremath{^{56}\mathrm{Ni}}}{} Production [${\ensuremath{\mathrm{M}_{\odot}}}$] & $\ll 1$ & $0.1 - 50$ & $\ll 1$ \\
Explosion Energy [${\ensuremath{\mathrm{erg}}}$] & $1-100 \times 10^{49}$ & $1-100 \times 10^{51}$ & $6-10\times10^{54}$ \\
Fluid Instabilities & Colliding Shells & Reverse Shock & Burning \\
\botrule
\end{tabular} \label{sn_comp}}
\end{table}
\begin{figure}[ht]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width = \columnwidth]{ijmpc_pic/3d_bigstar}
\caption[]{ An exploding supermassive star of $55,500\,{\ensuremath{\mathrm{M}_{\odot}}}$: Colors show the oxygen mass fraction of the inner core of the star. Many fluid instabilities have occurred right after the bounce of the core. \label{gsn}}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Candidates for Superluminous Supernovae in the Early and Local Universe}
Because of the advancement of modern CCDs, the detection rates of SNe have rapidly increased. Large SN surveys,
such as the Nearby Supernova Factory \cite{snf1, snf2} and the Palomar Transient Factory \cite{ptf1, ptf2}{}, have rapidly
increased the volume of SN data and sharpened our understanding of SNe and their host environments.
More and more supernovae defying our previous classifications have been found in the last decade; they have challenged our
understanding of the SN progenitors, their explosion mechanisms, and their
surrounding environments. One new type of SNe found in recent observations is the superluminous SNe (SLSNe)\cite{galyam2012}{},
such as SNe 2006gy and 2007bi [\refcite{smith2007,galyam2009,past2010,quimby2007,quimby2011}]{}, which shine an order of magnitude brighter
than general SNe that have been well studied in the literature\cite{filip1997,smartt2009}{}. These SLSNe are relatively scarce,
comprising less than $5\%$ of the total number of SNe that have been detected. They are usually found in galaxies with a lower
brightness, e.g., dwarf galaxies. The engines of SLSNe challenge our understanding of CCSNe. First, the luminosity of SNe can be
simply approximated in the form: $\propto 4\pi r^2 T^4$, where is $r$ is the radius of the photo-sphere, and $T$ is its effective
surface temperature. If we assume the overall luminosity from the black body emission of hot ejecta, it requires either larger $r$ or $T$ to produce a
more luminous SN. $r$ is determined when the hot ejecta becomes optically thin; then the photons start to stream freely. $T$
depends on the thermal energy of ejecta, which is directly related to the explosion energy. The duration of light curves is associated with
the mass of ejecta determining the diffusion time scale and the size of the hot reservoir. PPSNe and PSNe are ideal candidates
of SLSNe. The collision shells of PPSNe can generate very luminous transits \cite{woosley2007}{}. PSNe are also ideal candidates
for SLSNe because of their huge explosion energy and massive {\ensuremath{^{56}\mathrm{Ni}}}{} production\cite{kasen2011}{}. Radioactive isotopes {\ensuremath{^{56}\mathrm{Ni}}}{} can
decay into {\ensuremath{^{56}\mathrm{Co}}}{} then {\ensuremath{^{56}\mathrm{Fe}}}{}, which releases much energy to lift up the light curve of SNe.
It is promising that future large space and ground observatories, such as the James Webb
Space Telescope (JWST), may be able to directly detect these SNe from Pop~III stars.
Although the
gigantic explosions make the GSNe also a viable candidate, its huge mas makes the transit
time of SNe last for several decades. Observation of GSNe become very difficult. Figure~\ref{all_sn} shows an artificial image of the observational signatures
of PPSNe, PSNe, and GSNe, which can be of one or two orders of magnitude brighter than normal SNe.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{ijmpc_pic/all_sn}
\caption[]{Pseudo observational
signatures of supernovae: Ia, PPSN, PSN, and GSN. Due to the enormous explosion energy or
large out-shining radius, (P)PSN or GSN can be $10-100$ times brighter than a type Ia SN. (Original image credit: NASA/HST/High-z SN Search Team)\label{all_sn}}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\section{Supernova Feedback with {\texttt{GADGET}}}
\label{feed_gadget}
If the first stars were massive and died as SNe, their energetics and synthesized
metals must have returned to the early Universe. An important question arises: How does the stellar
feedback of the first stars impact the early Universe and how do we model such feedback?
In this section, we describe our computational approaches of feedback simulations by introducing the
features of \texttt{GADGET}{} and additional physics modules that we use for feedback simulations.
We first introduce the hydrodynamics and gravity of SPH of \texttt{GADGET}{} in \S~\ref{sph_sec}.
The cooling and chemical network of the primordial gas is discussed in \S~\ref{cooling_sec}.
Since the star formation in the context of cosmological simulations cannot be modeled from
first principles, we explain the sink particle approach for star formation in \S~\ref{sink_sec}.
Once the first stars form in the simulation, they start to emit UV photons. Most of these stars
would die as SNe. Under the context of cosmological simulations, we discuss the radiation transfer of UV
photons in \S~\ref{ray_sec} and the supernovae feedback in \S~\ref{sn_sec}. Finally, we present
a scaling performance of \texttt{GADGET}{} in \S~\ref{gadget_sec}.
\subsection{Smoothed Particle Hydrodynamics}
\label{sph_sec}
$\texttt{GADGET}{}$\cite{springel2005} ({\bf GA}laxies with {\bf D}ark matter and {\bf G}as int{\bf E}rac{\bf T})
is the main tool for our cosmological simulations. It is a well-tested,
massively-parallel cosmological code that computes gravitational forces by using a
tree algorithm and models gas dynamics by using smoothed particle
hydrodynamics (SPH). We discuss the modified version of \texttt{GADGET}{} including
the relevant physics of the early Universe, such as star formation, radiative
transfer, cooling, and chemistry. Cosmological simulations
need to resolve the small-scale resolution under a huge domain. The SPH approach uses the
Lagrangian coordinate instead of a spatial coordinate and is suitable for cosmological simulations.
In addition to hydro and gravity, our simulations consider several feedback elements
from the first stars, e.g., radiation, supernova explosion, metal diffusion, et al.
Major code development was done by Prof.~Volker Bromm and his group
at the University of Texas.
Smoothed particle hydrodynamics\cite{monaghan1992} uses a mesh-free Lagrangian method
by dividing the fluid into discrete elements called particles. Each particle has its own position ($r_i$),
velocity ($v_i$), mass ($m_i$), and thermal dynamical properties, such as internal
energy per unit mass ($u_i$). Additionally, each particle is given a physical size
called smoothing length ($h$). The distribution of physical quantities
inside a particle is determined by a kernel function ($W$). The most
popular choices of kernel functions are Gaussian and cubic spline functions.
When each particle evolves with the local conditions, the
smoothing length changes, so the spatial resolution of the fluid element
becomes adaptive, which allows SPH to handle a large dynamic
scale and be suitable for cosmological simulations.
$h$ of particles in higher-density regions becomes smaller because more particles
accumulate. SPH automatically increases the spatial resolution of simulations. The
major disadvantages of SPH are in catching
shock fronts and resolving the fluid instabilities because of
its artificial viscosity formulation, which injects the necessary entropy in shocks.
The shock front becomes broadened over the smoothing scale, and true contact
discontinuities cannot be resolved. However, SPH are very suitable for simulating
the growing structures due to gravity, and SPH adaptively resolves higher-density
regions of halos, which are usually the domain of interest.
The cold dark matter is collisionless particles, and they interact with each
other only through gravity. Hence gravity is the dominating force that drives the
large-scale structure formation in the Universe, and its computation is the workhorse
of any cosmological simulation. The long-range nature of gravity
within a high dynamic range of structure formation problems makes the
computation of gravitational forces very challenging. In \texttt{GADGET}{}, the algorithm
of computing gravitational forces employs the hierarchical multipole expansion called
a tree algorithm. The method groups distant particles into larger cells, allowing their
gravity to be accounted for by means of a single multipole force.
For a group of N particles, the direct-summation approach needs N -1 partial
forces per particle, but the gravitational force using the tree method only requires
about log N particle forces per particle. This greatly saves the computation cost.
The most important characteristic of a
gravitational tree code is the type of grouping employed. As a grouping algorithm, \texttt{GADGET}{}
uses the geometrical oct-tree \cite{bh1986} because of advantages in terms of memory
consumption. The volume of the simulation is divided up into cubic cells in an oct-tree.
Only neighboring particles are treated individually, but distant particles are grouped into a
single cell. The oct-tree method significantly reduces the computation of pair
interactions more than the method of direct N-body.
\subsection{Cooling and Chemistry Networks of Primordial Gas}
\label{cooling_sec}
Cooling of the gas plays an important role in the star formation.
The dark matter collapses into halos and provides gravitational
wells for the primordial star formation. The mass of the gas cloud must be
larger than its Jeans mass so the star formation can proceed. Cooling is an
effective way to decrease the Jeans mass and trigger the star formation.
The chemical cooling of the first star formation is relatively simple because
no metals are available coolants at the time.
According to [\refcite{bromm2004a}], the dominant coolant in the first star formation is molecular hydrogen. For the local Universe, the formation of {{\ensuremath{^{} \mathrm{H}_2}}} occurs mainly at the surface of
dust grains, where one hydrogen atom can be attached to the dust surface and combine
with another hydrogen atom to form {{\ensuremath{^{} \mathrm{H}_2}}}. There is no dust when Pop~III
stars form; the channel of {{\ensuremath{^{} \mathrm{H}_2}}} through dust grain is unavailable. {{\ensuremath{^{} \mathrm{H}_2}}} formation
of primordial gas can only go through gas phase reactions. The simplest
reaction is
\begin{equation}
{\ensuremath{^{} \mathrm{H}}} + {\ensuremath{^{} \mathrm{H}}} \longrightarrow {\ensuremath{^{} \mathrm{H}_2}} + \gamma,
\end{equation}
which occurs when one of the hydrogen atoms is in an electronic state.
When the densities of hydrogen become high
enough, $n_{\ensuremath{^{} \mathrm{H}}} \,\ge\,10^8\,\ensuremath{\mathrm{cm}^{-3}}$, three-body formation of ${\ensuremath{^{} \mathrm{H}_2}}$ becomes possible:
\begin{equation}
{\ensuremath{^{} \mathrm{H}}} + {\ensuremath{^{} \mathrm{H}}} + {\ensuremath{^{} \mathrm{H}}} \longrightarrow {\ensuremath{^{} \mathrm{H}_2}} + {\ensuremath{^{} \mathrm{H}}} ,
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
{\ensuremath{^{} \mathrm{H}_2}} + {\ensuremath{^{} \mathrm{H}}} + {\ensuremath{^{} \mathrm{H}}} \longrightarrow {\ensuremath{^{} \mathrm{H}_2}} + {\ensuremath{^{} \mathrm{H}_2}}.
\end{equation}
For the first star formation, the cloud collapses at the densities $n_{\ensuremath{^{} \mathrm{H}}} \,\sim\,10^4\,\ensuremath{\mathrm{cm}^{-3}}$.
${\ensuremath{^{} \mathrm{H}_2}}$ is dominated by two sets of reactions:
\begin{equation}
{\ensuremath{^{} \mathrm{H}}} + {\ensuremath{^{} \mathrm{e}^-}} \longrightarrow {\ensuremath{^{} \mathrm{H}}} ^- + \gamma,
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
{\ensuremath{^{} \mathrm{H}}} ^- + {\ensuremath{^{} \mathrm{H}}} \longrightarrow {\ensuremath{^{} \mathrm{H}_2}} + {\ensuremath{^{} \mathrm{e}^-}}.
\end{equation}
This reaction involves the ${\ensuremath{^{} \mathrm{H}}} ^-$ ion as an intermediate state,
\begin{equation}
{\ensuremath{^{} \mathrm{H}}} + {\ensuremath{^{} \mathrm{H}}} ^+ \longrightarrow {\ensuremath{^{} \mathrm{H}_2}}^+ + \gamma,
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
{\ensuremath{^{} \mathrm{H}_2}}^+ + {\ensuremath{^{} \mathrm{H}}} \longrightarrow {\ensuremath{^{} \mathrm{H}_2}} + {\ensuremath{^{} \mathrm{H}}} ^+.
\end{equation}
The second one involves the ${\ensuremath{^{} \mathrm{H}}} ^+$ ion as an intermediate state.
These two processes are denoted as the ${\ensuremath{^{} \mathrm{H}}} ^{-}$ pathway and the ${\ensuremath{^{} \mathrm{H}_2}}^+$ pathway, respectively.
The difference between the two pathways is that the ${\ensuremath{^{} \mathrm{H}}} ^-$ path forms ${\ensuremath{^{} \mathrm{H}_2}}$ much faster than the
${\ensuremath{^{} \mathrm{H}_2}}^+$ does, so the ${\ensuremath{^{} \mathrm{H}}} ^-$ pathway dominates the production of ${\ensuremath{^{} \mathrm{H}_2}}$
in the gas phase. During the epoch of the first star formation, [\refcite{bromm2004a}] pointed out that
molecular hydrogen fraction is $f_{{\ensuremath{^{} \mathrm{H}_2}}}=10^{-3}\sim10^{-4}$ at minihalos and $f_{{\ensuremath{^{} \mathrm{H}_2}}}\approx10^{-6}$
at the IGM. For given ${\ensuremath{^{} \mathrm{H}_2}}$ abundances, density, and temperature, we are able to
calculate the ${\ensuremath{^{} \mathrm{H}_2}}$ cooling. The values of ${\ensuremath{^{} \mathrm{H}_2}}$ cooling rates are not well-defined
because of the uncertainties in the calculation of collisional de-excitation rates.
The cooling and chemistry network in our modified \texttt{GADGET}{} is based on [\refcite{greif2010}]
and include all relevant cooling mechanisms of primordial gas, such as H and He collisional
ionization, excitation and recombination cooling, {\it bremsstrahlung},
and inverse Compton cooling; in addition, the collisional excitation cooling via ${\ensuremath{^{} \mathrm{H}_2}}$ and HD is also taken into account. For ${\ensuremath{^{} \mathrm{H}_2}}$ cooling,
collisions with protons and electrons are explicitly included. The chemical network includes $\rm H, H^+, H^-, H_2, H_2^+, He, He^+, He^{++}$, and ${e^-}$, D, $\rm D^+$, and HD.
\subsection{Sink Particles}
\label{sink_sec}
Modern cosmological simulations can potentially use billions of particles
to model the formation of the Universe. However, it is still challenging
to resolve mass scales from galaxy clusters (10$^{13}\,{\ensuremath{\mathrm{M}_{\odot}}}$) to a
stellar scale ($1\,{\ensuremath{\mathrm{M}_{\odot}}}$). For example, the resolution length in our
simulation is about $1\,{\ensuremath{\mathrm{pc}}}$, hence modeling the process of star formation on cosmological scales from first
principles is impractical for the current setup. Alternatively, in the treatment of star
formation and its feedback, sub-grid models are employed, meaning that a
single particle behaves as a star, which comes from the results of stellar models.
Also, when the gas density inside the simulations becomes increasingly high,
the SPH smoothing length decreases according to the Courant condition and forces it to shrink the time steps very rapidly. When the resulting runaway collapse occurs,
the simulation easily fails. Creating sink particles is required to bypass this numerical
constraint and to continue following the evolution of the overall system for longer.
For the treatment of star formation, we apply the sink particle algorithm\cite{JB2007}{}.
We have to ensure that only gravitationally bound particles can be merged
to form a sink particle and utilize the nature of the Jeans instability.
We also consider how the density evolves with time inside the collapsing
region of the first star formation when gas densities are close to $n_c\,\sim\,10^4\,{\ensuremath{\mathrm{cm}}}^{-3}$ and subsequently increase rapidly by several orders
of magnitude. So the most important criterion for a particle
to be eligible for merging is $n\,>\,n_{c}$ because in the collapse around the
sink particles, the velocity field surrounded by the sink must be converged fluid,
which yields $\nabla\cdot\vec{v}<0$. The neighboring particles around the sink
particle should be bounded and follow with [\refcite{JB2007}]
\begin{equation}
E\,=\,E_{g}\,+\,E_{k}\,+\,E_{t}\,<\,0,
\end{equation}
where $E$, $E_{g}$, $E_{k}$, and $E_{t}$ are the overall binding, gravitational, kinetic, and thermal
energies, respectively. Sink particles are usually assumed to be collisionless, so that they only
interact with other particles through gravity. Once the sink particles are
formed, the radiative feedback from the star particles would halt further accretion of in-falling gas.
So collisionless properties of sink particles are reasonable for our study. The sink particles
provide markers for the position of a Pop~III star and its remnants, such as a black hole or supernovae,
to which the detailed physics can be supplied.
\subsection{Radiative Transfer}
\label{ray_sec}
When a Pop~III star has formed inside the minihalo, the sink particle
immediately turns into a point source of ionizing photons to mimic the
birth of a star. The rate of ionizing photons emitted depends on the
physical size of the star and its surface temperature based on the subgrid
models of stars. Instead of simply assuming constant rates of emission,
we use the results of one-dimensional stellar evolution
to construct the luminosity history of the Pop~III stars that served as our
sub-grid models for star particles. The luminosity of the
star is actually evolving with time and demonstrates a considerable
change. The streaming photons from the star then form an ionization front and build
up H~II{} regions. For tracing the propagation of photons and the ionization front,
we use the ray-tracing algorithm from [\refcite{greif2009a}], which solves the
ionization front equation in a spherical grid by tracking $10^5$ rays
with 500 logarithmically spaced radial bins around the ray source.
The propagation of the ray is coupled to the hydrodynamics of the gas through
its chemical and thermal evolution. The transfer of the $\rm H_2$-dissociating photons
of Lyman--Werner (LW) band ($11.2-13.6\,\ensuremath{\mathrm{e\!V}}$) from Pop~III stars is also
included.
In the ray-tracing calculation, the particles' positions are transformed from Cartesian to
spherical coordinates, radius ($r$), zenith angle ($\theta$), and azimuth angle ($\phi$).
The volume of each particle is $\sim h^3$, when $h$ is the
smoothing length. The corresponding sizes in spherical coordinates are $\Delta r\,=\,h$,
$\Delta \theta\,=\,h/r$, and $\Delta \phi\,=\,h/r\sin(\theta)$. Using spherical coordinates is
for convenience in calculating the Str\"{o}mgren sphere around the star,
\begin{equation}
n_n r^2_{\rm I}\frac{d r_{\rm I}}{dt}\,=\, \frac{\dot{N}_{\rm ion}}{4\pi}\,-\,\alpha_{\rm B}\int_0^{r_{\rm I}}n_en_+r^2dr,
\label{rad1}
\end{equation}
where $r_{\rm I}$ is the position of the ionization front, $\dot{N}_{\rm ion}$ represents
the number of ionizing photons emitted from the star per second, $\alpha_{\rm B}$ is
the case B recombination coefficient, and $n_n$, $n_e$, and $n_+$ are the number densities of neutral
particles, electrons, and positively charged ions, respectively. The recombination coefficient
is assumed to be constant at temperatures around $2\times10^4\,\ensuremath{\mathrm{K}}$. The ionizing photons for
H~I{} and He~II{} emitted are
\begin{equation}
\dot{N}_{\rm ion}\,=\,\frac{\pi L_*}{\sigma T_{\rm eff}^4}\,\int_{\nu_{\rm min}}^{\infty}\frac{B_{\nu}}{h_{\rm P}\nu} {\rm d}\nu,
\label{rad2}
\end{equation}
where $h_{\rm P}$ is the Planck's constant, $\sigma$ is the Boltzmann's constant, $\sigma_{\nu}$ is the photo-ionization
cross sections, and $\nu_{\rm min}$ is the minimum frequency for the ionization photons of
H~I, He~I, and He~II.
By assuming the blackbody spectrum of a star $B_\nu$ of an effective temperature, $T_{\rm eff}$,
its flux can be written
\begin{equation}
F_{\nu}\,=\,\frac{L_*}{4 \sigma T_{\rm eff}^4r^2}B_{\nu}.
\end{equation}
The size of the H~II{} region is determined by solving Equation~(\ref{rad1}).
The particles within the H~II{} regions now save information
about their distance from the star, which is used to calculate the
ionization and heating rates,
\begin{equation}
k_{\rm ion}\,=\,\int_{\nu_{\rm min}}^{\infty}\frac{F_{\nu}\sigma_{\nu}}{h_{\rm P}\nu} {\rm d}\nu, \quad\quad
\Gamma\,=\,n_n\int_{\nu_{\rm min}}^{\infty}F_{\nu}\sigma_{\nu}\Big(1\,-\,\frac{\nu_{\rm min}}{\nu}\Big){\rm d}\nu. \
\end{equation}
{\ensuremath{^{} \mathrm{H}_2}}{} is the most important coolant for cooling the
primordial gas, which leads to formation of the first stars. However, its hydrogen bond is weak
and can be easily broken by photons in the LW
bands between 11.2 and 13.6 eV. The small ${\ensuremath{^{} \mathrm{H}_2}}$ fraction in the IGM
creates only a little optical depth for LW photons, allowing them to propagate over a much
larger distance than ionizing photons. In our algorithm, self-shielding of H$_2$ is not
included because it is only important when H$_2$ column densities are high.
Here we treat the photodissociation of ${\ensuremath{^{} \mathrm{H}_2}}$ in the optically thin limit and the dissociation rate in a
volume constrained by causality within a radius, $r =ct $. The dissociation rate
is given by $k_{\rm H_2}=1.1\times10^8 F_{\rm LW}\,{\ensuremath{\mathrm{sec}}}^{-1}$, where $F_{\rm LW}$
is the flux within LW bands.
\subsection{Supernova Explosion and Metal Diffusion}
\label{sn_sec}
After several million years, the massive Pop~III
stars eventually burn out their fuel, and most of
them die as supernovae. As we discussed in Part~I,
the first supernovae are very powerful explosions
accompanied by huge energetics and metals.
In this subsection, we discuss how we model the SNe explosion in
our cosmological simulation.
When the star reaches the end of its lifetime, we remove the
star particles from the simulation and set up the explosions
by injecting the explosion energy to desired particles surrounded
by the previous sink. Because the resolution of the simulation
is about 1~pc, we cannot resolve the individual
SNe in both mass and space. Here we assume the SN ejecta is
disturbed around a region of 10~pc, embedding the progenitor
stars, in which most kinetic energy and thermal energy of ejecta
are still conservative. We attach the metals to these particles based on
the yield of our Pop~III SN model. The explosion energy of hypernovae
and pair-instability SNe can be up to $10^{52}-10^{53}\,{\ensuremath{\mathrm{erg}}}$.
For the iron-core collapse SN, it is about $1.2 \times 10^{51}\,{\ensuremath{\mathrm{erg}}}$.
In our \texttt{GADGET}{} simulations, we are unable to resolve the stellar scale below
1~pc. However, the fluid instabilities of SN ejecta develop initially at a scale far below 1~pc.
These fluid instabilities would lead to a mix of SN metals with the primordial IGM.
Therefore, mixing plays a crucial role in transporting the metal, which could be the most
important coolant for later star formation. To model the transport of metals,
we apply a SPH diffusion scheme\cite{greif2009b} based on the idea of turbulent
diffusion, linking the diffusion of a pollutant to the local physical
conditions. This provides an alternative to spatially resolving mixing
during the formation of supernova remnants.
A precise treatment of the mixing of metals in cosmological simulations
is not available so far because the turbulent motions responsible for
mixing can cascade down to very small scales, far beyond the resolutions
we can achieve now. Because of the Lagrangian nature of SPH simulations, it is
much more difficult than the direct modeling of mixing by resolving the fluid
instabilities in SPH than in grid-based codes. However, we can assume the motion
of a fluid element inside a homogeneously and isotropically turbulent velocity
field, such as a diffusion process, which can be described by
\begin{equation}
\frac{{\rm d}c}{{\rm d}t }\,=\,\frac{1}{\rho}\nabla\cdot(D\nabla c),
\end{equation}
where $c$ is the concentration of a metal-enriched fluid-per-unit mass; {\it D}
is the diffusion coefficient, which can vary with space and time;
and $\frac{\rm d}{\rm dt}$ is the Lagrangian derivative.
After the SN explosion, metal cooling must be considered in the cooling network. We assume that C, O,
and Si are produced with solar relative abundances, which are the dominant coolants for the first SNe.
There are two distinct temperature regimes for these species. In low temperature regimes,
$T\,<\,2\,\times\,10^4\,\ensuremath{\mathrm{K}}$, we use a chemical network presented in [\refcite{glover2007}], which follows
the chemistry of C, C$^+$, O, O$^+$, Si, Si$^+$, and Si$^{++}$, supplemental to the primordial species discussed above.
This network
also considers effects of the fine structure cooling of C, C$^+$, O, Si, and Si$^+$. The effects of molecular
cooling are not taken into account. In high temperatures,
$T\,\geq\,2\,\times\,10^4\,\ensuremath{\mathrm{K}}$, due to the increasing number of ionization states, a full non-equilibrium
treatment of metal chemistry becomes very complicated and computationally expensive. Instead of directly
solving the cooling network, we use the cooling rate table\cite{suther1993}{}, which gives effective cooling
rates (hydrogen and helium line cooling, and {\it bremsstrahlung}) at different metallicities. Dust cooling
is not included because the nature of the dust produced by Pop~III SNe is still poorly understood.
\subsection{Parallel Performance of {\texttt{GADGET}} }
\label{gadget_sec}
\texttt{GADGET}{} simulations that include several physical processes are very computationally expensive
and must be run on supercomputers. It is good to know the scaling performance of the code so that
we can better manage our jobs. To understand the parallel efficiency of \texttt{GADGET}, we perform a
strong scaling study. The test problem is a $\Lambda$CDM problem including gas hydrodynamics of
gas particles coupled with gravity of CDM, which started with the condition at $z = 100$ in a periodic
box of linear size of 1~Mpc (comoving), using $\Lambda$CDM cosmological parameters with matter
density $\Omega_m=0.3$, baryon density $\Omega_b=0.04$, Hubble constant $H_0 = 70\,{\ensuremath{\mathrm{km}}}\,\sec^{-1} {\ensuremath{\mathrm{Mpc}}}^{-1}$,
spectral index $n_{\rm s}=1.0$, and normalization $\sigma_8=0.9$, based on the CMB measurement from WMAP
\cite{komatsu2009}{}. The total number of particles for this problem is about 80 million (40 million for gas and 40 million for dark matter).
This is the identical setup for our real problem, including the cooling and the chemistry of the primordial gas.
The purpose of the scaling test is to allow us to determine the optimal computational resources to perform our simulations
and complete them within a reasonable time frame. We perform these tests on Itasca, a 10,000$-$CPU supercomputer located at the Minnesota
Supercomputing Institute. We increase the CPU number while running the same job and record the amount of time it takes to finish
the run. For perfect scaling, the run time should be inversely proportional to the number of CPUs used. Figure~\ref{gscaling}
presents the results of our scaling tests. It shows a good strong scaling when the number of CPUs is $n_c\,\lesssim\, 300$.
Once $n_c\,>\,300$, the scaling curve becomes flat, which means the scaling is getting saturated, and $n_c\,=\,256$ seems
to be a turning point. Hence we use $n_c\,=\,256-384$ for our production runs.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{ijmpc_pic/gadget_scaling}
\caption[]{Strong scaling of \texttt{GADGET}{} on Itasca:
The blue curve presents the scaling performance of \texttt{GADGET}{} on
Itasca, and the red-dashed curve is the case of perfect scaling. \label{gscaling}}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\section{Pop~III Supernovae - Impact to the Early Universe}
\label{feed_result}
Galaxies are the building blocks of large-scale structures in the Universe.
The detection of galaxies at $z \approx 10$ by the Hubble Space Telescope
suggests that these galaxies formed within a few hundred million years (Myr)
after the Big Bang. In \S~\ref{firststar}, we discussed the Pop~III stars that
are predicted to form inside the dark matter halos of mass about $10^5\,{\ensuremath{\mathrm{M}_{\odot}}}$, known as minihalos.
The gravitational wells of minihalos are very shallow, so they could
not maintain a self-regulated star formation because the stellar feedback from the Pop~III
stars inside the minihalos could easily strip out the gas and prevent formation of the next
subsequent stars. Thus the minihalos cannot be treated as the first galaxies. Instead, the first galaxies must
be hosted by more massive halos generated from the merging of minihalos. The high
redshift galaxies should come from the merger of the first galaxies. But {\it how did the first galaxies form}?
and {\it what are the connections among the first stars, the first supernovae, and the first galaxies?}
A key to answering these questions is held by the Pop~III stars formed inside the minihalos.
Massive Pop~III stars might have died as supernovae (Pop~III SNe).
The Pop~III stars with initial masses of $10-150\,{\ensuremath{\mathrm{M}_{\odot}}}$ die as CCSNe;
those with initial masses of $150-260\,{\ensuremath{\mathrm{M}_{\odot}}}$ die as PSNe, and those with mass
$ > 260\, {\ensuremath{\mathrm{M}_{\odot}}}$ just collapse to black holes. We temporarily neglect the feedback of exploding super massive stars here
because of their scarcity. Massive Pop~III stars could emit copious amounts of hydrogen-ionizing photons, which contribute to
cosmic reionization. Their SNe dispersed the first metals to the intergalactic medium (IGM).
This chemical enrichment could trigger the formation of the second generation of stars (Pop~II stars).
Finally, the minihalos and IGM, together with relic H~II{} regions and metals from Pop~III stars, jointly formed
into the first galaxies, as shown in Figure~\ref{afsg}.
The formation of the first galaxies not only depends on the evolution of dark matter but also on baryon,
which provides the material for forming stars. The chemical, mechanical, and radiative feedback from the first
stars makes the assembly process of the first galaxies much more complex. The model of first galaxy formation
is still at its infant phase and is not sophisticated enough to offer reliable predictions. One of the obstacles for models
is in resolving the relevant spatial scales and physical processes. Beneficial to the advancement of computational technology,
new supercomputers allow us to perform more realistic cosmological simulations and start to investigate the first galaxy
formation.
In this section, we review the current understanding of the first galaxies in \S~\ref{fg_sec}.
Then we discuss the role of the first stars in the first galaxy formation in \S~\ref{ccstar_sec}.
The stellar feedback includes radiation during its stellar evolution and chemical enrichment when
the star dies as a SN. We discuss the radiation feedback of the first stars in \S~\ref{fg_rad_sec}
and the chemical enrichment of their SNe in \S~\ref{fg_met_sec}.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width = \columnwidth]{ijmpc_pic/assembly_galaxy}
\caption[]{ Assembly of the first galaxies:
Based on the model of [\refcite{bromm2011}], the first galaxies form with a mass of about $10^{8}$ {\ensuremath{\mathrm{M}_{\odot}}}{} at $z \sim 10$. The feedback of previous Pop~III stars can affect the star formation inside the first galaxy. The gravitational wells of minihalos are shallow, so they cannot be treated as galaxies in this scenario. \label{afsg}}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Assembly of the First Galaxies}
\label{fg_sec}
There are several definitions of the first galaxy. In general, a galaxy should have multiple stars hosted in a bound
halo; its potential well is deep enough to retain the gas heated by the UV radiation from stars or inside it
\cite{barkana2001,bromm2011,goodstein2011}. In addition, SN explosions in the first galaxies can only trigger
a minimum mass loss. In brief, a galaxy must have a stable and self-regulated star formation.
The potential well of the halo is the most important factor determining whether it can be a galaxy or not. For a given halo
mass at $z \gg 1$, the gravitational binding energy of the halo can be estimated as [\refcite{bromm2011}],
\begin{equation}
E_{b} = \frac{GM^2}{r_{\rm vir}} \simeq 5 \times 10^{53}\bigg(\frac{M}{10^8\,{\ensuremath{\mathrm{M}_{\odot}}}}\bigg)^{5/3} \bigg(\frac{\delta_c}{18\,\pi^2}\bigg)
^{1/3}\bigg(\frac{1+z}{10}\bigg)\,{\rm erg},
\end{equation}
where $r_{\rm vir}$ is the virial radius of the halo, and $\delta_c$ is the density contrast when the halo formed.
The results of [\refcite{wise2008,grief2010}] have suggested that dark matter halos of a mass of $10^8\,{\ensuremath{\mathrm{M}_{\odot}}}$ forming at $z\approx10$ can satisfy the
criteria. These halos have a virial temperature of about $10^4\,\ensuremath{\mathrm{K}}$, which is related to the
characteristic temperature due to atomic hydrogen cooling. These halos are also called atomic cooling halos. Unlike minihalos,
the dominating cooling process of gas is by H instead of H$_2$. Such halos also keep most of their gas that previously
received stellar feedback, such as through radiation and the SN blast wave.
For observers, there are two primordial types of galaxies
that can be the first galaxies. The first galaxies can be defined as the highest redshift galaxies detected. However, such
a definition may change once there is a new telescope. On the other hand, the galaxies containing zero metallicity may
be defined as the first galaxies. However, chemical enrichment might already occur in the first galaxies.
In this review, we use definitions based on [\refcite{bromm2011}] for the first galaxies that are constructed by
a dark matter halo and host the Pop~III or Pop~II stars.
\subsection{Cosmological Impact of the First Stars}
\label{ccstar_sec}
The process of the first galaxy formation is highly complex because the initial conditions and relevant physics
are not well understood. In the $\Lambda$CDM model, the first stars are predicted to have been born before the
first galaxies formed. Thus the first stars together with primordial gas would offer a rockbed for the first galaxies.
Feedback from the first stars would play an important role in determining the initial conditions for forming the first
galaxies. The stellar feedback usually includes radiative \cite{schaerer2002}{} and supernova feedback \cite{ciardi2005}{}.
The massive Pop~III stars produce UV radiation to ionize the primordial gas \cite{barkana2007}{}. The
WMAP measured an increasing optical depth at $z\sim15$, implying cosmic reionization by the massive Pop~III stars. The
SN feedback has both a mechanical and a chemical impact; the blast wave of the explosion injects heat and momentum to the
surrounding IGM and concurrently disperses metals into the primordial gas [\refcite{ferra2000,bromm2004a}].
As discussed before, some Pop~III stars may die as PSNe, and such explosion modes could quickly pollute the IGM
with large amounts of metals. Such chemical enrichment can alter the subsequent star formation because additional
metal cooling starts to function. Both radiative and SN feedback of the first stars transforms the simple Universe into a much
more complex state by setting the initial conditions for the first galaxy formation.
Figure~\ref{bsg} shows a density snapshot of our cosmological simulations at
the time when the first star is about to form inside one of the minihalos. The density of the gas
cloud is approaching $10^4\,{\ensuremath{\mathrm{cm}}}^{-3}$, and its {\ensuremath{^{} \mathrm{H}_2}}{} mass fraction rises to $10^{-3}$.
to cool the gas cloud to about $200\,\ensuremath{\mathrm{K}}$. A runaway collapse of the cloud will occur, and
the first star is about to form.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{ijmpc_pic/birth_firststar}
\caption[]{ Birth of the first stars: The first star is about to form within the dark matter
halo (white circle) of mass of $10^5\,{\ensuremath{\mathrm{M}_{\odot}}}$ at $z\approx28$. There will be a runaway collapse, and a sink will form to mimic the star formation. \label{bsg}}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Radiative Feedback}
\label{fg_rad_sec}
The radiation emitted from Pop~III stars would affect the subsequent
thermal properties of the primordial IGM, which changed the properties
of star-forming clouds and affected the later star formation inside the first
galaxies. The radiative feedback may have several
different forms, e.g., UV photons and x-rays, depending on the stars
and their compact remnants. Since H$_2$ is the most important coolant for
the first star formation, it is relevant to learn how the radiation
influences H$_2$. The hydrogen bond of H$_2$ is weak and can be easily broken
by Lyman--Werner (LW) photons with energy in $11.2-13.6$~eV,
\begin{equation}
{\rm H}_2\,+\,\gamma\,\rightarrow\,{\rm H}^*_2\,\rightarrow\,2{\rm H}.
\end{equation}
H$_2^*$ is an excited state, which is unstable and soon decays into two H.
Massive Pop~III stars could emit large amounts of UV photons,
easily ionizing the primordial hydrogen and helium, thus suppressing the
corresponding H$_2$ cooling. Without effective H$_2$ cooling, massive
Pop~III stars may not be able to form hereafter. On the other hand, in the ionized
region, the abundance of free electrons may increase and facilitate the formation of H$_2$.
It is still unclear whether the radiation from the Pop~III stars is helpful (facilitating later star formation)
or harmful (hampering later star formation). The overall impact of the radiative feedback on
the H$_2$ is pretty uncertain. Besides ionizing primordial gas, energetic UV photons can photoheat
the surrounding gas and allow it to escape the host halo and form an outflow. This disperses
the gas inside the minihalos and may shut the later star formation off. More cosmological simulations of
comprehensive radiative effects of the Pop~III stars are necessary for clarifying this issue.
Figure~\ref{ionhep} shows a He~II{} region created by a $100\,{\ensuremath{\mathrm{M}_{\odot}}}$ Pop~III star.
When the first star evolves to the main sequence and stable hydrogen burning at the core occurs,
its surface temperature quickly rises to $T\sim2\times10^5$ K and begins to emit a large amount of
ionizing photons for neutral hydrogen and helium. The gas inside the host halo is strongly
photoheated, which allows the gas to escape the
gravitational well of the host halo, forming an outflow.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{ijmpc_pic/ionhep}
\caption[]{ The He~II{} region created by a $100\,{\ensuremath{\mathrm{M}_{\odot}}}$ Pop~III
star before it dies: The white star indicates the position of the star. The strong UV
photons emitted from the star create an extensive He~II{} region of a size about several $\ensuremath{\mathrm{kpc}}$. \label{ionhep}}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Supernova Feedback}
\label{fg_met_sec}
Massive Pop~III stars might die as energetic SNe and dump metal-rich ejecta to the IGM.
The are two kinds of feedback from SNe: thermodynamical and chemical.
The SN explosions produce strong shocks that blow up the stars (see Part~I).
The SN feedback strongly depends on its progenitor stars, which determine the amount of
explosion energy and metals produced. Chemical enrichment of the IGM by Pop~III
SNe is important for understanding the transition in the star-formation mode from high-mass dominated
to low-mass dominated [\refcite{bromm2004a}]. If metals are very uniformly dispersed by the SNe, the transition
may occur rather sharply. In contrast, if the enrichment is not very uniform, gas clumps of high-metallicity
may appear and surround the primordial gas. In this case, the transition of star formation mode
may occur more smoothly. [\refcite{bromm2003}] first present numerical simulations of the first SN explosions at
high redshifts ($z \approx 20$); they assume that one single PSN occurs inside the center of the minihalo
and simulate the explosion. Their simulations explore two explosion energies of PSNe,
$10^{51}\,{\ensuremath{\mathrm{erg}}}$ and $10^{53}\,{\ensuremath{\mathrm{erg}}}$. Their results show that the explosion of $10^{53}\,{\ensuremath{\mathrm{erg}}}$ can
create giant metal bubbles the size of several kpc. The lower explosion energy instead shows relatively smaller
regions of metal enrichment. More recent results \cite{grief2010} show that the metals are dispersed
uniformly due to the diffusion mixing.
Figure~\ref{fsgsn} shows a SN explosion at five million years after its onset. The metal of the SN has been
dispersed to the IGM of a radius about $1\,\ensuremath{\mathrm{kpc}}$.
When the SN shock breaks out of the stellar surface and propagates into the low-density
ISM surrounding, it is suddenly accelerated to a velocity above $10^4$ km/s, about a few
percent of the speed of light. The shock front can quickly reheat the relic H~II{} regions
created by the progenitor stars and
maintain the ionized status of the H~II{} region for
an additional $1\sim2\,\ensuremath{\mathrm{Myr}}$. For chemical feedback, the SN ejecta are metal-rich and
can pollute the pristine IGM to a metallicity of about $10^{-3}$-$\,10^{-5}\,\ensuremath{Z_\odot}$ inside
a region of 1~kpc. The first metals are very important to the later star formation because the
metal cooling affects the mass of scale during the star formation. Once the gas cloud reaches the critical metallicity\cite{schneider2012}{}, $10^{-3}\,\ensuremath{Z_\odot}$, Pop~II stars that
have a mass scale similar to present-day stars may start to form.
The resolutions of these simulations are still very crude. We are just starting to understand the complex processes of the first chemical enrichment by the first SNe.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{ijmpc_pic/m60_3d}
\caption[]{ Metal enrichment of the first SNe: The \texttt{GADGET}{} simulation shows that a SN explosion from a $60\,{\ensuremath{\mathrm{M}_{\odot}}}$ star can efficiently spread the metal over 1~kpc in a
few million years and enrich the metallicity of pristine gas inside IGM to $10^{-3}$ - $10^{-5}\ensuremath{Z_\odot}$. \label{fsgsn}}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\section{Summary and Perspective}
\label{summary}
One of the frontiers in modern cosmology is understanding the end of the cosmic dark ages,
when the first luminous objects (e.g., stars, supernovae, and galaxies) transformed the
simple early Universe into a state of ever-increasing complexity. In this review,
we discussed several possible fates of the first SNe as well as their impact on the
early Universe.
The thermonuclear supernovae of very massive stars include two types of
pair-creation instability supernovae and one possible type of general relativity supernovae.
The first stars with initial masses of $80-150\,{\ensuremath{\mathrm{M}_{\odot}}}$ might eject a few solar masses pulsationally;
they are triggered by violent instabilities in stellar cores before they die. These ejected masses may lead to catastrophic collisions and power extremely
luminous optical transients called pulsational pair-instability supernovae, which may account for the
superluminous supernovae. The first stars with initial masses of $150-260\,{\ensuremath{\mathrm{M}_{\odot}}}$ eventually die as pair-instability supernovae. We report the discovery of an extraordinary supernova of a
$55,500\,{\ensuremath{\mathrm{M}_{\odot}}}$.
We infer that the possible driver of the explosion of a super massive star is triggered by
general relativity, where the supporting pressure term becomes a source of gravity.
This catalyzes the helium burning, leading to an explosion of energy up to $10^{55}\,{\ensuremath{\mathrm{erg}}}$, which is
about 10,000 times more energetic than normal SNe. This also implies a narrow mass window
in which the super massive stars may die as supernovae instead of collapsing into black holes.
Violent mixing has been found inside the GSNe ejecta.
These SNe produce a broad range of fluid instabilities and resulting mixing that is
reflected in their observational signatures.
We discuss the impact of the first stars and their SNe on the early Universe.
The stellar feedback from the first stars could affect the later star formation
and the assembly of the first galaxies. Because the proper mass scale of
the first stars and their population are very uncertain. The stellar impact depends on the mass of the stars;
the more massive the stars are, the more UV photons can be produced, which leads to a
more extensive region of ionized hydrogen and helium. Massive Pop~III stars can die as several different
kinds of supernovae, such as core-collapse supernovae and hypernovae, yielding different explosion
energetics and amounts of metals. The metals dispersed by SNe can enrich the primordial gas and may
lead to the formation of the second generation of stars forming inside the first galaxies.
Our results suggest that the first stars of masses can effectively create a H~II{} region of a size about $3-4\,\ensuremath{\mathrm{kpc}}$
and enrich a region of IGM gas of size $1 - 2\,\ensuremath{\mathrm{kpc}}$ to a metallicity of $\sim 10^{-3}-10^{-5}\,\ensuremath{Z_\odot}$.
The chemical enrichment tends to be uniformly painted on the primordial gas instead of forming higher-metallicity clumps.
Simulations shed a light of understanding on the underlying physical processes
of the first supernovae and their impacts. However, astronomy is a science
based on observational data. Models only offer a promising way of understanding
the data. Strong theoretical models from simulations must offer useful
predictions for observation, such as light curves or the spectra of targeted objects.
For calculating predictions for these first SNe, a self-consistent radiation transport
must be considered.
Hydrodynamics simulations, including radiation calculations, can be very
computationally expensive and technically difficult. One high-resolution 3D SN simulation
may require several million CPU hours and can only be run on some of the world's most powerful
supercomputers. Much effort are still needed to push the model frontiers.
The first supernovae hold the keys to understanding how the cosmic dark ages were terminated.
The detection of these objects will be the holy grail in modern cosmology. New ground and space
telescopes with unprecedented apertures are planned for achieving this goal (see Table~\ref{ta_telescopes}). These forthcoming ground-based facilities include
the {\sf European Extremely Large Telescope (E-ELT)}, the {\sf Thirty Meter Telescope (TMT)},
and the {\sf Giant Magellan Telescope (GMT)}. In space, the {\sf James Webb Space Telescope}
({\sf JWST}) will take the lead.
These telescopes will become the world's biggest eyes in the sky in human history and will allow us
to probe the most distant Universe, showing when the first luminous objects such as stars, supernovae, and galaxies
were about to form. Meaningful predictions of the first luminous objects through robust simulations
are critical to the success of these observatories, which will be constructed by 2020. Before that date,
significant efforts are needed to refine models to achieve the level of sophistication that will
offer the most accurate scientific predictions for these forthcoming facilities. It is
extremely urgent and important that we start to push the model frontiers along with the construction
of these telescopes. With fast-growing computational power, simulations will be able to resolve the spatial scale as well as
relevant physical processes that occur.
With both the forthcoming data and the sophisticated models, the most enigmatic and radical mystery of
these first luminous objects will be revealed in the foreseeable future.
\begin{table}[ht]
\tbl{Future telescopes for studying the early Universe}
{\begin{tabular}{@{}ccccc@{}} \toprule
Name & Type & Aperture (m) & Planned & References \\ \colrule
{\sf E-ELT} & Ground & 40 & 2020+ & [\refcite{evans2013}] \\
{\sf JWST} & Space & 6.5 & 2018+ & [\refcite{gardner2006}] \\
{\sf TMT} & Ground & 30 & 2018+ & [\refcite{nelson2008}]\\
{\sf GMT} & Ground & 24.5 & 2018+ & [\refcite{johns2012}] \\ \botrule
\end{tabular} \label{ta_telescopes}}
\end{table}
\section*{Acknowledgments}
I thank Alex Heger, Stan Woosley, Volker Bromm, Ann Almgren, Lars Bildsten, John Bell,
and Dan Kasen for many useful discussions. K.C. was supported by an IAU-Gruber
Fellowship, a Stanwood Johnston Fellowship, and a KITP Graduate Fellowship. All numerical
simulations were performed with allocations from the University of Minnesota Supercomputing
Institute and the National Energy Research Scientific Computing Center. This work has been
supported by the DOE grants; DE-SC0010676, DE-AC02-05CH11231, DE-GF02-87ER40328, DE-FC02-09ER41618 and by the NSF grants; AST-1109394, and PHY02-16783.
|
\section{Introduction}
Glass forming liquids have a very peculiar and rich phenomenology \cite{BBRMP}. Dynamical correlation
functions are characterized by a two-steps relaxation indicating that a finite fraction of degrees of freedom, {\it e.g.}
density fluctuations, takes a longer and longer time $\tau$ to relax. This time-scale actually grows very rapidly---more than
14 orders of magnitude in a rather restricted window of temperatures---and can be fitted by the Vogel-Fulcher-Tamman
law, hence suggesting a possible divergence at finite temperature. The slowing down of the dynamics is accompanied by the growing
of dynamical correlations, which can be measured by a four point susceptibility. This function
displays at time $\tau$ a peak, that grows decreasing the temperature and is related to the number of molecules
that have to move in a correlated way in order to make the liquid flow. \\
One of the most influential results obtained in the field of the glass transition was the discovery by Kirkpatrick, Thirumalai and
Wolynes \cite{RFOT} that some---apparently unrelated---fully connected Mean-Field (MF) disordered systems, like the Potts glass, display a phenomenology
very similar to the one described above. This set the stage for an approach to the glass transition problem that combined disordered systems,
Mode-Coupling and Adam-Gibbs theories and culminated in the development of the Random First Order Transition (RFOT) theory \cite{RFOTbook}.
Although structural liquids do not explicitly contain quenched disorder in the Hamiltonian, they are frustrated and characterized
by a very complicated rugged energy landscape. This is the key element they have in common with several disordered
systems and that is at the origin of the relationship cited above.
MF disordered systems divide in two classes: some have a phenomenology similar to glass-forming liquids,
others to spin-glasses.
The former are the ones for which, in replica language, the one step replica symmetry breaking (1RSB)
approximation is exact \cite{1RSB}. For these models the relaxation time is known to diverge at a finite temperature,
called $T_d$ \cite{pspin_dyn}. This transition was shown to be identical to the one predicted by the Mode Coupling theory of the glass transition \cite{BBRMP}.
Below $T_d$ ergodicity is broken. The phase space is fractured
into a number of states $\mathcal{N}$
that is exponential with the size $N$ of the system: $\mathcal{N}\propto e^{N\Sigma}$ ($\Sigma$ is called complexity or configurational entropy).
The system undergoes a thermodynamic phase transition \`a la Kauzmann
at a smaller temperature $T_K<T_d$, where the configurational entropy vanishes and hence number of states that dominate the Boltzmann measure becomes sub-exponential \cite{Cavagna}. The order parameter for this transition is the overlap $q$ measuring the similarity between two different replicas of the system (characterized by the same realization of the disorder). Its distribution, $P(q)$, shows a single peak at $q_{RS}$ for $T>T_K$ and two distinct peaks $q_0$ and $q_1$ for
$T<T_K$. The lowest value, $q_0$, corresponds to the two replicas being in configurations
belonging to two different amorphous states, whereas
the higher one, $q_1$, to configurations belonging to the same state.
There is however another class of MF disordered systems, the spin-glasses,
characterized by a quite different behavior.
They display a continuous transition and are solved by the Full Replica Symmetry Breaking (FRSB) Ansatz \cite{FRSB}.
Dynamical correlation functions do not show any two-step relaxation, the four point susceptibility is not peaked,
$P(q)$ has a continuous support below the transition and $T_K=T_d$.\\
In view of the forementioned analogy between structural glasses and MF 1RSB disordered models
and of its relevance for RFOT theory, the numerical results on finite dimensional counterpart of MF 1RSB
systems were deceiving. It was found that the usual fate of these systems, once studied on finite dimensional lattices,
is to display either a continuous spin glass transition or no transition at all!
For instance, the MF Potts glass \cite{Potts}, the model from which RFOT theory originated,
is characterized by a glass transition for any $p>4$,
where $p$ is the number of values that Potts variables can take,
but in three dimension it does not show any transition for $p=10$ \cite{Potts3D}.
The problem of the disappearing of the 1RSB phenomenology in finite dimension could be a signal
of the fragility of the 1RSB theory out of MF, and poses the question of the validity of RFOT
in $D=3$ as discussed in a series of paper by Moore and collaborators \cite{moore}.
In a recent work \cite{NO1RSBbethe} it was pointed out that the MF disordered models
studied so far are not frustrated enough and even simple local fluctuations are enough to change their physics
(see also \cite{eastwood02}).
This is well illustrated by their change of behaviour on Bethe lattices,
which provide a better mean-field like approximation than fully-connected models
since have finite connectivity and, hence, allow one to take into account the kind
of local fluctuations present in finite dimensions.
One should not conclude however that there are not models or results connecting MF theory to the behavior of
finite dimensional glass-forming liquids. Indeed, there are. Lattice glass models display the correct
phenomenological behavior and they belong to the 1RSB class when solved on a Bethe lattice \cite{LG1,LG2}.
A particular form of a disordered 5-spin model appears to behave correctly too \cite{5spin3D_KZ}.
Finally, hard spheres in the limit of infinite dimensions do display a 1RSB transition \cite{HS_highD}.
However, from the point of view of the quest of finding simple finite dimensional models displaying a glass transition,
all these systems suffer from one or more limitations: they are either too hard to simulate in finite dimensions or
they display a crystal phase that preempts the existence of the glass transition and deep super-cooling or they
do not have pair-wise interactions, which makes them difficult to be analyzed in finite dimension, in particular by real
space renormalization group methods. \\
The aim of this work is to introduce and study a model that short-circuits these problems and therefore offers a
new way to test RFOT theory and to answer questions on glassy physics. We call it the {\it Super-Potts model}.
It is similar to the modifications of the Potts glass introduced and studied in \cite{PermutationPotts,PermutationPotts2}, which display a continuous transition and not the discontinuous one that we are looking for.
Its degrees of freedom are variables that take $M$ values, as in the usual Potts model,
and its Hamiltonian reads:
\begin{equation*}
H(\{\mathbf{\sigma}\})=\sum_{(i,j)}\epsilon_{ij}(\sigma_i, \sigma_j)
\text{\hspace{1cm} with }
\end{equation*}
\begin{align}\label{Eq:H}
\epsilon_{ij}(\sigma_i, \sigma_j)=
\begin{cases}
E_0 &\text{ if } (\sigma_i, \sigma_j)=(\sigma_i^*, \sigma_j^*)\\
E_1 &\text{ otherwise}
\end{cases}
\end{align}
and
$(\sigma_i^*, \sigma_j^*)$ are randomly drawn among the $M\times M$ possible couples $(\sigma_i,\sigma_j)$
(independently for any couple of neighbors $(i,j)$).
For simplicity we will take $E_0=0$.
We believe that singling out one random couple of variables per link makes the
model more frustrated than the usual Potts glass \cite{Potts} and the random-permutation versions of Ref. \cite{PermutationPotts,PermutationPotts2}.
This is manifest in dimension $D=1$. For these models, after having chosen the value of the first Potts variable,
one can easily find sequentially the configuration of the next variable that minimizes the energy, because for each value
of one variable, there exists a value of the neighboring one that can minimize the energy of the link.
For the Super-Potts glass, instead, there is only one particular configuration of both variables
that minimizes the energy of the link, and not all the links can be satisfied simultaneously even in $D=1$.
The Super-Potts glass can easily be generalized to more complicated choices of the link-energy, {\it e.g.}
$\epsilon_{ij}(\sigma_i, \sigma_j)$ randomly drawn from a Gaussian distribution.
In this way, in the limit $M\rightarrow\infty$ one ends up with a random energy model on each link \cite{REM,FPR}.
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|c|}
\hline
$M$ & $\beta_{RS}$ & $\beta_d$ & $\beta_k$ & $q_1(\beta_d)-q_0(\beta_d)$\\ \hline
4 & 2.0841(9) & 2.07(3) & 2.07(3) & 0 \\ \hline
10 & 1.9658(6) & 1.949(12) & 1.949(12) & 0\\ \hline
20 & 2.306(1) & 2.215(4) & 2.229(1) & 0.2623(1)\\ \hline
50 & 3.255(6) & 2.589(7) & 2.665(3) & 0.5772(7)\\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{\label{Tab:Tc} $\beta_{RS}$, $\beta_d$, $\beta_k$ and the difference $q_1-q_0$ at the dynamical transition
for different values of $M$
for the fully connected MF version of the Super-Potts model.}
\end{table}
We first present the analytical solution of the fully connected MF Super-Potts glass.
The corresponding Hamiltonian is the one in eq. (\ref{Eq:H}) with the sum over all the pairs of Potts variables and the energy
that scales as $E_1=\frac{e_1}{\sqrt{N}}$, with $e_1=O(1)$ for finite $M$ and $N$ being the total number of Potts variables.
We sketch briefly the main steps of the computation and the results,
more details can be found in the supplementary material.
The replica method allows one to compute the average free energy $f=\overline{f_{\epsilon}}$,
where the bar indicates the average over the disorder,
in terms of the partition function of $n$ replicas:
\begin{equation}
e^{-\beta Nnf}=\lim_{n\rightarrow0}\overline{Z^n}=
\lim_{n\rightarrow0}\overline{\sum_{\{\boldsymbol{\sigma}\}}\prod_{i,j} e^{-\beta \sum_{a=1}^n \epsilon_{ij}(\sigma_i^a\sigma_j^a)}}.
\end{equation}
Repeating standard procedures \cite{Cavagna}, {\it i.e.} computing the average over the disorder, expanding the exponential for large $N$
and introducing Gaussian integrals over an auxiliary matrix $Q_{ab}$, we obtain:
\begin{equation}
\overline{Z^n}\propto\sum_{\{\boldsymbol{\sigma}\}}\int\prod_{a<b}dQ_{ab}e^{-NA(\mathbf{Q},{\{\boldsymbol{\sigma}\}})}\propto\int d\mathbf{Q} e^{-NS(\mathbf{Q})}
\label{Eq:Zn}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\text{with\hspace{0.2cm}}A(\mathbf{Q},{\{\boldsymbol{\sigma}\}})=C\sum_{a<b}Q_{ab}^2-\frac{1}{N}\sum_{a<b}2C\sum_{i=1}^N\delta_{\sigma_i^a\sigma_i^b}Q_{ab}
\label{Eq:A(Q)}
\end{equation}
where we defined $C=(\frac{\beta e_1}{M})^2$.
We have chosen $e_1=M$ in order to reabsorb the scaling with $M$ of the critical temperature. The integral over $\mathbf{Q}$
is performed by the saddle-point method. The saddle point value of $Q_{ab}$, defined by the equation
$\frac{dA(\mathbf{Q},{\{\boldsymbol{\sigma}\}})}{d\mathbf{Q}}=0$, corresponds to the average value
of the overlap $\frac{1}{N}\sum_i\delta_{\sigma_i^a\sigma_i^b}$. By using the replica symmetric (RS) Ansatz, we
restrict the possible forms of $Q_{ab}$ to $Q_{ab}=q_{RS}$. Within this assumption the saddle-point equation
simplifies to:
$$q_{RS}=\int \prod_{\tau=1}^M\frac{dh_{\tau}}{\sqrt{4\pi}}e^{-\frac{h_{\tau}^2}{4}}
\frac{\sum_{\tau=1}^Me^{2\sqrt{Cq_{RS}}h_{\tau}}}{(\sum_{\tau=1}^Me^{\sqrt{Cq_{RS}}h_{\tau}})^2}.$$
Here and in the following, we shall solve these kinds of $M$-dimensional integrals by the Monte Carlo method.
Note that even when the RS solution is the correct, stable one, $q_{RS}$ is different from zero.
In order to analyze whether the RS solution is the correct one, we have also studied its local stability by diagonalizing the Hessian of the action:
$G_{ab,cd}=\left.\frac{d^2 S(Q_{ab})}{dQ_{ab}dQ_{cd}}\right|_{Q_{ab}=q_{RS}}$ \cite{dAT}.
One eigenvalue is always larger than 0, while the other one becomes negative at $T_{RS}(M)$,
indicating that the RS solution becomes unstable at low temperature. The values of $T_{RS}(M)$ are listed in Table \ref{Tab:Tc} for $M=4,10,20,50$.
Below $T_{RS}(M)$ one necessarily has to look for a RSB solution.
The next step is therefore to assume a 1RSB Ansatz \cite{1RSB} for the matrix $Q_{ab}$,
which is parametrized by three parameters $q_0$, $q_1$, $0\leq m\leq 1$.
We are interested in finding $T_d$, $T_K$ and deciding whether the transition is continuous or discontinuous;
all this information can be obtained in the limit $m\rightarrow1$ \cite{Compl_Monasson}.
In this case $q_0=q_{RS}$ and the saddle point equation on $q_1$ reads:
\begin{align*}
q_1&=\int\prod_{\tau=1}^M\frac{d\eta_{\tau}}{\sqrt{4\pi}}
\frac{e^{-\frac{\eta_{\tau}^2}{4}}}{\sum_{\tau=1}^Me^{C(q_1-q_{RS})+\sqrt{Cq_{RS}}\eta_{\tau}}}\times\\
&\times\int \prod_{\tau'=1}^M\frac{dh_{\tau'}}{\sqrt{4\pi}}e^{-\frac{h_{\tau'}^2}{4}}
\frac{\sum_{\tau'=1}^Me^{2(\sqrt{C(q_1-q_{RS})}h_{\tau'}+\sqrt{Cq_{RS}}\eta_{\tau})}}{\sum_{\tau'=1}^Me^{\sqrt{C(q_1-q_{RS})}h_{\tau'}+\sqrt{Cq_{RS}}\eta_{\tau}}}.
\end{align*}
Note that $q_1=q_{RS}$ is always a solution. As usual, we locate $T_d$ as the highest temperature at which one finds a solution $q_1\neq q_0$
and $T_K$ as the temperature at which the configurational entropy vanishes \cite{footnote}.
We found that for large values of $M$ ($M=20,50$) $q_1$ emerges discontinuously from $q_0$,
and $T_K(M)<T_d(M)$, signaling that the transition is 1-RSB, {\it i.e.} glass transition-like.
For smaller $M$ ($M=4,10$) instead, $q_1$ emerges continuously from $q_0$ and $T_K(M)=T_d(M)$,
meaning that the transition becomes continuous and similar to the one of MF spin-glasses in
a field, {\it i.e.} of FRSB type.
The difference between $q_0$ and $q_1$ at $T_d$ grows for larger $M$ indicating that increasing $M$ indeed favors
structural glass-like behavior.
The values of $T_d(M)$, $T_K(M)$ and $q_1-q_0$ at $T_d$ are listed in Table \ref{Tab:Tc}.
In agreement with the previous results, for $M=4$ and $M=10$,
the critical temperatures are compatible within the error with $T_{RS}$ \cite{footnote2}.
As discussed previously, three dimensional glass models may behave quite differently from their
MF counterparts. It is therefore crucial to check that the Super-Potts glass still behaves
like a glass beyond MF. To this aim, we performed Monte Carlo (MC) numerical simulations of the model on
a cubic lattice. We use the parallel tempering algorithm \cite{paralleltemp}
to thermalize the system at low temperatures, running it simultaneously at 30 different
temperatures. Four replicas have been simulated in parallel,
letting them evolve independently
with the same realization of disorder.
We measure the overlap $q$ between two of them, replicas $a,b$, as
$q_{ab}=\frac{1}{N}\sum_{i=1}^N\delta_{\sigma_i^a, \sigma_i^b}.$
We check the equilibration dividing the first measurements into bins with a
logarithmically growing size, and we assume that the
system has reached the equilibrium when the probability distribution of the overlap $P(q)$
between the first two replicas is equal to $P(q)$ of the second two replicas
inside the last bin, and with respect to the precedent bin (practically we check the first four moments of $q$).
Equilibration time is of the order of $10^8$ MC steps for systems with $M=30$ and size $L=8$.
Once the system is thermalized, we run standard MC simulations
to measure dynamical correlation functions.
Disorder averages were performed over 30 samples, while thermal ones over 100 trajectories.
\begin{figure}[t]
\includegraphics[width=0.9\columnwidth]{corr8M30inset}
\caption{Two-time correlation function for systems with $M=30$ and $L=8$
(main panel, inverse temperature $\beta$ equally spaced in $[0.28,0.85]$, from left to right) and
with $L=12$ $M=4$ (inset, $\beta$ equally spaced in $[0.76,1.09]$, from left to right).
}
\label{Fig:corr}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[t]
\includegraphics[width=0.9\columnwidth]{chi8M30inset}
\caption{Four point susceptibility for a system with
$L=8$ $M=30$ (main panel) and with $L=12$ $M=4$ (inset). Temperatures as in Fig. \ref{Fig:corr}.}
\label{Fig:chi4}
\end{figure}
The behavior of the two times correlation (brackets indicate thermal average):
$$C(t)=\frac{1}{N}\overline{\sum_i\<\sigma_i(0)\sigma_i(t)\>}$$
is shown in Fig. \ref{Fig:corr} for $M=30$ \cite{footnote3}. By lowering the temperature the
two-steps relaxation characteristic of glass-forming liquids emerges
(For $M=30$ the true plateau, corresponding in the peak of the susceptibility,
is preceded by a first plateau that saturates at low enough temperature).
Note that the asymptotic value of $C(t)$, $C(\infty)\equiv q_0$, is non zero since
the Super-Potts glass, as many other disordered models introduced previously \cite{Potts, PermutationPotts, PermutationPotts2},
has no symmetry precluding $q_0$ from being different from zero (in consequence the two steps relaxation emerges on top of $q_0$)
\cite{BinderKobbook}. The value of $q_0$ grows lowering the temperature,
as found also in the MF model, starting from $q_0=1/M$ at $T=\infty$.
For small values of $M$, instead,
one finds a relaxation similar to the one of spin-glasses in a field, as shown in the inset
for $M=4$. In Fig. \ref{Fig:chi4} we show that the evolution of the four point susceptibility $\chi_4(t)$, defined as
$$
\frac{1}{N}\sum_{i,j}\((\overline{\<\sigma_i(0)\sigma_i(t)\sigma_j(0)\sigma_j(t)\>-\<\sigma_i(0)\sigma_i(t)\>\<\sigma_j(0)\sigma_j(t)\>}\)),
$$
confirms this trend: $\chi_4(t)$ is peaked, its maximum takes place at the time at which the correlation escape from the plateau
and grows when lowering the temperature as it happens for super-cooled liquids. This behavior, present for $M=30$,
is markedly different from the one shown in the inset for $M=4$.
For $M$s in between the two presented values
the system actually seems to show a mixed behaviour, for instance $\chi_4(t)$
shows a peak but also a growing plateau.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.35\textwidth]{Pq10M20}
\caption{$P(q)$ for a system with $L=10$ $M=20$. $\beta$ equally spaced in $[0.55, 1.3]$ (from left to right).}
\label{Fig:L10M20}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
We also studied the overlap distribution $P(q)$.
Although of course one would need much larger sizes to provide convincing evidences of a phase transition,
our results shown in Fig. \ref{Fig:L10M20} suggest that if there is a transition then it should
be discontinuous already for $M=20$, since a second peak seems to appear discontinuously
at small temperatures as if a 1RSB transition were indeed taking place.
Overall our numerical results indicate that at large
$M$ ($M\gtrsim 20$) the Super-Potts glass behaves similarly to glass-forming liquids whereas for smaller $M$s
analogously to a spin-glass in a field, in agreement with the MF treatment presented before.
In conclusion we introduced a new model, the Super-Potts glass, and showed
that is the first long-sought example of glassy disordered system with
pair-wise interactions, solved by a 1RSB Ansatz at the MF level, and which has in three dimensions
a phenomenological behaviour strongly reminiscent of glass-forming liquids.
In particular it shows stretching (non-exponential behaviour) and two steps relaxation for the correlation function,
a time for the relaxation from the plateau that seems to diverge at finite temperature, a growing peak in the
four point correlation function and a discontinuous peak appearing in the $P(q)$.
The glassy behaviour is only found for sufficiently high numbers $M$ of values that the Potts variables can take.
This is reasonable if we think to a real-world structural glass, where the degrees of freedom, i.e.
the position of particles, can take infinite values.
Compared to previous models for which the glassy behaviour does not survive in finite dimensions,
the Super-Potts glass is more frustrated and this enhances its stability. Indeed, we computed
the so called surface energy cost, $Y$, to disrupt amorphous order as done in \cite{NO1RSBbethe}
and found a value of $Y/T_K$ which is an order of magnitude higher than in previous models for large values of $M$,
e.g. $M=50$.
There are several extensions of our work worth pursuing further. First, it would be interesting to
clarify how the transition between the glass-like to the spin-glass like behaviour induced
by decreasing the value of $M$ takes place, both in mean-field and in finite dimensions.
A possible scenario, inspired by the behaviour of the 2+4 spin MF model,
is the following \cite{1FRSB}: Whereas at small $M$ there is a pure FRSB phase and at large $M$ a pure 1RSB phase,
at intermediate $M$, by decreasing the temperature, there is first a RS to FRSB transition,
and then, lowering the temperature further, there is a transition to a 1+FRSB
in which $P(q)$ has a continuous part but also develops a discontinuous
peak. This is consistent with the fact that for intermediate values of M the correlation function and
the four point susceptibility show mixed features characteristic both of the 1RSB and FRSB phases.
Another research direction for future studies is solving exactly the Super-Potts model on Bethe lattices.
This would provide a good approximation to the 3D case since, as we found in numerical simulations,
the behaviour on cubic and Bethe lattices with connectivity $C=6$ is qualitatively and also quantitatively
similar. The exact solution of models on the Bethe lattices can be obtained via the cavity method which
in the case of the Super-Potts glass, however, is particularly challenging \cite{footnote4}.
It could be also interesting to apply the trick used in Ref. \cite{PermutationPotts} to obtained
a modified version of the model that could have a symmetric $P(q)$, allowing an easier thermalization and
more extensive numerical simulations.
Finally, another interesting route to follow in order to clarify the behaviour of the 3D model is performing
a renormalization group analysis. Since the model has pair-wise interactions, this can be naturally done
by the Migdal-Kadanoff approximation.
\begin{acknowledgments}
We acknowledge support from the ERC grants NPRGGLASS. We thank F. Caltagirone, U. Ferrari, M. Moore, M. Muller,
F. Ricci-Tersenghi and M. Tarzia, for useful discussions.
\end{acknowledgments}
|
\section{ Introduction}
In recent years, the Camassa-Holm (CH) equation \cite{CH}
\begin{eqnarray}
m_t-\alpha u_x+2m u_x+m_xu=0, \quad m=u-u_{xx},
\label{bCH}
\end{eqnarray}
has attracted much attention in the theory of integrable systems and solitons.
Since the work of Camassa and Holm \cite{CH}, various studies on this equation have remarkably been developed \cite{OR}-\cite{JR}. The most remarkable feature of the CH equation (\ref{bCH}) is that it admits peaked
soliton (peakon) solutions in the case of $\alpha=0$ \cite{CH,CH2}. A peakon is a weak
solution in some Sobolev space with corner at its crest.
The stability and interaction of peakons were discussed in several references \cite{CS1}-\cite{JR}.
In addition to the CH equation being an integrable model with peakon solutions,
other integrable peakon models have been found, including the Degasperis-Procesi (DP) equation \cite{DP1} whose
Lax pair, bi-Hamiltonian formulation and peakon solutions were discovered in \cite{DP2,DP3},
the cubic nonlinear peakon equations \cite{Q1,NV1,HW1},
and a generalized CH equation (gCH) with both quadratic and cubic nonlinearity \cite{QXL}
\begin{eqnarray}
m_t=\frac{1}{2}k_1\left[ m(u^2-u^2_x)\right]_x+\frac{1}{2}k_2(2 m u_x+ m_xu), \quad m=u-u_{xx},\label{gCH}
\end{eqnarray}
where $k_1$ and $k_2$ are two arbitrary constants.
Through some appropriate rescaling, equation (\ref{gCH}) could be transformed to the one in the papers of Fokas and Fuchssteiner \cite{Fo,Fu}, where it was derived from the motion of a two-dimensional, inviscid,
incompressible fluid over a flat bottom.
In \cite{QXL}, the Lax pair, bi-Hamiltonian structure, peakons, weak kinks, kink-peakon interactional and smooth soliton solutions of equation (\ref{gCH}) are presented.
It is an interesting task to study the (2+1)-dimensional generalizations of the peakon equations. For example, in \cite{EP,EP2} the authors provided
a (2+1)-dimensional extension of the CH hierarchy, and they further studied the hodograph transformations and peakon solutions for their (2+1)-dimensional CH equation. In the present letter, we generalize the gCH equation (\ref{gCH}) to the whole integrable hierarchies in (1+1) and (2+1)-dimensions. We show that the gCH hierarchies admit Lax representations and construct a relation between the gCH hierarchies in (1+1) and (2+1)-dimensions. Moreover, we derive the single-peakon solution and the multi-peakon dynamic system for the (2+1)-dimensional gCH equation.
The letter is organized as follows. In section 2, we review the CH hierarchies in (1+1) and (2+1)-dimensions. In section 3, we present the gCH hierarchies in (1+1) and (2+1)-dimensions. In particular, we give their Lax representations. In section 4, we derive the peakon solutions to the $(2+1)$-dimensional gCH equation. Some conclusions and discussions are drawn in section 5.
\section{Overviews
In this section, we review the (1+1) and (2+1)-dimensional CH hierarchies presented in \cite{Q3,EP,EP2}.
The new results we find are a relation between the CH hierarchies in (1+1) and (2+1)-dimensions and an isospectral Lax representations for the CH hierarchies.
\subsection{The CH hierarchies in (1+1) and (2+1)-dimensions}
Let us consider the Lenard operators pair \cite{CH}
\begin{eqnarray}
J=\partial_x m+m\partial_x, \quad K=\frac{1}{2}(\partial^3_x-\partial_x).
\end{eqnarray}
The Lenard gradients $b_{-k}$ are defined recursively by
\begin{eqnarray}
Kb_{-k}=Jb_{-k+1}, \quad Kb_0=0, \quad k\in\mathbb{Z^{+}}.
\end{eqnarray}
Taking an initial value $b_0=-\frac{1}{2}$, one may generate the negative CH hierarchy \cite{Q3}
\begin{eqnarray}
\left\{\begin{array}{l}
m_{t_{-n}}=Jb_{-n},\\
Kb_{-j}=Jb_{-j+1},
\end{array}\right. \quad 1\leq j\leq n.
\label{CHH}
\end{eqnarray}
For $n=1$, (\ref{CHH}) becomes
\begin{eqnarray}
\left\{\begin{array}{l}
m_{t_{-1}}=(mb_{-1})_x+mb_{-1,x},\\
\frac{1}{2}(b_{-1,xxx}-b_{-1,x})=-\frac{1}{2}m_{x},
\end{array}\right.
\label{CHH1}
\end{eqnarray}
which is nothing but the CH equation (\ref{bCH}) with $\alpha=0$ \cite{CH}.
For $n=2$, we arrive at
\begin{eqnarray}
\left\{\begin{array}{l}
m_{t_{-2}}=(mb_{-2})_x+mb_{-2,x},\\
\frac{1}{2}(b_{-2,xxx}-b_{-2,x})=(mb_{-1})_x+mb_{-1,x},
\\
\frac{1}{2}(b_{-1,xxx}-b_{-1,x})=-\frac{1}{2}m_{x}.
\end{array}\right.
\label{CHH2}
\end{eqnarray}
In what follows, we call equation (\ref{CHH2}) the $2$-nd CH equation.
For the general $n$, we refer to (\ref{CHH}) as the $n$-th CH equation.
In \cite{EP,EP2}, the authors proposed a (2+1)-dimensional CH equation
\begin{eqnarray}
\left\{\begin{array}{l}
m_{t}=(mb_{-2})_x+mb_{-2,x},\\
\frac{1}{2}(b_{-2,xxx}-b_{-2,x})=m_y.
\end{array}\right.
\label{CH3d}
\end{eqnarray}
In general, a $(2+1)$-dimensional generalization of the CH hierarchy could be written as \cite{EP,EP2}
\begin{eqnarray}
\left\{\begin{array}{l}
m_{t_{-n}}=Jb_{-n},\\
Kb_{-j}=Jb_{-j+1},
\\
Kb_{-2}=m_y,
\end{array}\right. \quad 3\leq j\leq n.
\label{CHH3d}
\end{eqnarray}
In \cite{EP,EP2}, the authors also studied the hodograph transformations and the peakon solutions of the (2+1)-dimensional CH equation.
\subsection{Lax representation}
Let
\begin{eqnarray}
U=\left( \begin{array}{cc} 0 & 1\\
\frac{1}{4}+\lambda m & 0 \\ \end{array} \right),
\quad
V^{(-n)}=-\frac{1}{2}U+\sum_{i+j=n, ~0\leq i\leq n-1, ~1\leq j\leq n}\lambda^{-i}\tilde{V}^{(-j)},
\label{LP}
\end{eqnarray}
where
\begin{eqnarray}
\tilde{V}^{(-j)}=\left( \begin{array}{cc} -\frac{1}{2}b_{-j,x} & b_{-j}+\frac{1}{2}-\frac{1}{2\lambda} \\
m(b_{-j}+\frac{1}{2})\lambda-\frac{1}{2}b_{-j,xx}+\frac{1}{4}(b_{-j}+\frac{1}{2})-\frac{1}{2}m-\frac{1}{8\lambda}& \frac{1}{2}b_{-j,x} \\ \end{array} \right),
\label{Vj}
\end{eqnarray}
$\lambda$ is the eigenparameter and $b_j$ is defined through equation (4).
By a direct calculation, we obtain the following result.
\begin{proposition}
The n-th CH equation (\ref{CHH}) admits the Lax representation
\begin{eqnarray}
U_{t_{-n}}-V_{x}^{(-n)}+[U,V^{(-n)}]=0,
\label{cc}
\end{eqnarray}
where the Lax pair $U$ and $V^{(-n)}$ given by (\ref{LP}).
\end{proposition}
As $n=1$, we recover the Lax pair of the well-known CH equation (\ref{bCH}) with $\alpha=0$ \cite{CH}
\begin{eqnarray}
\begin{array}{l}
U=\left( \begin{array}{cc} 0 & 1\\
\frac{1}{4}+\lambda m & 0 \\ \end{array} \right),
\quad
V^{(-1)}=\left( \begin{array}{cc} -\frac{1}{2}b_{-1,x} & b_{-1}-\frac{1}{2\lambda} \\
mb_{-1}\lambda-\frac{1}{2}b_{-1,xx}+\frac{1}{4}b_{-1}-\frac{1}{2}m-\frac{1}{8\lambda} & \frac{1}{2}b_{-1,x} \\ \end{array} \right).
\end{array}
\label{LPCH1}
\end{eqnarray}
As $n=2$, we obtain the Lax pair of the $2$-nd CH equation (\ref{CHH2})
\begin{eqnarray}
\begin{split}
U=&\left( \begin{array}{cc} 0 & 1\\
\frac{1}{4}+\lambda m & 0 \\ \end{array} \right),
\\
V^{(-2)}=&\left( \begin{array}{cc} -\frac{1}{2}b_{-2,x} & b_{-2}-\frac{1}{2\lambda} \\
mb_{-2}\lambda-\frac{1}{2}b_{-2,xx}+\frac{1}{4}b_{-2}-\frac{1}{2}m-\frac{1}{8\lambda} & \frac{1}{2}b_{-2,x} \\ \end{array} \right)
\\
&+\frac{1}{\lambda}\left( \begin{array}{cc} -\frac{1}{2}b_{-1,x} & b_{-1}+\frac{1}{2}-\frac{1}{2\lambda} \\
m(b_{-1}+\frac{1}{2})\lambda-\frac{1}{2}b_{-1,xx}+\frac{1}{4}(b_{-1}+\frac{1}{2})-\frac{1}{2}m-\frac{1}{8\lambda} & \frac{1}{2}b_{-1,x} \\ \end{array} \right).
\end{split}
\label{LPCH2}
\end{eqnarray}
It has been known that there exist some relations between integrable models in (1+1)-dimensions and ones in (2+1)-dimensions. For example, assembling of the first two 1+1 dimensional non-trivial members in the AKNS hierarchy: the coupled nonlinear Schr\"{o}dinger equation and the coupled mKdV equation, yields the well-known (2+1)-dimensional KP equation \cite{KSS}-\cite{Cao1}. The compatible solution of the first two members in the KdV hierarchy produces a special solution of the (2+1)-dimensional Sawada-Kotera equation \cite{Cao2}-\cite{SK}.
Here in our paper, we have some similar results listed as follows.
\begin{proposition} Let $t_{-1}=y$, $t_{-2}=t$. Let $m(x,y,t)$ be a compatible solution of the CH equation (\ref{CHH1}) and the 2-nd CH equation (\ref{CHH2}). Then $m(x,y,t)$ provides a special solution to (2+1)-dimensional CH equation (\ref{CH3d}).
In general, if $m(x,t_{-1},t_{-n})$ is a compatible solution of the CH equation (\ref{CHH1}) and the $n$-th CH equation (\ref{CHH}), then the (2+1)-dimensional CH hierarchy (\ref{CHH3d}) has a special solution $m(x,t_{-1},t_{-n})$.
\end{proposition}
The above proposition immediately yields the following corollary
\begin{corollary} The (2+1)-dimensional CH equation (\ref{CH3d}) possesses a Lax triad $U$, $V^{(-1)}$, $V^{(-2)}$.
In general, the (2+1)-dimensional CH hierarchy (\ref{CHH3d}) possesses a Lax triad $U$, $V^{(-1)}$, $V^{(-n)}$.
\end{corollary}
{\bf Remark 1.}
Based on proposition 2, we may construct the algebraic-geometric solution of the (2+1)-dimensional CH hierarchy with the method developed in \cite{Cao1,Cao2,Q3}. We will consider this topic in another publication.
\section{The gCH hierarchies in (1+1) and (2+1)-dimensions}
Let us first introduce a pair of Lenard operators \cite{QXL}
\begin{eqnarray}
J=k_1\partial_{x} m\partial_{x}^{-1}m\partial_{x}+\frac{1}{2}k_2(\partial_x m+m\partial_x), \quad K=\partial_x-\partial^3_x,
\label{gJK}
\end{eqnarray}
and define the Lenard gradients $b_{-k}$ recursively by
\begin{eqnarray}
Kb_{-k}=Jb_{-k+1}, \quad Kb_0=0, \quad k\in\mathbb{Z^{+}}.
\label{gLG}
\end{eqnarray}
We define a gCH hierarchy in (1+1)-dimension as follows
\begin{eqnarray}
\left\{\begin{array}{l}
m_{t_{-n}}=Jb_{-n},\\
Kb_{-j}=Jb_{-j+1},\\
Kb_{-1}=m_{x},
\end{array}\right. \quad 2\leq j\leq n.
\label{gCHH}
\end{eqnarray}
The first member in (\ref{gCHH}) reads as
\begin{eqnarray}
\left\{\begin{array}{l}
m_{t_{-1}}=\frac{1}{2}k_1\left[m(b_{-1}^2-b_{-1,x}^2)\right]_x+\frac{1}{2}k_2(2m b_{-1,x}+m_xb_{-1}),\\
m=b_{-1}-b_{-1,xx},
\end{array}\right.
\label{gCHH1}
\end{eqnarray}
which is nothing but the gCH equation (\ref{gCH}).
For $n=2$, equation (\ref{gCHH}) is cast into the $2$-nd gCH equation in the gCH hierarchy (17)
\begin{eqnarray}
\left\{\begin{array}{l}
m_{t_{-2}}=k_1\left[m\partial^{-1}_{x}mb_{-2,x}\right]_x+\frac{1}{2}k_2(2m b_{-2,x}+m_xb_{-2}),\\
b_{-2,x}-b_{-2,xxx}=\frac{1}{2}k_1\left[m(b_{-1}^2-b_{-1,x}^2)\right]_x+\frac{1}{2}k_2(2m b_{-1,x}+m_xb_{-1}),
\\
m=b_{-1}-b_{-1,xx}.
\end{array}\right.
\label{gCHH2}
\end{eqnarray}
For the general case $n\geq 2$, we refer to (\ref{gCHH}) as the $n$-th gCH equation.
Similar to the (2+1)-dimensional generalization of the CH equation, we extend the (1+1)-dimensional gCH equation (2) to the (2+1)-dimensional system as follows:
\begin{eqnarray}
\left\{\begin{array}{l}
m_{t}=k_1\left[m\partial^{-1}_{x}mb_{-2,x}\right]_x+\frac{1}{2}k_2(2m b_{-2,x}+m_xb_{-2}),\\
m_y=b_{-2,x}-b_{-2,xxx}.
\end{array}\right.
\label{gCH3d}
\end{eqnarray}
Furthermore, we may define the (2+1)-dimensional gCH hierarchy in the following form:
\begin{eqnarray}
\left\{\begin{array}{l}
m_{t_{-n}}=Jb_{-n},\\
Kb_{-j}=Jb_{-j+1},
\\
m_y=Kb_{-2},
\end{array}\right. \quad 3\leq j\leq n.
\label{gCHH3d}
\end{eqnarray}
In particular, as $k_1=0$ and $k_2=2$, our (2+1)-dimensional gCH hierarchy (\ref{gCHH3d}) is reduced to the (2+1)-dimensional CH hierarchy (\ref{CHH3d}).
Let us now show that the gCH hierarchies admit Lax representations.
Let
\begin{eqnarray}
U=\frac{1}{2}\left( \begin{array}{cc} -1 & \lambda m\\
-k_1\lambda m-k_2\lambda & 1 \\ \end{array} \right),
\quad
V^{(-n)}=U+\sum_{0\leq j\leq n-1}\lambda^{-2j}\tilde{V}^{-(n-j)},
\label{gLP}
\end{eqnarray}
where
\begin{eqnarray}
\tilde{V}^{(-j)}=-\frac{1}{2}\left( \begin{array}{cc} A &
B \\
C &
-A \\ \end{array} \right),
\label{gVj}
\end{eqnarray}
with
\begin{eqnarray}
\begin{split}
A&=\lambda^{-2}+k_1\partial^{-1}mb_{-j,x}+\frac{1}{2}k_2(b_{-j}-b_{-j,x})-1,
\\
B&=-\lambda^{-1}(m-b_{-j,x}+b_{-j,xx})+\lambda m(-k_1\partial^{-1}mb_{-j,x}-\frac{1}{2}k_2b_{-j}+1),
\\
C&=\lambda^{-1}[k_1(m+b_{-j,xx}+b_{-j,x})+k_2]-\lambda (k_1m+k_2)(-k_1\partial^{-1}mb_{-j,x}-\frac{1}{2}k_2b_{-j}+1).
\end{split}
\label{gVjc}
\end{eqnarray}
Direct calculations lead to the following proposition
\begin{proposition}
The gCH hierarchy (\ref{gCHH}) possesses the Lax representation
\begin{eqnarray*}
U_{t_{-n}}-V_{x}^{(-n)}+[U,V^{(-n)}]=0,
\label{gcc}
\end{eqnarray*}
with the Lax pair $U$ and $V^{(-n)}$ given by (\ref{gLP}).
\end{proposition}
In particular, the Lax pair of the gCH equation (\ref{gCHH1}) are given by
\begin{eqnarray}
\begin{array}{l}
U=\frac{1}{2}\left( \begin{array}{cc} -1 & \lambda m\\
-k_1\lambda m-k_2\lambda & 1 \\ \end{array} \right),
\quad
V^{(-1)}=\left( \begin{array}{cc} A_1 & B_1 \\
C_1 & -A_1 \\ \end{array} \right),
\end{array}
\label{LPgCH1}
\end{eqnarray}
with
\begin{eqnarray}
\begin{split}
A_1&=\lambda^{-2}+\frac{1}{2}k_1(b_{-1}^2-b_{-1,x}^2)+\frac{1}{2}k_2( b_{-1}-b_{-1,x}),
\\
B_1&=-\lambda^{-1}(b_{-1}-b_{-1,x})-\frac{1}{2}\lambda m\left[ k_1(b_{-1}^2-b_{-1,x}^2)+k_2 b_{-1}\right],
\\
C_1&= \lambda^{-1}[k_1(b_{-1}+b_{-1,x})+k_2]+\frac{1}{2}\lambda \left[k_1^2m(b_{-1}^2-b_{-1,x}^2)+k_1k_2(m b_{-1}+b_{-1}^2-b_{-1,x}^2)+k_2^2b_{-1}\right].
\end{split}
\label{gVjc1}
\end{eqnarray}
The Lax pair of the $2$-nd gCH equation (\ref{gCHH2}) are given by
\begin{eqnarray}
\begin{array}{l}
U=\frac{1}{2}\left( \begin{array}{cc} -1 & \lambda m\\
-k_1\lambda m-k_2\lambda & 1 \\ \end{array} \right),
\quad
V^{(-2)}=U+\tilde{V}^{(-2)}+\lambda^{-2}\tilde{V}^{(-1)},
\end{array}
\label{LPgCH2}
\end{eqnarray}
where $\tilde{V}^{(-1)}$ and $\tilde{V}^{(-2)}$ are defined by (\ref{gVj}) and (\ref{gVjc}).
One may easily check the following results.
\begin{proposition} Let $t_{-1}=y$, $t_{-2}=t$. Let $m(x,y,t)$ be a compatible solution of the gCH equation (\ref{gCHH1}) and the $2$-nd gCH equation (\ref{gCHH2}). Then $m(x,y,t)$ provides a special solution to (2+1)-dimensional gCH equation (\ref{gCH3d}).
In general, if $m(x,t_{-1},t_{-n})$ is a compatible solution of the gCH equation (\ref{gCHH1}) and the $n$-th gCH equation (\ref{gCHH}), then the (2+1)-dimensional gCH hierarchy (\ref{gCHH3d}) has a special solution $m(x,t_{-1},t_{-n})$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{corollary} The (2+1)-dimensional gCH equation (\ref{gCH3d}) possesses the Lax triad $U$, $V^{(-1)}$, $V^{(-2)}$ given by (\ref{LPgCH1}) and (\ref{LPgCH2}) .
In general, the (2+1)-dimensional gCH hierarchy (\ref{gCHH3d}) possesses the Lax triad $U$, $V^{(-1)}$, $V^{(-n)}$ given by (\ref{gLP}).
\end{corollary}
\section{Peakon solutions to the 2dgCH equation (\ref{gCH3d})}
Assume the single-peakon solution of (2+1)-dimensional gCH equation (\ref{gCH3d}) is given in the form of
\begin{eqnarray}
b_{-2}=p(y,t)e^{-\mid x-q(y,t)\mid}, \quad m=2r(y,t)\delta(x-q(y,t)), \label{ocp}
\end{eqnarray}
where $p(y,t)$, $q(y,t)$ and $r(y,t)$ are to be determined.
Substituting (\ref{ocp}) into (\ref{gCH3d}) and integrating against the test function with support around the peak, we finally arrive at
\begin{eqnarray}
\left\{\begin{array}{l}
r_{y}=r_{t}=0,\\
q_{y}=-\frac{p}{r},\\
q_{t}=-\frac{1}{3}k_1rp-\frac{1}{2}k_2p,
\end{array}\right. \label{socp1}
\end{eqnarray}
which yields
\begin{eqnarray}
\left\{\begin{array}{l}
r=c,\\
q=F(y+(\frac{1}{3}k_1c^2+\frac{1}{2}k_2c)t),\\
p=-cq_y,
\end{array}\right. \label{socp2}
\end{eqnarray}
where $c$ is an arbitrary constant, $F$ is an arbitrary smooth function. Thus, the single-peakon solution of equation (\ref{gCH3d}) is given by
\begin{eqnarray}
\begin{array}{l}
b_{-2}=-cF_y\left(y+(\frac{1}{3}k_1c^2+\frac{1}{2}k_2c)t\right)e^{-\mid x-F\left(y+(\frac{1}{3}k_1c^2+\frac{1}{2}k_2c)t\right)\mid},
\\
m=2c\delta\left(x-F\left(y+(\frac{1}{3}k_1c^2+\frac{1}{2}k_2c)t\right)\right).
\end{array}
\label{ocps}
\end{eqnarray}
As $k_1=0$, $k_2=2$, we recover the single-peakon solution of the $(2+1)$-dimensional CH equation proposed in \cite{EP}.
In particular, if we take $F(y+(\frac{1}{3}k_1c^2+\frac{1}{2}k_2c)t)=y+(\frac{1}{3}k_1c^2+\frac{1}{2}k_2c)t$, then the single-peakon solution of equation (\ref{gCH3d}) becomes
\begin{eqnarray}
\begin{array}{l}
b_{-2}=-ce^{-\mid x-y-(\frac{1}{3}k_1c^2+\frac{1}{2}k_2c)t\mid},
\\
m=2c\delta\left(x-y-(\frac{1}{3}k_1c^2+\frac{1}{2}k_2c)t\right).
\end{array}
\label{ocps2}
\end{eqnarray}
See Figure \ref{f1} for the graph of the single-peakon solution $b_{-2}(x,y,t)$ at $t=0$.
If we take $F(y+(\frac{1}{3}k_1c^2+\frac{1}{2}k_2c)t)=\left(y+(\frac{1}{3}k_1c^2+\frac{1}{2}k_2c)t\right)^2$, then the single-peakon solution (\ref{ocps}) becomes
\begin{eqnarray}
\begin{array}{l}
b_{-2}=-2c\left(y+(\frac{1}{3}k_1c^2+\frac{1}{2}k_2c)t\right)e^{-\mid x-\left(y+(\frac{1}{3}k_1c^2+\frac{1}{2}k_2c)t\right)^2\mid},
\\
m=2c\delta\left(x-\left(y+(\frac{1}{3}k_1c^2+\frac{1}{2}k_2c)t\right)^2\right).
\end{array}
\label{ocps3}
\end{eqnarray}
See Figure \ref{f2} for the graph of $b_{-2}(x,y,t)$ in (\ref{ocps3}) at $t=0$.
\begin{figure}
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.5\linewidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=2.2in]{fig1.eps}
\caption{\small{Single-peakon solution $b_{-2}(x,y,t)$ in (\ref{ocps2}) with $c=-1$ at $t=0$.}}
\label{f1}
\end{minipage}
\hspace{2.0ex}
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.5\linewidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=2.2in]{fig3.eps}
\caption{\small{Single-peakon solution $b_{-2}(x,y,t)$ in (\ref{ocps3}) with $c=-1$ at $t=0$.}}
\label{f2}
\end{minipage}
\end{figure}
In general, let us suppose that the $N$-peakon has the following form
\begin{eqnarray}
b_{-2}=\sum_{j=1}^N p_j(y,t)e^{-\mid x-q_j(y,t)\mid}, \quad m=2\sum_{j=1}^N r_j(y,t)\delta\left( x-q_j(y,t)\right).\label{Ncp}
\end{eqnarray}
Similar to the cases of one-peakon but with a lengthy calculation, we are able to obtain the following $N$-peakon dynamical system
\begin{eqnarray}
\begin{split}
r_{j,y}&=0,\\
r_{j,t}&=-\frac{1}{2}k_2r_j\sum_{k=1}^Np_k sgn(q_j-q_k)e^{ -\mid q_j-q_k\mid},\\
p_{j}&=-r_{j}q_{j,y},\\
q_{j,t}&=\frac{1}{6}k_1r_{j}p_{j}-\frac{1}{2}k_2\sum_{k=1}^Np_k e^{ -\mid q_j-q_k\mid}+\frac{1}{2}k_1\sum_{i,k=1}^N r_ip_k(sgn(q_j-q_i)sgn(q_j-q_k)-1)e^{ -\mid q_j-q_i\mid-\mid q_j-q_k\mid}.
\end{split} \label{dNcp}
\end{eqnarray}
\section {Conclusions and discussions}
In this letter, we have extended the gCH equation to the hierarchies in (1+1)-dimensions and (2+1)-dimensions. We first show the gCH hierarchies admit Lax representation. Then we show the (2+1)-dimensional gCH equation possesses single peakon solution as well as multi-peakon solutions. Other topics, such as smooth soliton solutions, cuspons, peakon stability, and algebra-geometric solutions, remain to be developed.
\section*{ACKNOWLEDGMENTS}
This work was partially supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant Nos. 11301229, 11271168, 11171295, and 61328103), the Natural Science Foundation of the Jiangsu Province (Grant No. BK20130224), the Natural Science Foundation of the Jiangsu Higher Education Institutions of China (Grant No. 13KJB110009), and Qiao also thanks the Haitian Scholar Plan of Dalian University of Technology, the China state administration of foreign experts affairs system under the affiliation of China University of Mining and Technology, and the U.S. Department of Education GAANN project (P200A120256) for their cooperations in conducting the research program.
\vspace{1cm}
\small{
|
\section{Introduction}
Some field theories support topological defects with non-Abelian moduli on the world volume of these defects.
This discovery was first made in 2003 in the context of supersymmetric Yang-Mills theories with matter (for a
thorough review and an extensive list of references see \cite{book}). Since then much effort has been invested
in the studies of the so-called non-Abelian strings -- topological defects of codimension two. In this
paper we develop a similar construction of codimenion one, i.e. non-Abelian walls. To this end we generalize
the analysis of the simplest model \cite{Sh1} supporting topologically stable strings with
non-Abelian moduli.\footnote{In \cite{Sh1} the basic idea of domain walls with non-Abelian moduli due to the ``$\chi$-structure" (see below)
was outlined,
but calculations of the wall profiles were not carried out.} The model \cite{Sh1} was inspired
by Witten's construction for cosmic strings \cite{Wit} and used in \cite{ShYu,NShV,MShYu}
to study diverse effects associated with non-Abelian moduli on the string world sheet.
Our task is to identify non-Abelian moduli on
domain walls and study their low-energy dynamics. We will show that, as in \cite{Sh1}, the latter will be
described by the O(3) sigma model. Then we deform our basic model by adding a Lorentz violating term of a
special form (relevant to condense-matter systems) in the bulk. This term (similar to that
in \cite{NShV}) leads to a coupling between translational and orientational moduli.
The qualitative non-Abelian string picture \cite{Sh1} is supported in the wall case by numerical calculations,
in a way similar to that in \cite{MShYu} for the Abrikosov-Nielsen-Olesen string. In the wall case the emphasis
is put on qualitative aspects too, rather than on exact results. Calculations are carried out in the quasiclassical
approximation at weak coupling.\footnote{For technical reasons the relevant coupling constants, although small,
are not too small. We are at the borderline of the quasiclassical domain.}
We begin with a simple domain wall in a model of a single real scalar field, and then add an extra term
with a $\chi^i$ field in the Lagrangian. It is shown that the standard domain wall solution becomes unstable.
A nonvanishing $\chi^i$ develops in the wall core resulting in rotational moduli. For a fixed set of parameters
the two-field solution is found numerically from the standard Euler-Lagrange equations. We discuss both translational
and rotational moduli. In the last part a spin-orbit interaction is introduced. It gives rise to an entanglement of
translational and rotational moduli.
\section{Domain wall and an additional field}
Let us start from a simple model (e.g. \cite{ShBook}, section 5) of a single real scalar field, described by the Lagrangian
\beq
{\cal L}_0=\frac{1}{2}\partial_{\mu}\varphi\partial^{\mu}\varphi-V(\varphi),
\qquad
V(\varphi)=\lambda(\varphi^{2}-v^{2})^{2},
\label{L0}
\end{equation}
where $\lambda$ and $v$ are constants. This Lagrangian obviously possesses
a $\mathbb{Z}_2$ symmetry ($\varphi\to -\varphi$) which is spontaneously broken in the vacuum. Hence, the model
supports domain walls. In this model there are two physically equivalent vacua. For a wall, oriented
in the $(x,y)$ plane, we have the boundary condition $\varphi=\pm v$ for $z=\mp \infty$ (or vice versa).
In this case the solution for $\varphi$ can be found analytically,
\beq
\varphi(z)=-v\tanh\left[\frac{m_{\varphi}}{2}(z-z_{0})\right],
\label{tanh}
\end{equation}
where $m_{\varphi}=\sqrt{8\lambda v^{2}}$ is the mass of the $\varphi$ field, and $z_{0}$ is the wall center.
The minus sign in the right-hand side of (\ref{tanh}) was chosen for convenience of the subsequent consideration.
Now let us add, according to \cite{Sh1}, a triplet field $\chi^{i}$, $i=1,2,3$, described by the Lagrangian
\beqn
{\cal L}_{\chi}&=&\frac{1}{2}\partial_{\mu}\chi^{i}\partial^{\mu}\chi^{i}-U(\chi,\varphi),
\label{Lchi}
\nonumber\\[2mm]
U(\varphi,\chi^i)&=&\gamma\left[(\varphi^{2}-\mu^{2})\chi^{i}\chi^{i}
+\beta(\chi^{i}\chi^{i})^{2}\right], \qquad v^2>\mu^2.
\label{U}
\end{eqnarray}
The deformed model with the extra field $\chi^i$ is described by the Lagrangian
\beq
{\cal L}={\cal L}_0+{\cal L}_{\chi}.
\label{Ltot}
\end{equation}
In the vacuum, where $\varphi=\pm v$, the expectation value of $\chi$ is $0$, but in the core of the wall,
where $\varphi$ is small, $\chi$ develops a non-vanishing expectation value
\beq
\chi_{0}\cong\sqrt{\frac{\mu^2}{2\beta}}\, .
\label{chi0}
\end{equation}
\section{Instability of the \boldmath{$\chi=0$} solution}
The stability analysis is similar to that in \cite{Wit} and \cite{MShYu}. Let us assume that the
field $\varphi$ is given by (\ref{tanh}) and $\chi$ is small. This allows us to work in the quadratic
in $\chi$ approximation. We have the following energy functional
\beq
{\cal E}_\chi=A\int\left[\frac{1}{2}\left(\frac{\partial\chi}{\partial z}\right)^2+\gamma(\varphi^2-\mu^2)\chi^2\right]dz,
\end{equation}
where $A$ is the area of the wall. After integration by parts we arrive at
\beq
{\cal E}_\chi=A\int\left[-\frac{1}{2}\chi\frac{\partial^2\chi}{\partial z^2}+\gamma(\varphi^2-\mu^2)\chi^2\right]dz\,.
\label{7}
\end{equation}
Whether or not $\chi=0$ is a stable solution depends on the eigenmodes of the operator in (\ref{7}).
Existence of negative mode(s) will imply instability.
The eigenvalue equation can be interpreted as a Schr\"{o}dinger equation. Taking $\varphi$
from (\ref{tanh}) directly, we have the eigenvalue equation
\beq
-\chi''+\frac{\gamma}{4\lambda}{\cal V}(\zeta)\chi=\epsilon\,\chi\,,
\label{Shrod}
\end{equation}
where
\beq
{\cal V}(\zeta)=\left[\left(1-\frac{\mu^2}{v^2}\right)-\frac{1}{\cosh^2 \frac{\zeta}{2}}\right]\,.
\label{ShrodPot}
\end{equation}
Moreover, $\zeta=m_\varphi z$, differentiation over $\zeta$ is denoted by prime, and the center of the wall is $\zeta_0=0$.
A plot of the potential (\ref{ShrodPot}) for the set of parameters used (see Sec. \ref{secf}
for our numerical choice) is depicted in Fig. \ref{Coshplot}. We see a negative-energy domain near the origin,
which allows in principle the existence of negative modes. Concretely, the lowest-eigenenergy $\epsilon$ was
found numerically to be $-0.11$ for the choice of parameters presented in (\ref{parameters}).
\begin{figure}[t]
\epsfxsize=250px
\centerline{\epsffile{cosh.jpg}}
\caption{Potential ${\cal V}(\zeta)$ in the Schr\"{o}dinger equation (\ref{Shrod}).}
\label{Coshplot}
\end{figure}
\section{Equations and solutions}
\label{secf}
The Lagrangian (\ref{Ltot}) implies the following classical static equations of motion:
\beq
\begin{dcases}
\varphi''=4\lambda\varphi(\varphi^{2}-v^{2})+2\gamma\chi^{2}\varphi, \\[2mm]
\chi^{i}~''=2\gamma(\varphi^{2}-\mu^{2})\chi^{i}+4\beta\gamma\chi^{2}\chi^{i},
\end{dcases}
\end{equation}
where $\chi^{2}=\chi^{j}\chi^{j}$ $(i,j=1,2,3)$, and $z$ differentiation is denoted by prime. The wall ansatz is implied:
the solution sought for is independent of $x$ and $y$.
The function $\chi(z)$ is determined by energy minimization, but orientation of $\chi^i$ in the internal
space can be arbitrary. Thus it is obvious that we can use an ansatz with a fixed orientation, for example,
\beq
\chi^{i}=\chi(z)\begin{pmatrix}0\\
0\\
1
\end{pmatrix}.
\end{equation}
This gives us
\beq
\begin{dcases}
\varphi''=4\lambda\varphi(\varphi^{2}-v^{2})+2\gamma\chi^{2}\varphi , \\[2mm]
\chi''=2\gamma(\varphi^{2}-\mu^{2})\chi+4\beta\gamma\chi^{3}\,.
\end{dcases}
\label{syst}
\end{equation}
We see that this system of equations has the first integral
\beq
\frac{1}{2}\left(\frac{d\varphi}{dz}\right)^{2}+\frac{1}{2}\left(\frac{d\chi}{dz}\right)^{2}-W(z)=0,
\label{firstint}
\end{equation}
where
\begin{figure}[t]
\epsfxsize=324px
\centerline{\epsffile{potential.jpg}}
\caption{Potential $-W(z)$ as a function of $\varphi$ and $\chi$. The points denoted
by $\bullet$ ($\varphi=\pm v$ and $\chi=0$) correspond to the vacua of the system, and a
domain wall can be visualized as a trajectory of motion in this potential with time standing for the $z$ coordinate.}
\label{Potentialplot}
\end{figure}
\beq
W(z)=U\left[\varphi(z),\chi(z)\right]+V[\varphi(z),\chi(z)],
\end{equation}
with $V$ from (\ref{L0}) and $U$ from (\ref{U}). The constant was chosen to vanish,
because at infinity $\varphi=v$, $\chi=0$, and the kinetic term is zero.
Equation (\ref{firstint}) allows us to visualize Eq.(\ref{syst}) as equations of
motion for a particle in a two-dimensional potential $-W(z)$, where $\varphi$ and $\chi$
play the role of coordinates, and $z$ the role of time.
The ``potential" $-W(z)$ as a function of $\varphi$ and $\chi$ is plotted in Figure \ref{Potentialplot}. Parameters used are
\beq
\lambda=\frac{1}{12}\,, \quad \beta=0.2\,, \quad\gamma=\frac{2}{3}\,, \,\,\quad \mathlarger{\frac{\mu}{v}}=0.55\,.
\label{parameters}
\end{equation}
We use this set of parameters for finding a sample solution. The quartic constants are moderately small which
warrants the validity of the quasiclasssical approximation.
The unstable maxima of $-W(z)$ with $\varphi=\pm v$ and $\chi=0$ correspond to the vacua of the system, and
trajectories connecting these points correspond to the domain wall configurations. We have a
nonvanishing solution for $\chi$ in the wall core when the ``particle" is ``dragged" near the
starting point in the $\chi$ direction, and then goes along $\varphi$. To have a wall without
$\chi$, the ``particle" should move exactly in the $\varphi$ direction, but, as it was proved
previously, for a certain set of parameters such a configuration is unstable.
Before passing to actual calculations it is worth asking what happens if we vary the value of the parameters in (15), in particular, $\gamma$. When $\gamma$ is very small, only the $\phi$ field in the solution does not vanish. With increasing $\gamma$ metastable vacua in which $\chi$ condenses while $\phi$ does not start to ``attract” the wall until it becomes unstable, and a new configuration, with a nonvanishing $\chi$ in the middle appears.
With further increase of $\gamma$, at a certain value of $\gamma$, $\phi$ and $\chi$ vacua will become degenerate, but this does not affect the (in)stability of the wall configuration. This is clear from Eq. (8) in which the potential ${\mathcal V}$ will still have negative modes. If we further increase $\gamma$ the $\phi$ vacua will become metastable.
The choice of parameters in (15) was determined by the condition that $\gamma$ should be large enough to create a stable wall configuration with non-zero $\chi$ and, at the same time, small enough not to make $\phi$ vacua metastable. The choice we made is quite close to the limit of degenerate vacua. This particular choice was made only for the sake of calculational convenience. Generally speaking, there is no need to fine-tune $\gamma$ to be close to this limit.
Now let us proceed to numerical solution of the system (\ref{syst}). Since we have boundary conditions set at infinity,
we need to examine the asymptotic behavior of our equations there.
If $\varphi(-\infty)=v$, $\chi(-\infty)=0$, then at $z$ near minus infinity $\chi$ and $\eta\equiv v-\varphi$ are small;
therefore,
\beq
\begin{dcases}
\eta''=8v^{2}\lambda\eta, \\[2mm]
\chi''=2\gamma(v^{2}-\mu^{2})\chi,
\end{dcases}
\end{equation}
which implies the following asymptotic behavior:
\beq
\eta=A\exp\left(\sqrt{8v^{2}\lambda}~z\right),
\qquad
\chi=B\exp\left[\sqrt{2\gamma(v^{2}-\mu^{2})}~z\right]
\end{equation}
at $z\rightarrow-\infty$. Here $A$ and $B$ are some unknown constants.
For a system of the second-order equations we need boundary conditions
for both functions themselves and their first derivatives. Asymptotical solutions
above provide us with the connection between functions and their derivatives
at infinity. Since we need both $\varphi$ and $\chi$ at the boundary and the analytical connection between them is
unknown, the shooting method was used: we
set a small initial value for $\eta$ at $z=-\infty$ (on the left edge of the interval under consideration) and
varied the initial value of $\chi$
in solving the system of equations, until we obtained the desired value of $\varphi$
at $+\infty$ (the right edge of the interval under consideration). The results obtained
are presented in Figs. \ref{Phi} and \ref{Chi}, where $\chi$ is normalized
by $\mathlarger{\chi_{0}=\frac{\mu}{\sqrt{2\beta}}}$ and $z$ normalized by $m_\varphi$.
For comparison the plot of $\varphi$ from (\ref{tanh}) (i.e. with $\chi=0$) is also given in Fig. \ref{Phi}.
\begin{figure}[t]
\epsfxsize=250px
\centerline{\epsffile{phi.jpg}}
\caption{The solid line represents $\varphi(z)$ in the presence of $\chi$, the dashed line is $\varphi(z)$ for $\chi=0$, given by (\ref{tanh}).}
\label{Phi}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\epsfxsize=250px
\centerline{\epsffile{chi.jpg}}
\caption{Calculated $\chi(z)$.}
\label{Chi}
\end{figure}
\section{Moduli}
If we have the solutions for $\varphi(z)$ and $\chi(z)$, then due to
rotations in the internal space the general solution has rotational moduli
\beq
\chi^{i}=\chi(z)\cdot S^{i}(x,y,t), \qquad S^{i}S^{i}=1, \hspace{3 px} i=1,2,3\,.
\end{equation}
The kinetic term takes the form
\beq
\partial_{\mu}\chi^{i}\partial^{\mu}\chi^{i}\rightarrow\left[
\chi(z)^{2}\right]\partial_{p}S^{i}\partial^{p}S^{i}-\left(\frac{d\chi}{dz}\right)^{2},\qquad p=0,1,2\,,
\end{equation}
which leads us to the following term in action on the world volume
\beq
{\Delta}S_{1}=\frac{1}{2}\,\frac{\chi_{0}^{2}}{m_{\varphi}}I_{1}\int dt\,dx\,dy\,\left(\partial_{p}S^{i}\partial^{p}S^{i}\right).
\label{modact}
\end{equation}
Here
\beq
I_{1}=\frac{m_{\varphi}}{\chi_{0}^{2}}\int\chi(z)^{2}dz.
\end{equation}
From numerical integration over $z$, using the known function $\chi(z)$, we obtain
\beq
I_{1}=0.38\,.
\end{equation}
Next, we should take into account the fact that
small excitations due to the translational symmetry
breaking on the wall, give rise to a single translational modulus.
Under translations the function $\chi(z)$ does not change but the center of the wall
is displaced, $$\chi(z)=\chi[z-z_{0}(t,x,y)]\,.$$
As a result,
\beq
\partial_{\mu}\chi^{i}\partial^{\mu}\chi^{i}\rightarrow\left(\frac{d\chi}{dz}\right)^{2}
\left[\partial_{p}z_{0}\partial^{p}z_{0}-1\rule{0mm}{4mm}\right],
\label{tranmodkinterm1}
\end{equation}
implying the emergence of an additional term in the action,
\beq
{\Delta}S_{2}=\frac{1}{2}\,\chi_{0}^{2}m_{\varphi}I_{2}\int dt\,dx\,dy \,
\left(\partial_{p}z_{0}\partial^{p}z_{0}\right),
\label{tranmodact1}
\end{equation}
where
\beq
I_{2}=\frac{1}{\chi_{0}^{2}m_{\varphi}}\int\left(\frac{d\chi}{dz}\right)^{2}dz.
\end{equation}
From numerical integration we obtain $I_{2}=0.14$.
Let us add this term to the world-volume action for the field $\varphi$,
\beq
\frac{1}{2}\left[\int\left(\frac{d\varphi}{dz}\right)^{2}dz\right]\int dt\,dx\,dy \,
\left(\partial_{p}z_{0}\partial^{p}z_{0}\right).
\label{phimodaction}
\end{equation}
Equation (\ref{firstint}) imply for the tension
\beq
T=\int\left[\frac{1}{2}\left(\frac{d\varphi}{dz}\right)^{2}
+\frac{1}{2}\left(\frac{d\chi}{dz}\right)^{2}+V(z)\right]dz=\int\left[\left(\frac{d\varphi}{dz}\right)^{2}
+\left(\frac{d\chi}{dz}\right)^{2}\right]dz.
\label{tensionandderivatives}
\end{equation}
The world-volume action for the translational modulus is obtained from our calculation as
\beq
{\Delta}S_{\rm trans}=\frac{T}{2}\int dt\,dx\,dy \,
\left(\partial_{p}z_{0}\partial^{p}z_{0}\right),
\label{wsactionforboth}
\end{equation}
as it should be on general grounds. Numerically (under our choice of parameters) the total tension is $$T= 0.998 m_\varphi^3\,,$$ the integral over the $\varphi$ derivative term is $$T_{\varphi} =0.844 m_\varphi^3\,,$$ and the integral over the $\chi$ derivative term is $$T_\chi = 0.154 m_\varphi^3\,.$$
\section{Adding a spin-orbit interaction}
Previously translational and rotational modes were independent. Now let us introduce an additional term for spin-orbit interaction,
\beq
{\cal L}_{so}=-\varepsilon(\partial_i\chi^i)^2\,.
\end{equation}
The {\em raison d'etre} of such a term and its possible origin is discussed in \cite{NShV}.
To the leading order in $\varepsilon$, now we obtain an additional term in the action,
\begin{eqnarray}
\Delta S_{3}&=&-\varepsilon\chi_{0}^{2}m_{\varphi}I_{2}\int dtdxdy
\left[(\partial_{k}z_{0})(\partial_{l}z_{0})S^{k}S^{l}+S^{3}S^{3}+2(\partial_{k}z_{0})S^{k}S^{3}\right]
\nonumber\\[3mm]
&-&
\varepsilon\frac{\chi_{0}^{2}}{m_{\varphi}}I_{1}\int dtdxdy\left(\partial_{k}S^{k}\right)^{2},\qquad k=1,2.
\end{eqnarray}
We see that the structure of this entangled term is quite different from that in \cite{MShYu} for
the Abrikosov-Nielsen-Olesen string.
The entanglement between the translational and orientational moduli of a special form is evident.
In higher orders in $\varepsilon$ the spin-orbit interaction will also change the formula for the $\chi(z)$
solution compared to that following from Eq. (12).
\section{Conclusions}
We considered the simplest model with a domain wall and non-Abelian moduli fields, localized on it.
Instability of the solution without the additional $\chi$ field was shown,
and then the numerical solution with $\chi\neq 0$ was found.
The latter implies the existence of extra rotational moduli on the wall world volume.
Then we considered this model with addition of a spin-orbit interaction.
\section*{Acknowledgments}
The work of M.S. is supported in part by DOE grant DE-SC0011842.
Kind hospitality and support extended to M.S. during his stay at IHES is acknowledged.
|
\section{Introduction}
\label{introduction}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=8cm]{fig1}
\setlength{\abovecaptionskip}{0pt}
\caption{ ${\rm D}^3$-Micro\xspace prototype in the original configuration used for most studies presented here. The sensitive volume consists of a 9.2-mm vertical drift gap between the copper cathode (mesh visible on the top of the detector) and the top GEM (foil protruding on the right).
}
\setlength{\belowcaptionskip}{0pt}
\label{detector}
\end{figure}
Time Projection Chambers \cite{Nygren:1978rx} with charge readout via micro-pattern
gaseous detectors are the digital analog to bubble chambers, allowing 3-D reconstruction of ionization
with many space points and great precision. Over the last decade, a number of studies have
demonstrated impressive performance when reconstructing ionizing primary particles with such detectors \cite{Bellazzini:2004hr, Colas:2004ks, Kim:2008zzi}. Our group is investigating \cite{Seong_vci2013,Ross:2013bza,Yamaoka:2012ux,Vahsen:2014mca,Jaegle:2012sma} the detection of nuclear recoils resulting from the scattering
of neutral primary particles, such as neutrons and, potentially, WIMPs. Neutron detectors
with improved directional sensitivity are likely to find applications in particle physics,
nuclear physics, homeland security, and neutron imaging. Directional searches for WIMP Dark Matter are
sensitive to a unique signature, the 24-hour directional oscillation in the mean WIMP recoil direction
due to the rotation of the earth \cite{Spergel:1987kx}. Observation of this signature would constitute a convincing detection of WIMPs by demonstrating the cosmological origin of the signal, and may be required to distinguish WIMP scattering from coherent neutrino scattering \cite{Grothaus:2014hja}. A number
of technological approaches are being explored \cite{Ahlen:2010ub,Daw:2010ud,Vahsen:2011qx,Santos:2011kf,Miuchi:2010hn,Naka:2011sf,Drukier:2012hj, Nygren:2013nda,Ahlen:2009ev}. An ideal directional WIMP detector, capable of excluding the isotropy of nuclear recoils in galactic coordinates with order ten signal events, would track nuclear recoils in 3-D, with low track energy threshold and head/tail recognition \cite{Green:2006cb}.
The technology under study is a candidate for building such a detector. One obvious challenge
for gas-based WIMP searches is low target mass per unit volume. However, the proper metric for comparing
technologies is sensitivity per unit of cost. For high-resolution gas TPCs, the cost drivers are typically the
readout plane and electronics. If the cost of these can be minimized, for instance by focusing the drift charge onto
the detection plane \cite{Ross:2013bza}, large gas TPCs will be more competitive.
We report here on the performance
of a miniature prototype, ${\rm D}^3$-Micro\xspace (Directional Dark Matter Detector - Micro),
constructed at the University of Hawaii in 2010. In that detector the TPC drift charge is multiplied
with a double layer of Gas Electron Multipliers (GEMs) \cite{Sauli:1997qp} and
detected with the ATLAS FE-I3 Pixel Application Specific Integrated Circuit (ASIC) \cite{Aad:2008zz}.
The high double GEM gain (of order $10^4$), low pixel threshold (typically 2000-4000 e$^-$), and
low pixel noise (typically 100-200 e$^-$) result in several attractive features, such as stable operation
with single electron efficiency near unity, self-triggered readout, and negligible rates of noise hits. In practical
terms, this means that at high gain, essentially all primary ionization can be detected, so that the energy threshold
is equal to the work function of the gas, typically about 30~eV. Therefore one can expect a large number of
hits even for keV-scale tracks. It seems likely that these outstanding capabilities will enable reconstruction of tracks with the lowest track energy threshold possible in any detector of ionization. Due to the self-triggering capability of the pixel chip, the detector produces no data in the absence of ionization in the drift gap, greatly reducing the requirements on DAQ electronics. This is important in the context of scaling to larger detectors.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=8cm]{fig2}
\caption{ ${\rm D}^3$-Micro\xspace prototype in the test vessel, after the drift gap was increased to 45~mm, and the thickness of nearby Delrin (acetal) parts was reduced. These modifications were crucial for achieving a significant directional neutron signal.}
\label{detector2}
\end{figure}
All measurements presented here were carried out at atmospheric pressure (760 Torr). Initial measurements employed Ar:CO$_2$ (70:30), which is a commonly used detector gas, and allows a comparison with work by others. Later measurements were performed with He:CO$_2$ (70:30), which is more suitable for reconstructing fast neutron recoils. Helium is a good neutron target, since up to 64\% of the neutron energy can be transfered to a helium nucleus. Helium is also a good detection medium, since the low electron density results in small specific
ionization, yielding longer recoil tracks. The CO$_2$ component improves detector performance and stability by reducing diffusion, improving quenching, and raising the electric field strength threshold for sparking.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=9cm, trim=1.2cm 21.3cm 13cm 1.0cm, clip=true,]{fig3}
\setlength{\abovecaptionskip}{0pt}
\caption{Schematic representation of the ${\rm D}^3$-Micro\xspace prototype. \label{fig:detectordrawing}}
\setlength{\belowcaptionskip}{0pt}
\end{figure}
\section{Detector and Principle of Operation}
The ${\rm D}^3$-Micro\xspace prototype consists of a Delrin (acetal) support structure, visible as white parts in Figs.~\ref{detector} and~\ref{detector2}, on which the different electrical components are mounted. The support structure resides inside a 25-liter stainless steel test vessel. Much of the detector design, shown schematically in Fig.~\ref{fig:detectordrawing}, is based on a previous prototype constructed at LBNL \cite{Kim:2008zzi}. The sensitive volume of the detector consists of a drift gap situated between a copper mesh and the upper surface of GEM1. For most measurements the drift gap was 9.2~mm. For the demonstration of neutron detection, higher detection efficiency was required, and the drift gap was increased to 45~mm, as shown in Fig.~\ref{detector2}. Ionizing radiation produces free electrons in this gap. These electrons then drift in a uniform electric field to a double GEM layer, where the electrons are avalanche multiplied, and finally the resulting avalanche charge is detected with an ATLAS FE-I3 pixel chip \cite{Aad:2008zz} operating in self-trigger mode (described below) and sampling at 40 MHz. The GEMs used are the standard CERN design with an active area of $5\times 5$~cm and 140 $\mu {\rm m}$ hole spacing \cite{Sauli:1997qp}. The pixel chip has an active area of $7.2 \times 8.0~{\rm mm}^2$, divided into 2880 pixels. Each individual $50 \times 400~\mu{\rm m}^2$ pixel contains an integrating amplifier, a discriminator, a shaper, and associated digital controls. Since most of the pixel chip surface is non-conductive, a pixelized metal layer was deposited \cite{Kim:2008zzi} onto the chip to increase the charge collection efficiency. (This did, however, not improve charge collection as intended -- see the section on energy resolution.) When charge is detected in the chip (at least one pixel detects charge above threshold), the self-trigger results in the output of a zero-suppressed digital serial stream that encodes the 2-D position, arrival time, and amount of charge collected, for each pixel above threshold within the next sixteen cycles of 25 ns each. The charge collected in each pixel is deduced from the time above threshold (ToT), which is measured with 7-bit precision. By using the known drift velocity in the drift gap, the timing information is converted into a (relative) third spatial coordinate, so that a 3-D image of ionization in the drift gap is obtained, as shown in Figs.~\ref{fig:cosmic}, \ref{fig:alpha}, and \ref{fig:recoil}. The pixel chip is glued to a circuit board and electrically connected with wirebonds, which are shielded against the electric field with a small metal overhang, as described in \cite{Kim:2008zzi}. In addition to the digital charge readout via the pixel chip, the area surrounding the chip is covered with a copper plate which is connected via a capacitor to an Endicott eV-5093 charge sensitive preamplifier. The amplifier output is fed through a Canberra AFT 2025 shaping amplifier into an Ortec EASY-MCA operating in pulseheight analyzer (PHA) mode. The PHA is used to measure gain and gain resolution of the double GEM.
For the studies described here, the test vessel was typically pumped down to $10^{-4}$~Torr, and then filled with the target gas under study. To ensure good gas purity, we usually performed multiple such pump-and-fill sequences before data taking, repeated the gain studies with and without gas flow during detector operation, and checked for long term gain stability, which was better than 2\% over several weeks. For studies with x-rays and alpha-particles, radioactive sources were placed inside the vessel. For neutron detection studies, we placed the source outside the vessel. We adjusted the double GEM gain and drift field depending on the energy scale and requirements of each particular study. The different settings are summarized in Table \ref{table:gain_and_efields}.
\begin{table*}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{|l|c|c|c|c|c|}
\hline
source of & $V_{GEMS}$ & effective gain & $E_{drift}$ & $E_{transfer}$ & $E_{collection}$\\
ionization & & ($10^3$) & (kV/cm) & (kV/cm) & (kV/cm) \\\hline
cosmic rays & 983 & 41 & 1.2 & 3.7 & 2.7 \\
alpha particles & 833 & 3.2 & 0.84 & 2.3 & 3.1 \\
neutron recoils & 806 & 2.0 & 0.64 & 2.2 & 3.0 \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{Gain and electric field settings used for the different studies presented. $V_{GEMS}$ is the sum of the two, nearly equal, voltages across GEM1 and GEM2. \label{table:gain_and_efields}.}
\end{center}
\end{table*}
\section{Measurements of Gain and Gain Resolution\label{sec:gain}}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=8cm]{fig4_upper}
\includegraphics[width=8cm]{fig4_lower}
\setlength{\abovecaptionskip}{0pt}
\caption{Pulseheight spectra recorded with an Fe-55 x-ray source using ArCO$_2$ (upper) and HeCO$_2$ (lower) gas and a double-GEM gain of $4\times10^4$. The black points show experimental data. The smooth curves (red in online version) are the result of fits to the data, as described in the text. \label{fig:spectra}}
\setlength{\belowcaptionskip}{0pt}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=8cm]{fig5}
\setlength{\abovecaptionskip}{0pt}
\caption{Pulseheight spectrum recorded with a Po-210 alpha source in ArCO$_2$ gas at a double-GEM gain of approximately 45. The black points show experimental data. The smooth curve (red online) is the result of a fit to the data, as described in the text.
\label{fig:alphaspectrum}}
\setlength{\belowcaptionskip}{0pt}
\end{figure}
\subsection{X-rays}
We measure the effective double-GEM gain and its resolution by placing an uncollimated Fe-55 5.9-keV x-ray source on top of the cathode mesh and observing the resulting pulse height spectra in the PHA. Two of the many spectra measured are shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:spectra}. We perform a $\chi^2$-minimization to the spectra, where the ArCO$_2$ x-ray conversion signal is modeled by the sum of two Gaussians (the argon main peak and escape peak). We perform each fit twice, once with the noise background in the PHA spectrum modeled by a polynomial of degree two, and once with the noise modeled by a power-law function. We take the mean fit parameters obtained with the two background models as our result, and the differences between results with the two models, in quadrature with fitting uncertainties, as systematic uncertainties. For HeCO$_2$ spectra we model the signal with a Crystal Ball function \cite{Oreglia:1980cs}, i.e. a Gaussian peak with a power-law low-end tail below an adjustable threshold, and obtain a good fit to the relevant part of the spectrum without including any additional background component. For both gases, the mean of the Gaussian is used to calculate a gain value, and the sigma of the Gaussian is used to calculate the gain resolution at that gain, as follows: We convert PHA channel numbers into detected charge values using the measured response of the PHA and amplifier chain. The latter was measured to be $0.91\pm0.13$~V/pC, using an injection capacitor and voltage pulse generator. The quoted uncertainty is systematic, limited by our measurement of the small injection capacitance. As a result, all effective gain measurements presented have a common, $14\%$ systematic uncertainty, which we do not include in error bars in any figures. We assume that the x-ray conversion yields 210 electrons for the main peak in ArCO$_2$, and 172 electrons for the peak in HeCO$_2$ \cite{Sharma:1998xw}. The ratio of detected charge to the x-ray conversion yield is taken to be the effective gain.
\subsection{Alpha Particles}
Since the gain resolution improves with increasing number of primary electrons, we also performed ArCO$_2$ gain and resolution measurements with a Po-210 5.3-MeV alpha particle source. The source was aimed horizontally so that the alpha particles would enter and stop in the drift gap above the copper pad that feeds the PHA. In this configuration we expect $4 \pm 1.3$~ MeV of primary ionization to contribute to the PHA signal. The large uncertainty on this initial energy stems from an uncertainty in the exact position of the source. As can be seen in Fig.~\ref{fig:alphaspectrum}, the resulting PHA spectra are much narrower than those at lower energies. We fit the PHA spectra with a Crystal Ball function, and extract the gain and its resolution as described above for x-rays. Note that this implies that the narrow upper tail of the pulseheight peak is used to measure the gain resolution. The broad, lower tail of the peak is dominated by alpha particles that are emitted at a small angle from the source, thus taking a slightly longer trajectory (and having lower energy) before reaching the drift gap, and depositing less ionization in the drift gap. Conversely, the upper tail of the peak pulseheight spectrum is due to alpha particles taking the shortest possible trajectory to reach the drift gap. There is thus a sharp upper limit for the deposited energy, and the width of the upper tail reflects the gain resolution.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=8cm]{fig6_upper}\\\includegraphics[width=8cm]{fig6_lower}
\setlength{\abovecaptionskip}{0pt}
\caption{Effective gain of double GEM layer versus sum of GEM voltages. Top: measured for high GEM voltages with 5.9-keV x-rays in ArCO$_2$ gas (black points) and HeCO$_2$ gas (gray points). Bottom: measured for lower GEM voltages with 4-MeV alpha particles in ArCO$_2$ gas. The straight lines show fits of equation \ref{eq:gain} to the data.\label{fig:gain}}
\setlength{\belowcaptionskip}{0pt}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=8cm]{fig7_upper}\\\includegraphics[width=8cm]{fig7_lower}
\setlength{\abovecaptionskip}{0pt}
\caption{Gain resolution versus effective gain of double GEM. Top: measured for high GEM voltages with Fe-55 x-rays in ArCO$_2$ gas (black points: 5.9~keV, dark gray points: 2.9~keV) and HeCO$_2$ gas (light gray points, 5.9~keV). Bottom: measured for low GEM voltages with Po-210 alpha particles in HeCO$_2$ gas. The curves show fits of equation \ref{eq:resvsgain} to the data.\label{fig:gain_resolution}}
\setlength{\belowcaptionskip}{0pt}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Dependence on GEM Voltage, Gas Type, and Energy}
We were able to operate the detector stably and for weeks at a time with double GEM gains as high as $4\times 10^4$. Figure~\ref{fig:gain} summarizes the measured gain versus double-GEM voltage, where each gain value was obtained from a fit to a PHA spectrum as discussed above. The dependence of gain on GEM voltage is well described by the function
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
G &= 10^{\frac{V_{\rm GEM}-V_1}{V_2}},
\label{eq:gain}
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
where $G$ is the gain, $V_{\rm GEM}$ is the sum of the voltages across the two GEMs, and $V_1$ and $V_2$ are free parameters that we extract with a $\chi^2$ fit, see Table \ref{table:gain}. These parameters agree at the 20\%-level with measurements of our previous prototype \cite{Kim:2008zzi} and measurements by other groups \cite{Bachmann:1999xc}. When extrapolated to the same GEM voltages, the effective gain measured with the Po-210 alpha source is slightly lower than that measured with the Fe-55 x-ray source. This may be due to an increased loss of ionization to recombination in the case of alpha particles.
Figure~\ref{fig:gain_resolution} summarizes the measured gain resolution versus effective gain, where each resolution and gain value was obtained from a fit to a PHA spectrum as discussed above. The resolution versus gain is well described by a function of form
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
\sigma_{G}/G &=\sqrt{(a/G)^2+b^2}, \label{eq:resvsgain}
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}where G is the gain, {\it a} a term due to noise fluctuations, and {\it b} is the asymptotic detector resolution at high gain. Fitting this function to the data yields the parameters shown in Table \ref{table:gain}. The gain resolution at 5.9 keV becomes asymptotic (at high gain, where PHA noise becomes negligible) to $\approx 9\%$, typical for gas detectors. The measured resolution for MeV signals is as low as 3.4\%, with the fitted function extrapolating to an asymptotic value of ~2\% at higher gain, i.e. approaching the excellent energy resolution of solid state detectors.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=8cm]{fig8}
\setlength{\abovecaptionskip}{0pt}
\caption{Asymptotic (high-gain) gain resolution versus ionization energy for ArCO$_2$ gas. See text for discussion. \label{fig:resolution_vs_energy}}
\setlength{\belowcaptionskip}{0pt}
\end{figure}
\begin{table*}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{|l|l|l|l|l|l|}
\hline
gas mixture & ionization energy & $V_1$ & $V_2$ & a & b \\ \hline
ArCO$_2$ & 5.9~keV & $434\pm9$ & $116\pm2$ & $(7.8\pm2.2)\times 10^4$ & $(9.4\pm0.6)$\% \\
ArCO$_2$ & 2.9~keV & $434\pm18$ & $116\pm4$ & $(1.8\pm0.7)\times 10^5$ & $(13\pm4.2)$\% \\
ArCO$_2$ & 4.0~MeV & $427\pm3$ & $130\pm2$ & $120.3\pm0.7$ & $(1.98\pm0.06$)\% \\
HeCO$_2$ & 5.9~keV & $356\pm7$ & $136\pm2$ & $(1.375\pm0.003)\times 10^5$ & $(8.79\pm.02)$\% \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{Parameters characterizing the double GEM gain and its resolution, defined by equations \ref{eq:gain} and \ref{eq:resvsgain}, and with the following physical interpretations: $V_1$ is the double-GEM voltage that gives a gain of unity. $V_2$ is the double-GEM voltage change required to increase the gain by a factor of 10. The parameter {\it a} is the gain above which the gain resolution becomes asymptotic, and {\it b} is the asymptotic gain resolution at high gain.
\label{table:gain}}
\end{center}
\end{table*}
Since three of the resolution measurements were performed in ArCO$_2$, but at different energies, we can obtain the dependence of the asymptotic (high-gain) detector resolution versus energy, as shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:resolution_vs_energy}. The three points are well described by the function
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
\sigma_{G}/G=\sqrt{d^2+c^2/E},
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
with $d=(1.94\pm0.07)\%$, and $c=(22.3\pm1.5)\%\times\sqrt {keV}$, where G is the gain, {\it d} is the effective gain stability of the detector and the measurement system (e.g. limited by the stability of the GEM high voltage supply, shaping amplifier, and PHA), while $c/\sqrt E$ is the fundamental gain resolution of the technique, determined by statistical fluctuations in the initial ionization statistics and in the avalanche process. These two statistical effects both average out as the number of primary electrons increases, which gives rise to the factor $1/\sqrt E$ multiplying the $c$ term. It can be shown \cite{Knoll:2000fj} that $c^2=W\times (F+b')$, where $W$ is the work function of the gas, $F$ is the Fano factor describing the fluctuations in primary ionization statistics \cite{Fano:1947zz}, and $b'$ is the Polya distribution parameter describing the variation in the avalanche gain \cite{polya}. Using our measured value for $c$, $W=28.05~eV/{\rm electron}$ and the Fano factor $F=0.23$ for gaseous Argon \cite{Fano2}, we obtain $b'=1.54$ for the combined double GEM layer, or $b=0.77$ per GEM.
Figure~\ref{fig:resolution_vs_energy} leads to interesting conclusions: For the lowest energy measured, 2.9 keV, the gain resolution is of order 15\%, likely sufficient to provide head/tail discrimination for keV-scale nuclear recoils, such as might be expected for low mass ($\approx$ 10-GeV) WIMPs. Since the resolution in the keV range is limited by the primary ionization statistics in the gas and the avalanche gain fluctuations in the GEMs, improving the detector electronics would not improve energy resolution in this energy region. Electron counting \cite{Sorensen:2012qc}, however, may reduce or theoretically even fully eliminate the component of energy resolution due to gain fluctuations, and thus lead to improved energy resolution in the keV regime. At MeV scale energies, of interest for fast-neutron spectroscopy, the number of primary electrons is so large that statistical fluctuations in ionization statistics and avalanche gain become lesser effects, and instead the detector and measurement system stability currently limit the gain resolution measured. Hence improved pixel, shaper, and PHA electronics could lead to improved gain and energy resolution in this regime.
\section{Measurements of Point Resolution\label{sec:pointres}}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=9cm]{fig9_upper}
\smallskip
\includegraphics[width=9cm]{fig9_lower}
\setlength{\abovecaptionskip}{0pt}
\caption{Cosmic ray events measured in ArCO$_2$ gas (top) and HeCO$_2$ gas (bottom) with a detector gain of $4\times 10^4$. The small boxes represent hits recorded by the pixel chip, and measure $50~\mu{\rm m}~\times~400~\mu{\rm m}$ in $x \times y$. Their color (available online) is determined by the measured ToT, which reflects the ionization density. The line is the best fit to the hits. The large volume below the hits is the pixel chip, and the transparent volume above the hits is part of the cathode mesh. Assuming these tracks were created by minimum ionizing particles, the total energies deposited are of order 2~keV (ArCO$_2$) and 1.0~keV (HeCO$_2$), demonstrating the excellent detector sensitivity at high gain settings.
\label{fig:cosmic}}
\setlength{\belowcaptionskip}{0pt}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=9cm]{fig10_upper}
\includegraphics[width=9cm]{fig10_lower}
\setlength{\abovecaptionskip}{0pt}
\caption{Measured transverse point-resolution in $x$ (upper) and $y$ (lower) versus drift length ($z$) for cosmic ray tracks in HeCO$_2$ gas. The black points show experimental data, the curves (red in online version) are fits of equation \ref{eq:res} to the data.}
\label{fig:point_resolution}
\setlength{\belowcaptionskip}{0pt}
\end{figure}
We use cosmic ray events to measure the transverse ($x,y$) point resolution of the detector with HeCO$_2$ gas, as a function of the drift length, $z$. For this study we operate the detector with high gain ($>40\times 10^3$) and increased drift field (1180~V/cm) for an expected drift velocity of 22.8~${\rm \mu m/ns}$ \cite{magboltz, Biagi:1999nwa}. Since the chip is sampling charge at a fixed 40~MHz, the increased drift velocity degrades the $z$-resolution, but allows 16 pixel chip time bins, the maximum number that can be recorded consecutively, to cover the entire drift gap. This enables an important analysis technique: we select tracks that traverse the entire drift gap and which have hits near the top and bottom of this gap, as shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:cosmic}. This allows us to assign an absolute $z$ position to each recorded hit, which is normally not possible in a TPC. For each event, we fit a straight line to the distribution of hits and determine the $x$ and $y$ point resolution from the distribution of the $x$-distance and $y$-distance between the hit positions and points of closest approach to the line. Though these distances are not generally equal to the true miss-measurements, the two quantities become identical for vertical tracks. We keep tracks within 25 degrees of vertical ($z$). A GEANT4\cite{Agostinelli:2002hh} Monte Carlo simulation estimates that for such tracks our procedure measures the actual $x$ and $y$ point resolutions to an accuracy better than 5 percent. We perform this procedure for each of the 16 $z$-coordinates separately, and obtain the transverse point resolution versus drift distance $z$, shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:point_resolution}. We expect the point resolution to be the quadrature sum of the readout plane's point resolution (which is independent of $z$), and the transverse diffusion (which is proportional to $\sqrt z$), i.e.
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
\sigma^T_{x/y}(z)=\sqrt{(\sigma^{R}_{x/y})^2+C_T^2 z},
\end{aligned}
\label{eq:res}
\end{equation}
where $\sigma^{R}_{x/y}$ is the readout plane point resolution in $x$ or $y$, $C_T$ is the transverse diffusion per $\sqrt{z}$ , and $z$ is the drift distance. By fitting this function to the experimental data, we obtain $\sigma^{R}_x=(197 \pm 11)~\mu m$ and $\sigma^{R}_y=(142 \pm 9)~\mu m$, in good agreement with the analytical estimates $\sigma^{R}_x=184~\mu m$ and $\sigma^{R}_y=143~\mu m$. Table \ref{table:pointresolution} gives a breakdown of the analytical estimate. The resolution in $y$ is better than that in $x$ because the rectangular pixels are smaller in the $y$ direction ($50~\mu m$) than the $x$-direction ($400~\mu m$). Note that in $y$, the readout resolution is not limited by the feature size of either the GEMs or pixels, but by the diffusion in the collection and transfer gaps.
\begin{table}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{|l|l|l|l|}
\hline
& $\sigma_x (\mu m)$ & $\sigma_y (\mu m)$ \\ \hline
GEM1 hole spacing & 40.4 & 40.4 \\
transverse diffusion in collection gap & 93.2 & 93.2 \\
GEM2 hole spacing & 40.4 & 40.4 \\
transverse diffusion in transfer gap & 91.8 & 91.8 \\
pixel size & 115 & 14.4 \\ \hline
Predicted $\sigma_{x,y}$ & 184 & 143 \\
Measured $\sigma_{x,y}$ & $197 \pm 11$ & $142 \pm 9$ \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{Estimated contributions to the readout plane resolution. The collection gap, transfer gap, and coordinate system are defined in Fig.~\ref{fig:detectordrawing}. Diffusion values were calculated with Magboltz \cite{magboltz} and the GEM and pixel resolution values are the respective feature sizes divided by $\sqrt{12}$. The predicted resolution is the quadrature-sum of the contributions.
\label{table:pointresolution}}
\end{center}
\end{table}
As for the diffusion in the drift gap, the fits to $\sigma_{x}(z)$ and $\sigma_{y}(z)$ yield $C_T=(172\pm 46)~\mu m$ and $C_T=(189\pm 27)~\mu m$, respectively, where the quoted uncertainties are statistical only. The two values are consistent with each other, as expected, but significantly larger than the Magboltz prediction of $C_T=109~\mu {\rm m}$. The discrepancy may be due to non-uniformities in the drift field, or possibly from impurities in the gas. However, the GEANT4 simulation also suggests that while our analysis procedure is reliable for measuring the point resolution, it adds a systematic uncertainty to the measured diffusion: this is because equation \ref{eq:res} does not account for detector inefficiencies in the case of highly diffuse charge at the edge of the ionization cloud, which can be seen to bias the measured diffusion in Fig. \ref{fig:point_resolution} for $z$ greater than 0.6~cm. Hence we exclude this $z$-range from the fit. However, the exact diffusion value measured is very sensitive to the exact $z$-range used, resulting in a systematic uncertainty of order 50\%. If accurate diffusion measurements are desired in the future, this may be accomplished by operating the detector at settings where the single electron efficiency approaches unity, so that the fraction of undetected charge becomes negligible.
\section{3-D Tracking of Helium Nuclei: Angular Resolution\label{angles}}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=8.8cm]{fig11}
\setlength{\abovecaptionskip}{0pt}
\caption{Alpha particle track segment measured in HeCO$_2$ gas with a detector gain of $3\times 10^3$. The Po-210 alpha source is located beyond the right edge of the image, at $x\approx 46~{\rm mm}$. \label{fig:alpha}}
\setlength{\belowcaptionskip}{0pt}
\end{figure}
One incidental benefit of using $^4{\rm He}$ nuclei as our neutron target is that we can use alpha particle sources to estimate the detector performance for detecting He-recoils. We estimate the angular resolution with three complementary methods, described in the next three paragraphs.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=8cm]{fig12_upper}\\
\includegraphics[width=8cm]{fig12_middle}
\includegraphics[width=8cm]{fig12_lower}
\setlength{\abovecaptionskip}{0pt}
\caption{Reconstructed direction of Po-210 alpha tracks in HeCO$_2$ gas, with the alpha source placed 3.88~cm from the detector. Top: polar angle ($\theta$) versus azimuthal angle ($\phi$) for each reconstructed track. Middle: azimuthal angle ($\phi$) distribution (black data points) with a Gaussian fit superimposed. Bottom: polar angle ($\theta$) distribution (black data points) with a Gaussian fit superimposed.}
\label{fig:alpha_theta_phi}
\setlength{\belowcaptionskip}{0pt}
\end{figure}
All three methods make use of the same data sample, recorded with a Po-210 (5.3 MeV) alpha source located at $z\approx 5~{\rm mm}$, $x\approx 46~{\rm mm}$. The source is oriented so that the emitted alpha particles traverse the drift gap above the chip, approximately parallel to the $x$-axis. Due to the large ionization density in these events, we operate the detector with a reduced gain of 3200. We select a pure sample of well-reconstructed alpha tracks by fitting the events with a straight line and requiring $L>5000~\mu {\rm m}$, $\chi^2/n.d.f. < 2.0$, and $N>60$, where $L$ is the track length, $\chi^2/n.d.f.$ is the reduced chi-squared, and $N$ is the number of pixels hit. To ensure the full energy of tracks can be measured, we veto events with hits within $400~\mu {\rm m}$ of the $y$-edges of the chip. Figure~\ref{fig:alpha} shows an example of an event passing the selection.
Method I sets an upper limit on the track angle resolution using the angular spread of tracks pointing back to the alpha source. Though the physical source is not collimated, we collimate it in the analysis by requiring $3.0~{\rm mm}<d_y<3.4~{\rm mm}$, where $d_y$ is the $y$-impact parameter of the fitted track at $x=7.2~{\rm mm}$, the chip edge closest to the alpha-source. Figure~\ref{fig:alpha_theta_phi} shows the polar and azimuthal angle distribution for the 3-D tracks passing that selection. These tracks point back to a point-like object, as expected for the small disk source used. By fitting a Gaussian distribution to the 1-D projections in Fig. \ref{fig:alpha_theta_phi}, we obtain $\sigma^{source}_\phi=(0.95\pm 0.04) ^\circ$, and $\sigma^{source}_\theta=(2.2\pm 0.1)^\circ$. These values are upper limits on the track angle resolutions, because $\sigma^{source}$ is the convolution of several effects:
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
\sigma^{source} = \sqrt{\sigma^2_{\rm DET}+\sigma^2_{\rm STRAG}+\sigma^2_{\rm SIZE}+\sigma^2_{\rm COLL}},
\end{aligned}
\label{eq:ang_res}
\end{equation}
where $\sigma_{DET}$ is the true track angle resolution of the detector, and the remaining terms represent broadening of the observed angular distribution due to nuclear straggling (kinked tracks), the size of the alpha-particle source, and the lack of source collimation, respectively. Without a selection on impact parameter $\sigma_{\rm COLL}$ is dominant for our geometry. In the $\phi$ direction, the selection on $d_y$ ensures that the contribution from collimation is sub-dominant ($\sigma_{\rm COLL}\lesssim 0.3^\circ$), so that $\sigma_{\rm SIZE}$ ($\approx 1^\circ$) dominates. Since, however, a TPC cannot measure absolute position in the drift direction ($z$), we cannot know the true $d_z$, and hence cannot select on it to collimate the source in theta. This is the reason why $\sigma^{source}_\theta > \sigma^{source}_\phi.$ We have not tried to experimentally measure the straggling.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=8cm]{fig13_upper}
\includegraphics[width=8cm]{fig13_lower}
\setlength{\abovecaptionskip}{0pt}
\caption{Track fitter uncertainties (black data points) in azimuthal angle ($\phi$) (top) and polar angle ($\theta$) (bottom), for alpha particle events measured in HeCO$_2$ gas. The curves show Gaussian fits to the data. \label{fig:fitter_errors}}
\setlength{\belowcaptionskip}{0pt}
\end{figure}
Method II estimates the angular resolution from the event-by-event uncertainties reported by the track-fitter. This requires that the $\chi^2$ used to fit the tracks is calculated with the correct point resolutions. We use the residual distributions from the alpha track sample to obtain $\sigma_y=(275\pm 0.7)~\mu {\rm m}$, and $\sigma_z=(313\pm 62)~\mu {\rm m}$. Because most alpha tracks are nearly parallel to the $x$-axis, these events don't really constrain $\sigma_x$. Since, except for the pixel size, our detector is symmetric in $x$ and $y$, we instead obtain $\sigma_x=(298\pm1)~\mu {\rm m}$ by subtracting the pixel y-resolution (Table \ref{table:pointresolution}) in quadrature from $\sigma_y$, and then adding the pixel x-resolution in quadrature. Our final results are not sensitive to the exact choice of $\sigma_x$. Note that these point resolutions for alpha particles are slightly larger than the point resolutions measured for cosmic ray events (Fig. \ref{fig:point_resolution}) at $z=0.5$~cm (the approximate vertical position of the alpha source). This, presumably, is mainly due to straggling. The track angle resolutions reported by the track fitter are shown in Fig. \ref{fig:fitter_errors}. Fitting for the mean resolution with a Gaussian gives $\sigma_{\phi}=(1.068\pm0.003)^\circ$ and $\sigma_{\theta}=(1.202\pm0.004)^\circ$. These values are again upper limits on the track angle resolutions, because we estimated the point resolution without removing outlier hits or accounting for kinked tracks. Compared with Method I, the present technique is insensitive to the direction in space where each track points, but rather measures how well the hits on each track align in a given direction. As a result, the present technique excludes the contributions from $\sigma^2_{\rm COLL}$ and $\sigma^2_{\rm SIZE}$, which dominated in Method I. This explains why Method II gives a stronger limit on $\sigma_{\theta}$.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=9cm]{fig14_upper}
\includegraphics[width=9cm]{fig14_lower}
\setlength{\abovecaptionskip}{0pt}
\caption{Track fitter uncertainties in $\phi$ (top) and $\theta$ (bottom) versus track length ($L$) and number of pixels hit ($N$) for alpha-particle events. The smooth curves are fits of Equation \ref{eq:res2} to the distributions.\label{fig:res_vs_npoints}}
\setlength{\belowcaptionskip}{0pt}
\end{figure}
Method III extracts the angular resolution for alpha tracks analytically. This allows the generalization of our results to a wider set of track types. Assuming the charge is deposited uniformly along a straight line (according to a SRIM simulation \cite{SRIM}, this is a good approximation for the short mid-section of the alpha-particle trajectories measured), it can be shown by a simple estimate that the track angle resolution depends on the point resolution as
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
\sigma_{\phi,\theta}=\frac{\sqrt{12}~\sigma_{y,z}}{L\sqrt{N}} (\rm radians).
\label{eq:res2}
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
Here, $\sigma_{\phi,\theta}$ is the point resolution in the coordinate direction that determines the angle of interest, $L$ is the track length, and $N$ is the number of space-points measured. The alpha tracks considered here traverse the whole chip width in $y$, so that $L \approx 7.2$~mm, and they are roughly parallel to the $x$-axis. Hence, when calculating $\sigma_\phi$, we use $\sigma_y=275~\mu {\rm m}$, and when calculating $\sigma_\theta$, we use $\sigma_z=313~\mu {\rm m}$. In order to verify the predicted dependence of the resolution on $N$ and $L$, we remove our selection on the impact parameter. This yields a set of tracks with a larger variation in the number of spacepoints, because the tracks traverse regions of the chip with different efficiencies. Figure~\ref{fig:res_vs_npoints} shows the resolution reported by the track fitter for these events. The red line in the figure shows the result of fitting Equation \ref{eq:res2} to the data points, where we allow $\sigma_{y,z}$ to float in the fit. The analytical expression appears to account correctly for the dependence of the resolution on track length and the number of space points measured. The point resolutions obtained from the fit are $\sigma_y=(332\pm1)~\mu{\rm m}$ and $\sigma_z=(376\pm 1)~\mu{\rm m}$, both 20\% higher than the actual point resolutions. While not a precise agreement, this means that the track angle resolution for a range of track lengths and number of measurement points can be predicted at the 20\%-level from the point resolution, which in turn can be predicted reliably from analytical estimates based on pixel and GEM feature sizes, as demonstrated in Section \ref{sec:pointres}. The present work thus provides a validated foundation for optimizing future, larger detectors, and for estimating the performance requirements on the components needed.
\section{3-D Tracking of Helium Nuclei: Energy Resolution}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=8cm]{fig15}
\setlength{\abovecaptionskip}{0pt}
\caption{Reconstructed (uncalibrated) energy of alpha-particle events, recorded with a Po-210 source placed 3.88 cm from the detector, which was operating with HeCO$_2$ gas. The black points show experimental data, and the curve is a Gaussian fit.\label{fig:energy_resolution}}
\setlength{\belowcaptionskip}{0pt}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=8.5cm]{fig16_left}\includegraphics[width=8.5cm]{fig16_right}
\setlength{\abovecaptionskip}{0pt}
\caption{Time-normalized recoil angle distribution without (left) and with (right) a Cf-252 fast neutron source near the detector. The source is detected with high significance, and the recoils point back to the source.\label{fig:recoil_angles}}
\setlength{\belowcaptionskip}{0pt}
\end{figure*}
We estimate the fractional energy resolution of the detector for MeV-scale energies using the alpha particle sample discussed in the previous section. The energy of each reconstructed track is obtained by converting the time over threshold (ToT) measured by each pixel into an energy value, and adding up the energy values for all pixels in the event. The conversion from ToT to energy requires a calibration of the ToT measurement in each pixel, which is performed with a charge injection circuit internal to the pixel chip. The calibration requires knowledge of the gain, which was measured as described in section \ref{sec:gain}, and the work function $W$ for the gas. After performing this calibration procedure, the energy scale of the detector should be uniform across pixels. Contrary to expectation, however, we find that the energy scale varies strongly across the chip. Studies at LBNL \cite{kadyk} revealed that this is caused by imperfect contact between the chip and the conductive layer that was deposited onto it, so that at certain positions some of the GEM avalanche charge does not reach the pixel chip. We have already built an upgraded detector with the next generation (FE-I4) pixel chip, where we employed improved metal deposition, and this seems to have resolved the issue \cite{beasttpc}. Once we realized that the metal layer was the culprit, we gave up on an absolute energy scale calibration of the current detector, and we quote energy measurements here in uncalibrated, arbitrary units (a.u.). Figure~\ref{fig:energy_resolution} shows the energy measured with the pixel chip for the same alpha sample as was used to measure the angular resolution. A Gaussian fit determines the fractional energy resolution to be $\sigma_E/E=6.9\%$. The energy resolution is good, but quite a bit worse than the outstanding gain resolution, expected to be of order $2-3\%$ for MeV-scale signals and the gain used. The discrepancy appears to be due to the imperfect metallization. Also the energy resolution is improved in our next-generation detector \cite{beasttpc}.
\section{Directional Detection of Fast Neutrons \label{sec:neutrons}}
Having established the excellent performance of the ${\rm D}^3$-Micro\xspace prototype, we expose it to a $50~\mu $Ci Cf-252 fast neutron source. The average expected track length of reconstructed He-recoils from neutron-He elastic scattering is 1.6~mm at atmospheric pressure, which should be easy to detect, given the established detector performance. However, given the tiny detector volume and hence scattering probability, a very long exposure is required. Figure~\ref{fig:recoil_angles} shows the event rate versus 3-D recoil angle after selecting recoil-like events, for a 56-day source-free background run and a 7.5-day run with the neutron source 47 cm from the detector. The event rate is 27-sigma larger with the source present, the excess seen agrees with expectations from a detailed simulation \cite{Jaegle:2012sma}, and the observed recoil angle distribution points correctly back to the source. Clearly, already this tiny prototype can detect fast neutrons, and locate a point-like source in 3-D. More quantitative detail on the performance of a larger detector will be published soon.
Note that the width of the recoil angle distribution is mainly due to scattering kinematics; the contribution from detector resolution (Section \ref{angles}) is negligible. Figure~\ref{fig:recoil} shows one of the neutron-recoil event candidates measured with the Cf-252 source present.
The seemingly minor mechanical modifications we made to the support structure for this particular study (Fig.~\ref{detector2}) were crucial for obtaining the clean directional signal. The larger detector volume increased the signal efficiency by a factor of five, while the reduced amount of plastic lowered the rate of the two main backgrounds, protons from neutron scattering in the plastic and alpha-particles not related to the neutron source (presumably from decaying radon-progeny stuck to the plastic) by an order of magnitude.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=9cm]{fig17}
\setlength{\abovecaptionskip}{0pt}
\caption{He-recoil candidate in HeCO$_2$ gas, measured with Cf-252 source near the detector.\label{fig:recoil}}
\setlength{\belowcaptionskip}{0pt}
\end{figure}
\section{Discussion of Results and Conclusion}
We demonstrated the 3-D reconstruction of mm-length alpha-track segments and nuclear recoils. We investigated two main performance measures of interest in that context, angular resolution and energy resolution, and how these are determined by choice of detector components, geometry, and gas mixture.
The point (single-hit) resolution of the detector can be reliably predicted from the GEM hole spacing, pixel segmentation, and diffusion in the different detector regions, and was found to be of order $200~\mu m \oplus~C \sqrt z$, where the first term is the resolution of the readout plane, $C$ is the diffusion per $\sqrt z$, $z$ is the drift length, and $\oplus$ denotes addition in quadrature. Interestingly, in the most precise coordinate, $y$, the resolution of the readout plane is no longer limited by detector segmentation, but rather diffusion in the transfer and collection gaps. We showed how the point resolution in turn determines the track angle resolution, and how this resolution scales with track parameters. For the mm-length alpha-track segments studied, the angular resolution was of order 1 degree. By combining equations \ref{eq:res} and \ref{eq:res2}, we find that the angular resolution in larger detectors will be approximately $\sqrt{12}(200~\mu m \oplus C \sqrt z)/(L \sqrt N)$, where $L$ is the track length, $N$ is the number of space points, and $C$ is the diffusion per $\sqrt z$. The implication is that tracks of length 5-10~mm can be reconstructed with angular resolution of order a few degrees in detectors with electron drift ($C\approx 200~\mu m/\sqrt{\rm cm}$) and short drift length ($z\lesssim 10~cm)$. For detectors with longer drift length or improved track angle resolution, negative ion drift \cite{Martoff:2000wi, Miyamoto:2004dc} would be advantageous to reduce the otherwise dominant contribution from diffusion in the drift gap.
The energy resolution measured for MeV-scale signals was $\sigma_E/E=7\%$, limited by a position dependence in the charge collection efficiency due to imperfect contact between the pixel chip and a metal layer that was deposited onto it. This has been resolved in the next generation detector \cite{beasttpc}. The measured asymptotic (high-gain) gain resolution, which we expect to limit the energy resolution in future detectors, varies from $\sigma_E/E=15\%$ at 3~keV, limited by statistical fluctuations in the primary ionization and in the gas avalanche process, to $\sigma_E/E=2\%$ at the MeV-scale, limited by detector and measurement stability. Improved gain resolution and thus energy resolution at low energies may be achieved by counting electrons individually, which again may require negative ion drift \cite{Sorensen:2012qc}.
The TPC charge readout technology under study looks promising for future directional WIMP searches and neutron detectors. The angular and energy resolutions measured are excellent, and the 3-D tracking capability reduces the number of signal events needed to claim a dark matter observation. The technology studied has other advantages, among them negligible noise rates and exceptionally high sensitivity. More precise studies are needed, but for now, the lack of noise hits in our event displays and the successful 3-D reconstruction of cosmic ray induced tracks with energies of order 1~keV demonstrate the potential for achieving directional detection with low track energy threshold. This will be important in the context of searching for the keV-scale nuclear recoil energies expected from the interaction of low-mass ($\approx$10 GeV) WIMPs. In the work presented we focused on MeV-scale nuclei and atmospheric gas pressure. We did not operate at low gas pressure ($\approx$10-50~Torr), which is required to extend the length of keV-scale recoils to measurable size \cite{Jaegle:2012sma}, nor did we use target gases optimized for WIMP sensitivity. We have already performed other work in this direction \cite{Vahsen:2014mca}. Further measurements with additional gas mixtures, e.g. CF$_4$, CF$_4$:CS$_2$ \cite{Daw:2010ud} and CF$_4$:CS$_2$:O$_2$ \cite{Snowden-Ifft:2014taa} at low gas pressures are required and planned. For low-mass WIMP searches, another outstanding question is the significance of straggling for keV-scale recoils, which we plan to measure. For now we can conclude that if such recoils deposit charge in the shape of tracks, then a detector based on GEMs and pixel ASICs should be able to reconstruct them in 3-D. As for neutron detection, we demonstrated that the technology under study can locate a fast neutron source in 3-D. We expect that the next generation detector, where the energy measurement has been improved \cite{beasttpc}, should be able to simultaneously locate and measure the neutron spectrum of a source.
\section{Acknowledgements}
We thank Marc Rosen for his assistance in designing the support structure and test vessel. We thank Blake Pollard and Kamaluoawaiku Beamer for performing electric field simulations. We acknowledge support from the U.S. Department of Homeland Security under Award Number 2011-DN-077-ARI050-03 and the U.S. Department of Energy under Award Number DE-SC0007852.
\section{References}
\bibliographystyle{elsarticle-num}
|
\section{Introduction}
Ecological systems are characterized by processes occurring at different levels of organization, yielding a complicated network of interactions \citep{allenhoek:1992}. Ecologists have dedicated much effort to understanding how dynamics originating at different levels of organization can feed back upon and constrain one another. Although the influence of population and community level dynamics on whole ecosystem properties have been documented, for example species richness-productivity relationships \citep{tilman2001}, shifting production to biomass ratios over time \citep{odum1969}, the incidence of N fixers and N availability over succession \citep{vitousek2002}, and diversification influencing primary production and abiotic ecosystem characteristics \citep{harmon2009}, the degree to which evolution shapes whole ecosystem properties that subsequently feedback to constrain evolutionary trajectories of constituent populations/species is not known in general \citep{schoener2011}. Traits at the single species population level, change in response to certain ecological pressures (e.g. resource acquisition, predator defense), but it is not clear if evolutionary optima for individual species beget the greatest resilience to perturbation at the ecosystem level.
Characterizing how systems respond to perturbations is, at its core, an analysis of stability, and a
hallmark of theoretical studies in ecology \citep{may:1973}. From analyzing a variety of multi-species models, we have learned that species richness and food web structure may alter the stability of communities \citep{may:1973,mccanetal:1998,Loreau1998,Thebault2005,Vallina2011}, but in most theoretical studies, model parameters are typically chosen to maintain coexistence of all the species in the system rather than allowing trait combinations across species to emerge through mutation, speciation, and extinction. In real ecosystems, component species are subject to ecological pressures arising from interactions between conspecifics and other species, which determine selection pressures that may subsequently affect dynamical stability properties of the ecosystem. Behavioral changes, species replacements, and changing allele frequencies all have the potential to alter the nature of interspecific interactions, which by influencing rates of resource use and predation, can radically shift trophic structure \citep{estes1998,harmon2009} and ecosystem processes \citep{walsh:carbon_budget,miner2012,bassar2010}.
Theoretical work on evolution to ecological attractors has blossomed over the past 20 years in Ecology. Earlier during this period, \citet{marrow1996} called for addressing whether general mechanisms of selection lead to different types of dynamics because some studies showed that evolution leads to chaos \citep{ferriere1993} while others showed that populations evolve to simple dynamics \citep{doebeli1995}, and some even demonstrated that evolution may cause unstable (ecologically) systems to become stable \citep{hochberg1995}. When the evolution of traits has been explicitly incorporated into ecological models, adaptive behavior along fitness gradients can confer desirable whole-system stability properties \citep{Valdovinos2010, loeuille2010,doebeli:monograph}, destabilize dynamics \citep{Loreau2010}, or have negligible effects on local stability \citep{lawlor1976}. Examining the first directional step in evolution via ecological selection, \citet{loeuille2010} showed that evolution in an ecological context can increase or decrease dynamical stability for relatively generic models, and that the ecological context (interaction type and diversity) is critical for determining community stability. Using evolution to guide assembly, uninvasible (evolutionarily stable) communities can be constructed, but if they exist in regions of dynamic instability, species can go extinct due to large oscillations \citep{wilson1996}. Thus, a point in trait space that is on the cusp of dynamical stability, even if it corresponds to an Evolutionarily Stable Strategy (ESS), is still at peril because a seemingly small mutation can potentially push a system over the precipice. A well known example is that an increase in consumer efficiency initially results in increased consumer fitness, but can lead to species extinction \citep{Webb2003,Loreau2010}(Ch. 4), analogous to the paradox of enrichment \citep{rosenzweig1971}.
Many studies have assumed that ecosystems organize in response to fundamental principles, often maximizing or minimizing a property or flux \citep{jorgenson:thermoecology}. \citet{schneider:kay} propose that ecosystems evolve to maximize energy dissipation, \citet{mulleretal:indicators} argue that ecosystems maximize integrity, \citet{cropp2002} suggest that resilience is maximized, \citet{odum1969} hypothesizes that production to biomass ratios are minimized at equilibrium, and \citet{pattee:simplification} takes an alternative view that living systems self-simplify. A unifying theme across all of these studies is some degree of self-reinforcement \citep{ulanowicz1997} of core ecosystem structure. In a thought-provoking study, \citet{cropp2002} examined properties of ecosystems that maximized certain ecological goal functions, such as resilience and a number of related thermodynamic properties, and found that high maximum growth rate of the autotrophs, low grazing/palatability, and high herbivore excretion led to high ecosystem resilience. However, this means that the herbivores in the ecosystem were very inefficient and hence poor competitors, and is at odds with the fact that the most competitive herbivores should reduce the autotrophs to the lowest level \citep{holt1977}.
Here, we aim to address the essential question of whether in the context of evolving populations, ecosystems attain properties that promote persistence of the ecosystem itself. We use a coupled resource-producer-consumer model similar to \citet{cropp2002, loeuille2002, loeuille2004} to analyze how evolution affects whole ecosystem resilience. Rather than making resilience or some other whole-system properties a goal for evolution, we focus on the end result of evolution in terms of dynamical stability properties. We allow the evolution of a producer species subject to a tradeoff between nutrient acquisition and grazing from consumer species, and the evolution of a consumer species subject to a tradeoff between resource consumption and mortality. When only the producer species evolves, we show how the location of the ESS in nutrient acquisition and grazing-rate trait space changes along an environmental gradient in consumer strategies. When only the consumer species evolves, we show how the location of the ESS in grazing-rate and mortality trait space changes along an environmental gradient in producer strategies. When both the producer and consumer simultaneously evolve, we quantify the different potential coevolutionary outcomes. For each evolutionary scenario, we characterize how the entire ecosystem responds to perturbations by quantifying whole system resilience, and we compare the resilience of the ESSs to the maximum resilience. We establish that optimal traits for population-level fitness often do not correspond to those that maximize the resilience of a generic and widely-used ecosystem model.
\section{Material and methods}
\subsection{Model}
We build on previous modeling of food chains that are subject to dynamical \citep{cropp2002} and evolutionary \citep{loeuille2002, loeuille2004} selective forces. We define a simple ecosystem with equations for the inorganic nutrient resource $R$, producer species $P$, and consumer (herbivore) species $H$,
\begin{eqnarray}
\frac{dR}{dt} &=& I - R (q+k P)\\
\frac{dP}{dt} &=& P(k l R - m - a H)\\
\frac{dH}{dt} &=& H(-d+ a b P), \label{popeqns}
\end{eqnarray}
where $I$ represents inorganic nutrient input, $q$ represents the inorganic nutrient loss rate, $k$ is the nutrient uptake rate, $l$ is the conversion factor of nutrients into producers, $m$ is the mortality rate of producer species $P$,
$a$ is the consumption rate of the consumer species on the producer species, $b$ is the conversion factor of the producer species into the consumer species, and $d$ is the mortality rate of consumer species $H$, similar in notation to \citet{hulot2006}, see also Table 1.
For our analysis, let $\hat{R}, \hat{P}, \hat{H}$ represent equilibrium densities so that,
\begin{eqnarray}
\hat{R} &=& \frac{I}{q+\Omega\Psi}, \\
\hat{P} &=& \frac{\Psi}{a}, \\
\hat{H} &=& \frac{I l}{\frac{q}{\Omega}+\Psi}-\frac{m}{a},
\end{eqnarray}
is the equilibrium with the producer and the consumer present. The existence of this interior equilibrium with $\hat{H}>0$ is possible when $I > \Psi \frac{m}{a l} + \frac{m q}{k l}$.
We have made the following substitutions for simplification:
\begin{equation}
\Omega=\frac{k}{a},
\quad \quad
\Psi=\frac{d}{b}.
\end{equation}
$\Omega$ is a ratio of per capita per exploiter loss rates, and thus reflects the efficiency with which producers and consumers deplete or take up lower trophic level resources. Because $\Omega$ is inversely related to steady state nutrient concentration and positively associated with consumer biomass, it integrates resource fluxes across two trophic levels in a way that neither the standard conversion factor $b$ nor producer uptake do. $\Psi$ is the effective per capita loss rate from the consumer. Ecosystems with high $\Psi$, therefore, do not effectively convert producers to consumer biomass and retain the converted biomass in the consumer pool, rendering a greater fraction of the initially consumed basal resources underutilized. $\Omega$ is a very useful quantity being a ratio of parameters that define the ecological interactions in the simple ecosystem that are ultimately determined by traits of the organisms themselves (see below). Inspection of the Jacobian matrix evaluated at equilibrium,
\[
\hat{J}=
\begin{pmatrix}
-q-\Omega\Psi & -\frac{I k}{q+\Omega\Psi} & 0 \\
\Omega\Psi l & 0 & -\Psi \\
0 & \frac{I a b l}{\frac{q}{\Omega} + \Psi} -m b & 0
\end{pmatrix} \label{jacobian}
\]
makes it clear that whole system stability is affected by not a single parameter but a multitude of quantities, with $\Omega$ likely to be important. The above equilibrium is stable (see Appendix for details), which is to be expected given its similarity to the model used by \citet{loeuille2002}, \citet{loeuille2004} and \citet{cropp2002}.
\begin{landscape}
\begin{table}[htb]
\caption{Parameter values unless noted otherwise.}
\centerline{ \begin{tabular}{lll} \hline Variable or Parameter [Dimension] & Definition & Value \\ \hline
$ R $ [Quantity of nutrient] & inorganic nutrient concentration & state variable \\
$ P $ [Quantity of biomass] & producer species biomass & state variable \\
$ H $ [Quantity of biomass] & consumer (herbivore) species biomass & state variable \\
$ s_P $ [Dimensionless] & producer trait determines nutrient uptake and consumption by consumer & evolves \\
$ s_H $ [Dimensionless] & consumer trait determines consumption strategy & evolves \\
\\
$ I $ [nutrient (time)$^{-1}$] & inorganic nutrient input & 5 \\
$ q $ [time$^{-1}$] & inorganic nutrient loss rate & 1 \\
$ k $ [(producer biomass x time)$^{-1}$] & per capita nutrient uptake rate & function of $ s_P $ \\
$ l $ [producer biomass (nutrient)$^{-1}$] & conversion factor (efficiency) of nutrients into producers & 1 \\
$ m $ [time$^{-1}$] & mortality rate of producer species & 0.2 \\
$ a$ [(consumer biomass x time)$^{-1}$] & per capita consumption rate of the consumer species on the producer species & function of $ s_P,s_H $ \\
$ b$ [consumer biomass (producer biomass)$^{-1}$] & conversion factor (efficiency) of the producer species into the consumer species & 1\\
$ d$ [time$^{-1}$] & mortality rate of consumer species & function of $ s_H $ \\
\hline
\end{tabular}}
\end{table}
\end{landscape}
To explore how traits and trade-offs influence ecological interactions, resource uptake, and grazing pressure, we incorporate several aggregate traits for species in the system that define strategies in resource consumption similar to \citet{loeuille2002}. The producer species, $P$, has a trait $s_P$ that defines its strategy in nutrient uptake and susceptibility to grazing. The consumer species, $H$, has a trait $s_H$ that defines its strategy in grazing and mortality. Specifically, we let nutrient uptake ($k$) be a function of $s_P$, so that $k(s_P)=\omega e^{-\gamma s_P}$, see Figure \ref{chiplotsallgrazweak}. We let $a$ be a function of $s_P,s_H$ to define the grazing interaction so that $a(s_P,s_H)= \frac{\alpha}{\beta +e^{\chi(s_P-s_H)}}$, see Figure \ref{chiplotsallgrazweak}. Note that low values of $s_P$ have high nutrient uptake rates but are also grazed at the highest rate. This corresponds to the situation in which herbivores have a preference for more nutritious producers \citep{branco2010}.
For the consumer species, we assume that mortality rate increases as a function of the trait $s_H$ that increases grazing rate ($d(s_H)=d_H e^{g s_H}$), inducing a tradeoff. This could occur if consumers experience greater metabolic losses or more intense predation as their own grazing rates increase \citep{loeuille2002}.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering \leavevmode \includegraphics[scale=0.9]
{chiplot2newer.eps}
\caption{Nutrient uptake rate [(producer biomass x time)$^{-1}$] and grazing rate [(consumer biomass x time)$^{-1}$] parameters $k(s_P)$ and $a(s_P,s_H)$ as a function of producer strategy, $s_P$. Dashed line is a plot of $k(s_P)$ where $\omega=0.75$. Solid lines are plots of $a(s_P,s_H)$ where $\alpha=1, \beta=1, \chi=5$, for five different values of consumer strategy, $s_H$ (range is -1.1 to 0.5, the line nearest $a(s_P,s_H)=0$ is for $s_H=-1.1$).
\label{chiplotsallgrazweak}
}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Adaptive trait evolution}
To study how trait evolution influences whole ecosystem properties and ecological interactions, we borrow many of the tools of adaptive dynamics \citep{Dieckmann1996,geritz1998} to analyze trait evolution.
We make the standard assumption, that mutations are rare and occur infrequently enough for populations to reach their ecological attractor before a new mutation occurs, therefore creating a separation of ecological and evolutionary time scales. Furthermore, we assume that mutations result in small magnitude changes in trait values, but that they correspond to discrete steps in phenotypic space. Typically, reproduction is assumed to be clonal \citep{geritz1998}.
First, we consider phenotypic change due to evolution within the producer species. We define the fitness, $W_{P_{inv}}$, of an invading phenotype of the producer species with trait $s_{P_{inv}}$
\begin{equation}
W_{P_{inv}}(s_{P_{inv}},s_P,s_H)=\frac{1}{P_{inv}} \frac{dP_{inv}}{dt} = (k(s_{P_{inv}}) l \hat{R} - m - a(s_{P_{inv}},s_H) \hat{H})
\end{equation}
Similarly, we define the fitness of an invading phenotype of the consumer species, $W_{H_{inv}}$ with trait $s_{H_{inv}}$
\begin{equation}
W_{H_{inv}}(s_{H_{inv}},s_P,s_H)=\frac{1}{H_{inv}} \frac{dH_{inv}}{dt} = (-d(s_{H_{inv}}) + a(s_{P_{inv}},s_H) b \hat{P})
\end{equation}
and evaluate both fitness equations with the equilibrium environment set by the resident species $P$ and $H$ (refer to the equilibrium above). Hereafter we use the following subscript notation to describe: the $j=P$ producer species and $j=H$ for the consumer species evolutionary equations involving derivatives of the fitness equations.
\subsubsection{Finding the singular strategies}
Our goal was to find the evolutionary endpoints for a given abiotic environment. More specifically, we wanted to determine the trait values species eventually evolve to on the fitness landscape.
We can directly find these trait values by simultaneously setting the equations for the fitness gradients ($\left. \frac{\partial W_{j_{inv}}}{\partial s_{j_{inv}}} \right|_{s_{j_{inv}} \rightarrow s_j} $ for $j=P,H$) equal to zero and solving for the trait values. These are known as the singular strategies \citep{geritz1998}. The analytical expressions for singular strategies, while they exist, do not permit interpretation in general because the expression for the producer singular strategy is too complicated, hence we resorted to numerical methods in all producer cases. Specifically, in Mathematica, we computed derivatives analytically (using ``D") and then parameterized the expressions and used numerical root finding techniques (using ``FindRoot") to locate the singular strategies. For the consumer, we can obtain an analytical result by setting
$\left. \frac{\partial W_{H_{inv}}}{\partial s_{H_{inv}}} \right|_{s_{H_{inv}} \rightarrow s_H} =0$ and solving for $s_H$, which yields the consumer evolutionary isocline, $s_H = s_P + \frac{ \rm{ln} (\frac{\chi-g}{g})}{\chi}$.
To confirm the validity of our numerically determined singular strategies, we routinely performed evolutionary simulations. The goal of these simulations was two-fold: 1) to confirm the location of the singular strategy found numerically as described above, and 2) for coevolution, to confirm that runaway selection was the outcome (runaway selection is defined as ever increasing or decreasing trait values) when trait values were unconstrained. For the simulations, first we defined the dynamics of the traits ($s_P$ and $s_H$ of the producer and consumer respectively) evolving through mutation and selection as
\begin{equation}
\frac{ds_j}{dt}= \mu \hat{N}_j \left. \frac{\partial W_{j_{inv}}}{\partial s_{j_{inv}}} \right|_{s_{j_{inv}} \rightarrow s_j} \; \quad \quad \text{for $j=P,H$}
\label{canonical}
\end{equation}
in which the mutation rate, $\mu$, dictates the pace of evolutionary change and $\hat{N}_j$ is the equilibrium population size for $j=P,H$. For each simulation, we numerically solved the five-dimensional system consisting of the three equations for the quantities of the resource, producer, and consumer (equations 1, 2, 3) and one equation for each of the trait values of the producers and consumers (equations \ref{canonical}). Thus, all five state variables were allowed to change simultaneously. In the evolutionary simulations with Equations \ref{canonical}, we routinely tested multiple sets of initial conditions and allowed traits to evolve until no further change was observed.
Coevolutionary cycles can occur if parameters are chosen to be within a limited range and rates of evolution between producers and consumers are disparate enough \citep{loeuille2002} . Our purpose here was not to detail all the qualitatively different evolutionary cases, as this has already been shown in \citet{loeuille2002}, rather we sought to determine the evolutionary endpoints and their corresponding values of resilience and compare them to maximum resilience, thus we set $\mu$ to be equal between the species.
\subsection{Classifying the singular strategies}
To classify the singular strategies, which we denote as $s_j^*$, we determined the signs of the following derivatives numerically (using the same parameters as simulations).
We take the second derivative of the invader fitness equation with respect to the invader
\begin{equation}
\left. \frac{\partial^2 W_{j_{inv}}}{\partial s_{j_{inv}}^2} \right|_{s_{j_{inv}} \rightarrow s_j \rightarrow s_j^*}\; \quad \quad \text{for $j=P,H$}
\label{ESS}
\end{equation}
and find that Eqn \ref{ESS}$<0$ for $j=P$ or $H$, therefore the singular strategy is an ESS for the producer or consumer species respectively. To further classify the ESS, we take the second derivative of the fitness equation with respect to the resident
\begin{equation}
\left. \frac{\partial^2 W_{j_{inv}}}{\partial s_{j}^2} \right|_{s_{j_{inv}} \rightarrow s_j \rightarrow s_j^*} \; \quad \quad \text{for $j=P,H$}
\label{singularity}
\end{equation}
to show that it is convergence stable (Eqn \ref{singularity}-Eqn \ref{ESS}$>0$ for $j=P$ or $H$) and therefore a continuously stable strategy, CSS (Geritz et al.1998) for the producer or consumer species respectively. These findings are consistent with the conclusions of \citet{loeuille2002, loeuille2004} that for a set of parameters in similar models, there can exist an ESS that is convergence stable and it is this CSS on which we concentrate for the three different cases of evolution: producer evolution only, consumer evolution only, and coevolution.
\subsection{Does evolutionary stability match maximum resilience?}
For the model ecosystem considered here, the ecologically relevant equilibrium (both producers and consumers positive) is stable \citep{loeuille2002}, and CSSs for evolving producers and consumers can also exist \citep{loeuille2002}, but our interest was in determining how producer and consumer trait evolution influences resilience of the entire ecosystem. Although model equilibria are typically classified as stable or unstable in a binary sense \citep{Allesina2012}, different parameter sets can result in quite different dynamical responses following a perturbation, namely the rate of return to equilibrium or resilience. We quantified relative stability of different stable equilibria using a resilience metric, which characterizes how fast a system returns to equilibrium \citep{Pimm1984}. Return time is often approximated by the inverse of the absolute value of the real part of the eigenvalue (with the largest real part) because it is highly correlated with return time for an entire system \citet{deangelis1989, cottingham1994}. Return time depends on the type of perturbation so although they are qualitatively similar, measured return time can differ from the return time computed from the dominant eigenvalue.
We calculated the resilience of the ecosystem described by Eqns 1,2,3 as a function of both producer and consumer traits. We followed \citet{deangelis1980} and defined resilience of the entire ecosystem (Eqns 1,2,3) as the absolute value of the real part of the eigenvalue with the largest real part of the Jacobian matrix for the system: \begin{equation} {\rm Resilience}= -{\rm Max[Re}(\lambda)]. \label{resilience} \end{equation}
We compared this measure of resilience to resilience measured as the inverse of return time following a perturbation and found general concordance. However, we only present results from resilience calculated from eigenvalues for greater tractability and to follow previous studies \citep{cropp2002, loeuille2010}.
We were also interested in what properties of our model determined measured resilience \citep{deangelis1980,deangelis1989,cropp2002}. Unfortunately, the analytical expressions for the eigenvalues are sufficiently complicated to prevent any inference about how parameters or combinations of parameter such as $\Omega$ influence resilience from simple inspection. As a consequence, we numerically computed $-{\rm Max[Re}(\lambda)]$ over a range of parameters and trait values of $s_P$ and $s_H$ to quantify resilience. This allowed us to illustrate the exact influence of combinations of parameters such as $\Omega$ on resilience. Overall, for results presented, we varied the following parameters (and their range): $\chi$ (1 - 13), $\gamma$ (0.24 - 0.85), $g$ (0.24 - 0.99), and $a, k, d$ (0 - 1) .
\section{Results}
\subsection{Traits, ecological interactions, and resilience}
We predicted that the qualitative influence of traits on stability will be related to $\Omega$, because in all but one entry in the Jacobian for the system, $k(s_P)$ and $a(s_P,s_H)$ appear as the ratio $\Omega$, and $k(s_P)$ appears in only one entry without $a(s_P,s_H)$. Although $d$ is a function of $s_H$, and thus evolution of $s_H$ may influence stability via $\Psi$, we expected $\Omega$ to be more influential because of previous work \citep{cropp2002} and because it is a function of two evolving traits (and thus a richer ratio than $\Psi$). In Figure \ref{ka}, we see that $\Omega$ indeed accounts for the majority of variation in resilience and that maximum resilience occurs at an intermediate value. The residual variation in Figure \ref{ka} results from the non-uniqueness of $\Omega$ as a function of $s_P$ and $s_H$. It is possible for the same $\Omega$ value to be reached with different combinations of $s_P$ and $s_H$, but because $\Psi$ is an independent function of $s_H$, different $s_P$ values result in different levels of resilience even if $\Omega$ does not vary. This means that ecosystems (with relatively low per capita per exploiter loss rate ratios) with intermediate nutrient concentrations and consumer biomass, confer the greatest resilience for the ecosystem model studied here. Computing the resilience landscape as a function of traits subject to evolution (Figure \ref{contourer}) sets the stage for determining whether trait evolution moves ecosystems toward regions of increased or decreased resilience.
\begin{figure}[h!] \centering \leavevmode \includegraphics[scale=0.9]
{kanew.eps}
\caption{Resilience for the system as a function of $\Omega$. We generated this figure by sampling with a regular grid a region of $s_P - s_H$ parameter space that determine resilience, and plotting those values of resilience against the values of $\Omega$ for that grid in the region of $s_P - s_H$ parameter space. Region of $s_P - s_H$ parameter space is the same as Figure \ref{contourer} except only where $H$ is positive.
Sampled locations create n=699 points. Parameters are: $\alpha=1, \beta=1, \chi=5, g=0.95, d_H=0.05, \omega=0.75, \gamma=0.85$. \label{ka}
}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Evolutionary outcomes on the resilience landscape}
In general, the particular outcome of evolution (runaway, node, or cycle) crucially depends on which traits are evolving (producer and consumer traits in isolation or both simultaneously) and how much the parameters defining ecological interactions and resilience (such as $g, \chi, \gamma$) cause changing trait values \citep{loeuille2002} to impact ecological and evolutionary dynamics. By directly placing evolutionary attractors (specific trait values) in the context of the resilience landscape, we were able to determine if traits associated with individual ecosystem components evolve to reinforce whole ecosystem stability. We see in Figure \ref{contourer}a that resilience exhibits a complex relationship with the producer strategy, $s_P$ and consumer strategy, $s_H$.
Of particular note, for a fixed $s_H$ strategy, resilience can be a multi-modal function of $s_P$. This leads to multiple local peaks in resilience along a gradient of $s_P$.
\subsubsection{Isolated evolution of ecosystem components}
For the model studied here, when only the producer trait is allowed to evolve, the CSS for the producer species in the $s_P$ - $s_H$ trait space traverses a region of low resilience. In fact, in Figure \ref{contourer}a, the producer CSS is in a region of parameter space that exhibits generally less than $25\%$ of the potential maximum resilience. Furthermore, the CSS line is very close to the boundary of consumer extinction; the white region in Figure \ref{contourer}a is where consumers cannot exist in the system ($\hat{H}= \frac{I l}{\frac{q}{\Omega}+\Psi}-\frac{m}{a} \leq 0$). Thus, selection will move the system away from regions of highest resilience to the CSS. The discrepancy between evolved resilience and maximum resilience apparent in Figure \ref{contourer}a is representative of the parameter space we explored (see appendix). We compared this result across other parameter values as depicted in Appendix Figure \ref{gridproev} to illustrate robustness of this result.
\begin{figure}[h!] \centering \leavevmode \includegraphics[scale=0.7]
{coevprodcons.eps}
\caption{Resilience as a function of producer strategy, $s_P$ and consumer strategy, $s_H$ for a) producer evolution only and b) consumer evolution only. Darker regions are higher levels of resilience. Resilience calculated according to equation \ref{resilience}. In a), the trait values that comprise the producer CSS are denoted by the small dashed line on the plot and in b), the trait values that comprise the consumer CSS are denoted by the large dashed line on the plot. The white region is a feasibility boundary where consumers cannot exist in the system ($\hat{H}=\frac{I l}{\frac{q}{\Omega}+\Psi}-\frac{m}{a} \leq 0$). Resilience values shown in legend for other shades of gray. Parameters are: $\alpha=1, \beta=1, \chi=5, g=0.95, d_H=0.05, \omega=0.75, \gamma=0.85$.
\label{contourer}
}
\end{figure}
When only consumers evolve, the situation is similar to isolated producer evolution (Figure \ref{contourer}b), however, note that the consumer CSS isocline ($s_H = s_P + \frac{ \rm{ln} (\frac{\chi-g}{g})}{\chi}$) traverses a small region of trait space exhibiting high resilience, roughly up to $80\%$ of the maximum resilience in Figure \ref{contourer}b.
By varying $g$ and $\chi$, which influence the steepness of producer and consumer trade-offs, it is possible for the CSS isocline to be closely aligned with the ``left-hand thumb" region of high resilience (for example by increasing $\chi$), but as the CSS approaches the region of increased resilience, the stability landscape changes, the region of high resilience shrinks, and the isocline never intersects with the trait combination yielding maximum resilience (see appendix).
\newpage
\subsubsection{Coevolution}
When both the producer species and the consumer species are allowed to simultaneously evolve, the possible evolutionary outcomes are increased to at least four cases, depending on the positions of the producer and consumer isoclines \citep{loeuille2002}. A CSS for one or both species (joint CSS) is possible. However, for most parameters, the typical outcome is runaway selection \citep{loeuille2002} which pushes both $s_P$ and $s_H$ to negative infinity since we do not artificially bound the trait values. Runaway selection does not yield ecosystems with high resilience.
If the consumer isocline intersects the producer isocline left of its maximum (Figure \ref{coevcss}a), the result is instability, but evolution can lead to stabilization if the mutation rate of the producer relative to the consumer is below a certain threshold \citep{loeuille2002}. However, this case is a CSS only for the consumer, not the producer. In fact, it is an evolutionary repeller for the producer. Regardless, the stable evolutionary endpoint is in a region of low resilience (Figure \ref{coevcss}a), generally less than $25\%$ of the potential maximum resilience.
\begin{figure}[h!] \centering \leavevmode \includegraphics[scale=0.7]
{coevcss2a.eps}
\caption{Resilience as a function of producer strategy, $s_P$ and consumer strategy, $s_H$ for coevolution to a) consumer CSS and b) joint CSS. Darker regions are higher levels of resilience. However, for a), the upper left white region is for resilience $>0.6$. Resilience calculated according to equation \ref{resilience}. The producer isocline is denoted by the small dashed line and the consumer isocline is denoted by the large dashed line on the plot. The trait values that comprise the one (a) or two (b) species CSS are denoted by the black dot on the plot. Resilience values shown in legend for other shades of gray. Parameters for a) are: $\alpha=1, \beta=1, \chi=5, g=0.95, d_H=0.05, \omega=0.75, \gamma=0.85$. Parameters for b) are the same as a) except: $\chi=1$.
\label{coevcss}
}
\end{figure}
If the consumer isocline intersects the producer isocline on the stable part, right of the maximum, the result is a CSS for both species, but this joint CSS can be somewhat difficult to achieve because it requires the evolutionary stability of not just one but both species. Additionally, the region of parameter space that results in a joint CSS appears to be small relative to the large unstable areas that lead to runaway evolution. However, all of the joint CSSs we were able to generate always occurred in a region of low resilience; generally with less than $25\%$ of the potential maximum resilience (Figure \ref{coevcss}b; see appendix for extended treatment). If the consumer and producer isoclines do not intersect, evolution proceeds via runaway selection along the consumer isocline and will drive traits $(s_P,s_H)$ to a minimum boundary if one is specified. Finally, if the consumer isocline does not exist, evolution is sensitive to initial conditions and producer and consumer trait values either diverge toward infinity (or a specified bound) or proceed along the stable (right) part of the producer isocline where an ESS can exist for the producer but there is still runaway selection on $s_H$ for decreasing values \citep{loeuille2002}.
\section{Discussion}
We have shown that an inherent conflict often exists between whole ecosystem resilience and component-wise evolutionary stability for a generic and widely used ecological model. In particular, this is an example in which evolutionary stability at the producer and consumer levels results in low resilience of the whole ecosystem. When a producer trait that dictates nutrient uptake and influences grazing rate is allowed to evolve in a nutrient-producer-consumer ecosystem model, the trait value associated with the producer CSS does not confer the greatest resilience of the entire ecosystem. Similarly, the evolution of a consumer trait does not confer the greatest resilience and it appears that coevolution of both producers and consumers typically does not lead to high-levels of resilience.
Using a similar model to the one analyzed here, \citet{loeuille2002} showed that trait evolution can induce dynamic instability (a transition from a stable node to a limit cycle), but we have gone further by establishing that it is often impossible to simultaneously maximize evolutionary stability and ecosystem resilience. Together with the work of \citet{wilson1996}, \citet{loeuille2010}, and \citet{Loreau2010}, our results underscore the fact that evolution of species-level traits lead to less than maximally stable ecosystems. This fact may force us to reevaluate our notions about ecosystem structure, in particular how it may emerge and be maintained.
Species-level trait evolution not only influences stability properties of entire ecosystems, but also material flux and the distribution of biomass. For example, in the case of producer evolution only, the producer CSS does not maximize resource uptake, but rather strikes a balance between acquiring resources and avoiding predation, a commonly hypothesized trade-off (e.g. \citet{armstrong1979, Grover1994, leibold1996}), that has been experimentally verified more recently \citep{yoshida2004}. In fact, the producer CSS in Figure \ref{contourer} is linearly related to consumer strategy across a gradient in consumer strategy, $s_H$. A linear relationship between the producer strategy and the consumer strategy across a gradient in consumer strategy also appears for different values of the parameter $\chi$, which, controls the strength of the grazing interaction function $a(s_P,s_H)$. As the consumer trait value increases, so should the producer trait to maintain evolutionary stability (Figure \ref{contourer}a). In this way, the producer maintains a low level of consumption from the consumer across changes in the consumer strategy (Appendix Figure \ref{chiplotcss}).
We also found that the resilience of the ecosystem at the CSS is very low relative to the maximum resilience that could be achieved in general.
For example, in the case of producer evolution only, there is a large quantitative difference between trait values associated with the producer CSS versus those associated with maximum resilience everywhere along a gradient of the consumer trait (Figure \ref{contourer}a). The associated return time of the producer CSS is on the order of 20 units of time (e.g. days) compared to a return time of two units of time for the region of maximum resilience. We found a similarly large difference between maximum resilience and resilience at the coevolutionary CSS. In addition, maximum resilience does not always change smoothly with changes in trait values. Maximum resilience and the producer trait ($s_P$) associated with maximum resilience change abruptly in some regions of trait space due to the two high resilience veins in Figure \ref{contourer}a. Thus, at a specific value of the consumer trait ($s_H$), two different $s_P$ values have the same maximum resilience. Hence, if one seeks to maximize resilience, very small differences in trait values can make the maximum attainable value change abruptly and to maintain maximum resilience, the ``lagging" trait would have to change significantly. These multimodal peaks in resilience create the potential for nonlinear responses of an evolving ecosystem, the end result of which may only be a local maximum.
We used a previously employed tradeoff in our work (similar to \citet{loeuille2002, branco2010}), and our choice of the tradeoff shape may influence our results concerning stability. Although we have not proved that maximum resilience and a CSS cannot coincide, we observed no correspondence between evolutionary stable outcomes and resilience over a wide range of parameters for the different tradeoff functions employed here (see Appendix Figures \ref{gridproev}, \ref{gridconev}, \ref{gridcoev}, \ref{tradeoffchi1} and \ref{tradeoffchi5}). In general, with isolated producer evolution, the nature of the tradeoffs considered will place the producer CSS in a region of low resilience. However, other outcomes are possible for isolated consumer evolution and coevolution. In these cases, the shape of the tradeoff curve may permit the CSS to occur in a region of higher resilience by changing the location of the CSS and the resilience landscape. We see this with varying $\chi$ (compare Figure \ref{tradeoffchi1} with Figure \ref{tradeoffchi5}). With our tradeoffs and by comparing the geometry of potentially different tradeoffs in our model \citep{demazancourt2004}, we still only found CSSs, evolutionary repellers, and runaway selection, and therefore branching points are extremely unlikely, similar to the findings of \citet{branco2010}.
We were interested in characterizing how different combinations of resource acquisition quantitatively determine whole ecosystem resilience, and in particular, how resilience is related to $\Omega$.
Other studies have attempted to link aggregate ecosystem measures, individual traits, and resilience and have found some interrelationships. \citet{cropp2002} examined the five physiological parameters in their model food chain and used a genetic algorithm to find the maximum resilience as a function of those parameters. They conclude that resilience is very strongly positively related to (producer max growth rate)/(grazing rate). Although their model is different than ours, including their Type II producer-nutrient response, our $k(s_P)$ is essentially the same as their producer max growth rate. Contrary to their findings, we observed a unimodal relationship of resilience with $\Omega=k(s_P)/a(s_P,s_H)$ (Figure \ref{ka}).
Here, we have focused on one aspect of ecosystem stability, resilience, but other aspects of stability can and should be addressed in an evolutionary context in the future. Resistance \citep{Pimm1984} can play a more significant role in overall stability than resilience in model ecosystems \citep{Vallina2011}, future studies should consider the combined role of resistance and resilience in determining stability and the consequences of evolution since data suggest they are independent of one another (\citeauthor{steiner2006} \citeyear{steiner2006}, Mellard unpublished results). In future studies, resistance should be calculated from a perturbation to individual system components so that it is a measure of whole system response to a component-level perturbation. In addition, expanding the scope to include initially unstable systems, or those that cycle \citep{cortez2010} will enable a deeper understanding of the influence of evolution on the persistence of a population or ecosystem \citep{Allesina2012}. Methods exist for characterizing stability in nonequilbrium environments \citep{neubert1997,Vallina2011}, and focus on the same basic idea of characterizing a recovery following a perturbation.
Future studies should also explicitly study the diversity in or simultaneous evolution of traits associated with different trophic levels \citep{ellner2011} to fully understand the consequences of evolution for whole ecosystem resilience. Future studies should also explicitly consider the degree to which phenotypic change matters \citep{ellner2011a}. For example, behavioral responses may differ from species replacement, which may differ from evolution in how they affect whole-ecosystem properties and their responses to perturbations. Expanding the focus to stability of the evolutionary equilibrium of different ecosystem models with richer dynamics \citep{abrams1996} could lead to a better understanding of the multiple layers of stability that affect whole ecosystem stability on different time scales and organizational levels.
In closing, we reiterate that an essential tension can arise between evolutionary and ecological dynamics. Using conventional ecological selection pressures at the population level, our results show that ecosystems tend to evolve to regions in trait space with relatively low overall resilience. The ecosystem model we studied here apparently cannot simultaneously maximize dynamical and evolutionary stability, as selection for each leads to very different trait values. However, it remains to be seen if the discrepancy between traits values that confer maximum resilience and trait values corresponding to CSSs is a general feature of ecological systems. Regardless, the fact that evolutionary stability and dynamical stability can be at odds has important implications for how we view and manage ecosystem structure. Our results suggest that managing for biomass or production of individual species or ecosystem components may place the whole ecosystem at an increased risk of collapse.
\section{Acknowledgements}
The authors would like to acknowledge several anonymous reviewers for providing helpful comments that led to improvements of the manuscript. The Centre for Biodiversity Theory and Modelling is supported by the TULIP Laboratory of Excellence (ANR-10-LABX-41).
\clearpage
\bibliographystyle{spbasic}
|
\section{Introduction}
Before the occurrence of string theories, elementary particles were
described as point particles. They could live in principle in arbitrary
dimensions, interacting by gravitational and other three fumdamental
forces. In string theories, particles and fields are excitations of
a string. Quantized bosonic string theory is consistent in 26-dimensions.
As an approximation, a string can be treated as a point particle with
extrinsic curvature and spin\,\cite{Lindstrom2,PavsicRigid1,PavsicRigidFromString},
the so called rigid particle\,\cite{Nesterenko1}--\cite{PavsicRigidRevisited}.
In the description of Ref.\,\cite{PavsicRigidFromString}, the system has two first
class constraints, inherited from the string, and four additional constraints
that are second class. In this paper we consider the zero length limit
of such a system, in which case all six constraints become first class, and
effectively eliminate from the description all the degrees of freedom, except
those of a point particle, whose extrinsic curvature and spin vanish.
At first sight this could mean that we have arrived at the theory of a point
particle, living, in principle, in arbitrary dimensions. But the six
first class constraint are still present there, and upon quantization, they
become restrictions on possible physical states. We have found that for
a rather general class of solutions the quantum description can be
performed consistently in eight dimensions, but not in other dimensions.
In Sec.\,2 we derive a particle with extrinsic curvature from a string, and
in Sec.\,3 we consider its zero length limit. We obtain the same action that
had already been considered by McKeon\,\cite{McKeon}. However, in distinction
to the case of Ref.\,\cite{McKeon}, our system is subjected to a
constraint, inherited from the string theory, that was not taken into account
in Ref.\,\cite{McKeon}. Therefore, our dynamical system is different, because
it has two primary constraints, whose conservation gives additional
four constraints. Altogether, we obtain six constraints that turn out to be
all first class. In the presence of those constraints, the particle's center
of mass momentum $p^\mu$,
velocity $q^\mu={\dot x}^\mu$, and the conjugate momentum $\pi^\mu$ are
all parallel to each other. Therefore, the particle's spin and extrinsic
curvature are zero, which means that the particle's position $x^\mu (\tau)$
describes a straight worldline, and not a helix, as in the case of a
rigid particle. In Sec.\,4 we quantize the system by imposing the six
constraints as restrictions on physical states, and find a wave function
that solves the latter system of equations, provided that the dimension
of the space in which the particle lives, is eight. In Conclusion we
argue why this is a remarkable, nontrivial, result, revealing
yet another surprising property of string theories.
\section{The particle with curvature from a string}
In the previous paper\,\cite{PavsicRigidFromString} its was shown that
one can obtain a particle with curvature as an approximation to a string,
living in a target space with an extra time like dimension. The string
equation of motion in the conformal gauge are then
\begin{equation}
{\ddot X}^{\hat \mu} + X''^{\hat \mu} = 0,~~~~
{\dot X}^{\hat \mu}{\dot X}_{\hat \mu} - X'^{\hat \mu} X'_{\hat \mu}=0,
~~~~{\dot X}^{\hat \mu} X'_{\hat \mu} = 0,
\label{2.1}
\end{equation}
where ${\hat \mu} = (\mu,D+1)$, $\mu=0,1,2,3,...,D-1$. A possible
solution is
\begin{eqnarray}
&&X^{\mu} = C^\mu +\sum_n (a_n^\mu {\rm cos} \, \omega_n \tau
+ b_n^\mu {\rm sin} \, \omega_n \tau ) {\rm e}^{k_n \sigma} \nonumber \\
&&X^{D+1} = \sigma~,~~~~~\sigma \in [0,L], \label{2.2}
\end{eqnarray}
where
\begin{eqnarray}
&&\omega_n^2-k_n^2=0,~~~a_n^2=b_n^2,~~~C_\mu a_n^\mu=C_\mu b_n^\mu =
a_n^\mu b_{n \mu}=0,\nonumber\\
&&C^2=1. \label{2.3}
\end{eqnarray}
In particular, if all higher modes with $n\ge 1$ vanish, we have:
\begin{eqnarray}
&&X^{\mu} = C^\mu +(a^\mu {\rm cos} \, \omega \tau
+ b^\mu {\rm sin} \, \omega \tau ) {\rm e}^{k \sigma} \nonumber \\
&&X^{D+1} = \sigma~,~~~~~\sigma \in [0,L], \label{2.4}
\end{eqnarray}
where we have denoted $a_1^\mu \equiv a^\mu,~b_1^\mu \equiv b^\mu,~
\omega_1 \equiv \omega$. Such a string satisfies the Dirichlet boundary
condition
\begin{equation}
\delta X^{\hat \mu}|_B = 0,
\label{2.5}
\end{equation}
such that the string ends move on a $D$-brane\,\cite{PavsicRigidFromString}.
For a fixed $\sigma$, Eq.\,(\ref{2.4}) describes a helix in $D$-dimensions.
If the string length $L$ is small in comparision with the radius of the
helix, then the string effectively behaves like a point-particle, tracing
a helical worldline.
The string embedding functions can be expanded according to\,\cite{Lindstrom2,
PavsicRigid1,PavsicRigidFromString},
\begin{eqnarray}
&&X^\mu (\tau,\sigma) = x^\mu (\tau) + y^\mu (\tau) k \sigma +
{\cal O}(k^2 \sigma^2) \nonumber \\
&&X^{D+1} (\sigma) = \sigma, \label{2.6}
\end{eqnarray}
where $k$ is a constant. For the solution (\ref{2.4}) this gives
\begin{eqnarray}
x^\mu (\tau) = C^\mu \tau + a^\mu {\rm cos}\, \omega \tau +
b^\mu {\rm sin}\,\omega \tau \nonumber\\
y^\mu = a^\mu {\rm cos}\, \omega \tau
+ b^\mu {\rm sin}\,\omega \tau . \label{2.7}
\end{eqnarray}
From now on, we will consider the expansion (\ref{2.6}), and search for
the action satisfied by the variables $x^\mu (\tau)$ and $y^\mu (\tau)$.
In Ref.\,\cite{PavsicRigidFromString} we started from the Polyakov action
\begin{equation}
I[X^{\hat \mu},\gamma^{ab}] = \frac{T}{2} \int \mbox{\rm d}^2 \xi \, \sqrt{ \gamma}
\, \gamma^{ab} \partial_a X^{\hat \mu} \partial_b X_{\hat \mu} ,
\label{2.8}
\end{equation}
where $T$ is the string tension, and $\xi^a = (\tau,\sigma)$.
Using the expansion (\ref{2.6}), the action (\ref{2.8})
becomes\,\cite{PavsicRigidFromString}
\begin{equation}
I = \frac{LT}{2} \int \mbox{\rm d} \tau \, \left [ \frac{1}{e} ({\dot x}^2 + L k
{\dot x}{\dot y}) + e (1+f^2) (k^2 y^2 + 1) - 2 f k {\dot x} y \right ]
+ {\cal O}(k^2 L^2) ,
\label{2.9}
\end{equation}
where $e(\tau)$ and $f(\tau$ comes from the expansion of $\sqrt{\gamma}\gamma^{11}$
and $\sqrt{\gamma} \gamma^{12}$, respectively, whereas the expansion of
$\sqrt{\gamma} \gamma^{22}$ gives $e(\tau) (1 + f^2(\tau)) + {\cal O}(\sigma)$.
The equations of motion are:
\begin{eqnarray}
&&\delta e\; : ~~~~- \frac{1}{e^2} ({\dot x}^2 + L k{\dot x}{\dot y}) +
(1+f^2) (1+ k^2 y^2) = 0, \label{2.13a}\\
&&\delta f\; : ~~~~ f e (1+k^2 y^2)- k {\dot x} y = 0, \label{2.14} \\
&& \delta y\; : - L k \, \frac{\mbox{\rm d}}{\mbox{\rm d} \tau}
\left ( \frac{{\dot x}^\mu} {e} \right )
+ 2 e (1+f^2) y^\mu - 2 f k {\dot x}^\mu = 0, \label{2.15}\\
&&\delta x\; : ~~~~\frac{\mbox{\rm d}}{\mbox{\rm d} \tau} \left ( \frac{{\dot x}^\mu}{e}
+ \frac{L k {\dot y}^\mu}{2 e} - f k y^\mu \right ) = 0. \label{2.16}
\end{eqnarray}
In a gauge in which $f=0$, the action (\ref{2.9}) is
\begin{equation}
I = \frac{L T}{2} \int \mbox{\rm d} \tau \, \left [ \frac{{\dot x}^2}{e}+e +
\frac{Lk {\dot x}{\dot y}}{e} + e k^2 y^2 \right ].
\label{2.10}
\end{equation}
If we plug the equation of motion
\begin{equation}
y^\mu = \frac{L}{2 k} \,\frac{1}{e}\, \frac{\mbox{\rm d}}{\mbox{\rm d} \tau}
\left ( \frac{{\dot x}^\mu}{e} \right ),
\label{2.11}
\end{equation}
and introduce the parameters
\begin{equation}
m=LT~,~~~~~\mu= \frac{L^3 T}{8},
\label{2.12}
\end{equation}
then the action (\ref{2.10}) becomes\,\cite{PavsicRigidFromString}:
\begin{equation}
I[x^\mu,e] = \int \mbox{\rm d} \tau \, \left [ \frac{m}{2} \left (
\frac{{\dot x}^2}{e}+e \right ) - \frac{\mu}{e} \, \frac{\mbox{\rm d}}{\mbox{\rm d} \tau}
\left (\frac{{\dot x}^\mu}{e} \right ) \frac{\mbox{\rm d}}{\mbox{\rm d} \tau}
\left (\frac{{\dot x}_\mu}{e} \right ) \right ] .
\label{2.13}
\end{equation}
This action contains first and second order derivatives of the variables
$x^\mu (\tau)$. According to the Ostrogradski formalism\,\cite{Ostrogradski},
higher derivative theories contain negative energies. In the presence
of an interaction such a system can become unstable. A relatively
recent finding is that this is not always so. As shown in
Refs.\,\cite{Smilga}--\cite{Ilhan}, there exist interacting second order systems
that are unconditionally stable. Moreover, as pointed out by
Woodard\,\cite{Woodard}, the presence of a sufficient number of gauge constraints
can stabilize the system. As an example, Woodard cited the second derivative
model of a a massless point particle with rigidity, considered by
Plyushchay\,\cite{Plyushchay1}.
\section{Zero length limit}
We will now consider the limit in which the string length $L$ tends to
zero. For such purpose let us introduce a new parameter $\tau' = h (\tau)$,
and a new Lagrange multiplier ${\tilde e} (\tau')$ according to the
relation
\begin{equation}
\mbox{\rm d} \tau e = \mbox{\rm d} \tau' m {\tilde e}.
\label{3.1}
\end{equation}
Under such a reparametrization the action (\ref{2.13}) becomes
\begin{equation}
I[x^\mu,{\tilde e}] = \int \mbox{\rm d} \tau' \, \left \{ \frac{1}{2} \left [
\left ( \frac{\mbox{\rm d} x}{\mbox{\rm d} \tau'} \right )^2 \frac{1}{\tilde e}
+ m^2 {\tilde e} \right ] - \frac{\mu}{m^3} \frac{1}{\tilde e} \frac{\mbox{\rm d}}{\mbox{\rm d} \tau'}
\left (\frac{1}{\tilde e} \frac{\mbox{\rm d} x^\mu}{\mbox{\rm d} \tau'} \right )
\frac{\mbox{\rm d}}{\mbox{\rm d} \tau'}\left (\frac{1}{\tilde e}
\frac{\mbox{\rm d} x^\mu}{\mbox{\rm d} \tau'} \right ) \right \}.
\label{3.2}
\end{equation}
The parameter $\tau'$ can be renamed into $\tau$, and the latter action can
be written as
\begin{equation}
\int \mbox{\rm d} \tau \left [ \frac{1}{2} \left ( \frac{{\dot x}^2}{\tilde e}
+ m^2 {\tilde e} \right ) - \frac{\mu}{m^3 {\tilde e}} \frac{\mbox{\rm d}}{\mbox{\rm d} \tau}
\left ( \frac{{\dot x}^\mu}{\tilde e} \right ) \frac{\mbox{\rm d}}{\mbox{\rm d} \tau}
\left ( \frac{{\dot x}_\mu}{\tilde e} \right ) \right ].
\label{3.3}
\end{equation}
Expressing $m$ and $\mu$ according to Eq.\,(\ref{2.12}), the coefficient
in front of the second term of the latter action becomes
$\mu/m^3 = 1/(8 T^2) \equiv {\tilde \mu}$. In Eq.\,(\ref{3.3}) we have
a term that corresponds to the Howe-Tucker action\,\cite{Howe-Tucker}, and
an extra term that corresponds to the particle's curvature.
The action (\ref{3.3}) has two important limits:
\ (i) $T \rightarrow \infty$, implying $\mu/m^3 \equiv {\tilde \mu} = 1/(8T^2)
\rightarrow 0$. The term with curvature then disappears from the action. The
term containing $m = LT$ would become infinite, unless we also impose the limit
$L \rightarrow 0$ such that $m=LT$ remains finite. Then Eq.\,(\ref{3.3})
becomes the well-known Howe-Tucker action for massive point particle.
(ii) $T$ finite, $L \rightarrow 0$. In such limit, we have $m=LT \rightarrow 0$,
whereas $\mu/m^3 \equiv {\tilde \mu} = 1/(8 T^2)$
remains intact, and the action (\ref{3.3}) becomes
\begin{equation}
I[x^\mu,{\tilde e}] = \int \mbox{\rm d} \tau \, \left [ \frac{1}{2 {\tilde e}}
{\dot x}^2 - \frac{{\tilde \mu}}{\tilde e} \, \frac{\mbox{\rm d}}{\mbox{\rm d} \tau}
\left (\frac{{\dot x}^\mu}{\tilde e} \right ) \frac{\mbox{\rm d}}{\mbox{\rm d} \tau}
\left (\frac{{\dot x}_\mu}{\tilde e} \right ) \right ] .
\label{3.4}
\end{equation}
The latter action is identical to the action for the ``massless" particle
with curvature, considered by McKeon\,\cite{McKeon}.
In the following we will investigate in some detail the case (ii).
From now on, we will rename ${\tilde e}$ into $e$, and ${\tilde \mu}$ into $\mu$,
and write the action (\ref{3.4}) as
\begin{equation}
I[x^\mu,{e}] = \int \mbox{\rm d} \tau \, \left [ \frac{1}{2 {e}}
{\dot x}^2 - \frac{{\mu}}{e} \, \frac{\mbox{\rm d}}{\mbox{\rm d} \tau}
\left (\frac{{\dot x}^\mu}{e} \right ) \frac{\mbox{\rm d}}{\mbox{\rm d} \tau}
\left (\frac{{\dot x}_\mu}{e} \right ) \right ] .
\label{3.5}
\end{equation}
The canonical momenta are
\begin{eqnarray}
&&p_\mu = \frac{\partial L}{\partial {\dot x}^\mu}
- \frac{\dd}{\dd \tau} \left (\frac{\partial L}{\partial {\ddot x}^\mu} \right )
= \frac{{\dot x}_\mu}{e} + \frac{2 \mu}{e}\, \frac{\dd}{\dd \tau} \left ( \frac{1}{e}\,
\frac{\dd}{\dd \tau} \left ( \frac{{\dot x}_\mu}{e} \right ) \right ) , \label{3.6} \\
&&\pi_\mu = \frac{\partial L}{\partial {\ddot x}^\mu} = - \frac{2 \mu}{e^2} \,
\frac{\dd}{\dd \tau} \left ( \frac{{\dot x}_\mu}{e} \right ) , \label{3.7} \\
&&p_e = \frac{\partial L}{{\partial \dot e}} = \frac{2 \mu}{e^3}\, {\dot x}^\mu \, \frac{\dd}{\dd \tau}
\left ( \frac{{\dot x}_\mu}{e} \right ) . \label{3.8}
\end{eqnarray}
The equations of motion are
\begin{eqnarray}
&&\delta x^\mu\,: ~~~~{\dot p}_\mu = 0 \label{3.9}\\
&&\delta e\,: ~~~~\frac{\partial L}{\partial e} - \frac{\dd}{\dd \tau} \frac{\partial L}{\partial{\dot e}} \nonumber\\
&&~~~~~~~\frac{{\dot x}^2}{e^2} + 3 \mu \,\frac{1}{e}
\frac{\dd}{\dd \tau} \left ( \frac{{\dot x}^\mu}{e} \right )\frac{1}{e}
\frac{\dd}{\dd \tau} \left ( \frac{{\dot x}_\mu}{e} \right ) - \frac{2 \mu}{e}\,
\frac{\dd}{\dd \tau} \left ( \frac{{\dot x}^\mu}{e^2}
\frac{\dd}{\dd \tau} \left ( \frac{{\dot x}_\mu}{e} \right ) \right ) = 0. \label{3.10}
\end{eqnarray}
The Hamiltonian is
\begin{equation}
H_0 = p_\mu {\dot x}^\mu + \pi_\mu {\ddot x}^\mu + p_e {\dot e} - L_0 ,
\label{3.11}
\end{equation}
Let us introduce the new variables
\begin{equation}
{\dot x}^\mu = q^\mu,~~~~~~{\dot e} = \beta .
\label{3.12}
\end{equation}
From Eqs.\,(\ref{3.6}),(\ref{3.7}) we have
\begin{equation}
{\ddot x}^\mu = \frac{e^3}{2 \mu} \pi^\mu + \frac{{\dot e}}{e} q^\mu,
~~~~~ p_e = - \frac{\pi_\mu q^\mu}{e},
\label{3.13}
\end{equation}
and after inserting the latter expressions into the Hamiltonian (\ref{3.11}),
we obtain
\begin{equation}
H_0 = e \left ( \frac{p_\mu q^\mu}{e}- \frac{e^2 \pi^2}{4 \mu}
-\frac{q^2}{2 e^2}\right ) + \beta ( p_e + \frac{\pi_\mu q^\mu}{e} ).
\label{3.14}
\end{equation}
In deriving the action (\ref{2.13}) we used a gauge in which $f=0$.
In such a gauge the constraint (\ref{2.14}) becomes
\begin{equation}
{\dot x}^\mu y_\mu = 0.
\label{3.15}
\end{equation}
By using Eqs.\,(\ref{2.11}),(\ref{3.7}) and (\ref{3.12}), the latter
equation can be written as
\begin{equation}
\pi_\mu q^\mu = 0.
\label{3.16}
\end{equation}
Our action (\ref{2.13}) and its $L \rightarrow 0$ limit (\ref{3.5}) is then
subjected to the constraint (\ref{3.16}). Therefore, the Lagrangian
${\cal L}_0$ must be supplemented with the above constraint:
\begin{equation}
{\cal L} = {\cal L}_0 - \alpha \pi_\mu q^\mu ,
\label{3.17}
\end{equation}
and the Hamiltonian $H_0$ with
\begin{equation}
H = H_0 + \alpha \pi_\mu q^\mu.
\label{3.18}
\end{equation}
The equations of motion derived from the Hamiltonian $H$ are
\begin{eqnarray}
&&{\dot x}^\mu =\lbrace x^\mu, H \rbrace = q^\mu, \label{3.19}\\
&&{\dot e} = \lbrace e, H \rbrace = \beta , \label{3.20}\\
&&{\dot q}^\mu = \lbrace q^\mu,H \rbrace = - \frac{e^3 \pi^\mu}{2 \mu}
+ \alpha q^\mu + \frac{\beta q^\mu}{e} , \label{3.21}\\
&&{\dot p}_\mu = \lbrace p_\mu , H \rbrace = 0 , \label{3.22}\\
&&{\dot \pi}_\mu = \lbrace \pi_\mu, H \rbrace =
- \left ( p_\mu - \frac{q_\mu}{e} + \alpha \pi_\mu
+ \frac{\beta \pi_\mu}{e} \right ) , \label{3.23}\\
&&{\dot p}_e = \lbrace p_e , H \rbrace = - \frac{3 e^2 \pi^2}{4 \mu}
+\frac{q^2}{2 e^2} - \beta \frac{\pi_\mu q^\mu}{e^2}. \label{3.24}
\end{eqnarray}
Variation of the action $\int {\cal L} \mbox{\rm d} \tau$ with respect to
$e$ and $\alpha$, gives the constraints
\begin{eqnarray}
&&{\tilde \phi}_1 = \frac{3 e^2 \pi^2}{4 \mu}
- \frac{q^2}{2 e^2} = 0 , \label{3.25}\\
&&\phi_2 = \pi_\mu q^\mu = 0 , \label{3.26}
\end{eqnarray}
From the requirement that those constraints
must be preserved in time, we obtain another three constraints,
\begin{eqnarray}
&& \phi_3 = e p_\mu \pi^\mu, \label{3.28}\\
&&\phi_4 = \frac{p_\mu q^\mu}{e}
+\frac{e^2 \pi^2}{2 \mu}- \frac{q^2}{e^2}, \label{3.29}\\
&&\phi_5 = p^2 - \frac{p_\mu q^\mu}{e} \label{3.30}.
\end{eqnarray}
The linear combination
\begin{equation}
{\phi}_1 = - {\tilde \phi}_1 + \phi_4 = \frac{p_\mu q^\mu}{e} -
\frac{q^2}{2 e^2} - \frac{e^2 \pi^2}{4 \mu}
\label{3.31}
\end{equation}
is an expression that enters the Hamiltonian (\ref{3.14}).
Variation of the action $\int {\cal L} \mbox{\rm d} \tau$ with respect $\beta$
gives the constraint
\begin{equation}
\phi_6 = e p_e + \pi_\mu q^\mu = 0 . \label{3.27}
\end{equation}
The equation ${\dot \phi_6}=\{\phi_6,H\}$ for conservation of $\phi_6$
does not give a new constraint.
The constraints $\phi_i$. $i=1,2,3,4,5$, include only the momenta $p_\mu$ and
$\pi_\mu$, conjugated to the dynamical variables $x^\mu$ and $q^\mu$,
whereas the constraint $\phi_6$ includes also the momentum $p_e$ which,
due to (\ref{3.26}) vanishes on the constraint surface. Thus, $p_e$ is
merely an auxiliary momentum, and the constraint associated with it is treated
as the ``last" one.
From $\phi_1 =0$, $\phi_4 =0$, $\phi_5 =0$ it follows that
\begin{eqnarray}
&& \frac{p_\mu q^\mu}{e} = p^2, \label{3.32}\\
&& \frac{q^2}{e^2} = \frac{3}{2} p^2,
\label{3.33}\\
&& \frac{e^2 \pi^2}{\mu} = p^2. \label{3.34}
\end{eqnarray}
Because $q^\mu$ is supposed to be a time like vector and $\pi^\mu$ a space
like vector,
and because their scalar product, $\pi_\mu q^\mu$, vanishes on the constraint
surface, it follows that $q^2 =0$, $\pi^2 \le 0$. Taking also into account that
Eq.\,(\ref{3.25}) implies the proportionality between $q^2$ and $\pi^2$,
it follows that $\pi^2 =0$. Eqs.\,(\ref{3.32})--(\ref{3.34} then become
\begin{eqnarray}
&&\frac{p_\mu q^\mu}{e} = 0, \label{3.35}\\
&&\frac{q^2}{e^2} = 0,~~~~ \frac{e^2 \pi^2}{\mu} = 0, \label{3.36}
\end{eqnarray}
implying $p^2 =0$.
Because $p^2 = 0$, it follows that all constraints $\phi_i$, $i=1,2,...,6$,
are {\it first class}, i.e., $\lbrace \phi_i,\phi_j \rbrace = 0$. This can
be verified by calculating the Poisson brackets between all the constraints.
In fact, the constraints become $\phi_1=p_\mu q^\mu/e$, $\phi_2=q^\mu \pi_\mu$,
$\phi_3 = e p_\mu \pi^\mu$, $\phi'_4 = \pi^2$, $\phi'_5 = p^2$, $\phi'_6 = e p_e$,
where $\phi'_4$, $\phi'_5$ and $\phi'_6$ are the appropriate linear combinations
of the constraints $\phi_i$.
Eqs.\,(\ref{3.26}),(\ref{3.28}),(\ref{3.32}) and (\ref{3.34}) imply that
$q^\mu$, $\pi^\mu$ and $p^\mu$ are parallel. Consequently, the spin tensor
$S^{\mu \nu}=q^\mu \pi^\nu - q^\nu \pi^\mu$ vanishes. The parallelism between
$q^\mu = {\dot x}^\mu$ and $p^\mu$ means that the 4-velocity oscillations are
tangential to the worldline of the particle's center of mass. Therefore, the
center of mass worldline
\begin{equation}
x_{\rm T}(\tau) = x_0^\mu + p^\mu \tau ,
\label{3.37}
\end{equation}
and the particle's position worldline
\begin{equation}
x^\mu (\tau) = x_0^\mu + p^\mu \tau + a^\mu {\rm cos}\, \omega \tau +
b^\mu {\rm sin}\, \omega \tau ,
\label{3.38}
\end{equation}
which are both solutions of the equations of motion (\ref{3.19})--(\ref{3.23}),
are not different wordllines. Both equations, (\ref{3.37}) and (\ref{3.38}),
represent the same curve, they differ only in the choice of parameter.
If in Eq.\,(\ref{3.37}) we change $\tau$ according to $\tau \rightarrow
1 + \alpha {\rm cos}\, \omega \tau + \beta {\rm sin}\, \omega \tau$, where
$\alpha$ and $\beta$ are proportionality factors, defined according to
$p^\mu = \alpha a^\mu$ and $p^\mu = \beta b^\mu$, we obtain
Eq.\,(\ref{3.38}).
The six first class constraints diminish the number of independent
degrees of freedom of our dynamical system. It turns out that $q^\mu$ and
$\pi^\mu$ are not dynamical degrees of freedom at all. Since $q^\mu$ and
$\pi^\mu$ are parallel to $p^\mu$, they bring nothing new to the classical
dynamics system. In the following we will investigate what happens if we
nevertleless pursue with the quantization of our constraint system.
\section{Quantization}
Upon quantization the phase space variables become the operators, satisfying
the commutation relations
\begin{eqnarray}
&&[{\hat x}^\mu,{\hat p}_\nu] = i {\delta^\mu}_\nu,
~~~~[{\hat q}^\mu,{\hat \pi}_\nu] = i {\delta^\mu}_\nu, \label{4.1a}\\
&&[{\hat x}^\mu,{\hat x}^\nu]=0, ~~~[{\hat p}^\mu,{\hat p}^\nu]=0,
~~~[{\hat q}^\mu,{\hat q}^\nu]=0,~~~[{\hat \pi}^\mu, {\hat \pi}^\nu]=0,
\label{4.1b}
\end{eqnarray}
and the constraints become restrictions on physical states:
\begin{eqnarray}
&&{\hat p}^\mu \frac{{\hat q}^\mu}{e}|\psi\langle =0, \label{4.2}\\
&&\frac{1}{2}({\hat q}^\mu {\hat \pi}_\mu + {\hat \pi}_\mu {\hat q}^\mu)|\psi \rangle = 0, \label{4.3}\\
&&e {\hat \pi}_\mu p^\mu |\psi \rangle = 0, \label{4.4}\\
&&{\hat \pi}^\mu {\hat \pi}_\mu |\psi \rangle = 0, \label{4.5}\\
&&{\hat p}^\mu {\hat p}_\mu |\psi \rangle = 0, \label{4.6}\\
&&e {\hat p}_{\hat e}|\psi \rangle = 0. \label{4.7}
\end{eqnarray}
We do not impose the condition
\begin{equation}
{\hat q}^2 |\psi \rangle = 0,
\label{4.7a}
\end{equation}
but only
\begin{equation}
\langle \psi |{\hat q}^2 |\psi \rangle = 0.
\label{4.7b}
\end{equation}
In the representation in which ${\hat x}^\mu$ and ${\hat q}^\mu$ are diagonal, whereas
${\hat p}_\mu = - i \partial/\partial x^\mu$, ${\hat \pi}_\mu = -i \partial/\partial q^\mu$, Eqs.\,(\ref{4.6}) and
(\ref{4.5}) become massless Klein-Gordon equations in the $x^\mu$-space, and the
$q^\mu$-space, respectively.
A particular solution of Eqs.\,(\ref{4.6}),(\ref{4.5}) is
\begin{equation}
\psi_{p,q} (x^\mu,q^\mu) = {\rm e}^{i p_\mu x^\mu} {\rm e}^{i \pi_\mu q^\mu}
\label{4.8}
\end{equation}
Here $p_\mu$ and $\pi_\mu$ are now eigenvalues of the corresponding
operators. The eigenvalues must satisfy the relations $p^\mu p_\mu = 0$ and
$\pi^\mu \pi_\mu=0$.
We will now show that a general solution of the system of equations
(\ref{4.2})--(\ref{4.7}) that satisfies the condition (\ref{4.7b}), is
\begin{equation}
\psi(x^\mu,q^\mu) = \int \mbox{\rm d}^D p\, \mbox{\rm d}^D \pi \, a(p,\pi) {\rm e}^{i p_\mu x^\mu}
{\rm e}^{i \pi_\mu q^\mu} \delta(p^2) \delta (\pi^2) \delta (q^2)
\delta(q^\mu \pi_\mu) \delta (p^\mu \pi_\mu) \delta (p_\mu q^\mu)
\label{4.9}
\end{equation}
where the constraints and the condition (\ref{4.7b}) are expressed in terms
of the $\delta$-functions.
\ \ \ (i) Eq.\,(\ref{4.2}) gives
\begin{equation}
{\hat p}_\mu {\hat q}^\mu \psi = \int \mbox{\rm d}^D p\, \mbox{\rm d}^D \pi a(p,\pi)
p_\mu q^\mu \, {\rm e}^{i p_\mu x^\mu}
{\rm e}^{i \pi_\mu q^\mu} \delta(p^2) \delta (\pi^2) \delta (q^2)
\delta(q \pi) \delta (p \pi) \delta (p q) = 0,
\label{4.19}
\end{equation}
because the integral of $p_\mu q^\mu \,\delta (p_\mu q^\mu)$ over $\mbox{\rm d}^D p$
gives zero.
We distinguish the operators from their eigenvalues by the hat symbol.
\ \ (ii) For Eq.\,(\ref{4.3}) we obtains
\begin{eqnarray}
&&({\hat q}^\mu {\hat \pi}_\mu - \frac{i}{2} D) \psi = 0 \label{4.20}\\
&&{\hat q}^\mu {\hat \pi}_\mu \psi = (-i) \int \mbox{\rm d}^D p \,\mbox{\rm d}^D \pi a(p,\pi)
{\rm e}^{i p_\nu x^\nu}\nonumber\\
&&\hspace{3cm} \times \frac{\partial}{\partial q^\mu} \Bigl(
{\rm e}^{i \pi_\nu q^\nu} \delta(\pi^2) \delta (q \pi) \delta (q^2)
\delta(p q) \Bigr)
\delta (p^2) \delta(p \pi).
\label{4.21}
\end{eqnarray}
In Eq.\,(\ref{4.20}) we took into account the commutation relation
(\ref{4.1a}), which gives ${\hat \pi}_\mu {\hat q}^\mu =
{\hat q}^\mu {\hat \pi}_\mu - i D$.
We will use
\begin{equation}
\frac{\partial}{\partial q^\mu} \delta (f(q)) = \frac{\partial f(q)}{\partial q^\mu}
\frac{\partial \delta(f(q)}{\partial f(q)},
\label{4.22}
\end{equation}
which in particular gives
\begin{equation}
\frac{\partial}{\partial q^\mu} \delta(q^\nu \pi_\nu)
= \pi_\mu \frac{\partial \delta(q^\nu \pi^\nu)}{\partial (q^\nu \pi_\nu)}.
\label{4.23}
\end{equation}
We then have
\begin{eqnarray}
&&\frac{\partial}{\partial q^\mu}\left (
{\rm e}^{i \pi_\nu q^\nu} \delta (q \pi) \delta (q^2) \delta(p q)\right )
= i \pi_\mu {\rm e}^{i \pi_\nu q^\nu} \delta (q \pi) \delta (q^2) \delta(p q)
+ \pi_\mu \frac{\delta(q \pi)}{\partial (q \pi)} \delta(q^2) \delta(p q)
\nonumber\\
&&\hspace{4cm} +
2 q_\mu \frac{\partial \delta(q^2)}{\partial q^2} \delta(q \pi) \delta (p q)
+
p_\mu \frac{\partial \delta(p q)}{\partial (p q)} \delta (q \pi) \delta (q^2).
\label{4.24}
\end{eqnarray}
Inserting the latter expression into Eq.\,(\ref{4.21}), we obtain
\begin{eqnarray}
&&{\hat q}^\mu {\hat \pi}_\mu = (-i) \int \mbox{\rm d}^D p \,\mbox{\rm d}^D \pi \,a(p,\pi)
{\rm e}^{i p_\nu x^\nu} {\rm e}^{i \pi_\nu q^\nu}\biggl(
i q^\mu \pi_\mu \delta (q \pi) \delta (q^2) \delta(p q)
\nonumber \\
&&\hspace{3cm} + q^\mu \pi_\mu \frac{\delta(q \pi}{\partial (q \pi)} \delta(q^2) \delta(p q) +
2 q^\mu q_\mu \frac{\partial \delta(q^2)}{\partial q^2} \delta(q \pi) \delta (p q)
\nonumber\\
&&\hspace{4cm} +
q^\mu p_\mu \frac{\partial \delta(p q)}{\partial (p q)} \delta (q \pi) \delta (q^2)
\biggr) \delta (p^2) \delta(p \pi) .
\label{4.25a}
\end{eqnarray}
Using the relation
\begin{equation}
x \delta'(x) = - \delta(x)
\label{4.25b}
\end{equation}
we obtain
\begin{equation}
{\hat q}^\mu {\hat \pi}_\mu \psi = 4 i \psi.
\label{4.25}
\end{equation}
Eq.\,(\ref{4.20}) then becomes
\begin{equation}
\left ( 4 i - \frac{i D}{2} \right ) \psi = 0,
\label{4.26}
\end{equation}
which is satisfied if $D=8$.
\ (iii) Eq.\,(\ref{4.4}) gives:
\begin{equation}
{\hat p}^\mu \hat{\pi}_\mu \psi= \int \mbox{\rm d}^D p \,\mbox{\rm d}^D \pi \,a(p,\pi) p^\mu \pi_\mu
{\rm e}^{i p_\nu x^\nu}{\rm e}^{i \pi_\nu q^\nu}
\delta(p^2) \delta (\pi^2) \delta (q^2)
\delta(q^\mu \pi_\mu) \delta (p^\mu \pi_\mu) \delta (p_\mu q^\mu),
\label{4.27}
\end{equation}
which vanishes, because of the expression $p^\mu \pi_\mu \delta (p^\mu \pi_\mu)$
under the integral.
\ (iv) In order to calculate Eq.\,(\ref{4.5}), we will use Eq.\,(\ref{4.24}),
in which we express the derivative of the $\delta$-function as
\begin{equation}
\delta' (x) = - \frac{\delta(x)}{x} + \Delta (x).
\label{4.27a}
\end{equation}
The latter expression gives
\begin{eqnarray}
&&\int \mbox{\rm d} x \, F(x) \delta' (x) = \int \mbox{\rm d} x
\left ( F(0) + F'(x)\Bigl\vert_{x=0}\, x \right )
\left ( - \frac{\delta(x)}{x} + \Delta (x) \right ) \nonumber\\
&&\hspace{2cm} = - F'(x)\Bigl\vert_{x=0} - \frac{F(x)}{x}\Bigl\vert_{x=0}+
\int \mbox{\rm d} x \, F(x) \Delta(x) = - F'(x)\Bigl\vert_{x=0},
\label{27b}
\end{eqnarray}
if we define $\Delta(x)$ according to
\begin{equation}
\int \mbox{\rm d} x \, F(x) \Delta(x)=\frac{F(x)}{x}\Bigl\vert_{x=0},
\label{27c}
\end{equation}
so that after the integration the term containing $\Delta(x)$ cancels out.
Then Eq.\,(\ref{4.24}) becomes
\begin{eqnarray}
&&\frac{\partial}{\partial q^\mu}\left (
{\rm e}^{i \pi_\mu q^\mu} \delta (q \pi) \delta (q^2) \delta(p q)\right )
= {\rm e}^{i \pi_\mu q^\mu}\delta (q \pi) \delta (q^2) \delta(p q)
\left (2 i \pi_\mu - \frac{\pi_\mu}{q^\nu \pi_\nu} - \frac{2 q_\mu}{q^2}
- \frac{p_\mu}{p^\nu q_\nu} \right )\nonumber \\
&&\hspace{7cm}+ ~terms~ with~ \Delta.
\label{27d}
\end{eqnarray}
If we use the above expression in Eq.\,(\ref{4.21}), we also obtain the
same result (\ref{4.25})
By using Eq.\,(\ref{27d}) in Eq.\,(\ref{4.5}), we obtain
\begin{eqnarray}
&& {\hat \pi}^\mu {\hat \pi}_\mu \psi = - \frac{\partial^2}{\partial q^\mu \partial q_\mu}
= - \int \mbox{\rm d}^D p\, \mbox{\rm d}^d \pi \, {\rm e}^{i p_\nu x^\nu}
{\rm e}^{i \pi_\nu q^\nu} \delta (q \pi) \delta (q^2) \delta(p q) \nonumber\\
&&\hspace{3cm} \times \biggl\{ \left [ \pi_\mu \left (2 i - \frac{1}{q \pi} \right )
- \frac{2 q_\mu}{q^2} - \frac{p_\mu}{p^\nu q_\nu} \right ]
\left [ \pi^\mu \left (2 i - \frac{1}{q \pi} \right )
- \frac{2 q^\mu}{q^2} - \frac{p^\mu}{p^\nu q_\nu} \right ] \nonumber \\
&&\hspace{2cm} + \frac{\partial}{\partial q^\mu} \left ( - \frac{\pi^\mu}{q^2} - \frac{p^\mu}{p q}
\right ) \biggr\} \nonumber \\
&&\hspace{1.5cm} = \frac{2}{q^2} (D-8) \psi .
\label{27e}
\end{eqnarray}
All other terms, including those with $\Delta$, vanish.
We have found that the constraint (\ref{4.5}) is satisfied by the wave
function (\ref{4.9}) in eight dimensions, just like the constraint
(\ref{4.3}).
\ (v) Eq.\,(\ref{4.6}) becomes
\begin{equation}
{\hat p}^\mu {\hat p}_\mu \psi = - \frac{\partial^2 \psi}{\partial x^\mu \partial x_\mu}=0,
\label{4.29}
\end{equation}
which vanishes because of the expression $p^2 \delta (p^2)$ under the
integral over $\mbox{\rm d}^D p$.
\ \ (vi) Eq.\,(\ref{4.7}) becomes
\begin{equation}
- i \frac{\partial}{\partial e} \psi = 0,
\label{4.30}
\end{equation}
which is fulfilled, because $\psi$ does not explicitly depend on $e$.
A remarkable feature of the above calculations is that the wave function
(\ref{4.9}) does not solve the quantum constraints (\ref{4.2})--(\ref{4.7})
and the condition (\ref{4.7b})
in arbitrary dimension $D$, but only in $D=8$. If (\ref{4.9}) is indeed the most general
solution of the system of equation (\ref{4.2})--(\ref{4.7}),(\ref{4.7b}),
and there is no other solution, then
the system, obtained by
quantizing the zero length limit of the string, is consistent
in eight dimensions. Though the zero length limit is just like a point
particle, the system inherits from the string a set of constraints, which
upon quantization can be satisfied in eight dimensions, but not in an
arbitrary number of dimensions.
If we act on $\psi$ with the operator ${\hat S}_{\mu \nu}
= {\hat q}_\mu {\hat \pi}_\nu - {\hat q}_\nu {\hat \pi}_\mu$, which is
the generator of rotations in the $q^\mu$-space, we obtain
\begin{eqnarray}
&&{\hat S}_{\mu \nu} \psi = \int \mbox{\rm d}^D p \,\mbox{\rm d}^D \pi \,
\left [ (q_\mu \pi_\nu - q_\nu \pi_\mu ) \left ( 2 i - \frac{1}{q \pi}
\right ) + \frac{1}{q^2} (q_\mu p_\nu - q_\nu p_\mu) \right ] \nonumber \\
&&\hspace{3.5cm} \times \,{\rm e}^{p_\rho x^\rho} {\rm e}^{\pi_\rho q^\rho}
\delta(p^2) \delta (\pi^2)
\delta(q \pi) \delta (q^2) \delta (p \pi) \delta (p q)
\label{4.31}
\end{eqnarray}
The latter expression vanishes, because the $\delta$-functions restrict the
range of the variables $p^\mu$, $q^\mu$, $\pi^\mu$ on the surface, on which they
are all paralles to each other, so that on the surface, $q_\mu \pi_\nu - q_\nu \pi_\mu =0$
and $q_\mu p_\nu - q_\nu p_\mu = 0$.
The wave function $\psi(x^\mu,q^\mu)$ is thus a scalar under rotations
generated by ${\hat S}^{\mu \nu}$. The particle has vanishing spin.
\section{Conclusion}
We have found yet another surprising property of strings. So far it was
well known that a bosonic string can be consistently quantized in 26 dimensions,
but not in other dimensions\footnote{However, see Refs.\,\cite{PavsicSaasFee},
where slightly more general strings were shown to be consistent
in arbitrary dimensions.}. In this paper we considered a zero length
limit of a bosonic string. At first sight one would expect that such
a system is just a point particle, whose quantized counterpart can live
in arbitrary dimensions. But a thorough treatment of the constraints reveals,
that upon quantization we obtain a system of equations that can be solved
by a certain rather general wave function only in eight dimension. This means
that a quantized point particle that is obtained as a limit of a string must
live in eight dimensions, it cannot live in four dimensions. A consequence
is that, according to Kaluza-Klein theory, such a particle, in the case
when the 8-dimensional space is curved,
experiences the force that from the point of view of 4-dimensional
subspace manifests itself as gravitation and Yang-Mills forces. This means
that the zero point limit of the string leads to a theory that besides
gravitation contains other fundamental forces as well.
The original string theory (of strings with finite extension)
also leads to gravitation and Yang-Mills fields,
though within a rather different theoretical procedure.
Zero length limit of a string and the corresponding theoretical description,
is merely a theoretical idealisation. In reality, a string remains finite,
approximately being described as a zero length string living in eight
dimensions. In the approximate theory, only eight dimensions are
necessary for the consistency, the remaining eighteen dimensions are
superfluous. In fact the approximate theory is not consistent in
26-dimensions. The remaining eighteen dimensions are necessary for
consistent description of the remaining degrees of freedom that are
truncated in the approximate theory. Thus, treating a string as a point
particle, decouples eighteen dimenions from the description. The point particle
``sees" only eight dimensions, and, if the space is curved, feels gravitional
and Yang-Mills forces. Effectively, by treating the string approximately
as a point particle, we have reduced spacetime from twenty six to
eight dimensions, without really compactifying the remaining eighteen
dimensions; we have only eliminatied them from the dynamics, and thus
rendered them invisible to the particle. In other words, although
there might be present additional dimensions, the particle moves only
in an eihgt dimensional subspace.
\vspace{4mm}
\centerline{\bf Acknowledgment}
This work has been supported by the Slovenian Research Agency.
|
\section{Introduction}
\label{sec:intro}
Low energy effective field theories (EFTs) are a natural organizing
principle in physics. They have had great success in describing a wide
range of phenomena, from the classic particle theory example of the
chiral Lagrangian~\cite{Weinberg:1978kz} to an EFT for
quantum Hall systems~\cite{Wen:1992uk,Wen:1992ej}. The primary
ingredients in constructing an effective theory are energy scales,
degrees of freedom, and symmetries (spacetime, global, and gauge). In
particular some of these local symmetries are only preserved up to a
total derivative. Terms in the effective Lagrangian which are only
gauge invariant up to integration by parts, often called Wess-Zumino
terms, are a useful tool in classifying these EFTs and often inform us
of the topological nature of the matter at hand.
Consider quantum Hall (QH) systems as an example. In the
nonrelativistic case the topological nature is dictated by the
Chern-Simons couplings in the effective field theory: a
electromagnetic (standard) Chern-Simons term
$\epsilon^{\mu\nu\rho}A_\mu\partial_\nu A_\rho $ as well as a mixed
Chern-Simons term $\epsilon^{\mu\nu\rho}A_\mu\partial_\nu \omega_\rho$
($\omega$ being the spin connection of the spatial manifold), the
latter often called the Wen-Zee coupling. These two terms dictate the
Hall conductivity, the Hall viscosity, and the shift~\cite{Wen:1992ej}.
For systems with Galilean symmetry, an
extension of of these terms to a full EFT of quantum Hall based on
nonrelativistic diffeomorphism invariance~\cite{Son:2005rv} was worked
out in Refs.~\cite{Hoyos:2011ez,Son:2013rqa}. (The third Chern-Simons term
involving only the spin connection, $\omega \wedge d\omega$, has been
recently argued to be connected to the chirality of the edge
modes~\cite{Gromov:2014gta}).
Recently both integer \cite{Novoselov:2005kj,Zhang:2005zz} and
fractional \cite{FQHE-graphene1,QHE-graphene2} quantum Hall states
have been observed in graphene. Instead of Galilean invariance,
graphene, with its four massless Dirac modes, exhibits an approximate
relativistic invariance\footnote{While the massless Dirac cones have a
Lorentz symmetry the sound speed is not the speed of light. The
nearly instantaneous Coulomb interactions breaks the symmetry,
leading to a relatively slow running of the fermion
velocity~\cite{Gonzalez:1993uz,Son:2007ja}.}, hence to undertand the
EFT for quantum Hall states in graphene one needs to understand how to
write down topologically invariant terms. While the standard
Chern-Simons term is Lorentz invariant, the mixed Wen-Zee term
presents a problem since the (2+1) spin connection $\omega_\mu$ is a nonabelian connection, unlike the 1+1 dimensional version. Recently, we have found a
relativistic version of the Wen-Zee term~\cite{Golkar:2014}); in this
work we expand on the treatment of Ref.~\cite{Golkar:2014} and extend
the formalism to superfluids.
Relativistic superfluids at zero temperature can also be described via
an EFT~\cite{Son:2002} which, in its standard form, contains one
massless degree of freedom: the Goldstone mode from spontaneous
symmetry breaking. This formalism, as we will see, fail to deliver a
full treatment of parity broken effects in superfluids, in particular
it misses the possibility of a Hall viscosity. No Wess-Zumino term was
found in (2+1) dimensional relativistic superfluid EFT~\cite{Nicolis:2014}.
On the other hand, the Hall viscosity can be incorporated into an
effective field theory of parity-odd nonrelativistic
superfluids~\cite{Hoyos:2013eha}. This construction also relies on an
abelian spin connection which does not exist in the relativistic case.
In this paper we attack the problems of relativistic quantum Hall and
relativisic superfluids with the introduction of a new Lorentz
covariant conserved current. This current, defined for odd-dimensional
fluids, depends only on the velocity of the fluid and the spacetime
metric. The corresponding conserved charge is the Euler character of
even-dimensional spacelike foliations. Due to this nature we call it
the ``Euler current'' in analogy with the Euler density. Coupling this
current to the electromagnetic connection in the quantum Hall EFT
provides a natural Lorentz invariant generalization of the Wen-Zee
coupling and gives a nonzero Hall viscosity and shift. In the case of
the superfluid the appropriate coupling is most natural in the dual
description where the Goldstone mode is described by a gauge
field. With this coupling we find the requisite Wess-Zumino term for
nonzero Hall viscosity in the superfluid.
The outline of this paper is as follows. In section \ref{sec:current} we define this new current and discuss its various properties. In section \ref{sec:QH} we discuss coupling the Euler current to the relativistic quantum Hall EFT, summarizing and expanding on the results of \cite{Golkar:2014}. In section \ref{sec:SF} we discuss the dual description of the superfluid EFT and its coupling to the Euler current. We conclude in section \ref{sec:conclusions}. We include for completeness the full list of superfluid correlation functions in appendix
\ref{App:SF}.
\section{The Euler current}
\label{sec:current}
In this section we define the new topological current and look at its various properties and generalizations to other dimensions.
\subsection{Definition and conservation}
\label{subsec:def_cons}
Let us consider a three dimensional manifold $\mathcal{M}$ supplied with a metric $g_{\mu\nu}$ and a vector field $u^\mu$ of unit norm $u_\mu u^\mu = \sigma$. Here $\sigma=\pm 1$ corresponding to positive or negative signature. We consider the following current:
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:top_current_defined}
J^\mu =\frac{1}{8\pi} \varepsilon ^{\mu\nu\rho} \varepsilon^{\alpha\beta\gamma} u_\alpha
\left( \nabla_\nu u_\beta \nabla_\rho u_\gamma
+ \frac\sigma2 R_{\nu\rho\beta\gamma}\right),
\end{equation}
where we define the totally antisymmetric tensor with $|\text{det }g|^{\frac12}\varepsilon^{txy}= +1$. To show the conversation of this current, we note that since $u^\mu$ has constant norm, $u^\mu\nabla_\nu u_\mu=0$ for any direction $\nu$. Hence $\nabla_\nu u_\mu$ is at each point constrained in the two dimensional surface perpendicular to $u$. Keeping this in mind, we define the parallel and perpendicular projectors
${P_\parallel}^\mu_\nu = \sigma u^\mu u_\nu$ and ${P_\perp}^\mu_\nu=\delta^\mu_\nu-\sigma u^\mu u_\nu$ and we calculate:
\begin{align}
\label{eq:current_conservation}
8\pi \nabla_\mu J^\mu = &\varepsilon ^{\mu\nu\rho} \varepsilon^{\alpha\beta\gamma}
\nabla_\mu u_\alpha \nabla_\nu u_\beta \nabla_\rho u_\gamma
+ 2 \varepsilon ^{\mu\nu\rho} \varepsilon^{\alpha\beta\gamma}
u_\alpha \nabla_\mu \nabla_\nu u_\beta \nabla_\rho u_\gamma
+ \frac\sigma2 \varepsilon ^{\mu\nu\rho} \varepsilon^{\alpha\beta\gamma}
\nabla_\mu u_\alpha R_{\nu\rho\beta\gamma}\notag\\
&+\frac\sigma2 \varepsilon ^{\mu\nu\rho} \varepsilon^{\alpha\beta\gamma}
u_\alpha \nabla_\mu R_{\nu\rho\beta\gamma}\notag\\
=& \varepsilon ^{\mu\nu\rho} \varepsilon^{\alpha\beta\gamma}
\nabla_\rho u_\gamma \left(
R_{\mu\nu\beta\lambda}u^\lambda u_\alpha
-\frac\sigma2 R_{\mu\nu\beta\alpha} \right)\notag\\
=&\varepsilon ^{\mu\nu\rho} \varepsilon^{\alpha\beta\gamma}
\nabla_\rho u_\gamma \left(\sigma
R_{\mu\nu\delta\lambda} ({P_\parallel}^\delta_\beta+{P_\perp}^\delta_\beta)
{P_\parallel}^\lambda_\alpha
-\frac\sigma2 R_{\mu\nu\delta\lambda}
({P_\parallel}^\delta_\beta+{P_\perp}^\delta_\beta)
({P_\parallel}^\lambda_\alpha+{P_\perp}^\lambda_\alpha) \right)\notag\\
= &-\frac\sigma2\varepsilon ^{\mu\nu\rho} \varepsilon^{\alpha\beta\gamma}
\nabla_\rho u_\gamma R_{\mu\nu\delta\lambda}{P_\perp}^\delta_\beta
{P_\perp}^\lambda_\alpha=0,
\end{align}
where in the first equality the first term vanishes as we have three vectors $\nabla u$ perpendicular to $u$ contracted with an epsilon, and the last term vanishes by the second Bianchi identity. Using the definition of the curvature tensor in terms of covariant derivatives and juggling some indices around we get the second equality. We then insert the identity $g = P_\parallel+P_\perp$ twice and expand. And finally in the last line, we again have three vector perpendicular to $u$ contracted with an epsilon which vanishes. We thus see that this current is in fact identically conserved.
A similar calculation demonstrates under a variation of $u$, $J$ transforms by a total derivative,
\eq{
\delta_u J^\mu = 2 \nabla_\nu \left[
\epsilon^{\mu\nu\rho} \epsilon^{\alpha\beta\gamma}
u_\alpha \delta u_\beta \nabla_\rho u_\gamma
\right],\label{eq:u_vary_J}
}
where we have used the fact that $u\cdot \delta u =0$.
We emphasize that the arguments above require the vector field to be of constant norm. In practical terms, what this means is that we require a nowhere vanishing vector field that we can normalize. As an example, we can consider small fluctuations about a large magnetic field. We will consider this example in detail in the following sections.
\subsection{Conserved topological charge}
\label{subsec:charge}
We now demonstrate that the conserved charge associated with the topological current is the Euler characteristic of the two dimensional surface on which it is calculated. We will first specialize to the case where $u^\mu$, the normalized vector from which we defined $J$ in the previous section, is normal to some surface $\Sigma$ and show the $u\cdot J$ is proportional to $^{(2)}\!R$, the curvature tensor of the submanifold $\Sigma$ and then generalize the result to any surface.
Assuming that there exists a spatial surface $\Sigma$ orthogonal to $u^\mu$,\footnote{Frobenius' theorem tells us the existence of such a surface requires an integrability condition $\epsilon^{\mu\nu\rho}u_\mu \nabla_\nu u_\rho=0$.} the identity relating the curvature tensor on $\Sigma$ to the full curvature tensor is:
\begin{equation}
{{{^{(2)}\!R}}_{abc}}^d=
{P_\perp}_a^\alpha{P_\perp}_b^\beta{P_\perp}_c^\gamma{P_\perp}_\delta^d
{R_{\alpha\beta\gamma}}^\delta+\sigma\left(K_{ac}{K_b}^d-K_{bc}{K_a}^d\right),
\end{equation}
where $\sigma=\pm1$ is as in the previous section and $K_{ab}$ is the extrinsic curvature associated with the surface $\Sigma$ defined as $K_{ab}=\nabla_a u_b$. Looking at the quantity $u\cdot J$ we have:
\begin{align}
u\cdot J = \frac1{8\pi}
\varepsilon ^{\mu\nu\rho} \varepsilon^{\alpha\beta\gamma} u_\mu u_\alpha
\left( \nabla_\nu u_\beta \nabla_\rho u_\gamma
+ \frac\sigma2 R_{\nu\rho\beta\gamma}\right)
=\frac \sigma{16\pi}
\varepsilon ^{\mu\nu\rho} \varepsilon^{\alpha\beta\gamma} u_\mu u_\alpha
{^{(2)}\!R}_{\nu\rho\beta\gamma}=\frac{\sigma}{8\pi}{}^{(2)}\!R.
\end{align}
Turning this into an integral equation we have:
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:total_charge}
Q_\Sigma=\int\limits_\Sigma \sqrt{^{(2)}\!g\;\,}\; u\cdot J = \frac{\sigma}{8\pi} \int\limits_\Sigma \sqrt{^{(2)}\!g\;}\; ^{(2)}\!R = \sigma \frac{\chi}{2},
\end{equation}
where $Q_\Sigma$ denotes the total charge evaluated on the surface $\Sigma$, $^{(2)}\!g$ is the two dimensional induced metric and $\chi$ is the Euler characteristic of the surface $\Sigma$.
Of course this was a special case, as by Frobenius theorem it is not always possible to find a surface normal to the vector field $u^\mu$. However, barring topological obstruction, we can find an interpolating function that interpolates between a spacelike hypersurface's normal vector to an arbitrary (smooth and everywhere timelike) unit vector $u_*^\mu$ as a function of time. If we have a family of foliations $\Sigma_t$ with normal vector $n^\mu$ Consider an $L^\infty$ vector of the form
\eq{
u^\mu=\frac{(1-f(t) )n^\mu+f(t)u_*^\mu}{\left\|(1-f(t) )n^\mu+f(t)u_*^\mu\right\|}
,~
f(t) =
\left\{\begin{array}{cc}
0 & t \le 0 \\
\mathcal{O}(t)^3 & 0 \mathrel{\hbox{\rlap{\lower.55ex \hbox{$\sim$}} \kern-.3em \raise.4ex \hbox{$<$}}} t\\
1+\mathcal{O}(1-t)^3 & t \mathrel{\hbox{\rlap{\lower.55ex \hbox{$\sim$}} \kern-.3em \raise.4ex \hbox{$<$}}} 1 \\
1 & t \ge 1
\end{array}\right.
}
The fact that $n$ and $u_*$ are both unit timelike vectors and the triangle inequality guarantees that $u$ is smooth as well.
Since the current $J$ is second order in derivatives, it will receive no contribution from the $t^3$ part at $t=0$ and from the $(1-t)^3$ at $t=1$. We can hence argue that this deformation leaves the value of the charge associated with the current unchanged at $t=1$. Also, from the previous argument, it is clear that the charge at $t=0$ is proportional to the Euler characteristic of the two dimensional surface defined by $t=0$. Applying charge conservation, we see that the value of the charge at $t\lsim1$ is also equal to the Euler characteristic. We have hence shown that the value of the charge evaluated on any surface which is cobord to the surface $t=0$ is equal to the Euler characteristic which remains unchanged in time. We note that this does \emph{not} imply that the charge density is equal to the Euler density, and it will of course in general not be.
Of course, the main assumption here was that the vector field $u$ was smoothly deformable to the constant normal vector $n$. This is true in Minkowski signature thanks to our requirement that $u$ be a smooth vector\footnote{Consider the 2D Euclidean analog where we take $u$ to be the normalized gradient of the height function of a Riemann surface. On foliations where the topology of a constant height section changes the height function must have an extremum, which means that $u$ is not smooth there.}. but does not always hold for the Euclidean case. We now turn to an example of a topologically non-trivial mapping where we cannot follow the arguments above.
Take $\mathcal M = \mathds R \times S^2$, where we treat the non-compact direction as time. We argued above that with a Minkowski signature and time-like $u^\mu$, the value of the total charge is $-1$. With a Euclidean signature, however, the value is not fixed. Since the space of unit vectors is a sphere, we can classify different vector fields $u^\mu$ by $\pi_2(S^2)=\mathds Z$. These are of course the winding classes of mapping a sphere to a sphere. Doing the calculation of the total charge on a surface of constant Euclidean time,we find that $Q=n$, where $n$ denotes the winding of $u^\mu$.
We can understand this result as follows. If we look at $\mathds R \times S^2$ as a spherical shell with time flowing radially outwards, then the mapping which we considered above of $u^\mu \sim \partial_\tau$, that is the vector field constantly pointing in the Euclidean time direction, would of course correspond to a radially outward pointing vector field. It is clear that this mapping has winding $n=1$ and therefore the charge would be equal to $Q=1$, matching equation \eqref{eq:total_charge}. For general products $\mathds R \times \Sigma$ in $D$ Euclidean dimensions, the vector field at constant $\tau \in \mathds R$ is a map $\Sigma \rightarrow S^{D-1}$ and will have some nontrivial mapping class for $D>1$.
\subsection{Weyl invariance}
\label{subsec:weyl}
Given the topological nature of the charge corresponding to this new current, it is natural to study how the current transforms under Weyl rescalings of the spacetime metric. Construction of the topological current requires a unit norm vector, and so under a nonstandard Weyl rescaling
\eq{
g_{\mu\nu}\rightarrow \tilde g_{\mu\nu} = e^{2\Omega} g_{\mu\nu},~u^\mu\rightarrow \tilde u^\mu = e^{-\Omega} u^\mu.
}
This leads to a rather simple transformation property for the current \emph{density} $\sqrt{-g}J^\mu$,
\eq{
4 \pi\delta_\Omega \left( \sqrt{-g} J^\mu \right) = \sqrt{-g} \nabla_\nu \left(u^\nu \partial^\mu \Omega - u^\mu \partial^\nu \Omega \right). \label{eq:Weyl_trams}
}
The benefit of this simplified transformation of the charge density is easily seen when we construct the charge density two form $(*J)_{\mu\nu} = -\varepsilon_{\mu\nu\rho} J^\rho$, whose pullback to $\Sigma$ is the charge density integrand,
\eq{
\phi_\Sigma^*\left(*J \right) = \sqrt{h_\Sigma} n_\mu J^\mu d\Sigma, ~4\pi \delta_\Omega\left( *J \right)_{\mu\nu}=\nabla_\sigma\varepsilon_{\mu\nu\rho} \left(u^\sigma \partial^\rho \Omega - u^\rho \partial^\sigma \Omega \right).
}
We therefore find that $\delta_\Omega (*J) = d\Lambda$ , and at least for manifolds without boundary, we confirm that the charge density is always Weyl invariant.
With a locally conserved current, it is of course natural to couple it to a $U(1)$ connection. One can check that, without boundary terms,
\eq{
\delta_\Omega \left( \int \sqrt{-g} A_\mu J^\mu \right) =\frac{1}{4\pi} \int \sqrt{-g} F_{\mu\nu} u^\nu \partial^\mu \Omega,
}
and therefore if $F\cdot u =0$, the coupling is Weyl invariant (up to boundary terms.) As we will see when considering this coupling in quantum Hall in section \ref{sec:QH} and 2+1 superfluids in section \ref{sec:SF}, this constraint is naturally satisfied.
\subsection{Boundary theory}
\label{subsec:anomaly}
On a theory with boundary with normal vector $n_\mu$, $n\cdot J$ is not necessarily zero and hence, to preserve charge conservation, there needs to be a boundary current to compensate for this. We define:
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:boundary_current}
k^\mu=\frac{1}{4\pi}\varepsilon^{\mu\nu\rho}n_\rho n'^\alpha \nabla_\nu t_\alpha,
\end{equation}
where $t^\mu=\frac1{\sqrt{1+(n\cdot u )^2}}\varepsilon^{\mu\nu\rho}u_\nu n_\rho$ and $n'^\mu=\varepsilon^{\mu\nu\rho} t_\nu u_\rho$. We note that this current has the desired properties of being parallel to the boundary and also the scalar $u\cdot k$ gives the correct contribution such that the total charge of the bulk and boundary currents is equal to the Euler characteristic. To calculate the divergence of this current, we define the boundary projector: ${P}^\mu_\nu=\delta^\mu_\nu-n^\mu n_\nu$. We see:
\begin{align}
8\pi\,{}^{(2)}\nabla_\mu k^\mu=& P^\mu_\alpha P^\beta_\mu \nabla_\beta k^\alpha
= P^\beta_\mu \nabla_\beta k^\mu
=2 P^\beta_\mu \nabla_\beta \left(\varepsilon^{\mu\nu\rho}n_\rho
n'^\alpha \nabla_\nu t_\alpha\right)\\
=& 2 P^\beta_\mu \varepsilon^{\mu\nu\rho}\left(\nabla_\beta n_\rho \right)
n'^\alpha (\nabla_\nu t_\alpha)
+ 2 P^\beta_\mu \varepsilon^{\mu\nu\rho} n_\rho
\left(\nabla_\beta n'^\alpha \right) (\nabla_\nu t_\alpha)
+ 2 P^\beta_\mu \varepsilon^{\mu\nu\rho} n_\rho
n'^\alpha \nabla_\beta \nabla_\nu t_\alpha \notag\\
=& 2 \varepsilon^{\beta\nu\rho}n_\nu \left(\nabla_\beta n_\rho \right)
n'^\alpha n^\gamma \nabla_\gamma t_\alpha
- 2 \varepsilon^{\beta\nu\rho} n_\rho
u_\alpha (\nabla_\beta n'^\alpha) u^\gamma (\nabla_\nu t_\gamma)
+ \varepsilon^{\beta\nu\rho} n_\rho n'^\alpha
R_{\beta\nu\alpha\gamma} t^\gamma\notag\\
=& 0 - 2 \varepsilon^{\beta\nu\rho} n_\rho
n'^\alpha t^\gamma (\nabla_\beta u_\alpha) (\nabla_\nu u_\gamma)
+\frac12 \varepsilon^{\rho\beta\nu} \varepsilon^{\lambda\alpha\gamma}
n_\rho u_\lambda R_{\beta\nu\alpha\gamma}\notag\\
=& - \varepsilon^{\rho\beta\nu} \varepsilon^{\lambda\alpha\gamma}
n_\rho u_\lambda \big(\nabla_\beta u_\alpha\nabla_\nu u_\gamma
+\frac12 R_{\beta\nu\alpha\gamma}\big).\notag
\end{align}
Here, in the third line the following manipulations have taken place. On the first term, the $\nu$ index has been projected onto $n$ as no other index in $\epsilon^{\mu\nu\rho}$ can be in the $n$ direction. In the second term, the $\alpha$ index has been projected on to $u$ because $\alpha$ has to be perpendicular to both $t$ and $n'$. And in the last term the identity for the curvature has been used.
In the fourth line, we note that $t$ can be continued into the bulk in such a way that $n\cdot \nabla t=0$. (One can also say that the derivative in the definition of $k$ is only a boundary derivative and therefore $n\cdot\nabla=0$.) This implies that the first term vanishes. On the second term we have swapped the vectors in the derivative twice. And in the third term (as well as the fifth line, we have used $n'^\alpha t^\gamma-n'^\gamma t^\alpha=\varepsilon^{\lambda\alpha\gamma}u_\lambda$. This coincides with $-8\pi n\cdot J$.
We can also calculate the transformation of the boundary current under a Weyl rescaling:
\eq{
g\rightarrow \tilde g_{ab} = e^{2\Omega} g_{ab},~u\rightarrow \tilde u_a = e^{\Omega} u_a,~n\rightarrow \tilde n_a = e^{\Omega} n_a,~t\rightarrow \tilde t_a = e^{\Omega} t_a.
}
Under this transformation, the boundary current transforms as:
\begin{align}
\sqrt{-{}^{(2)}\!g\,}\,k^\mu \rightarrow &
\frac1{4\pi} e^{-\Omega}
\sqrt{-{}^{(2)}\!g\,}\, \varepsilon^{\mu\nu\rho}n_\rho n'^\alpha
\tilde \nabla_\nu e^{\Omega} t_\alpha
=\frac{1}{4\pi} \sqrt{-{}^{(2)}\!g\,}\, \varepsilon^{\mu\nu\rho}n_\rho n'^\alpha
\tilde \nabla_\nu t_\alpha.
\end{align}
Therefore, the change of the boundary current is:
\begin{align}
\delta_\Omega \left(\sqrt{-{}^{(2)}\!g\,}\,k^\mu\right)
=& \frac1{4\pi}\sqrt{-{}^{(2)}\!g\,}\, \varepsilon^{\mu\nu\rho}n_\rho n'^\alpha
(\delta_\Omega \Gamma_{\nu\alpha}^\beta) t_\beta\notag\\
=& \frac1{4\pi}\sqrt{-{}^{(2)}\!g\,}\, \varepsilon^{\mu\nu\rho}n_\rho n'^\alpha t_\beta
\big(2 \delta^\beta_{(\nu} \partial^{}_{\alpha)} \Omega - g_{\nu\alpha} \partial^\beta \Omega\big)
\notag\\
=& \frac1{4\pi}\sqrt{-{}^{(2)}\!g\,}\, \varepsilon^{\mu\nu\rho}n_\rho
\big( n'_\alpha t_\nu - n'_\nu t_\alpha \big) \partial^\alpha \Omega \notag\\
=& \frac1{4\pi}\sqrt{-{}^{(2)}\!g\,}\, \varepsilon^{\mu\nu\rho}n_\rho
\varepsilon_{\lambda \nu \alpha} u^\lambda \partial^\alpha \Omega
= \frac1{4\pi}\sqrt{-{}^{(2)}\!g\,}\, n_\rho (u^\rho \partial^\mu - u^\mu \partial^\rho) \Omega\notag.
\end{align}
Again, this cancels the variation of \eqref{eq:Weyl_trams}.
\subsection{Generalizations}
\label{subsec:other_dims}
We can generalize this current to other dimensions as well. From the proof of conservation (eq. \eqref{eq:current_conservation}), it is clear to see that in $d$ dimensional space-time the current defined as:
\begin{equation}
J^\mu_d = \varepsilon^{\mu \mu_1\cdots \mu_{d-1}}\varepsilon^{\nu_1 \cdots \nu_d} u_{\nu_1}
{\nabla}_{\mu_1}u_{\nu_2}\cdots {\nabla}_{\mu_{d-1}}u_{\nu_d},
\end{equation}
is conserved in flat space\footnote{This current was discussed in the context of a background isospin field coupling to a Dirac spinor in two, three and four dimensional flat space \cite{Abanov:1999qz}.}. In curved space however, we can only define a conserved current in odd-dimensional spaces, given by:
\begin{multline}
J^\mu_d = \varepsilon^{\mu \mu_1\cdots \mu_{d-1}}\varepsilon^{\nu_1 \cdots \nu_d} u_{\nu_1}
\left({\nabla}_{\mu_1}u_{\nu_2}\cdots {\nabla}_{\mu_{d-1}}u_{\nu_d}
+\frac\sigma2 \frac{d-1}{2!!}R_{\mu_1\mu_2\nu_2\nu_3}
{\nabla}_{\mu_3}u_{\nu_4}\cdots {\nabla}_{\mu_{d-1}}u_{\nu_d}\right.\\\left.
+\left(\tfrac\sigma2\right)^2 \frac{(d-1)(d-3)}{4!!}R_{\mu_1\mu_2\nu_2\nu_3} R_{\mu_3\mu_4\nu_4\nu_5}
{\nabla}_{\mu_5}u_{\nu_6}\cdots {\nabla}_{\mu_{d-1}}u_{\nu_d}\right.\\\left.
+\left(\tfrac\sigma2\right)^3 \frac{(d-1)(d-3)(d-5)}{6!!}R_{\mu_1\mu_2\nu_2\nu_3} R_{\mu_3\mu_4\nu_4\nu_5} R_{\mu_5\mu_6\nu_6\nu_7}
{\nabla}_{\mu_7}u_{\nu_8}\cdots {\nabla}_{\mu_{d-1}}u_{\nu_d}\right.\\\left.
+\cdots +\left(\tfrac\sigma2\right)^\frac{d-1}{2}R_{\mu_1\mu_2\nu_2\nu_3}\cdots
R_{\mu_{d-2}\mu_{d-1}\nu_{d-1}\nu_d}\right).
\end{multline}
Again, we can demonstrate, following the arguments of section \ref{subsec:charge} that if there is a codimension one hypersurface $\Sigma$ perpendicular to the vector field $u^\mu$, then:
\begin{equation}
u\cdot J_d = \left(\tfrac\sigma2\right)^\frac{d-1}{2} \varepsilon^{\mu \mu_1\cdots \mu_{d-1}}\varepsilon^{\nu_1 \cdots \nu_d} u_\mu u_{\nu_1} \,^{(d-1)}\!R_{\mu_1\mu_2\nu_2\nu_3}\cdots
\,^{(d-1)}\!R_{\mu_{d-2}\mu_{d-1}\nu_{d-1}\nu_d},
\end{equation}
where again $\,^{(d-1)}\!R_{\mu\nu\rho\sigma}$ denotes the Riemann curvature tensor of the $d-1$-dimensional submanifold $\Sigma$. We recognize this as the $(d-1)$-dimensional Euler density. Integrating over $\Sigma$ we get:
\begin{equation}
\int\limits_\Sigma \sqrt{^{(d-1)}\!g\;\,}\; u\cdot J_d =(4\pi\sigma)^\frac{d-1}{2}
\left(\tfrac{d-1}2\right)!\, \chi(\Sigma).
\end{equation}
This justifies the fact that the conserved current can only be constructed in odd dimensions, as the Euler characteristic is only defined in even dimensions. Note that the three dimensional current defined previously is $J^\mu=\frac1{8\pi}J^\mu_3$.
It is also straight-forward to rewrite this current in the first order formalism. Taking $e^a_\mu$ and ${\omega^a_\mu}_b$ to be the tetrad and the connection 1-form respectively, the 3-dimensional current in first order formalism would most naturally be written:
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:firstorderformalism}
J=*\Theta, \;\; \Theta = \epsilon^{abc} u_a \left(D u_b \wedge D u_c - R_{bc} \right),
\end{equation}
where $u_a=e^\mu_a u_\mu$ and $D u_a = du_a - \omega ^b_a u_b$ is the covariant exterior derivative of $u$. In this language, the statement of current conservation is $d\Theta=0$. The generalization of this form of the current to higher dimensions follows exactly as above. The advantage of this notation, however, is that it would also be straightforward to generalize to some other gauge groups. In this case $u_a$ would be a representation and $\omega$ and $R$ would have to be replaced by $A$ and $F$, the connection and curvature of the gauge group respectively. An example of such structures is global angular forms \cite{bott1982lw}, used in algebraic topology and occasionally in high energy contexts (for instance \cite{Freed:1998tg}).
\section{Quantum Hall}
\label{sec:QH}
In this section we review the and expand on the results of \cite{Golkar:2014}. As discussed in \cite{Golkar:2014}, the inclusion of the topological current is required to match the correct degeneracy of the Landau levels similar to the Wen-Zee term in the non-relativistic case. Our goal is to construct an effective field theory to describe Lorentz invariant quantum Hall systems after all heavy degrees of freedom have been integrated out, and we are left with a generating functional
\eq{
Z[A_\mu, g_{\mu\nu}] = \exp\left( iS_{eff}[A_\mu, g_{\mu\nu}]\right)
}
which we require must be invariant under both $U(1)$ and diffeomorphism invariant. Since we want the effective theory to be applicable to quantum Hall systems, $F^2>0$, we will work in a derivative expansion about a background with a constant magnetic field, and do not require the action to be smooth as $B \rightarrow 0$, where the Landau level spacing would vanish.
While we have discussed in section \ref{sec:current} the generalization of the Euler current to manifolds with boundary, in what follows we will assume that the theory is defined on a manifold without boundary. The inclusion of the boundary and its implications for the existence of light modes is the subject of a forthcoming study.
\subsection{Effective action and power counting}
\label{subsec:QH-EFT}
We will work in natural units where $\hbar = v_F = e = 1$. Our power counting scheme is designed so that the external magnetic field $B$ is of $\mathcal{O}(1)$ and hence $F_{\mu\nu}=\mathcal{O}(1)$. This implies that the gauge field $A_\mu=\mathcal{O}(p^{-1})$. The metric is assumed to have perturbations about the flat background which are of order one, $g_{\mu\nu}=\mathcal{O}(1)$ such that the Riemann curvature would be of order $p^2$.
In order to include the current $J^\mu$ discussed in the previous section, we need a normalized time-like vector field. In the problem at hand, since we are considering fluctuations of the background electromagnetic field about a large magnetic field $B$, we would expect $F_{\mu\nu}F^{\mu\nu}$ to be always greater than one. We can hence construct:
\begin{equation}
u^\mu=\frac{1}{2b}\varepsilon^{\mu\nu\lambda} F_{\nu\lambda},
b=(\frac12 F_{\mu\nu}F^{\mu\nu})^\frac12,
\end{equation}
which has the desired properties. Physically, $u^\mu$ is the local frame in which the field is purely magnetic, and $b$ is the magnetic field in that frame. Note that the Bianchi identity $dF=0$ turns into a conservation equation $\nabla_\mu (b u^\mu)=0$.
Both $u^\mu$ and $b$ are $\mathcal{O}(1)$ in our power counting scheme and we will use them as building blocks of the gauge invariant terms in the action, as power counting is a simple derivative counting on $b$ and $u^\mu$. With this power counting, the Chern-Simons term is $\mathcal{O}(p^{-1}),$ and the only $\mathcal{O}(1)$ term we can write down is a scalar function of the magnetic field $\epsilon(b)$.
The action to order $\mathcal{O}(p^0)$ describes a perfect fluid with stress tensor given by:
\eq{
T^{\mu\nu}=(\epsilon+P)u^\mu u^\nu + P g^{\mu\nu},
P=b \epsilon'(b) - \epsilon(b).
}
The term $A_\mu J^\mu$ is $\mathcal{O}(p)$.
There are two other terms that one can write down at $\mathcal{O}(p)$:
\begin{equation}
f_1(b)\varepsilon^{\mu\nu\lambda} u_\mu \partial_\nu u_\lambda,
f_2(b)u^\mu\partial_\mu b.
\end{equation}
The second term, however, is seen to be a total derivative if we define $f_2(b)=b f'_3(b)$, that is $f_2(b)u^\mu\partial_\mu b=\nabla_\mu (b u^\mu f_3(b))$. Hence, the full Lagrangian including all possible terms to order $\mathcal{O}(p)$ is:
\begin{equation}\label{L-eff}
\mathcal L = \frac\nu{4\pi} \varepsilon^{\mu\nu\lambda}
A_\mu\partial_\nu A_\lambda - \varepsilon(b)
+ f(b) \epsilon^{\mu\nu\lambda} u_\mu\partial_\nu u_\lambda + \kappa A_\mu J^\mu.
\end{equation}
It is interesting to note that when $\epsilon(b)\sim b^{3/2}$ and
$f(b) \sim b$, the action is fully Weyl invariant. This would
be the case if the microscopic theory underlying the quantum Hall state is a conformal field theory, in which case all the non-universal functions appearing in the effective action up to first order in derivatives are fixed. In all that follows, the results for a Weyl invariant system can be easily read off by making the above substitutions.
\subsection{Relativistic shift}
\label{subsec:QH-shift}
If we calculate the charge density of the theory by taking a variation with respect to $A_0$, we see that the only contributions come from the Chern-Simons term and the new topological current:
\begin{equation}
Q=\int_\Sigma \left(\frac{\nu}{4\pi} n_\mu \varepsilon^{\mu\nu\rho}F_{\nu\rho} + \kappa n_\mu J^\mu \right) = \nu N_\phi + \frac \kappa 2 \chi.
\label{eq:QH_shift_defined}
\end{equation}
Where $N_\phi=\frac{1}{2\pi}\int_\Sigma F$ is the total magnetic flux quanta through the spatial manifold, $\chi=2(1-g)$ is the Euler character, and $n^\mu$ is the normal vector to our surface $\Sigma$. This of course, is the relativistic analogue of the shift. For comparison, in the non-relativistic case, the shift $\mathcal S$ is defined via $Q=\nu (N_\phi + \mathcal S)$, i.e., $\nu \mathcal S$ is the offset between the total charge and the fraction of the total flux. However, since in a relativistic theory, we can have a finite offset even at zero filling fraction, we have defined the offset (that is $\kappa \chi/2$) to be independent of $\nu$, so that it remains finite when $\nu=0$.
In order to match the coefficient $\kappa$ to a microscopic description, we look at the degeneracy of the Landau levels on a sphere. The situation is similar to the non-relativistic case \cite{Greiter:2011}, with two minor differences. Due to the nontrivial spin connection on the sphere, we can not simply square the Dirac Hamiltonian and use the Schr\"odinger equation degeneracy. For instance, the lowest Dirac Landau level on a sphere with $N_\phi$ magnetic flux is the same as the lowest Schr\"odinger Landau level with $N_\phi^{\text{NR}}=N_\phi-1$ flux quanta, and therefore has degeneracy $N_\phi = N_\phi^{\text{NR}}+1$. The degeneracy of the $n^\mathrm{th}$ Landau level is similarly $N_\phi+2n $. Second, the energy spectrum is offset, such that the ground state has zero energy, which is of course the source of the offset of $\frac12$ in the filling fractions.
For an integer quantum Hall state with $\nu= N_f(n+\frac12)$, where $N_f$ is the total ``flavor" degeneracy of the Landau levels ($N_f=4$ for graphene), the total charge
can be found by summing up all charges of the filled Landau levels. Defining the half-full, particle-hole symmetric zero energy level to carry zero charge gives $\kappa = N_f n (n+1)$. Note that $\kappa=0$ for the $\nu=\pm2$ states in graphene, corresponding to full and empty zero energy Landau levels.
A similar counting holds for fractionally filled Landau levels. For illustration, we look at graphene with complete $SU(4)$ flavor symmetry breaking. Consider the state with $0<\nu<1$. Of the four zero energy Landau levels, two are full, one is partially filled and the last is empty (the sequential complete filling of each of these characterized by $\nu=-1,0,1,2$ respectively). To proceed further, we need to know the charge offset at fractional filling. Comparing again with the non-relativistic case where $Q=\nu (N'_\phi + \mathcal S_{\text{NR}})$, we see that $\kappa=\nu (\mathcal S_{\text{NR}}-1)$. For instance, in the case of Laughlin fractions $\nu=\frac1m$, $\kappa=\frac{m-1}{m}$.
\subsection{Discrete symmetries}
\label{subsec:QH-CPT}
We now discuss how the effective theory transforms under $C$, $P$, and $T$. We start with the standard $CPT$ transformations of three dimensional abelian gauge theories \cite{Deser:1981wh},
\eqn{
C&:&A_\mu \rightarrow - A_\mu, \nonumber \\
P&:&x^1 \rightarrow -x^1,~A_0 \rightarrow A_0, ~A_1 \rightarrow -A_1, ~A_2 \rightarrow A_2, \nonumber \\
T&:&x^0 \rightarrow -x^0,~A_0 \rightarrow A_0, ~A_i \rightarrow -A_i.
}
All three individual symmetries are broken by a background magnetic field, and a nonzero chemical potential breaks $C$. The combination $PT$ is preserved by both the magnetic field and chemical potential. One finds that all terms in our effective action \eqref{L-eff} are invariant under $PT$. Turning off a chemical potential, we can classify all terms with respect to $CP$ and $CT$. Under both of these, the $\nu,~\kappa$ and $u\wedge du$ terms are all odd and therefore nonzero values at zero chemical potential indicate a spontaneous breaking of $CP$ and $CT$. As argued in \ref{subsec:QH-shift}, studying the shift of the $\nu=0$ integer quantum Hall state of graphene we find $\kappa=0$, consistent with unbroken symmetries. On the other hand, it is easy to construct a multi-flavor Moore-Read state \cite{Moore:1991ks} at $\nu=0$ which breaks both $CP$ and $CT$.
\subsection{Momentum density and the microscopic theory}
\label{subsec:QH-micro}
As a first example of what we can learn from our effective theory, we compute the momentum density
$T^{0i}$ in the background of a static inhomogeneous magnetic field $B=b(x,y)$. We turn on a perturbation in the $g_{0i}$ component of the metric tensor and read out the momentum density from the action: $\delta S =
\int\!d^3x T^{0i}g_{0i}$. We find
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:mom_density}
T^{0i} = - \epsilon^{ij}\partial_j \left(\frac\kappa{8\pi}b+f(b)\right) .
\end{equation}
Note that if we use $L=r\times p$ to construct an angular momentum density we trivially get zero.
For
the FQH states on the zeroth Landau level with negligible mixing with
other Landau levels, the function $f(b)$ is completely determined by
the topological coefficients $\nu$ and $\kappa$. This comes from a
holomorphic constraint relating the momentum density and the particle
density.
For concreteness, let us work with the standard Dirac representation of the Clifford algebra,
\begin{equation}
\gamma^0 = \sigma_3, \quad \gamma^1 = i\sigma_1, \quad
\gamma^2 = i\sigma_2,
\end{equation}
for which the free Dirac Hamiltonian at zero chemical potential has the form
\begin{equation}
H = -i \gamma^0\gamma^i D_i= 2\begin{pmatrix}
0 & D \\ -\bar D & 0 \end{pmatrix}.
\end{equation}
Here $D\equiv D_z= \nabla_z-i A_z$ and its conjugate $\bar D\equiv D_{\bar z}$, and we use complex coordinates $z = x+iy$, $\bar z = x-iy$. States in the $n=0$ level are simply zero energy eigenstates of the Hamiltonian, $\psi = (\varphi,0)^T$, with $\varphi$ satisfying
the holomorphic constraint $\bar D \varphi =\bar D \varphi^* = 0$.
Now let us look at the stress-energy tensor,
\begin{equation}\label{Tmunu}
T^{\mu\nu} = -\frac i4 \overline\psi \gamma^{(\mu} \Dlr{}^{\nu)} \psi,
\end{equation}
again assuming a static inhomogeneous magnetic field and no
electric field. For the $0i$ components we can ignore time
derivatives as $A_0=0$ and the lowest Landau level has zero energy.
We see that
\begin{equation}
T^{0i} = -\frac i4 \varphi^* \Dlr{}^i \varphi,
\end{equation}
which after changing to complex coordinates and using the holomorphic constraints becomes
\begin{equation}
T^{0i} = -\frac14 \epsilon^{ij}\partial_j n,
\end{equation}
where $n=\varphi^*\varphi$ is the particle number density on the
lowest Landau level. Comparing to \eqref{eq:mom_density} we find
that for FQH states in the zeroth Landau level,
\begin{equation}
f(b) = \frac1{8\pi}(\nu-\kappa) b.
\end{equation}
The calculation above neglects possible mixing between Landau levels,
as well as corrections to the stress-energy
tensor~(\ref{Tmunu}) due to interactions. Both effects are small when
the interaction energy scale is much smaller than the distance between
Landau levels $\sqrt B$. In particular, we know that turning on Coulomb interactions with a strength $e^2$ will partially split the degeneracy of the Landau level and correct the stress tensor, but the result will be
\eq{
T^{0i} = -\frac{\nu}{8\pi}\epsilon^{ij} \partial_j b + e^2 \times T_{int.},
}
which means that we can trust our result so long as the Coulomb interaction is weak\footnote{Note, of course, that even at small $e$ degeneracy splitting is a nonperturbative problem.}.
\subsection{Response functions}
\label{subsec:QH-response}
We now compute different response functions of the relativistic quantum Hall states to external fields. We can compute the conductivity directly from Ohm's law, $j_i = \sigma_{ij}E^i$, by looking at the linearized current in flat space. We find the conductivity matrix at nonzero
frequencies and wavenumbers,
\begin{equation}
\sigma_{xx}(\omega, \mathbf k) = -i\omega \frac{\varepsilon'(B)}{B}+\mathcal{O}(k^3)
,~
\sigma_{xy}(\omega,\mathbf k) = \frac\nu{2\pi} +
\left( \frac\kappa{4\pi} + \frac{2f(B)}B \right) \frac{\omega^2}B
- \frac{f'(B)}B \frac{\mathbf{k}^2}B+\mathcal{O}(k^4)\,.
\end{equation}
At lowest Landau level, the Hall conductivity simplifies to
\begin{equation}\label{Kohn}
\sigma_{xy}(\omega,\mathbf{k}) = \frac\nu{2\pi} + \frac\nu\pi \frac{\omega^2}B
+ \frac{\kappa-\nu}{8\pi}\frac{\mathbf{k}^2}B+\mathcal{O}(k^4,e^2).
\end{equation}
In Galilean invariant systems, the frequency dependence of the
conductivity matrix is completely determined, at $q=0$, by Kohn's
theorem~\cite{Kohn:1961zz}. In relativistic systems Kohn's theorem no
longer applies. Nevertheless, Eq.~\eqref{Kohn} implies that at least in the zeroth Landau level the $\omega^2$ correction is completely
fixed by the filling fraction.
We next compute the Hall viscosity, defined as parity odd response to uniform shear metric perturbations. Specifically in 2+1 dimensional theories with parity broken,
\eq{
\C{T_{xx}(-\omega,0)T_{xy}(\omega,0)}=-i\eta_H\omega+\mathcal{O}(\omega^2)
.}
Turning on only spatially homogeneous perturbations of the
spatial metric, $g_{ij}=\delta_{ij}+h_{ij}(t)$, one finds the only term that contributes is the Euler current coupling, giving
\begin{equation}
\kappa \int \!d^3x \,\sqrt{-g} A_\mu J^\mu =
-\frac{\kappa B}{32 \pi}
\int \!d^3x \, \epsilon^{jk} h_{ij} \partial_t h_{ik},
\end{equation}
yielding
\begin{equation}
\eta_H = \frac{\kappa B}{8 \pi}\,.
\end{equation}
The relationship between the Hall viscosity and $\kappa$ is identical to the nonrelativistic result $\eta_H = n \mathcal{S}/4$ \cite{ReadRezayi:2010} with the substitution $\mathcal{S} \rightarrow \mathcal{S}_{\text{NR}}-1$ for graphene states with $0<\nu<1$.
Note that the Hall viscosity depends only on the topological number
$\kappa$. This is expected since $\eta_H$ can be determined by adiabatic
transport and hence should not depend on non-universal functions like
$f(b)$. Note that we can calculate angular momentum density from \eqref{eq:mom_density} and find that it vanishes, so our effective action does not reproduce the relationship between Hall viscosity and orbital angular momentum density \cite{Read:2008rn,ReadRezayi:2010}.
Next we look at the components of the stress tensor when one turns
on a static, spatially inhomogeneous, electric field. The result is
\begin{equation}
T_{ij} = P\delta_{ij} + \frac{\kappa}{8\pi} (\partial_i E_j + \partial_j E_i)
- \left(\frac{\kappa}{4\pi}+f'(B)\right) \delta_{ij}
\bm{\nabla}\cdot {\bf E}.
\end{equation}
Rewriting this in terms of the drift velocity
$v^i=\epsilon^{ij}E_j/B$ and the shear rate
$V_{ij}=\frac12(\partial_iv_j+\partial_jv_i -\delta_{ij}\partial\cdot v)$,
\begin{equation}
T_{ij} = P\delta_{ij} - \eta_H (\epsilon_{ik}V_{kj}+\epsilon_{jk}V_{ki}) + \delta_{ij} (\eta_H+Bf'(B)) \bm{\nabla}\times {\bf v}.
\end{equation}
The traceless part of the stress tensor reflects the nonzero Hall
viscosity of the quantum Hall
fluid~\cite{Avron:1995fg,Avron:1997,Read:2008rn}.
Finally, we look at the response of the system to a gradient in the gravitational potential. Turning on a small contribution to $g_{tt}=-1+h_{tt}$, we find:
\begin{equation}
\langle T^{tx}\rangle= \left(\frac{ \kappa}{4\pi} B_0 + f(B_0) \right) \partial_y h_{tt}.
\end{equation}
\section{Superfluids}
\label{sec:SF}
In this section we consider the $2+1$ dimensional superfluid and look at the contributions of the new terms to parity odd transport. The overall structure of the Lagrangian and the power counting as well as the discrete symmetries here mirror closely those in the quantum Hall case. For the sake of completeness, we repeat the necessary arguments in the following sections.
\subsection{Effective action and power counting}
\label{subsec:SF-EFT}
The standard formulation of the effective theory of a
superfluid~\cite{Son:2002} is in terms of a single Goldstone mode
$\psi$ with a shift symmetry which is the phase of the superfluid
condensate. In three dimensions we can use an alternative dual
description in terms of a $U(1)$ gauge field, $f=da\sim *d\psi$. The
particle number current is then
\begin{equation}
j = \frac 1{2\pi} *\!\!f.
\end{equation}
The fluid conservation equation $d*j=0$ is simply the Bianchi identity for $f$. The field $f=da$ should not
be confused with the external electromagnetic field $F=dA$, which is
nondynamical and coupled via $q A\cdot j$. We will be
interested in expanding about backgrounds of the form:
\eq{
j^\mu = n_0 (\partial_t)^\mu,~A = \mu_A
dt,~g_{\mu\nu}=\eta_{\mu\nu}, }
which correspond to configurations
close to a stationary fluid in a flat background at constant finite
chemical potential.
Similar to the previous section, power counting in momenta $p$, we find that $f\sim \mathcal O(1)$, and therefore $a\sim \mathcal O(p^{-1}).$ The only difference now is that $A\sim \mathcal O(1).$ Now, under the reasonable assumption that we do not want a parity-breaking and mass-generating Chern-Simons term $a\wedge da$,\footnote{The massless excitations of this theory are indeed the Goldstone modes of spontaneously breaking the superfluid $U(1)$ symmetry generated by the current $\epsilon^{\mu\nu\rho} f_{\nu\rho}$ \cite{Kovner:1990pz}. Hence any term that would gap the system, such as $a\wedge da$, would be prohibited by this symmetry.} which would gap out the Goldstone boson, the most general action at lowest order $\mathcal{O}(p)^0$ is
\eq{
S_0 = \int\!d^3x\,\sqrt{-g} \left[
-\varepsilon(n)+ \frac q{4\pi} \varepsilon^{\mu\nu\rho}A_\mu f_{\nu\rho}
\right],
}
where $n^2 = -j^\mu j_\mu=+f^2/8\pi^2$.
Before including higher derivative terms, let us study this effective theory in some detail. The first variation of this action gives the lowest order equations of motion
\begin{equation}\label{SF-eom}
\frac{1}{4\pi^2} {\nabla}_\mu \Bigl(\frac{\varepsilon'(n)}n f^{\mu\nu}\Bigr)
+ \frac q{4\pi} \varepsilon^{\nu\rho\lambda}F_{\rho\lambda}=0,
\end{equation}
or in form notation,
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:zeroorderEOMform}
\frac{1}{4\pi^2} d*\!\left(
\frac{\varepsilon'}{n}f
\right)+\frac{q}{2\pi}F=0.
\end{equation}
We can also construct the zeroth order stress tensor and electromagnetic current,
\eq{
T_{\mu \nu} = -\varepsilon g_{\mu \nu}
+\frac{1}{4\pi^2} \varepsilon' f_{\mu \rho}f_\nu{}^\rho, \quad
j_{EM}^\mu = \frac{q}{4\pi} \varepsilon^{\mu \nu \rho} f_{\nu \rho} = q j^\mu.
}
The current is conserved thanks to $d^2=0$. If
we decompose it into a number density and four-velocity,
\eq{
j^\mu = n u^\mu,\qquad u^\mu = \frac{j^\mu}{\sqrt{-j^2}}
}
then the stress energy tensor will have the form
\begin{equation}
T^{\mu\nu} = n\varepsilon' u^\mu u^\nu + (n\varepsilon' -\varepsilon)g^{\mu\nu}
\end{equation}
If we now identify $\varepsilon(n)$ with the energy density, as a function
of the particle number density, and
recall the relationship between pressure and energy density in
zero-temperature thermodynamics: $p=n\epsilon'-\epsilon$, then we see
that the stress tensor can be written in the familiar ideal fluid form
$T^{\mu\nu} =
(\varepsilon+p)u^\mu u^\nu+p g^{\mu\nu}$. We can also use the thermodynamic identities to identify the chemical potential $\mu = \varepsilon'(n).$
Expanding the action to quadratic order, we can also identify the
superfluid sound
speed $c_s^2 = dp/d\rho = n\varepsilon''/\varepsilon'.$
Let us now work to one higher order in derivatives. By the power counting above, $u^\mu$ and $n$ are $\mathcal O(p^0)$ and $J$ the topological current is $\mathcal O(p^2)$. The lowest order coupling of the superfluid to the topological current, $a\cdot J$ is of order $\mathcal O(p)$. The arguments in section \ref{subsec:QH-EFT} can be repeated to show that the only other term up to redefinitions we need to consider is $\zeta(n) u \wedge du$.\footnote{There is one additional possible term $h(n) f_{\mu\nu}F^{\mu\nu}\propto n h(n)u \wedge F $, but it can be removed by a field redefinition of $a$ along with a shift of $\zeta$.} We therefore need to study the effect of two $\mathcal{O}(p)$ terms in the action,
\eq{
S_1 = \int \sqrt{-g} \left[
\zeta(n) \epsilon^{\mu\nu\rho}u_\mu\partial_\nu u_\rho
+ \kappa a_\mu J^\mu
\right],
}
on the transport properties of the system. Similar to the quantum Hall case discussed above, the entire action $S=S_0+S_1$ would be Weyl invariant if we take $\epsilon(n)\sim n^{3/2}$ and $\zeta(n) \sim n$.
We note that the term $a_\mu J^\mu$ can be considered a Wess-Zumino term for a fluid. In a recent paper, all possible Wess-Zumino terms of multiple systems including the $2+1$ dimensional superfluid were systematically studied \cite{Nicolis:2014}. However, the coupling to the topological current here was not found. We believe this is due to the fact that while the current $J$ is a local function of $d\psi$ and its derivatives the coupling to $a$ looks nonlocal when the superfluid is described using the Goldstone mode.
\subsection{Discrete symmetries}
\label{subsec:SF-CPT}
The CPT properties of the dual gauge field in our superfluid description are similar to those of the previous section. Explicitly, we have:
\eqn{
C&:&A_\mu \rightarrow - A_\mu,a_\mu \rightarrow - a_\mu,
\nonumber \\
P&:&x^1 \rightarrow -x^1,~A_{0,2} \rightarrow A_{0,2}, ~A_1 \rightarrow -A_1, ~a_{0,2} \rightarrow -a_{0,2}, ~a_1 \rightarrow a_1, \nonumber \\
T&:&x^0 \rightarrow -x^0,~A_0 \rightarrow A_0, ~A_i \rightarrow -A_i,~a_0 \rightarrow -a_0, ~a_i \rightarrow -a_i,
}
where we have derived the transformation properties of the dual gauge field, $a_\mu$ from the transformations of the goldstone mode in the microscopic theory. It is straight-forward to see using these transformations that the zeroth order action $S_0$, is $C$, $P$ and $T$ even. In turn the first order action $S_1$ is $C$ even but $P$ and $T$ odd.
\subsection{The superfluid shift}
\label{subsec:shift}
We now show that the effective theory of the superfluid exhibits a
nonzero shift: when put on a sphere with nonzero $\kappa$, our effective field theory needs a nonzero magnetic flux through the sphere to have a smooth ground state. We may rearrange our action as
\begin{equation}
S =\int\!d^3x\, \sqrt{-g}\,\left[
\mathcal{L}[f]+
a_\mu \left(
\frac q{4\pi}\varepsilon^{\mu\nu\lambda} F_{\nu\lambda}
+ \kappa J^\mu \right) \right],
\end{equation}
where $\mathcal{L}_f$ is a gauge-invariant Lagrangian density, depending only on $f_{\mu\nu}$ and its derivatives. The field equation for $a$ is
\eq{
\nabla_\mu \mathcal{D}^{\mu\nu}
= \frac{q}{4\pi} \epsilon^{\nu\rho\lambda}F_{\rho\lambda} + \kappa J^\nu,\label{eq:gen_SF_eom}
}
where in analogy with electromagnetism in medium we define the displacement tensor $\mathcal{D}^{\mu\nu}$,
\eq{
\mathcal{D}^{\mu\nu} = 2 \frac{\delta \mathcal{L}[f]}{\delta f_{\mu\nu}}+2 \kappa \frac{\delta u_\beta}{\delta f_{\mu\nu}} \left(\epsilon^{\lambda\sigma\rho}f_{\lambda\sigma} \epsilon^{\alpha\beta\gamma} u_\alpha \nabla_\rho u_\gamma \right).
}
which is still antisymmetric and a function of $f$ and its derivatives. It is clear that if we think only in terms of $\mathcal{D}$, the only change, compared to the zeroth order equation of motion \eqref{SF-eom}, is that now there is an extra source term.
Note that here and in what follows we assume that there are no superfluid vortices, which would act as delta function electric sources for $\nabla_\mu \mathcal{D}^{\mu\nu}$ in \eqref{eq:gen_SF_eom}. This can be seen by noting that vortices, which are infinitely massive in the limit where the electron binding energy gap goes to infinity, will couple to the effective theory via a worldline source $\Delta S = \int_\gamma a$, where $\gamma$ is the worldline of the vortex. This will add a delta function source to the right hand side of \eqref{eq:gen_SF_eom}. However in our effective theory we will then find that near the delta function, \eqref{eq:gen_SF_eom} implies that $\mathcal{D}^2$ and therefore $f^2$ will change sign and our effective field theory will break down. We therefore can not have any vortices and trust our effective theory (unless the source is cancelled by a singular magnetic flux tube).
If we have a smooth $\mathcal{D}$ and therefore a smooth timelike $u$ on a closed manifold, integrating the $\nu=0$ component of \eqref{eq:gen_SF_eom} gives
\begin{equation}
q N_\phi + \kappa \frac\chi 2 = 0.
\label{eq:SF_shift_defined}
\end{equation}
This is analogous to the definition of the shift for the quantum Hall case in \eqref{eq:QH_shift_defined}. There, the shift represents a mismatch between the total magnetic flux and the total charge on a closed surface. Here, the equations of motion require the total charge associated to $a_\mu$ to be zero and hence we derive a relationship between the total flux and the Euler characteristic of the surface, which as we will see below, if not satisfied signifies the presence of singularities in the field configurations. To be precise, we define the superfluid shift to be the net flux required to have no vortices when the superfluid is placed on a sphere:
\eq{
\mathcal{S} =-\frac{\kappa}{q}.
}
As an example, consider the $p_x+ip_y$ superfluid, whose order parameter defines a vector in the tangent space of the \emph{spatial} manifold which transforms under the electromagnetic $U(1)$, on a sphere. First we look at the case where there is no magnetic field present. Since we cannot comb a sphere with a vector field, it is clear that there will be singular points in any configuration, that is there will be superfluid vortices present. However, in the presence of a net magnetic field piercing the sphere, the combing problem is more subtle. We know that in this case the gauge field $A_\mu$ must be defined in patches with transition functions (which depend on the magnetic flux) that tell us about the patching procedure. Now, since the order parameter transforms covariantly under gauge transformations, it too must be defined in patches with the same transition functions. With this procedure, it can be shown that it \emph{is} possible to comb the sphere if there is an appropriate amount of magnetic flux. This argument can be generalized to any Riemann surface and the constraint for having a globally well defined covariant vector field is $q N_\phi -\chi=0$. Comparing to \eqref{eq:SF_shift_defined}, we can read off $\kappa=-2$. Setting the charge $q=-2$ for the order parameter of $p+ip$ we find that the shift is $\mathcal{S}=-1$.
A quick way of deriving this result is by looking at the condition of having a globally covariantly constant vector field, where the covariant derivative takes into account both the geometric and the electromagnetic connection, respectively $\omega$ and $A$:
\begin{equation}
\nabla_\mu v^a = \partial_\mu v^a +{\omega_\mu}^{ab} v^b - i q A_\mu v^a,
\end{equation}
where $a$, $b$ are Lorentz indices which are raised and lowered using $\delta^{ab}$ since the discussion is in Euclidean signature.
Defining $\omega_\mu={\omega_\mu}^{ab} \epsilon^{ab}$, $v=v_x+iv_y$ and $\bar v=v_x-iv_y$, we find:
\begin{equation}
\nabla_\mu v = \partial_\mu v + i \Big(\frac12 \omega_\mu - q A_\mu \Big) v,
\;\;\;\;
\nabla_\mu \bar v
= \partial_\mu \bar v - i \Big(\frac12 \omega_\mu + q A_\mu \Big) \bar v,
\end{equation}
We can now derive the above relationship between $N_\phi$ and $\chi$ by requiring the total connection to vanish. However, note that this can only be done either for $v$ or for $\bar v$ and not for both. Physically, this means that the $p+ip$ and $p-ip$ superfluids cannot be simultaneously made vortex-free on the sphere. In other words, the sign of the shift depends on the helicity of the order parameter. This discussion resembles the arguments of \cite{Read:1999fn}, which derive the same result by looking at the Bogoluibov-de Gennes equations in the microscopic theory.
\subsection{Transport Coefficients}
\label{subsec:SF-trans}
We now look at the transport coefficients of the system. The full
response of the system to background perturbations can be seen in
appendix \ref{App:SF}. Here, we summarize some key parity odd
transports.
Starting with Hall conductivity we have:
\begin{equation}
\sigma_{xy}(\omega,\mathbf k) =\frac{2n_0 \zeta'(n_0) \mathbf k^2- (4 \zeta(n_0)+\kappa n_0)\omega^2}{2\mu^2(c_s^2\mathbf k^2 - \omega^2)}
\end{equation}
In particular, we can read off the zero frequency Hall conductivity as:
\begin{equation}
\sigma_{xy}=\frac{\kappa q^2 n_0}{2 \mu^2}+\frac{2q^2\zeta(n_0)}{\mu^2}.
\end{equation}
We next look at the Hall viscosity by turning on a metric perturbation. We calculate:
\begin{equation}
\langle T_{xx}(-\omega,-\mathbf k) T_{xy}(\omega,\mathbf k)\rangle =
i\omega
\frac{\kappa n_0}{4 } \frac{\omega^2- 2 c_s^2 k_y^2 }{c_s^2 \mathbf k^2-\omega^2}.
\end{equation}
From which we see:
\begin{equation}
\eta_H=\frac{\kappa n_0}{4},
\end{equation}
which again matches exactly the value derived in the previous section. Lastly, we calculate the momentum current generated by a gravitation potential gradient via a small perturbation $g_{tt}=-1+\delta h_{tt}(y)$,
\begin{equation}
\langle T^{tx}\rangle= -n_0\frac{\kappa}{4 c_s^2} \partial_y h_{tt}.
\end{equation}
In a finite sample, there will be contributions to the momentum flow coming from the boundary terms. This effect as well as the relationship to the thermal Hall conductivity will be analyzed in a forthcoming paper.
\section{Conclusions}
\label{sec:conclusions}
We have constructed a new current in odd dimensions, whose charge is the Euler characteristic of the codimension one hypersurface on which it is calculated. We showed that it is identically conserved but its construction requires the existence of a vector field of unit norm.
We looked at the effects of this term in two scenarios where a normalized vector field is present: the quantum Hall system and the three dimensional relativistic superfluid. In the quantum Hall case, we showed that the topological current is necessary to correctly describe the offset between the magnetic flux and the total charge, i.e., the shift. We also showed that the shift defined in such a way satisfies the same relationship with the Hall viscosity as in the non-relativistic case.
For the superfluid, the topological current describes a parity odd Wess-Zumino term which allows for nonzero Hall viscosity and is only present (as a local gauge invariant term) in the gauge field description. This term also describes the superfluid shift: the amount of magnetic flux needed to pierce a sphere to allow the superfluid to have a vortex-free ground state. In this case, as well as the quantum Hall, the shift only depends on the topology of the spatial manifold of our theory.
It would be interesting to look at the effects of this current in other systems as well. In this paper we only analyzed the properties of systems in three dimensions. However, the current can be written in any odd dimensional system, where one can define a nowhere vanishing vector field. This of course would have many applications where the emergent properties of the low energy system rely on the presence of a background vector field (similar to the quantum Hall case) or when there is a vector-like dynamical degree of freedom, fluctuating about a non-zero background (similar to the superfluid case).
Another direction of generalization of these arguments is to extend the discussion to systems in backgrounds with torsion, that is, in the first order formalism. This would allow us to analyze the effects of this current on the spin current by looking at the response of the system to fluctuations in torsion and is the subject of a forthcoming paper.
\section*{Acknowledgments}
It is a pleasure to thank Emil J. Martinec, David R. Morrison, Sergej Moroz, and Nicholas Read for discussion. This work is supported, in part, by DOE grant DE-FG02-13ER41958, NSF grant DMR-0820054 and a Simons Investigator grant from the Simons Foundation.
|
\section{Introduction}
In the present paper, we concern the strong Feller property and irreducibility of the transition semigroups corresponding to a class of non-linear monotone stochastic partial differential equations(SPDEs) with multiplicative noise. Both of them are important in the study of ergodicity of stochastic systems, for example, it is well known that strong Feller property and irreducibility ensure the uniqueness of invariant measure of the transition semigroup, see \cite{PZ95,DPZ1996}. Indeed, there have been abundant literatures contributing to the study of these two properties for semilinear SPDEs with either additive or multiplicative noise. It is a pity that we can not to list them all here, and only mention monograph \cite{DPZ1996} for a systematic introduction on ergodicity for semilinear SPDEs and \cite{PZ95} for the fist result on this topic about semilinear SPDEs with multiplicative noise. On the other hand, the non-linear monotone SPDEs basing on the variational approach have been intensively investigated recently. The research of this type SPDEs can be dated back to Pardoux \cite{Pardoux}. Further development is given by Krylov and Rozovoskii \cite{KrylovR}. For the existence and uniqueness of strong and weak solutions, we refer to \cite{DPR04,BBDR,DRRW06,RenRW,LiuR10,Liu13,LiuR13}. Besides this, we shall mention that \cite{BDR,RW13,Gess13} for extinction problem of solutions, and \cite{Wang2007,LiuW08,Liu09,WBook13'} for Harnack inequalities and related topics, and \cite{Wang14b} for the first result on the gradient estimate for this type of equations. Though the dimensional free Harnack inequalities introduced by \cite{Wang97} are powerful tool to study strong Feller property and irreducibility, the existing results on this type inequalities for such equations are mainly for additive noise.
Before further discussion, let us recall the framework of this type of equations briefly. Let $(\H,\<\cdot,\cdot\>, |\cdot|)$ be a real separable Hilbert space. Let $\V$ be a reflective Banach space continuously and densely embedded into $\H$ and $\V^*$ be the dual space with respect to $\H$. We denote the dualization between $\V^*$ and $\V$ by $_{\V^*}\<\cdot,\cdot\>_{\V}$. Then $_{\V^*}\<u,v\>_{\V}=\<u,v\>$ for $u\in \H$, $v\in \V$. $(\V,\H,\V^*)$ is called a Gelfand triple. Let $\sL(\H)$($\sL_2(\H)$) be the set of all bounded(resp. Hilbert-Schmidt) operators on $\H$. We denote the operator norm and Hilbert-Schmidt norm by $|\cdot|$ and $|\cdot|_2$ respectively. Consider the following non-Linear SPDEs on $\H$
\bequ\label{equ_main}
\d X(t)=A(X(t))\d t+B(X(t))\d W(t),
\enqu
where $\{W(t)\}_{t\geq 0}$ is cylindrical Brownian motion on $\H$ with respect to a complete filtered probability spaces $\Big(\Om,\sF,\P,\{\sF_t\}_{t\geq 0}\Big)$. The coefficients $$A: \V\ra \V^*,\ B: \V\ra \sL_2(\H)$$
are measurable and such that the following assumptions hold
\beg{enumerate}[({H}1)]
\item (Hemicontinuity) For all $v_1,v_2,v\in \V$, $\R\ni s\ra _{\V^*}\<A(v_1+sv_2),v\>_\V$ is continuous.\label{H_hemi}
\item (Monotonicity) There exists $K_1\in\R$ such that for all $v_1,v_2\in \V$,\label{H_mono}
$$2_{\V^*}\<A(v_1)-A(v_2),v_1-v_2\>_\V+|B(v_1)-B(v_2)|_2^2\leq K_1|v_1-v_2|^2.$$
\item (Coercivity) There exist $r>0$ and $c_1,c_3\in \R,c_2>0$ such that for all $v\in \V$,\label{H_coe}
$$2_{\V^*}\<A(v),v\>_\V+|B(v)|_2^2\leq c_1-c_2|v|_\V^{r+1}+c_3|v|^2.$$
\item (Growth) There exists $c_3,c_4\in\R$ such that\label{H_grow}
$$|_{\V^*}\<A(u),v\>_\V|\leq c_4+c_5(|u|_\V^{r}+|v|_\V^{r+1}+|u|^2+|v|^2).$$
\end{enumerate}
\beg{defn}
A continuous $\H$-valued adapted process $X$ is called a solution to (\ref{equ_main}), if
$$\E\int_0^T\Big(|X(t)|_\V^{r+1}+|X(t)|^2\Big)\d t<\infty, T>0,$$
and $\P$-a.s.
$$X(t)=X(0)+\int_0^tA(X(s))\d s+\int_0^tB(X(s))\d s, t>0.$$
\end{defn}
According to \cite{PRo2007,LiuR10}, for $X(0)\in L^2(\Om\ra \H,\P)$, (H\ref{H_hemi})-(H\ref{H_grow}) ensure that (\ref{equ_main}) has a unique pathwise continuous solution. Denote $\sB_b(\H)$ as all bounded Borel measurable functions on $\H$. Let $X^x(t)$ be the solution of $\eqref{equ_main}$ starting from $x$, and $$P_tf(x)=\E f(X^x(t)),\ f\in \sB_b(\H),\ x\in \H.$$
Then $P_t$ is the associated Markov semigroup of (\ref{equ_main}).
The main aim of this paper is to study the strong Feller property and irreducibility of $P_t$ via coupling by change of measure. The coupling used to prove strong Feller property here was first introduced in \cite{Wang2007}. In \cite{ZhangX09}, the strong Feller property and irreducibility for stochastic differential equations with non-Lipschitz and monotone coefficients are concerned using the coupling as well as the approximative controllability method, moreover, the exponential ergodicity is obtained there. We shall follow the line of \cite{Wang2007} and \cite{ZhangX09}. Here, the drift term $A:\V\ra \V^*$ is usually singular, and can not be taken in the sense of usual nonlinear function in finite dimensional case. Moreover, though we shall assume that the noise term $B$ is non-degenerate, it is Hilbert-Schmidt operator, that means it is weaker than the usual semilinear SPDEs or SDEs cases where $\sup_{x\in \H}|B^{-1}(x)|<\infty$, see \cite{PZ95,DPZ1996,ZhangX09}. So another detailed discussion for this type of equations is needed. As in \cite{ZhangX09}, or \cite{RoWang2010,Wang2011,ZhangSQ,WBook13'}, we shall introduce the following non-degenerate condition for the SPDEs discussed here:
\beg{itemize}
\item ({\bf{Non-degenerate condition}}) There exist a positive self-adjoint operator $B_0$, and a measurable function $\rh:\V\ra (0,\infty)$ which satisfies
$$\inf_{v\in\V,|v|\leq R}\rh(v)>0,~R>0,$$
such that
\bequ\label{nondenerate_B}
B(v)B^*(v)\geq \rh(v)B_0^2,\ v\in \V.
\enqu
\end{itemize}
Define the intrinsic norm induced by $B_0$ as follow
$$
|u|_{B_0}=\beg{cases}
|B_0^{-1}u|,~&u\in B_0(\H),\\
~\infty,~&u\notin B_0(\H).
\end{cases}
$$
At last, we shall mention a recent result in \cite{Wang14b} which provided the gradient/H\"older estimates for this type of SPDEs for the first time. That is a quite strong result. But there, the noise term is split into a multiplicative part and an additive part independently. It is different from us.
The following two theorems are devoted to the strong Feller property.
\beg{thm}\label{thm:sFeller}
Let $r\geq 1$. Assume that
\beg{enumerate}[(1)]
\item~(H\ref{H_hemi}), (H\ref{H_coe})-(H\ref{H_grow}) and the non-degenerate condition (\ref{nondenerate_B}) hold, $|\cdot|_{B_0}:\V\ra [0,\infty)$ is measurable, and for all $n\in \N$, there exists $C_n\in \R$ such that
\bequ\label{locally_B_Lip}
|B(v_1)-B(v_2)|_2\leq C_n|v_1-v_2|,\ v_1,v_2\in \V, |v_1|\vee|v_2|\leq n,
\enqu
\item~there exist $\th\in [2,+\infty)\cap (r-1,+\infty)$ and $K_1\geq 0,~\de_1>0$ such that
\beg{ews}\label{HofA}
&2_{\V^*}\<A(v_1)-A(v_2),v_1-v_2\>_\V+|B(v_1)-B(v_2)|_2^2\\
&\quad\leq -\de_1|v_1-v_2|_{B_0}^\th|v_1-v_2|^{r+1-\th}+K_1|v_1-v_2|^2,~~v_1,v_2\in \V.
\end{ews}
\end{enumerate}
Then
$P_t$ is strong Feller.
\end{thm}
\beg{thm}\label{thm:sFeller'}
Let $0<r<1$. Assume that
\beg{enumerate}[(1)]
\item~(H\ref{H_hemi}), (H\ref{H_grow}) and the non-degenerate condition (\ref{nondenerate_B}) hold, $|\cdot|_{B_0}:\V\ra [0,\infty)$ is measurable, and $B$ is locally Lipschitz in the sense of \eqref{locally_B_Lip},
\item~there exists $\th\geq \ff 4 {r+1}$, $K_1\geq 0,~\de_1>0$ and measurable function $h:\V\ra [0,+\infty)$ such that
\beg{ews}\label{HofA'}
&2_{\V^*}\<A(v_1)-A(v_2),v_1-v_2\>_\V+|B(v_1)-B(v_2)|_2^2\\
&\quad\leq -\ff {\de_1|v_1-v_2|_{B_0}^\th} {|v_1-v_2|^{\th-2}\Big(h(v_1)\vee h(v_2)\Big)^{1-r}}+K_1|v_1-v_2|^2,~~v_1,v_2\in \V,
\end{ews}
\item there exist $c_1,c_3\in \R,~c_2>0$ such that
\bequ\label{H_coe'}
2_{\V^*}\<A(v),v\>_{\V}+|B(v)|^2_2\leq c_1-c_2h^{1+r}(v)+c_3|u|^2,~~v\in \V.
\enqu
\end{enumerate}
Then $P_t$ is strong Feller.
\end{thm}
Typical examples for Theorem \ref{thm:sFeller} are stochastic porous media equations and stochastic p-Laplace equations. Theorem \ref{thm:sFeller'} can be applied to stochastic fast diffusion equations. Conditions \eqref{HofA}, \eqref{HofA'} and \eqref{H_coe'} have been used in the previous works on studying Harnack inequalities, see \cite{Wang2007,LiuW08,Liu09,WBook13'}. For technical reason, we still need local Lipschitz condition \eqref{locally_B_Lip}. If $\inf_{v\in \V} \rh(v)>0$, by some global conditions, we can get that $P_t f$ is H\"older continuous on $\H$ for all $f\in\sB_b(\H)$, see Lemma \ref{lmm:sFeller} and \ref{lmm:sFeller'}.
The next theorem is for irreducibility. $P_t$ is said to be irreducibility at $t>0$ if for arbitrary non empty open set $S\subset \H$ and all $x\in \H$,
$$P_t(x,S)\equiv P_t1_{S}(x)>0.$$
We generalize a result in \cite{BaDa} to multiplicative noise. For more about using approximative controllability method to prove the irreducibility, we would like to refer \cite{DPZ1996}.
\beg{thm}\label{thm:irreducibility}
Assume that (H\ref{H_hemi})-(H\ref{H_grow}) hold, the non-degenerate condition (\ref{nondenerate_B}) holds with
\bequ\label{rh_irr}
\inf_{v\in\V}\rh(v)>0,
\enqu
and $|\cdot|_{B_0}:\V\ra[0,+\infty)$ is measurable, and for all $n\in \N$, there exists $C_n$ such that
\bequ\label{con_B_2}
|B(u)|_2\leq C_n,\ u\in \V,~|u|\leq n.
\enqu
Then
$P_t$ is irreducible.
\end{thm}
Though we assume that $B$ is locally bounded on $\H$, we should point out that it follows from (H\ref{H_coe}) and (H\ref{H_grow}) that there exists constant $\tld c>0$ such that
\bequ\label{bounded_B}
|B(u)|_2^2\leq \tld c\Big(1+|u|_\V^{r+1}+|u|^2\Big).
\enqu
The rest parts of the paper are organized as follows. In the following section, we give the proofs of the main results. Simple applications and examples are provided in Section 3.
\section{Proof of main results}
Fix $T>0$. We shall concern strong Feller property and irreducibility for $P_T$. Firstly, we shall prove the strong Feller property for $P_T$ under some global conditions. Throughout this section, (H\ref{H_hemi})-(H\ref{H_grow}) are assumed to be hold.
\begin{lem}\label{lmm:sFeller}
Assume that (\ref{nondenerate_B}) and (\ref{HofA}) hold for some self-adjoint Hilbert-Schmidt operator $B_0$ and $\rh$ with $\inf_{v\in \V}\rh(v)=\ff 1 {c_0}>0$. \\
{\rm{(1)}}~If there exists $K_2\geq0$ such that
\bequ\label{strong_cond_B}
|(B(u)-B(v))^*(u-v)|\leq K_2\Big(|u-v|^2\we|u-v|\Big),~~u,v\in \V.
\enqu
Then $P_T f$ is $\ff {\th-r+1} {2\th}$-H\"older continuous on $\H$ for all $f\in \sB_b(\H)$.\\
{\rm{(2)}}~If $\th >r$ and there exists $K_2\geq 0$ such that
\bequ\label{weak_cond_B}
|(B(u)-B(v))^*(u-v)|\leq K_2|u-v|,~~u,v\in \V.
\enqu
Then $P_Tf$ is $\ff {\th-r+1} {2\th}$-H\"older continuous on $\H$ for all $f\in \sB_b(\H)$.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof} We prove {\rm{(1)}} firstly. Let $\ep\in (0,1)$ such that $0\vee (r-1)<\th(1-\ep)<(2r)\we(r+1)$. Consider the following coupling equations
\beg{ews}\label{coupling}
\d X(t)&=A(X(t))\d t+B(X(t))\d W(t),\ X(0)=x\\
\d Y(t)&=A(Y(t))\d t+B(Y(t))\d W(t)+|x-y|^{\al}\ff {X(t)-Y(t)} {|X(t)-Y(t)|^{\ep}}\d t,\ Y(0)=y,
\end{ews}
where $0<\al<\ep$. By It\^o's formula,
\beg{ews}\label{ItoforX_Y}
&\d |X(t)-Y(t)|^2\\
&\quad=2\<A(X(t))-A(Y(t)),X(t)-Y(t)\>\d t+|B(X(t))-B(Y(t))|_2^2\d t\\
&\quad\quad +2\<(B(X(t))-B(Y(t)))\d W(t),X(t)-Y(t)\>-2|x-y|^{\al}|X(t)-Y(t)|^{2-\ep}\d t.
\end{ews}
According to (\ref{HofA}) and (\ref{ItoforX_Y}), we also have
\beg{ews}
&\d |X(t)-Y(t)|^2\\
&\quad\leq -\de_1|X(t)-Y(t)|_{B_0}^\th|X(t)-Y(t)|^{r+1-\th}\d t+K_1|X(t)-Y(t)|^2\d t\\
&\quad\quad +2\<(B(X(t))-B(Y(t)))\d W(t),X(t)-Y(t)\>-2|x-y|^{\al}|X(t)-Y(t)|^{2-\ep}\d t.
\end{ews}
Let $2\ga=r+1-\th(1-\ep)$. Then $\ga>0$, $r+1-\th-2\ga=-\th\ep$, moreover
$$\ga=\ff {r+1-\th(1-\ep)} 2< \ff {r+1-(r-1)\vee0} 2\leq 1.$$
So
\beg{ews}\label{Ito_ga}
&\d |X(t)-Y(t)|^{2-2\ga}\\
&\quad\leq-(1-\ga)\de_1\ff {|X(t)-Y(t)|_{B_0}^{\th}} {|X(t)-Y(t)|^{\th\ep}}\d t+(1-\ga)K_1|X(t)-Y(t)|^{2-2\ga}\d t\\
&\quad\quad+2(1-\ga)\Big\<\ff{(B(X(t))-B(Y(t)))^*(X(t)-Y(t))} {|X(t)-Y(t)|^{2\ga}},\d W(t)\Big\>.
\end{ews}
Let
$$\ta_n=\inf\{t>0~|~|X(t)-Y(t)|\geq \ff 1 n\},~~\ta=\inf\{t>0~|~|X(t)-Y(t)|=0\}.$$
Then
\bequ\label{int_t}
\E\int_0^{T\we\ta}\ff {|X(t)-Y(t)|_{B_0}^{\th}} {|X(t)-Y(t)|^{\th\ep}}\d t\leq \ff {e^{(1-\ga)K_1T}} {(1-\ga)\de_1} |x-y|^{2-2\ga}.
\enqu
We can define
$$\ze_n=\inf\{s>0~|~\int_0^s\ff {|X(t)-Y(t)|_{B_0}^{\th}} {|X(t)-Y(t)|^{\th\ep}}\d t\geq n\}.$$
Due to \eqref{int_t}, $\lim_{n\ra \infty}\ze_n\geq \ta$. Let
$$\eta_n=\ze_n\we\ta_n\we T.$$
Then $\lim_{n\ra\infty}\eta_n=\ta\we T$. Let $\tld B^{-1}(y)=B^*(y)(B(y)B^*(y))^{-1}$,
\bequ\label{tldW}
\tld W(t)=W(t) +\int_0^{t\we\ta}|x-y|^\al\ff {\tld B^{-1}(Y(s))(X(s)-Y(s))} {|X(s)-Y(s)|^{\ep}}\d s,
\enqu
and
\beg{ews}\label{R_T}
R_t&=\exp\Big\{|x-y|^\al\int_0^{t\we\ta}\Big\<\ff {\tld B^{-1}(Y(s))(X(s)-Y(s))} {|X(s)-Y(s)|^{\ep}},\d W(s)\Big\>\\
&\qquad-\ff {|x-y|^{2\al}} 2\int_0^{t\we\ta}\ff {|\tld B^{-1}(Y(s))(X(s)-Y(s))|^2} {|X(s)-Y(s)|^{2\ep}}\d s\Big\}.
\end{ews}
By Novikov's condition, $\{W(s)\}_{0\leq s\leq \eta_n\we t}$ is cylindrical Brownian motion on $\H$ under probability measure $R_{t\we\et_n}\P$. Next, we shall prove that $\{W(t)\}_{0\leq t\leq T}$ is cylindrical Brownian motion under $R_T\P$.
In the following, we denote $\Q_{n,t}(\Q)$ as the probability measure $R_{t\we\eta_n}\P$(resp. $R_T\P$) and $\E_{\Q_{n,t}}$($\E_{\Q}$) the expectation with respect to $R_{\eta_n,t}\P$(resp. $R_T\P$). According to \eqref{Ito_ga} and \eqref{tldW},
\beg{ews*}
&\d |X(t)-Y(t)|^{2-2\ga}\\
&\quad\leq-(1-\ga)\de_1\ff {|X(t)-Y(t)|_{B_0}^{\th}} {|X(t)-Y(t)|^{\th\ep}}\d t+(1-\ga)K_1|X(t)-Y(t)|^{2-2\ga}\d t\\
&\quad\quad-2(1-\ga)|x-y|^\al\Big\<\ff{(B(X(t))-B(Y(t)))\tld B^{-1}(Y(t))(X(t)-Y(t))} {|X(t)-Y(t)|^{2\ga}},\ff {X(t)-Y(t)} {|X(t)-Y(t)|^{2\ga}}\Big\>\d t\\
&\quad\quad+2(1-\ga)\Big\<\ff{(B(X(t))-B(Y(t)))^*(X(t)-Y(t))} {|X(t)-Y(t)|^{2\ga}},\d \tld W(t)\Big\>.
\end{ews*}
By H\"older inequality, there is $C>0$ such that
\beg{ews*}
&\Big|-2(1-\ga)|x-y|^\al\Big\<\ff{(B(X(t))-B(Y(t)))\tld B^{-1}(Y(t))(X(t)-Y(t))} {|X(t)-Y(t)|^{2\ga}},\ff {X(t)-Y(t)} {|X(t)-Y(t)|^{\ep}}\Big\>\Big|\\
&\quad\leq 2(1-\ga)c_0|x-y|^{\al}K_2\Big(|X(t)-Y(t)|^{1-2\ga}\we|X(t)-Y(t)|^{2-2\ga}\Big)\ff {|X(t)-Y(t)|_{B_0}} {|X(t)-Y(t)|^{\ep}}\\
&\quad\leq C(1-\ga)^{\ff {\th} {\th-1}}|x-y|^{\ff {\al\th} {\th-1}}\Big(|X(t)-Y(t)|^{1-2\ga}\we|X(t)-Y(t)|^{2-2\ga}\Big)^{\ff {\th} {\th-1}}\\
&\quad\quad+\ff {(1-\ga)\de_1} {2}\ff {|X(t)-Y(t)|^\th_{B_0}} {|X(t)-Y(t)|^{\th\ep}}.
\end{ews*}
Moreover, since $(1-2\ga)\ff {\th} {\th-1}\leq 2-2\ga$, we get that
$$\Big(|X(t)-Y(t)|^{1-2\ga}\we|X(t)-Y(t)|^{2-2\ga}\Big)^{\ff {\th} {\th-1}}\leq |X(t)-Y(t)|^{2-2\ga}.$$
Hence
\beg{ews*}
&\d |X(t)-Y(t)|^{2-2\ga}\\
&\quad\leq -\ff {\de_1} {2}\ff {|X(t)-Y(t)|^\th_{B_0}} {|X(t)-Y(t)|^{\th\ep}}\d t+2(1-\ga)\Big\<\ff{(B(X(t))-B(Y(t)))^*(X(t)-Y(t))} {|X(t)-Y(t)|^{2\ga}},\d \tld W(t)\Big\>\\
&\quad\quad+\Big(C|x-y|^{\ff {\al\th} {\th-1}}(1-\ga)^{\ff 1 {\th-1}}+K_1\Big)(1-\ga)|X(t)-Y(t)|^{2-2\ga}\d t.
\end{ews*}
Taking expectation with respect to $\Q_{n,s}$, we have that
$$\E_{\Q_{n,s}}\int_0^{s\we\et_n}\ff {|X(t)-Y(t)|^\th_{B_0}} {|X(t)-Y(t)|^{\th\ep}}\d t\leq \ff {2e^{(C|x-y|^{\ff {\al\th} {\th-1}}(1-\ga)^{\ff 1 {\th-1}}+K_1)(1-\ga)s}} {(1-\ga)\de_1}|x-y|^{2-2\ga},~~0\leq s\leq T.$$
Consequently,
\bequ\label{RlogR}
\sup_{s\in[0,T],n\geq 1}\E R_{\eta_n\we s}\log R_{\eta_n\we s}\leq \ff {2T^{\ff {\th} {\th-2}}e^{\Big(C|x-y|^{\ff {\al\th} {\th-1}}(1-\ga)^{\ff 1 {\th-1}}+K_1\Big)\ff {2(1-\ga)T} {\th}}} {((1-\ga)\de_1)^{2/\th}}|x-y|^{\ff {4(1-\ga)} {\th}+2\al},
\enqu
due to H\"older inequality. So, $\{R_{\eta_n\we s}\}_{s\in[0,T],n}$ is uniformly integrable. Consequently, $\{R_s\}_{s\in[0,T]}$ is uniformly integrable martingale. Then, by Girsanov's theorem, $\{\tld W(t)\}_{0\leq t\leq T}$ is cylindrical Wiener process under the probability measure $R_T\P$. Moreover, $Y(t)$ is a weak solution of the following equation
\bequ
\d Y(t)=A(Y(t))\d t+B(Y(t))\d \tld W(t),\ Y(0)=y.
\enqu
Thus, we get that
\beg{ews}
&|P_Tf(x)-P_Tf(y)|=|\E f(X(T))-\E R_Tf(Y(t))|\\
&=|\E f(Y(T))(1-R_T)|+|\E(f(X(T))-f(Y(T)))\mathbbm{1}_{\{\ta\geq T\}}|\\
&\leq |f|_\infty|\Big(\E|1-R_T|+\P(\ta\geq T)\Big),~f\in\sB_b(H).
\end{ews}
The last task is to give estimations of the two term in the last inequality.
By \eqref{RlogR},~\eqref{int_t} and
$$|1-e^x|\leq xe^x+2|x|\we 1,~~x\in \R,$$
there is $C>0$ such that
\beg{ews}
\E|1-R_T|&\leq \E R_T\log R_T+2\E|\log R_T|\\
&\leq C\Big(|x-y|^{\ff {2(1-\ga)} {\th}+\al}+|x-y|^{\ff {4(1-\ga)} {\th}+2\al}\Big).
\end{ews}
On the other hand, according to (\ref{ItoforX_Y}), we have
\beg{align*}
\d |X(t)-Y(t)|^{\ep}&=\ep/2 |X(t)-Y(t)|^{\ep-2}\d |X(t)-Y(t)|^2\\
&\quad +\ff 1 2 \ep(\ep/2-1)|X(t)-Y(t)|^{\ep-4}|(B(X(t))-B(Y(t)))^*(X(t)-Y(t))|^2\d t\\
&\leq \ff {\ep K_1} {2}|X(t)-Y(t)|^{\ep}\d t-|x-y|^\al\d t\\
&\quad+\ep\Big\<(B(X(t))-B(Y(t)))\d W(t),\ff {X(t)-Y(t)} {|X(t)-Y(t)|^{2-\ep}}\Big\>.
\end{align*}
Then
\beq*
\E |X(s\we\ta)-Y(s\we\ta)|^\ep\leq |x-y|^\ep + \ff {\ep K_1} {2}\E\int_0^{s\we\ta}|X(t)-Y(t)|^\ep\d t-|x-y|^\al\E(s\we\ta).
\enq*
By Gronwall's inequality, we have that
\beg{ews*}
\E |X(s\we\ta)-Y(s\we\ta)|^\ep&\leq |x-y|^\ep e^{\ff {\ep K_1s} {2}},\\
\int_0^s \E|X(t\we\ta)-Y(t\we\ta)|^\ep\d t&\leq \ff {2|x-y|^\ep (e^{\ff {\ep K_1s} {2}}-1)}{\ep K_1s},~s\in[0,T].
\end{ews*}
Hence
$$\E(s\we\ta)\leq |x-y|^{\ep-\al}\ff {e^{\ff {\ep K_1s} {2}}-1+s} s,~s\in[0,T],$$
and
$$\P(\ta\geq T)\leq \ff {\E(\ta\we T)} {T}\leq |x-y|^{\ep-\al}\ff {e^{\ff {\ep K_1T} {2}}-1+T^2} {T^2},~s\in[0,T].$$
Therefore, there exists constant $C$ depending on $|f|_\infty, \de_1,|B_0|,K_1,K_2,T,\ep,r,\th$ such that
$$|P_Tf(x)-P_Tf(y)|\leq C|x-y|^\be,$$
with
$$\be=\Big(\ff {2(1-\ga)} {\th}+\al\Big)\we (\ep-\al).$$
Let $\al=\ff {\ep} 2-\ff {1-\ga} {\th}$. Then $\be=\ff {\th-r+1} {2\th}$. The proof of {\rm{(1)}} is completed.
For {\rm{(2)}}. Since $\th>r$, we can choose $\ep=1-\ff r {\th}$. Repeating the argument used in {\rm{(1)}} with $\ga=1/2$ and \eqref{weak_cond_B} instead of \eqref{strong_cond_B}, we obtain the claim in {\rm{(2)}}.
\end{proof}
\bigskip
\noindent{\bf{\emph{Proof of Theorem \ref{thm:sFeller}:~}}} We truncate $B$ as follow
$$B_R(v)=
\begin{cases}
B(v),~~~~~|v|\leq R,\\
B(\ff {Rv} {|v|}),~~~|v|> R,
\end{cases}$$
where $R>0$. By \eqref{locally_B_Lip}, it is clear that $B_R$ is a bounded Lipschitz map, hence \eqref{strong_cond_B} and \eqref{weak_cond_B} in Lemma \ref{lmm:sFeller} hold for $B_R$ with some constant $C_R>0$. Moreover, we have the following non-degenerate condition:
$$B_R(v)B^*_R(v)\geq \rh_R B_0^2=(\sq\rh_R B_0)^{2},$$
where $\rh_R=\inf_{|v|\leq R}\rh(v)$. Let
$$\ta_R^x=\inf\{t>0~|~|X^x(t)|\geq R\},~~~\ta_R^y=\inf\{t>0~|~|X^y(t)|\geq R\},$$
and $$X^{R,x}(t),~X^{R,y}(t)$$
be the solution of the following equation
\bequ\label{equ_tranc}
\d X^R(t)=A(X^R(t))\d t+B_R(X^R(t))\d W(t)
\enqu
starting form $x,~y$ respectively. Let $P_T^Rf(x)=\E f(X^{R,x}(T))$. By the uniqueness of (\ref{equ_tranc}), $X^x(T)=X^{R,x}(T)$ and $X^y(T)=X^{R,y}(T)$ for $T< \ta_R^x\we\ta_R^y$. So
\beg{align}\label{inequ:sFeller}
&|P_Tf(x)-P_Tf(y)|\nonumber\\
&\quad\leq|\E(f(X^x(T))-f(X^y(T)))1_{\{\ta_R^x\we\ta_R^y> T\}}|+|f|_\infty\Big(\P\Big(\ta_R^x\leq T\Big)+\P\Big(\ta_R^y\leq T\Big)\Big)\nonumber\\
&\quad= |\E(f(X^{R,x}(T))-f(X^{R,y}(T)))1_{\{\ta_R^x\we\ta_R^y> T\}}|+|f|_\infty\Big(\P\Big(\ta_R^x\leq T\Big)+\P\Big(\ta_R^y\leq T\Big)\Big)\\
&\quad\leq |P_T^Rf(x)-P_T^Rf(y)|+2|f|_\infty\Big(\P\Big(\ta_R^x\leq T\Big)+\P\Big(\ta_R^y\leq T\Big)\Big).\nonumber
\end{align}
Applying Lemma \ref{lmm:sFeller} to (\ref{equ_tranc}), $P^R_T$ is strong Feller. On the other hand, by It\^o's formula and (H\ref{H_coe}), we have that
\beg{ews}\label{ItoforX}
\d |X^x(t)|^2\leq c_1-c_2|X^x(t)|_\V^{r+1}+c_3|X^x(t)|^2\d t+2\<B(X^x(t))\d W(t), X^x(t)\>,~x\in \H.
\end{ews}
According to Gronwall's inequality, we obtain that
\beg{ews}\label{inequ:X}
\E|X^x(t)|^2+\int_0^t\E|X^x(t)|_\V^{r+1}\d t\leq \Big(\ff {c_1t+|x|^2} {c_2\we 1}\Big)\Big(1+c_3e^{\ff {c_3t} {c_2\we 1}}\Big),~t\in [0,T],~x\in \H.
\end{ews}
Combining (\ref{ItoforX}), (\ref{inequ:X}) with B-D-G inequality and (H\ref{H_coe}), (H\ref{H_grow}), there exists $C>0$ which is independent of $T$ and $x$ such that
\bequ
\E\sup_{t\in[0,T]}|X^x(t)|^2\leq C\Big(1+e^{CT}\Big)\Big(T+|x|^2\Big),~x\in \H.
\enqu
Since
\beg{ews*}
&\P\Big(\ta_R^x\leq T\Big)\leq \P\Big(\sup_{t\in[0,T]}|X(t)|\geq R\Big)\\
&\leq \ff 1 {R^2}\E\sup_{t\in[0,T]}|X(t)|^2\leq \ff C {R^2}\Big(1+e^{CT}\Big)\Big(T+|x|^2\Big),~x\in \H,
\end{ews*}
we have
$$\sup_{z\in B(x,l)}\P\Big(\ta_R^z\leq T\Big)\leq \ff C {R^2}\Big(1+e^{CT}\Big)\Big(T+(|x|+l)^2\Big),~x\in \H,~l>0.$$
Letting $y\ra x$ in (\ref{inequ:sFeller}) first(assume that $|y-x|\leq 1$) and then $R\uparrow\infty$, we obtain the strong Feller property of $P_T$:
$$\lim_{y\ra x}|P_Tf(x)-P_Tf(y)|\leq 2|f|_\infty\lim_{R\uparrow \infty}\sup_{z\in B(x,1)}\P(\ta_T^z\leq T)=0.$$
\qed
\bigskip
To prove Theorem \ref{thm:sFeller'}, we only have to prove the following lemma.
\beg{lem}\label{lmm:sFeller'}
Assume that conditions of Theorem \ref{thm:sFeller'} hold with $\inf_{v\in\V}\rh(v)= \ff 1 {c_0}>0$ and the locally Lipschitz condition \eqref{locally_B_Lip} replaced by the boundedness of $B$: there exists $C>0$ such that
$$|B(v)|\leq C,~~v\in \V.$$
Then $P_T$ is locally $(\ff {2\th} {3\th+4}\we \ff 1 2)$-H\"older continuous.
\end{lem}
\beg{proof}
Let $\ep=\ff {\th} {\th+2}$. Consider the coupling equations as \eqref{coupling}. By \eqref{HofA'} and It\^o's formula, we have
\beg{ews}
\d |X(t)-Y(t)|^2&\leq -\ff {\de_2|X(t)-Y(t)|_{B_0}^\th} {|X(t)-Y(t)|^{\th-2}(h(X(t))\vee h(Y(t)))^{1-r}}\d t\\
&\quad+K_1|X(t)-Y(t)|^2\d t-2|x-y|^\al|X(t)-Y(t)|^{2-\ep}\d t\\
&\quad+2\Big\<(B(X(t))-B(Y(t)))\d W(t),X(t)-Y(t)\Big\>.
\end{ews}
Then
\begin{align}\label{Ito'}
&\d |X(t)-Y(t)|^{2\ep}\nonumber\\
&\quad\leq -\ff {\ep\de_2|X(t)-Y(t)|^\th_{B_0}} {|X(t)-Y(t)|^{2(1-\ep)+\th-2}(h(X(t))\vee h(Y(t)))^{1-r}}\d t\nonumber\\
&\quad\quad+\ep K_1|X(t)-Y(t)|^{2\ep}\d t+2\ep\Big\<(B(X(t))-B(Y(t)))\d W(t),\ff {X(t)-Y(t)} {|X(t)-Y(t)|^{2(1-\ep)}}\Big\>\\
&\quad\quad+\ep(\ep-1)|X(t)-Y(t)|^{2(\ep-2)}|(B(X(t))-B(Y(t)))^*(X(t)-Y(t))|^2\d t.\nonumber
\end{align}
Let
$$\ta_n=\inf\{t>0~|~|X(t)-Y(t)|\leq 1/n\},~~\ta=\inf\{t>0~|~|X(t)-Y(t)|=0\}.$$
It is clear that
\beg{ews}\label{zeta}
\E\int_0^{t\we\ta}\ff {|X(s)-Y(s)|^\th_{B_0}} {|X(s)-Y(s)|^{2(1-\ep)+\th-2}(h(X(s))\vee h(Y(s)))^{1-r}}\d s\leq \ff { e^{\ep K_1t}|x-y|^{2\ep}} {\ep\de_2},~~t>0.
\end{ews}
Let
$$\ze_n=\inf\Big\{t>0~|~\int_0^t\ff {|X(s)-Y(s)|_{B_0}^\th} {|X(s)-Y(s)|^{\th\ep}(h(X(s))\vee h(Y(s)))^{1-r}}\d s\geq n\Big\}.$$
By \eqref{zeta}, we have
$$\lim_{n\ra\infty}\ze_n\geq \ta, ~~\P\mbox{-a.s}.$$
On the other hand, by It\^o's formula and \eqref{H_coe'}, we get that
\beg{ews}
\d |X(t)|^2\leq c_1\d t-c_2h^{1+r}(X(t))\d t+c_3|X(t)|^2\d t+2\<B(X(t))\d W(t),X(t)\>
\end{ews}
So
$$\E\int_0^{t}h^{1+r}(X(s))\d s\leq \ff {e^{c_3T}} {c_2}\Big[\ff {c_1(1-e^{-c_3T})} {c_3}+|x|^2\Big],~~t\leq T.$$
According to It\^o's formula, it is easy to see that
$$\E\int_0^{t}h^{1+r}(Y(s))\d s<\infty,~~t>0.$$
Define
\bqn*
&&\xi_n=\inf\Big\{t>0~|~\int_0^t \Big[h^{1+r}(X(s))\vee h^{1+r}(Y(s))\Big]\d s\geq n\Big\},\\
&&\eta_n=\ta_n\we\ze_n\we\xi_n\we T.
\eqn*
Then $\lim_{n\ra\infty}\xi_n=\infty$ and $\lim_{n\ra\infty}\eta_n=T\we\ta.$
Let $\tld W(t)$ and $R_t$ defined as in \eqref{tldW} and \eqref{R_T}. Since
\beg{ews}\label{ForRlogR}
&\int_0^{t\we\et_n}\ff {|X(s)-Y(s)|_{B_0}^2} {|X(s)-Y(s)|^{2\ep}}\d s\\
&\quad\leq \Big(\int_0^{t\we\et_n}\ff {|X(s)-Y(s)|_{B_0}^\th} {|X(s)-Y(s)|^{\th\ep}(h(X(s))\vee h(Y(X(s))))^{1-r}}\d s\Big)^{\ff 2 {\th}}\\
&\quad\quad\times\Big(\int_0^{t\we\et_n}(h(X(s))\vee h(Y(s)))^{\ff {2(1-r)} {\th-2}}\d s\Big)^{\ff {\th-2} {\th}},
\end{ews}
$\{\tld W(s)\}_{0\leq s\leq \eta_n\we t}$ is cylindrical Brownian Motion under probability measure $\Q_{n,t}:=R_{\eta_n\we t}\P$ according to Noikov's condition, moreover
\bequ\label{Q_nY}
\E_{\Q_{n,s}}\int_0^{\eta_n\we s}h^{1+r}(Y(s))\d s\leq \ff {e^{c_3T}} {c_2}\Big[\ff {c_1(1-e^{-c_3T})} {c_3}+|y|^2\Big],~s\in[0,T].
\enqu
Next, we shall prove that $\{\tld W(t)\}_{0\leq t \leq T}$ is cylindrical Brownian Motion on $\H$. To this end, we shall prove that $\sup_{t\in[0,T]}\E(R_t\log R_t)$ is finite.
By It\^o's formula and \eqref{H_coe'},
\beg{ews}
\d |X(t)|^2&\leq c_1\d t-c_2h^{1+r}(X(t))\d t+c_3|X(t)|^2\d t+2\<B(X(t))\d W(t),X(t)\>\\
&=c_1\d t-c_2h^{1+r}(X(t))\d t+c_3|X(t)|^2\d t+2\<B(X(t))\d \tld W(t),X(t)\>\\
&\quad-\ff {2|x-y|^\al\Big\<B(X(t))\tld B^{-1}(Y(t))(X(t)-Y(t)),X(t)\Big\>} {|X(t)-Y(t)|^\ep}\d t.
\end{ews}
Since $\th \geq \ff {4} {r+1}$, we have $\ff {1-r} {(1+r)\th} +\ff 1 2+\ff 1 {\th}\leq 1$. Then, by H\"older inequality, there exist nonnegative constants $\tld c_1,~\tld c_2,~\tld c_3$ such that
\beg{ews*}
&\ff {|x-y|^{\al}|X(t)-Y(t)|_{B_0}|X(t)|} {|X(t)-Y(t)|^\ep}\\
&\quad\leq \tld c_3+\tld c_1|x-y|^{2\al}|X(t)|^2+\ff {c_2} 2(h(X(t))\vee h(Y(t)))^{1+r}\\
&\quad\quad+ \ff {\tld c_2|X(t)-Y(t)|^{\th}_{B_0}} {|X(t)-Y(t)|^{\th\ep}(h(X(t))\vee h(Y(t)))^{1-r}}.
\end{ews*}
So, there exist $\hat c_1,~\hat c_2,~\hat c_3\in \R^+$ such that
\beg{ews*}
\d |X(t)|^2&\leq \hat c_1\d t-c_2h^{1+r}(X(t))\d t+\hat c_3(1+|x-y|^{2\al})|X(t)|^2\d t\\
&\quad +\ff {\hat c_2|X(t)-Y(t)|_{B_0}^\th} {|X(t)-Y(t)|^{\th\ep}(h(X(t))\vee h(Y(t)))^{1-r}}\d t\\
&\quad+\ff {c_2} 2(h^{1+r}(X(t))+h^{1+r}(Y(t)))\d t+2\<B(X(t))\d \tld W(t),X(t)\>.
\end{ews*}
Denote $\E_{\Q_{n,s}}$ as the expectation with respective to probability $\Q_{n,s}$. We obtain that
\beg{align*}
&\E_{\Q_{n,s}}\int_0^{\eta_n\we s}e^{-\hat c_3(1+|x-y|^{2\al})t}h^{1+r}(X(t))\d t\\
&\quad\leq \ff {2|x|^2} {c_2}+\ff {\hat c_1(1-e^{-{\hat c_3(1+|x-y|^{2\al})T}})} {c_2\hat c_3(1+|x-y|^{2\al})}+\E_{\Q_{n,s}}\int_0^{\eta_n\we s}e^{-\hat c_3(1+|x-y|^{2\al})t}h^{1+r}(Y(t))\d t \\
&\quad\quad+\ff {2\hat c_2} {c_2}\E_{\Q_{n,s}}\int_0^{\eta_n\we s}\ff {e^{-\hat c_3(1+|x-y|^{2\al})t}|X(t)-Y(t)|_{B_0}^\th} {|X(t)-Y(t)|^{\th\ep}(h(X(t))\vee h(Y(t)))^{1-r}}\d t\\
&\quad\leq \ff {2|x|^2} {c_2}+\ff {\hat c_1(1-e^{-{\hat c_3(1+|x-y|^{2\al})T}})} {c_2\hat c_3(1+|x-y|^{2\al})}+ \ff {e^{c_3T}} {c_2}\Big[\ff {c_1(1-e^{-c_3T})} {c_3}+|x|^2\Big]\\
&\quad\quad+\ff {2\hat c_2} {c_2}\E_{\Q_{n,s}}\int_0^{\eta_n\we s}\ff {e^{-\hat c_3(1+|x-y|^{2\al})t}|X(t)-Y(t)|_{B_0}^\th} {|X(t)-Y(t)|^{\th\ep}(h(X(t))\vee h(Y(t)))^{1-r}}\d t,~s\in[0,T],
\end{align*}
combining this with \eqref{Q_nY}, we get that
\beg{ews*}
&\E_{\Q_{n,s}}\int_0^{\eta_n\we s}(h(X(t))\vee h(Y(t)))^{1+r}\d t\\
&\quad\leq \E_{\Q_{n,s}}\int_0^{\eta_n\we s}h^{1+r}(X(t))\d t+\E_{\Q_{n,s}}\int_0^{\eta_n\we s}h^{1+r}(Y(t))\d t\\
&\quad\leq \ff {2e^{\hat c_3(1+|x-y|^{2\al})T}} {c_2}\Big\{|x|^2+\ff {\hat c_1(1-e^{-\hat c_3(1+|x-y|^{2\al})T})} {\hat c_3(1+|x-y|^{2\al})}\\
&\quad\quad+\ff {e^{c_3T}} 2\Big[\ff {c_1(1-e^{-c_3T})} {c_3}+|y|^2\Big]\Big\}+\ff {e^{c_3T}} {c_2}\Big[\ff {c_1(1-e^{-c_3T})} {c_3}+|y|^2\Big]\\
&\quad\quad+\ff {2\hat c_2} {c_2} e^{\hat c_3(1+|x-y|^{2\al})}\E_{\Q_n}\int_0^{\eta_n}\ff {|X(t)-Y(t)|_{B_0}^\th} {|X(t)-Y(t)|^{\th\ep}(h(X(t))\vee h(Y(t)))^{1-r}}\d t,~s\in[0,T].
\end{ews*}
By \eqref{Ito'}, we have
\begin{align*}
&\d |X(t)-Y(t)|^{2\ep}\\
&\quad\leq -\ff {\ep\de_2|X(t)-Y(t)|^\th_{B_0}} {|X(t)-Y(t)|^{\th-2\ep}(h(X(t))\vee h(Y(t)))^{1-r}}\d t+\ep K_1|X(t)-Y(t)|^{2\ep}\d t\\
&\quad\quad+2\ep\Big\<(B(X(t))-B(Y(t)))\d \tld W(t),\ff {X(t)-Y(t)} {|X(t)-Y(t)|^{2(1-\ep)}}\Big\>\\
&\quad\quad-\ff {2\ep|x-y|^\al\Big\<(B(X(t))-B(Y(t)))\tld B^{-1}(Y(t))(X(t)-Y(t)),X(t)-Y(t)\Big\>} {|X(t)-Y(t)|^{2-\ep}}.
\end{align*}
Since $B(\cdot)$ is bounded, we have that
\begin{align*}
&\Big|\ff {2\ep|x-y|^\al\Big\<(B(X(t))-B(Y(t)))\tld B^{-1}(Y(t))(X(t)-Y(t)),X(t)-Y(t)\Big\>} {|X(t)-Y(t)|^{2-\ep}}\Big|\\
&\quad\leq \ff {2c_0\ep|x-y|^\al|X(t)-Y(t)|_{B_0}|(B(X(t))-B(Y(t)))^*(X(t)-Y(t))|} {|X(t)-Y(t)|^{2-\ep}}\\
&\quad=\ff {2C\ep|x-y|^\al|X(t)-Y(t)|_{B_0}|X(t)-Y(t)|^{2\ep-1}(h(X(t))\vee h(Y(t)))^{\ff {1-r} {\th}}} {|X(t)-Y(t)|^{\th\ep}(h(X(t))\vee h(Y(t)))^{\ff {1-r} {\th}}}\\
&\quad\leq \ff {\de_2\ep|X(t)-Y(t)|_{B_0}^\th} {2|X(t)-Y(t)|^{\th\ep}(h(X(t))\vee h(Y(t)))^{1-r}}\\
&\quad\quad+\tld C|x-y|^{\ff {\al\th} {\th-1}}|X(t)-Y(t)|^{\ff {\th(\th-2)} {(\th+2)(\th-1)}}(h(X(t))\vee h(Y(t)))^{\ff {1-r} {\th-1}},
\end{align*}
for some $\tld C>0$. Since $\ff {\th(\th-2)} {2(\th+2)(\th-1)\ep}+\ff {1-r} {(\th-1)(r+1)}<1$, by H\"older inequality, we get that for all $l>0$, there is $c(l)>0$ such that
\beg{ews*}
\d |X(t)-Y(t)|^{2\ep}&\leq -\ff {\de_1\ep|X(t)-Y(t)|_{B_0}^\th} {2|X(t)-Y(t)|^{\th\ep}(h(X(t))\vee h(Y(t)))^{1-r}}\d t\\
&\quad+(\ep K_1+c(l))|X(t)-Y(t)|^{2\ep}\d t\\
&\quad+l|x-y|^{2\al}\Big[(h(X(t))\vee h(Y(t)))^{1+r}+1\Big]\d t\\
&\quad+2\ep\Big\<(B(X(t))-B(Y(t)))\d \tld W(t),\ff {X(t)-Y(t)} {|X(t)-Y(t)|^{2(1-\ep)}}\Big\>,~s\in[0,T].
\end{ews*}
Hence
\beg{ews*}
&\E_{\Q_{n,s}}\int_0^{\eta_n\we s}\ff {|X(t)-Y(t)|^{\th}_{B_0}} {|X(t)-Y(t)|^{\th\ep}(h(X(t))\vee h(Y(t)))^{1-r}}\d t\\
&\quad\leq\ff {2le^{(\ep K_1+c(l))T}} {\de_2\ep} |x-y|^{2\al}\Big[\E_{\Q_{n,s}}\int_0^{\eta_n\we s}(h(X(t))\vee h(Y(t))^{1+r}\d t+\ff {1-e^{-(\ep K_1+c(l))T}} {\ep K_1+c(l)}\Big]\\
&\quad\quad+\ff {2e^{(\ep K_1+c(l))T}} {\de_2\ep}|x-y|^{2\ep},~s\in[0,T].
\end{ews*}
If $|x-y|\leq \Big(\ff {\de_2\ep} {4le^{(\ep K_1+c(l))T}}\Big)^{\ff 1 {2\al}}$, then
\beg{ews*}
&\E_{\Q_n}\int_0^{\eta_n}\ff {|X(t)-Y(t)|^{\th}_{B_0}} {|X(t)-Y(t)|^{\th\ep}(h(X(t))\vee h(Y(t)))^{1-r}}\d t\\
&\quad\leq \ff {4} {\de_2\ep} \Big[e^{(\ep K_1+C(l))T}|x-y|^{2\ep}+|x-y|^{2\al}\ff {\de_2\ep(1-e^{-(\ep K_1+C(l))})} {\ep K_1+C(l)}\Big].
\end{ews*}
According to \eqref{ForRlogR} and Fatou lemma, we get that for $|x-y|\leq \Big(\ff {\de_2\ep} {4le^{(\ep K_1+c(l))T}}\Big)^{\ff 1 {2\al}}$
\begin{align*}
\sup_{s\in[0,T]}\E R_s\log R_s &=\ff {|x-y|^{2\al}} 2\E_{\Q}\int_0^{T\we\ta}\ff {|\tld B^{-1}(Y(t))(X(t)-Y(t))|^2} {|X(t)-Y(t)|^{2\ep}}\d t\\
&\leq \ff {c_0|x-y|^{2\al}} 2\Big(\E_{\Q}\int_0^{T\we\ta}\ff {|X(t)-Y(t)|^{\th}_{B_0}} {|X(t)-Y(t)|^{\th\ep}(h(X(t))\vee h(Y(t)))^{1-r}}\d t\Big)^{\ff 2 {\th}}\\
&\quad\times\Big(\E_{\Q}\int_0^{T\we\ta}(h(X(t))\vee h(Y(t)))^{\ff {2(1-r)} {\th-2}}\d t\Big)^{\ff {\th-2} {\th}}\\
&\leq \ff {c_0T^{\ff{\th-2} {\th}}|x-y|^{2\al}} 2\Big(\E_\Q\int_0^{T\we\ta}\ff {|X(t)-Y(t)|^{\th}_{B_0}} {|X(t)-Y(t)|^{\th\ep}(h(X(t))\vee h(Y(t)))^{1-r}}\d t\Big)^{\ff 2 {\th}}\\
&\quad\times \Big(\E_\Q\int_0^{T\we\ta}(h(X(t))\vee h(Y(t)))^{1+r}\d t\Big)^{^{\ff {2(1-r)} {\th(1+r)}}}\\
&\leq C(T,\ep,K_1,|x|,|y|)\Big(|x-y|^{2\ep}+|x-y|^{2\al}\Big)^{\ff 2 {\th}}|x-y|^{2\al}
\end{align*}
From \eqref{ForRlogR}, we have
\beg{ews*}
&\E\int_0^{T\we\ta}\ff {|X(s)-Y(s)|^{2}_{B_0}} {|X(s)-Y(s)|^{2\ep}}\d s\\
&\quad\leq T^{\ff {\th-2} {\th}}\Big(\E\int_0^{T\we\ta}\ff {|X(s)-Y(s)|^{\th}_{B_0}} {|X(s)-Y(s)|^{\th\ep}(h(X(s))\vee h(Y(s)))^{1-r}}\d s\Big)^{\ff 2 {\th}}\\
&\quad\quad\times\Big(\E\int_0^{T\we\ta}(h(X(s))\vee h(Y(s)))^{1+r}\d s\Big)^{\ff {2(1-r)} {(1+r)\th}}\\
&\quad\leq C(|x|,|y|,T,\de_2,\ep,\th)|x-y|^{\ff {4\ep} {\th}}.
\end{ews*}
Then
\beg{ews*}
\E|1-R_T|&\leq \E R_T\log R_T +2\E |\log R_T|\\
&\leq C(T,\ep,K_1,\de_2,|x|,|y|)\Big(|x-y|^{2\ep}+|x-y|^{2\al}\Big)^{\ff 2 {\th}}|x-y|^{2\al}\\
&\quad+C\Big[|x-y|^{\al+\ff {2\ep} {\th}}+|x-y|^{2\al+\ff {4\ep} {\th}}\Big],~|x-y|\leq \Big(\ff {\de_2\ep} {4le^{(\ep K_1+c(l))T}}\Big)^{\ff 1 {2\al}}.
\end{ews*}
Repeating the argument used in Theorem \ref{lmm:sFeller}, we get that there is $C>0$ depending on $|f|_\infty$, $\de_2$, $|B_0|$, $K_1$, $K_2$, $T$, $\ep$, $r$, $\th$, $|x|$, $|y|$ such that
$$|P_Tf(x)-P_Tf(y)|\leq C|x-y|^{\be},~|x-y|\leq \Big(\ff {\de_2\ep} {4le^{(\ep K_1+c(l))T}}\Big)^{\ff 1 {2\al}}$$
with $\be=(\al+\ff {2\ep} {\th})\we(\ff {2(\th+2)\al} {\th})\we (\ep-\al)$. Since $0<\al<\ep$ arbitrary, we can choose that $\be=\ff {2\th} {3\th+4}\we \ff 1 2$. Therefore, we complete the proof.
\end{proof}
\bigskip
Let $\sD(A)=\{x~|~A(x)\in \H,~x\in \V\}$. The next lemma will be used to character the domain of the non-linear operator $A$ as an operator on $\H$. The proof of the following lemma follows from \cite{Bar2010} completely. For the sake of completeness, we include the proof here.
\beg{lem}\label{dense}
Assume that (H\ref{H_hemi})-(H\ref{H_grow}). Then $\sD(A)$ is dense in $\H$.
\end{lem}
\beg{proof}
Let $\tld A(x)=\Big[1/2(K_1\vee c_3)-A\Big](x),~x\in \sD(A)$. Then, according to (H\ref{H_hemi})-(H\ref{H_coe}) and \cite[Theorem 2.4. and Corollary 2.3.]{Bar2010}, $\tld A$ is surjective and maximal monotone operator on $\H$. For $x\in \H$. Let $x_n=(I+1/n\tld A)^{-1}(x),~n\in \N$. Then
$$|x_n|^2+1/n\<\tld A(x_n),x_n\>=\<x_n,x\>\leq |x_n|\cdot|x|.$$
By (H\ref{H_coe}) and (H\ref{H_grow}), we have that
\bequ\label{bound_x_n}|x_n|^2+c_2|x_n|_\V^{r+1}/n\leq |x|\cdot|x_n|+c_1/n,\enqu
and
\bequ\label{x_x_n}
|x-x_n|_{\V^*}=|\tld A(x_n)|_{\V^*}/n\leq (K_1\vee c_3)|x_n|_{\V^*}/(2n)+c_5(|x_n|_\V^{r}+|x_n|^2+1)/n.
\enqu
Then
$$\sup_{n}\Big(|x_n|+|x_n|_\V^{r+1}/n\Big)<\infty$$
due to \eqref{bound_x_n}. So
$$\lim_{n\ra \infty}|x-x_n|_{\V^*}=0, $$
and there exists a subsequence denoted also by $\{x_n\}$ such that $x_n$ convergent in $\H$ weakly. Consequently, $x_n$ convergent to $x$ weakly in $\H$. That means for all $x\in \H$, there exists a sequence $\{x_n\}\subset \sD(A)$ that convergent to $x$ weakly. But $\overline{\sD(A)}$ is convex according to \cite[Corollary 2.5.]{Bar2010}. Therefore $x\in\overline{\sD(A)}$, i.e. $\overline{\sD(A)}=\H$.
\end{proof}
\bigskip
\noindent{\bf{\emph{Proof of Theorem \ref{thm:irreducibility}:~}}}
Let $x\in \H$, and $X(t)$ be the solution of \eqref{equ_main} starting from $x$. To prove the irreducibility of $P_T$, we have to prove that for all $y_0\in \H$ and $l>0$,
$$\P(|X(T)-y_0|\leq l)>0 \mbox{~or~} \P(|X(T)-y_0|> l)<1.$$
By Lemma \ref{dense}, we can choose $y\in \sD(A)$ such that $|y-y_0|\leq l/4$. So, we only have to prove that
$$\P\Big(|X(T)-y|> \ff {3l} 4 \Big)<1.$$
To this end, we need some preparations. The proof due to \cite{BaDa,DPZ1996,ZhangX09} essentially.
Fix $y$. Let $R>0$. Firstly, we consider the following multivalued equation
\bequ\label{multivalued}
\d z(t)=A(z(t))\d t-C_R\mathrm{sgn}(z(t)-y)\d t,~~t\in[t_1,T],
\enqu
where
$$C_R=\ff {K_1(R+|y|)} {2\Big(1-e^{-K_1(T-t_1)/2}\Big)}+|A(y)|,$$
and $\mathrm{sgn}$ is a multivalued mapping on $\H$
$$
\mathrm{sgn}(h)=\beg{cases}
~~~~\displaystyle{{h}/|h|},~~&h\neq 0,\\
~\{h~|~|h|\leq 1\},~~&h=0.
\end{cases}
$$
Due to Lemma \ref{dense}, $A$ is quasi-m-accretive on $\H$. So there is a unique mild solution to \eqref{multivalued} for arbitrary $z\in\H$ according to \cite[Corollary 4.1]{Bar2010}. We denote the solution with initial value $z$ by $z(t,z)$. Moreover, $z(\cdot,\cdot)\in C([t_1,T]\times\H;\H)$ due to \cite[Theorem 4.2]{Bar2010}. By differentiation formula for norm of solution and some necessary regularization, or see the proof of \cite[Lemma 2.3]{BaDa}, one can get that
\bequ\label{inequ:z}
|z(t,z)-y|^2\leq |z-y|^2e^{K_1(T-t_1)},~~t\in [t_1,T],
\enqu
moreover, if $|z|\leq R$, then $z(T,z)=y$. Let
$$v(t,z)=\ff {z(t,z)-y} {|z(t,z)-y|} 1_{\{z(t,z)\neq y\}}+\ff {A(y)} {C_R}1_{\{z(t,z)=y\}},~~z\in\H,$$
and $\tld Y_z(t,h)$ be the solution of the following equation with initial point $h\in \H$
$$\d \tld Y_z(t)=A(\tld Y_z(t))\d t-C_Rv(t,z)\d t,~t\in[t_1,T].$$
Then $v(t,\cdot)\in\sB_b(\H)$ for all $t\in[t_1,T]$, and for $|z|\leq R$, we have
\bequ\label{equ_y=z}
\tld Y_z(t,z)=z(t,z),~t\in[t_1,T].
\enqu
In deed, let $T_1=\inf\{t\in[t_1,T]~|~z(t,z)=y\}$. Before $T_1$, it is clear that $\tld Y_z(t,z)=z(t,z)$. Since $\tld Y_z(\cdot,z)$ and $z(\cdot,z)$ are continuous, $\tld Y_z(T_1,z)=z(T_1,z)=y$. Starting from $T_1$, $z(t,z)\equiv y$ and then $\tld Y_z(t,z)$ satisfies
$$\d \tld Y_z(t,z)=A(\tld Y_z(t,z))\d t-A(y)\d t,~\tld Y_z(T_1,z)=y,~t\geq T_1.$$
By differentiation formula and (H\ref{H_mono}), we have
$$|\tld Y_z(t,z)-y|^2\leq |y-y|^2e^{-K_1(t-T_1)}=0,~t\geq T_1.$$
So, $z(t,z)=\tld Y_z(t,z),~t\in[t_1,T]$.
Let $\ep>0$, $X_R(t_1)=X(t_1)1_{\{|X(t_1)|\leq R\}}$, and $Y^\ep$ be the solution of the following equation
$$\d Y^\ep(t)=A(Y^\ep(t))\d t-C_R(\ep B_0^{-1}+I)^{-1}v(t,X_R(t_1))\d t,\ t\geq t_1,\ Y^\ep(t_1)=X_R(t_1).$$
Since $v(t,\cdot)$ is measurable for all $t\in[t_1,T]$, it is clear that $\tld Y^\ep(t)\in \sF_{t_1}$, and adapted consequently.
By differentiation formula,
\beg{ews}\label{IforY_Y}
&\d |\tld Y_{X_R(t_1)}(t,X_R(t_1))-Y^\ep(t)|^2\\
&\quad=2_{\V^*}\Big\<A(\tld Y_{X_R(t_1)}(t,X_R(t_1)))-A(Y^\ep(t)),\tld Y_{X_R(t_1)}(t,X_R(t_1))-Y^\ep(t)\Big\>_\V\d t\\
&\quad\quad-2C_R\Big\<\Big((\ep B_0^{-1}+I)^{-1}-I\Big)v(t,X_R(t_1)),\tld Y(t)-Y^\ep(t)\Big\>\d t\\
&\quad\leq (K_1+ C_R)\Big|\tld Y_{X_R(t_1)}(t,X_R(t_1))-Y^\ep(t)\Big|^2\d t+ C_R \Big|\Big((\ep B_0^{-1}+I)^{-1}-I\Big)v(t, X_R(t_1))\Big|^2\d t.
\end{ews}
Then we obtain that for $t_1 \leq t\leq T$
\bequ\label{bounded_Y_Y_1}
|\tld Y_{X_R(t_1)}(t,X_R(t_1))-Y^\ep(t)|^2\leq C_Re^{(K_1+C_R )(T-t_1)}\int_{t_1}^{T}\Big|\Big((\ep B_0^{-1}+I)^{-1}-I\Big)v(t, X_R(t_1))\Big|^2\d t.
\enqu
Since $|(\ep B_0^{-1}+I)^{-1}-I|\leq 1$ and $|v(t,X_R(t_1))|\leq 1$, we have, in particularly at time $T$,
\bequ\label{lim}
\lim_{\ep\ra 0}\E|\tld Y_{X_R(t_1)}(T,X_R(t_1))-Y^\ep(T)|^2=\lim_{\ep\ra 0}\E|y-Y^\ep(T)|^2=0.
\enqu
On the other hand, due to $\inf_{x\in(0,T]}|\ff {1-e^{-x}} {x}|\geq e^{-T}$, we have
$$C_R(T-t_1)\leq K_1e^T(R+|y|)+|A(y)|T.$$
Hence, it follows from \eqref{bounded_Y_Y_1} that there exists a constant $C_{R,T,y,K_1}$ depending on $R, T,y,K_1$ such that
\bequ\label{bound_Y_Y}
\sup_{t_1\in[0,T]}\sup_{t\in[t_1,T]}|\tld Y_{X_R(t_1)}(t,X_R(t_1))-Y^\ep(t)|^2\leq C_{R,T,y,K_1}.
\enqu
Let $\tld X$ be the solution of the following equation
\beq*
\d \tld X(t)=A(\tld X(t))\d t + B(\tld X(t))\d W(t)-C_R\Big(\ep B_0^{-1}+I\Big)^{-1}v(t,X_R(t_1))1_{\{t>t_1\}}\d t,\ \tld X(0)=x.
\enq*
This equation is well define, since $\Big(C_R\Big(\ep B_0^{-1}+I\Big)^{-1}v(t,X_R(t_1))\Big)_{t\in[t_1,T]}$ is a known adapted process. By It\^o's formula, we get that
\beg{ews*}
\d |\tld X(t)-Y^\ep(t)|^2&= 2\<A(\tld X(t))-A(Y^\ep(t)),\tld X(t)-Y^\ep(t)\>\d t\\
&\quad+2\<\tld X(t)-Y^\ep(t),B(\tld X(t))\d W(t)\>+|B(\tld X(t))|^2_2\d t\\
&\leq K_1|\tld X(t)-Y^\ep(t)|^2\d t+(2|B(\tld X(t))|_2|B(Y^\ep(t))|_2+|B(Y^\ep(t))|_2^2)\d t\\
&\quad+2\<\tld X(t)-Y^\ep(t),B(\tld X(t))\d W(t)\>,\ t>t_1.
\end{ews*}
Moreover, according to \eqref{bound_Y_Y},~\eqref{inequ:z}, \eqref{equ_y=z} and \eqref{con_B_2}, there exists a constant depending on $R, T,y,K_1$ such that
$$\sup_{t\in[t_1,T]}|B(Y^\ep(t))|_2\leq C_{R,T,y,K_1}.$$
So, by Gronwall inequality,
\beg{ews*}
&\E |\tld X(T)-Y^\ep(T)|^2\\
&\quad\leq e^{K_1(T-t_1)}\Big(\E|X(t_1)-Y^\ep(t_1)|^2+C_{R,T,y,K_1}\E\int_{t_1}^{T}|B(\tld X(t))|_2\d t+C_{R,T,y,K_1}(T-t_1)\Big)\\
&\quad\leq e^{K_1T}\Big(\E\Big[|\tld X(t_1)|^21_{\{|X(t_1)|\geq R\}}\Big]+C_{R,T,y,K_1}(T-t_1)+C_{R,T,y,K_1}\E\int_{t_1}^{T}|B(\tld X(t))|_2\d t\Big).
\end{ews*}
The fist term in the last inequality goes to $0$ as $R$ tending to infinity, and the second term goes to $0$ as $t_1$ tending to $T$ if $R$ is fixed. What remains to do is to prove that the last term goes to $0$ when fixing $R$ and letting $t_1$ tend to $T$. In fact, by It\^o's formula, (H\ref{H_coe}), (H\ref{H_grow}) and
$$\Big|(\ep B_0^{-1}+I)^{-1}v(t,X_R(t_1))\Big|\leq 1,$$
we have that there exists a constant $\tld C>0$ which is independent of $t_1$ and $\ep$ such that
$$\E\sup_{t\in[0,T]}|\tld X(t)|^2+\E\int_{0}^T|\tld X(t)|_\V^{r+1}\d t<\tld C.$$
According to H\"older inequality and \eqref{bounded_B}, there exists a constant $c>0$, independent of $t_1$ and $\ep$, such that
\beg{ews*}
\E\int_{t_1}^{T}|B(\tld X(t))|_2\d t&\leq c\E\int_{t_1}^{T}\Big(|\tld X(t)|_\V^{r+1}+|X(t)|^2+1\Big)^{1/2}\d t\\
&\leq c\sq{T-t_1}.
\end{ews*}
Therefore,
\bequ\label{last}
\E|Y^\ep(T)-\tld X(T)|^2\leq e^{K_1T}\Big(\E\Big[|\tld X(t_1)|^21_{\{|X(t_1)|\geq R\}}\Big]+C_{T,K_1,R,y}\sq{T-t_1}\Big).
\enqu
Now, we can prove that
\bequ\label{Prob_X_y}
\P\Big(|X(T)-y|> \ff {3l} 4\Big)<1.
\enqu
Due to \eqref{lim} and \eqref{last}, we choose $R$ large enough and then $\ep$ and $T-t_1$ small enough such that
$$\E|Y^\ep(T)-\tld X(T)|^2\leq \ff {l^2} {36},~\E|y-Y^\ep(T)|^2\leq \ff {l^2} {144}.$$
Let
\beg{ews*}
\tld R_T&=\exp\Big\{C_R\int_0^{T}\Big\<\tld B^{-1}(\tld X(t))(\ep B_0^{-1}+I)^{-1}v(t,X_R(t_1))1_{\{t> t_1\}},\d W(t)\Big\>\\
&\quad -\ff {C_R^2} 2 \int_0^T \Big|\tld B^{-1}(\tld X(t))(\ep B_0^{-1}+I)^{-1}v(t,X_R(t_1))1_{\{t> t_1\}}\Big|^2\d t\Big\}.
\end{ews*}
Due to (\ref{nondenerate_B}) and \eqref{rh_irr}(it is no harm to assume that $\rh\geq 1$), we obtain that
\beg{ews*}
&\E \exp\Big\{\ff {C_R^2} 2 \int_0^T \Big|\tld B^{-1}(\tld X(t))(\ep B_0^{-1}+I)^{-1}v(t,X_R(t_1))1_{\{t> t_1\}}\Big|^2\d t\Big\}\\
&\quad\leq \E \exp\Big\{ \Big(\ff { K_1(R+|y|)} {2\sq{2}(1-e^{-K_1(T-t_1)/2})}+\ff {|A(y)|} {\sq{2}}\Big)^2 \int_{t_1}^T\Big|B_0^{-1}(\ep B_0^{-1}+I)^{-1}v(t,X_R(t_1))\Big|^2\d t\Big\}\\
&\quad\leq \exp\Big\{ \ff {(R+|y|)^2 K^2_1 (T-t_1)} {4\ep^2(1-e^{-K_1(T-t_1)/2})^2} +|A(y)|^2(T-t_1) \Big\}<\infty.
\end{ews*}
Then, according to Girsanov's theorem,
$$\tld W(t):=W(t)+C_R\int_0^{t}\Big\<\tld B^{-1}(\tld X(s))(\ep B_0^{-1}+I)^{-1}v(s,X(t_1))1_{\{s> t_1\}},\d W(s)\Big\>,\ t\in[0,T]$$
is cylindrical Brownian motion under the probability measure $\tld R_T\P$ and $\tld R_T\P$ is equivalent to $\P$. Moreover, the law of $\tld X(T)$ under $\tld R_T\P$ equal to that of $X(T)$ under $\P$. Thus, under the probability measure $\P$, the law of $\tld X(T)$ is equivalent to that of $X(T)$. So, to prove (\ref{Prob_X_y}), we only have to prove that $$\P\Big(|\tld X(T)-y_0|> \ff {3l} 4\Big)<1.$$
In fact,
\beg{ews*}
&\P\Big(|\tld X(T)-y|\geq \ff {3l} 4\Big)\leq\P\Big(|\tld X(T)-Y^\ep(T)|+|Y^\ep(T)-y|\geq \ff {3l} 4\Big)\\
&\leq \P\Big(|\tld X(T)-Y^\ep(T)|+|Y^\ep(T)-y|\geq \ff {3l} 4;\ |Y^\ep(T)-y|\leq \ff l 4\Big)+\P\Big(|Y^\ep(T)-y|> \ff l 4\Big)\\
&\leq \P\Big(|X(T)-Y^\ep(T)|\geq \ff {l} {2}\Big)+\P\Big(|Y^\ep(T)-y|> l/4\Big)\leq 1/3+1/3=2/3<1.
\end{ews*}
Therefore, we have proved the irreducibility of $P_T$.
\qed
\section{Applications and examples}
In this part, we present some applications and examples.
\beg{cor}\label{cor:Holder}
Assume that $r>1$ and the conditions of Theorem \ref{thm:sFeller} hold with $\inf_{v\in\V}\rh(v)>0$ and \eqref{locally_B_Lip} replaced by
$$|(B(u)-B(v))^*(u-v)|\leq K_2|u-v|^2,~u,v\in V,$$
for some $K_2\geq 0$. Then $P_Tf$ is $\be$-H\"older continuous on $H$ for all $f\in \sB_b(H)$ with
$$0<\be<\sup_{1-\ff {(2(r-1))\we (r+1)} {\th}<\ep<1-\ff {r-1} {\th}}\Big[\ep-\inf_{p\in(0,1)}(\al_1\vee\al_2\vee\al_3)\Big],$$
where
$$\al_1=\ff {\ep\Big[2(r-1)-\th(1-\ep)\Big]} {2(p\th+1)(r-1)-\th(1-\ep)},~~\al_2=\ff {\ep(\th-2)} {2(1-p)\th+\th-2},~~\al_3=\ff {\ep-2(1-\ga)} {p\th+1}.$$
\end{cor}
\beg{proof}
Let $\ep\in (0,1)$ such that $r-1<\th(1-\ep)<2(r-1)\we(r+1)$. Consider the coupling as \eqref{coupling}. Let $2\ga=r+1-\th(1-\ep)$. Since
$$4-4\ga=4-2(r+1-\th(1-\ep))=2\th(1-\ep)-2(r-1)<\th(1-\ep),$$
there is $C>0$ depending on $K_1,~K_2,~\de_1,~\ep,~\th,~r,~T,~|B_0|$ such that
\beg{align*}
&\E\exp\Big\{u\int_0^{T\we\ta}e^{-(1-\ga)K_1t}\ff {|X(t)-Y(t)|_{B_0}^{\th}} {|X(t)-Y(t)|^{\th\ep}}\d t-\ff {u|x-y|^{2-2\ga}} {\de_1(1-\ga)}\Big\}\\
&\quad\leq \Big(\E\exp\Big\{\ff {u^2K_2^2} {\de_1^2} \int_0^{T\we\ta}e^{-2(1-\ga)K_1t}|X(t)-y(t)|^{4-4\ga}\d t\Big\}\Big)^{1/2}\\
&\quad\leq \Big(\E\exp\Big\{\ff u {|B_0|^\th}\int_0^{T\we\ta}e^{-(1-\ga)K_1t}|X(t)-Y(t)|^{\th(1-\ep)}\d t+Cu^{[2-\ff {4-4\ga} {\th(1-\ep)}]/[1-\ff {4-4\ga} {\th(1-\ep)}]}\Big\}\Big)^{1/2}\\
&\quad\leq\Big(\E\exp\Big\{u\int_0^{T\we\ta}e^{-(1-\ga)K_1t}\ff {|X(t)-Y(t)|_{B_0}^{\th}} {|X(t)-Y(t)|^{\th\ep}}\d t+Cu^{[2-\ff {4-4\ga} {\th(1-\ep)}]/[1-\ff {4-4\ga} {\th(1-\ep)}]}\Big\}\Big)^{1/2},
\end{align*}
according to (\ref{HofA}), (\ref{ItoforX_Y}), \eqref{Ito_ga} and H\"older inequality.
So there is $C>0$ depending on $K_1$, $K_2$, $\de_1$, $\ep$, $\th$, $r$, $T$, $|B_0|$ such that
\beg{ews*}
&\E\exp\Big\{u\int_0^{s\we\ta}e^{-(1-\ga)K_1t}\ff {|X(t)-Y(t)|_{B_0}^\th} {|X(t)-Y(t)|^{\th\ep}}\d t\Big\}\\
&\quad\leq\exp\Big\{C\Big(u^{\ff {2(r-1)} {2(r-1)-\th(1-\ep)}} +u|x-y|^{2-2\ga}\Big)\Big\}<\infty,~~u\in\R^+.
\end{ews*}
Defining $R_T$ as in lemma \ref{lmm:sFeller}, we obtain that there exists $C$ depending on $K_1$, $K_2$, $\de_1$, $\ep$, $\th$, $r$, $T$, $|B_0|$ such that
\beg{align}\label{exp}
\E R_T^2&\leq \Big(\E\exp\Big\{\ff {7|x-y|^{2\al}} 2\int_0^{T\we\ta}\ff {|\tld B^{-1}(Y(t))(X(t)-Y(t))|^2} {|X(t)-Y(t)|^{2\ep}}\d t\Big\}\Big)^{1/2}\nonumber\\
&\leq \Big(\E\exp\Big\{\ff {7|x-y|^{2\al}} 2\int_0^{T\we\ta}\ff {|(X(t)-Y(t))|_{B_0}^2} {|X(t)-Y(t)|^{2\ep}}\d t\Big\}\Big)^{1/2}\nonumber\\
&\leq \Big(\E\exp\Big\{C\Big(|x-y|^{p\al\th}\int_0^{T\we\ta}\ff {|X(t)-Y(t)|_{B_0}^\th} {|X(t)-Y(t)|^{\th\ep}}\d t+ (\th-2)|x-y|^{\ff {2\al\th(1-p)} {\th-2}}\Big)\Big\}\Big)^{1/2}\\
&\leq\exp\Big\{C\Big(|x-y|^{\ff {2p\th\al(r-1)} {2(r-1)-\th(1-\ep)}}+({\th-2})|x-y|^{\ff {2\al\th(1-p)} {\th-2}}+|x-y|^{2(1-\ga)+p\th\al}\Big)\Big\}\nonumber\\
&=:\exp\{\Phi(|x-y|)\}<\infty.\nonumber
\end{align
with $p\in(0,1)$ and if $\th=2$ we set $({\th-2})|x-y|^{\ff {2\al\th(1-p)} {\th-2}}=0$. It is clear that $\Ph$ is continuous and $\Ph(0)=0$. By Girsanov's theorem, $\{\tld W(t)\}_{t\geq0}$ is cylindrical Wiener process under the probability measure $R_T\P$. Repeating the same argument in Lemma \ref{lmm:sFeller} and via the following inequality
$$\E|1-R_T|\leq \Big(\E|1-R_T|^2\Big)^{1/2}=\Big(\E R_T^2-1\Big)^{1/2}\leq \Ph^{1/2}(|x-y|)\exp\{\Ph(|x-y|)/2\},$$
we obtain that
$$|P_Tf(x)-P_Tf(y)|\leq |f|_\infty\Big[\Ph^{1/2}(|x-y|)\exp\{\Ph(|x-y|)/2\}+|x-y|^{\ep-\al}\ff {e^{\ff {\ep K_1T} {2}}-1+T^2} {T^2}\Big].$$
So
$$|P_Tf(x)-P_Tf(y)|\leq C|x-y|^{\be}$$
with
$$\be=\ff {2p\th\al(r-1)} {2(r-1)-\th(1-\ep)}\we \ff {2\al\th(1-p)} {\th-2}\we (2(1-\ga)+p\th\al)\we (\ep-\al).$$
Since $p\in(0,1)$ and $\ep$ is arbitrary such that $(r-1)<\th(1-\ep)<(2(r-1))\we (r+1)$,
$$\be<\sup_{1-\ff {(2(r-1))\we (r+1)} {\th}<\ep<1-\ff {r-1} {\th}}\Big[\ep-\inf_{p\in(0,1)}(\al_1\vee\al_2\vee\al_3)\Big].$$
Therefore, the proof is completed.
\end{proof}
\beg{rem}
Since the coupling used here neither is optimal nor succeed in deterministic finite time, the H\"older continuity got in Lemma \ref{lmm:sFeller}, Lemma \ref{lmm:sFeller'} and the corollary above are worse comparing with results obtained in \cite{WBook13',Wang14b}.
\end{rem}
Combining Theorem \ref{thm:sFeller}, Theorem \ref{thm:sFeller'} and Theorem \ref{thm:irreducibility}, we have
\beg{cor}
The same conditions of Theorem \ref{thm:sFeller}(or Theorem \ref{thm:sFeller'}) with $\inf_{v\in\V}\rh(v)>0$ and \eqref{con_B_2} hold. Moreover, we assume that $|\cdot|_{B_0}$ is bounded on bounded sets of $\V$. Then $P_t$ has a unique invariant measure $\nu$ with full support on $H$, and for all probability measure $\mu$ on $\H$
$$\lim_{t\ra\infty} ||P^*_t\mu-\nu||_{VT}=0,$$
where $||\cdot||_{VT}$ is the total variation norm and $P_t^*$ is the adjoint operator of $P_t$.
\end{cor}
\beg{proof}
It is a direct consequence of the Doob theorem and \cite[Corollary 1.]{Stet94}.
\end{proof}
We present some specific examples to illustrate our main results. These examples have been intensively study in additive noise case. Here we do not repeat the details, one can consult \cite{Wang2007,LiuW08,Liu09,WBook13'} for more general discussion. The non-degenerate condition \eqref{nondenerate_B} allows us to compare the multiplicative noise with the additive noise situation.
\beg{exa}\label{exa_1}
(Stochastic porous media equations)
Let $D\subset \R^d$ be a bounded domain with smooth boundary, $\mu$ be the normalized Lebesgue measure on $D$. Let $\De_D$ be the Dirichlet Laplace on $D$ and $L=-(-\De_D)^\ga$ for some constant $\ga>0$. Consider the Gel'fand triple $$L^{r+1}(D,\mu)\subset H^\ga(D,\mu)\subset (L^{r+1}(D,\mu))^*,$$
where $H^{\ga}(D,\mu)$ is the completion of $L^2(D,\mu)$ under the norm
\bequ\label{norm}
|x|:=\Big(\int_{D}|(-\De_D)^{-\ga/2}x|^2\d\mu\Big)^{1/2},~x\in L^2(D,\mu),
\enqu
and $(L^{r+1}(D))^*$ is the dual space of $L^{r+1}(D,\mu)$ w.r.t. $H^\ga(D,\mu)$. Let $$\la_1\leq \la_2\leq \cdots\leq \la_n\leq \cdots$$
be the eigenvalues of $-\De_D$ including multiplicities with unite eigenfunctions $\{e_j\}_{j\geq 1}$. Let $r>1$,
$$\Psi(s)=s|s|^{r-1},~\Ph(s)=cs,~B_0e_j=j^{-q}e_j,~j\geq 1,$$
for some constants $c\geq 0$ and $q>1/2$. Then $B_0\in \sL_2(H^\ga(D,\mu))$. Let $$B(x)e_j=b_j(x)j^{-q}e_j,~j\geq 1,$$
with $b\in \R$ such that
\beg{ews}\label{B_exa}
|b_j(x)-b_j(y)|\leq b|x-y|,&~x,~y\in H^{\ga}(D,\mu),\\
\inf_{|x|\leq R}\inf_{j\geq 1} b_j(x)>0,&~R>0.
\end{ews}
We consider the following equation under the triple introduced above
\bequ\label{exa_porous/fast}
\d X(t)=\Big(L\Ps(X(t))+\Ph(X(t))\Big)\d t+B(X(t))\d W(t),
\enqu
where $W(t)$ is cylindrical Brownian motion on $\H$ w.r.t. a complete filtered probability space $(\Om, \{\sF\}_{t\geq 0},\P)$. According to \cite[Corollary 3.1]{Wang2007}, or \cite[Example 2.4.1]{WBook13'}, if $\ga\geq dq$, then \eqref{HofA}
holds for all $\th\in (r-1,r+1]$. By \eqref{B_exa} and the definition of the noise term $B$, \eqref{nondenerate_B} holds with $\rh(x)=\inf_{j\geq 1} b_j(x)$. So the claim in Theorem \ref{thm:sFeller} holds. If $\inf_{v, j\geq1}b_j(x)>0$, then Theorem \ref{thm:irreducibility} holds.
\end{exa}
\beg{exa}
(Stochastic fast diffusion equations) Let $D=(0,1)\subset \R^1$, $\mu$, $H^\ga(D,\mu)$, $L$, $\Ph$, $\Ps$ as in Example \ref{exa_1}. Let $\ff 1 3<r<1$, $\ga=1$ $\V=L^{r+1}(D,\mu)\bigcap H^{1}(D,\mu)$ with
$$
|v|_{\V}=|v|_{L^{r+1}}+|v|,~v\in \V.$$
We consider the equation \eqref{exa_porous/fast} under the triple
$$\V\subset H^{1}(D,\mu)\subset \V^*.$$
Let $B_0$ and $B$ defined as in Example \ref{exa_1} with $q$ to be determined later. According to \cite{LiuW08}, or \cite[Example 2.4.2]{WBook13'}, for all $\th\in (\ff 4 {r+1}, \ff {6r+2} {r+1})$ and $q\in (\ff 1 2,\ff {3r+1} {\th(r+1)})$ such that \eqref{HofA'} and \eqref{H_coe'} hold with $h(v)=|v|_{\V},~v\in\V$. Then Theorem \ref{thm:sFeller'} holds.
\end{exa}
At last, we give an explicit example of $B$ satisfying \eqref{B_exa}.
\beg{exa}
Let $D\subset\R^d$, $\mu$, $\{\la_j\}_{j\geq 1}$, $\{e_j\}_{j\geq 1}$ are defined as in Example \ref{exa_1}. Let
$$b_j(x)= \ff 1 {1+j^{-\ff {2\ga} {d}}|\mu(xe_j)|},~x\in L^{r+1}(D,\mu),~j\geq 1,$$
where $\mu(x):=\int_{D}x\d \mu$. By the Weyl's formula, see \cite{Weyl}, or \cite{Gull}, there is a constant $C_d$ depending on $d$ such that $\lim_{j\ra \infty}\ff {j^{2/d}} {\la_j}=C_d \mathbf{Vol}(D)$, where $\mathbf{Vol}(D)$ means the volume of $D$. So there is $C$ independent of $j$ such that
$$\ff 1 C |\<x,e_j\>|\leq j^{-\ff {2\ga} {d}}|\mu(xe_j)|\leq C|\<x,e_j\>|,~x\in L^{r+1}(D,\mu),~j\geq 1,$$
where $\<\cdot,\cdot\>$ is the inner product induced by the norm \eqref{norm}. It is easy to check that \eqref{B_exa} holds.
\end{exa}
\bigskip
\noindent\textbf{Acknowledgements}
\medskip
The author would like to thank Professor Feng-Yu Wang for his useful suggestions.
|
\section{Introduction}
\label{sec:1}
Understanding the nonequilibrium physics of particle and energy currents
in correlated systems
is important for various applications of novel materials.
The present electronic and photovoltaic technologies are based
on semiconductors, where the electron-electron interactions do not play any essential role.
From this point of view, the recent intensive studies on driven strongly correlated
systems\cite{matsuda1994,okamoto2010,okamoto2011,taguchi2000,oka2003,oka2005,eckstein2010,zala2012} are promising.
However, the nonequilibrium dynamics of various excitations in solids or nanosystems is usually too complex to be grasped in terms of a simple physical picture.
Hence these studies pose a real challenge both for the experiment as well as for the theory.
The evolution of even the simplest quantum system is already a complicated problem
with only few exactly solvable examples. In most cases the presence of many--body interactions
makes this problem intractable for purely analytical approaches, hence
majority of theoretical results have been obtained from recently developed numerical methods \cite{white2004,jim2006,my1,mierzejewski2011,prosen2010,aron2012,bukov2012,bonca2012}.
Many studies focus on charge dynamics in systems driven by strong electromagnetic fields \cite{jim2006,hasegawa2007,sugimoto2008,takahashi2008,
my1,my3,lev2011,lev2011_1,eckstein2011,aron2012,amaricci11,einhellinger12}.
The main motivation for this research is the
the ultrafast relaxation of photoinduced carriers revealed by the femtosecond pump--probe spectroscopy in various strongly correlated materials \cite{matsuda1994,dalconte12,rettig12,novelli12,okamoto2010,cortes2011,kim12}.
Interaction of strong electromagnetic fields with solids is a very complex issue
which may involve high--energy states \cite{al-Hassanieh2008} . Hence it is mostly impossible to work with microscopic Hamiltonians which include all the relevant degrees of freedom.
Fortunately, the highly excited carriers quickly dissipate their energy due to multiple scatterings and enter the regime which is within the reach of the standard tight--binding models.
The dynamics of photocarriers has been intensively studied in the context of their nonradiative recombination \cite{strohmaier2010,sensarma2010,al-Hassanieh2008,dias2012,zala2012a}. Various numerical approaches have been applied, e.g. exact diagonalization methods \cite{takahashi2002}, time--dependent density matrix renormalization group \cite{al-Hassanieh2008,dias2012}.
or nonequilibrium dynamical mean--field approach \cite{eckstein2013}.
In contradistinction to the quickly developing research on the charge dynamics under far--from--equilibrium conditions, the equally important problem of the energy transport remains almost unexplored.
In particular, understanding of the thermoelectric phenomena in quantum systems is important for heat--to--current conversion or heat pumping in the future nanoscale devices. However, thermoelectric properties of generic low-dimensional systems have been studied mostly within equilibrium approaches, while the nonequilibrium regime has been investigated within models of essentially noninteracting particles. First results have recently been reported in \cite{leijnse,kirchner} and \cite{sanchez2013} for quantum dots and mesoscopic systems, respectively. In particular, the lowest order corrections to LR have been studied within scattering theory in the latter paper.
In this work we do not address directly the problem of thermoelectricity in driven nanosystems. The aim is more modest still being directly related with the thermoelectric phenomena. In the first part we consider a microscopic Hamiltonian of correlated spinless fermions driven by external electric field and derive the continuity equation for the energy density. This allows us to derive the energy current in the presence of external driving for either homogeneous or inhomogeneous systems.
In subsequent part we study the energy fluctuation in driven quantum system. While irrelevant in solids these fluctuations may be very important in the nanoscale devices. Universality of these fluctuations has recently been shown for periodically driven systems \cite{naturepol}. Here, we demonstrate that analogous (but different in details) universality holds true also for the case of a steady driving.
\section{Energy current in a driven wire}
\label{sec:2}
We study a one--dimensional (1D) isolated system of interacting spinless fermions with periodic boundary conditions. The system is driven by a time--dependent magnetic flux $\phi(t)$ which enters only the
kinetic energy term of the following Hamiltonian
\begin{align}
H&= \sum_l h_l, \label{eq3} \\
h_l&= \left( -t_h e^{i\phi} c^{\dagger}_{l+1}c_l +\mathrm{H.c.} \right) +V \tilde{n}_{l+1}\tilde{n}_l
+\frac{1}{2} W \left( \tilde{n}_{l-1} \tilde{n}_{l+1}
+ \tilde{n}_{l} \tilde{n}_{l+2} \right),
\label{eq4}
\end{align}
where $\tilde{n}_l=n_l -\frac{1}{2}$, $n_l= c^{\dagger}_{l}c_l$, $t_h$ is the hopping integral,
whereas $V$ and $W$ are the repulsive interaction
strengths for particles on the nearest and the next nearest sites, respectively. The reason behind introducing $W$ is to stay away from the integrable case ($W=0$), which shows anomalous transport characteristics \cite{my1,tomaz2011,Marko2011,Robin2011}.
The aim of studies discussed in the present section is to derive the continuity equations for particle and energy densities in the presence of external driving. However, for the sake of completeness we start with a rather straightforward derivation of particle and energy currents ($j^N_l$ and $j^E_l$,
respectively) for the time--independent Hamiltonian. In the absence of driving, i.e. for a constant magnetic flux $\phi$, the particle number and the total energy are conserved, hence one derives the continuity equations which do not contain any source terms. In the Heisenberg picture the equation of motion for
the particle density operator $n_l$ reads
\begin{equation}
\frac{\mathrm d}{{\mathrm d} t} n_l +i[n_l,H]=0,
\label{eq1}
\end{equation}
and the corresponding current operator $j^N_l$ fulfills
\begin{equation}
\nabla j^N_l \equiv j^N_{l+1}-j^N_{l}=i[n_l,H].
\label{eq2}
\end{equation}
The solution of Eq. \ref{eq2} for the Hamiltonian \ref{eq4}
\begin{equation}
j^N_l= i t_h \exp(i\phi) c^{\dagger}_{l+1}c_{l}+ \mathrm{H.c.},
\label{jn}
\end{equation}
fulfills also the well known relation $j^N_l=-\frac{{\mathrm d} h_l}{{\mathrm d} \phi}$.
In order to determine the energy current we have defined the energy density $h_l$. Since $H$ can be split into $h_l$ in many inequivalent ways, the energy current operator is not uniquely defined either. In Eq. (\ref{eq4}) we take $h_l$ which has support symmetric with respect to the bond between sites $l$ and $l+1$. Then, similarly to Eq. (\ref{eq2}), one
defines the energy current through the continuity equation as
\begin{equation}
\frac{\mathrm d}{{\mathrm d} t} h_l+ i[h_l,H]=\frac{\mathrm d}{{\mathrm d} t} h_l+j^E_{l+1}-j^E_{l}=0.
\label{jedef}
\end{equation}
The calculations are straightforward but tedious.
For a translationally invariant system one usually
considers the current
averaged over the whole system $j^E=\frac{1}{L} \sum_l j^E_{l}$:
\begin{align}
j^E =& \,\frac{1}{L}\sum_l (-t_h^2) [i \exp(2i\phi) c^{\dagger}_{l+1}c_{l-1}+{\mathrm H.c.}] \nonumber \\
& + \frac{1}{L} \sum_l j^N_l \left[\frac{3W}{2} (\tilde{n}_{l+3}+\tilde{n}_{l-2})+ \frac{2V-W}{2} (\tilde{n}_{l+2}
+\tilde{n}_{l-1}) \right].
\label{je}
\end{align}
\textit{The energy current in a driven system}. For the time--dependent Hamiltonian the energy is not conserved
hence the continuity equation for $h_l$ may include source terms.
Other important difference with respect to the previous case
is that now it is easier to carry out calculations, at least initially, in the Schr\"odinger picture. For arbitrary
$| \psi_t \rangle$ and $ | \xi_t \rangle$ one finds directly from the Schr\"odinger equation
\begin{align}
\frac{\mathrm d}{{\mathrm d} t}
\langle \psi_t |h_l(t) | \xi_t \rangle +i\langle \psi_t |[h_l,H]| \xi_t \rangle =
\langle \psi_t |
\frac{{\mathrm d} h_l}{{\mathrm d} \phi} | \xi_t \rangle\, \dot{\phi} , && \\
\frac{\mathrm d}{{\mathrm d} t}
\langle \psi_t |H(t) | \xi_t \rangle =
\langle \psi_t |
\frac{{\mathrm d} H}{{\mathrm d} \phi} | \xi_t \rangle\, \dot{\phi},
\end{align}
Using Eqs. (\ref{eq4}-\ref{jedef}) and introducing the
time--dependent electric field $F(t)=-\dot{\phi}(t)$ one gets
\begin{align}
\frac{\mathrm d}{{\mathrm d} t}
\langle \psi_t |h_l(t) | \xi_t \rangle +
\langle \psi_t | \nabla j^E_l | \xi_t \rangle =
F \langle \psi_t | j^N_l | \xi_t \rangle, & \label{cont} \\
\frac{\mathrm d}{{\mathrm d} t}
\langle \psi_t |H(t) | \xi_t \rangle =
F \langle \psi_t | {\textstyle \sum_l} j^N_l | \xi_t \rangle, &\label{conttest}
\end{align}
where both current operators are defined without driving.
The main issue is to set whether the
term at the rhs. of Eq. (\ref{cont}) represents the source
of energy or whether it should be accommodated into a new
current operator $\nabla \bar{j}^E_l $. In the latter scenario
one would end up with the continuity equation
$\frac{\mathrm d}{{\mathrm d} t}
\langle \psi_t |h_l(t) | \xi_t \rangle +
\langle \psi_t | \nabla \bar{j}^E_l | \xi_t \rangle = 0 $, which
for periodic boundary conditions implies conservation of the total
energy. The latter result follows from the identity $\sum_l \nabla \bar{j}^E_l=\sum_l (\bar{j}^E_{l+1}-\bar{j}^E_{l}) =0$ which holds for
any $\bar{j}^E_{l}$. However conservation of the total
energy would violate Eq. (\ref{conttest}). Consequently, the nonequilibrium term $F j^N_l$ is a source of energy, while the energy current operator remains the same as for the case without driving. Note, that this reasoning holds true independently of any particular form of $h_l$.
For $| \xi_t \rangle = | \psi_t \rangle$,
Eq. (\ref{cont}) turns into the continuity equation for the
expectation value $ \langle h_l(t) \rangle =\langle \psi_t |h_l(t) | \psi_t \rangle$:
\begin{equation}
\frac{\mathrm d}{{\mathrm d} t}
\langle h_l \rangle +
\nabla \langle j^E_l \rangle =
F \langle j^N_l \rangle
\end{equation}
The same continuity equation may be derived for a system in a mixed state when $ \langle h_l \rangle = {\mathrm Tr }[\rho(t) h_l(t) ]$ and the density matrix
$\rho(t)$ evolves according to the von Neumann equation. Still, it might seem disturbing that the continuity equation for the driven
case concerns the expectation values, while Eq. (\ref{jedef}) has been derived entirely in the operator language. The evolution of an isolated system (whether driven or not) is unitary.
Putting $| \psi_t \rangle = U(t,t_0) | \psi_{t0} \rangle$
and $| \xi_t \rangle = U(t,t_0) | \xi_{t0} \rangle$ into
Eq. (\ref{cont}) and recalling that this equation holds
for arbitrary $ | \psi_{t0} \rangle$ and $ | \xi_{t0} \rangle$
one finds the continuity equation
\begin{equation}
\frac{\mathrm d}{{\mathrm d} t}
\tilde{h}_l(t) +
\nabla \tilde{j} ^E_l =
F \tilde{j}^N_l,
\end{equation}
where the operators with tilde are defined through
the unitary transformation
$\tilde{h}_l(t) = U^{\dagger}(t,t_0) h_l(t) U (t,t_0)$ and
$U^{\dagger}(t,t_0) U (t,t_0)=1$. While the continuity equation
can be written in the operator language also for driven systems,
in most cases this form is rather useless because of complicated form
or the evolution operator $U (t,t_0)$.
Finally we turn to the most general case of an inhomogeneous wire.
For this reason we consider site--dependent interactions $V \rightarrow V_l$ $W\rightarrow W_l$ as well as local potentials $\varepsilon_l$.
The energy density takes the form:
\begin{align}
h_l&=h^{tV}_{l,l+1}+\frac{1}{2}h^{W}_{l-1,l+1}+\frac{1}{2} h^{W}_{l,l+2}\\
h^{tV}_{l,l+1} &= \left( -t_h e^{i\phi} c^{\dagger}_{l+1}c_l +\mathrm{H.c.} \right) + V_l\, \tilde{n}_l \,\tilde{n}_{l+1} + \frac{1}{2} \varepsilon_{l}\, \tilde{n}_l + \frac{1}{2} \varepsilon_{l+1}\, \tilde{n}_{l+1}\\
h^{W}_{l-1,l+1} &= W_{l-1}\, \tilde{n}_{l-1} \, \tilde{n}_{l+1}
\label{inhom_hamiltonian}
\end{align}
This form of the local energy density has a symmetric support on sites $l-2$ through $l+2$. The partition in 3 distinct terms has been made to ease the calculation of the commutators.
From Eq. (\ref{jedef}) it is evident that we need to compute the commutator of $h_l$ with $H$ and break the term $j^E_{l+1}-j^E_{l}$ into distinct contributions to the energy current.
\begin{align}
\frac{d}{dt} h_l = &i [H, h_l] = i\, [\,{\textstyle \sum_j h_j}, h_l]\\
= &i [h_{l-3} + h_{l-2} + h_{l-1} + h_{l} + h_{l+1} + h_{l+2}+h_{l+3},
h_l]
\end{align}
since all terms with $|l-j| \geq 4$ share no common operators and commute. Writing explicitly the values for all $h_l$,
\begin{align}
\frac{d}{dt} h_l = &-i\, [ h^{tV}_{l,l+1}+\frac{1}{2} h^{W}_{l-1,l+1}+\frac{1}{2}h^{W}_{l,l+2} \;,\; \\
&+ h^{tV}_{l-3,l-2}+h^{tV}_{l-2,l-1}+h^{tV}_{l-1,l}+h^{tV}_{l+1,l+2}\\
&+h^{tV}_{l+2,l+3}+h^{tV}_{l+3,i+4}+\frac{1}{2}h^{W}_{l-4,l-2}+ h^{W}_{l-3,l-1}\\
&+ \frac{1}{2} h^{W}_{l-2,l}
+ \frac{1}{2}h^{W}_{l-1,l+1}+ \frac{1}{2}h^{W}_{l,l+2}+ h^{W}_{l+1,l+3}]
\end{align}
and expanding the big commutator, one obtains two nonzero terms involving only $h^{tV}$:
\begin{align}
\left[h^{tV}_{l,l+1},h^{tV}_{l-1,l}\right]\;,\; \left[h^{tV}_{l,l+1},h^{tV}_{l+1,l+2}\right]
\label{onlyV}
\end{align}
all terms involving only $h^W$ commute, leaving 12 nonzero mixed terms:
\begin{align}
2\, &\frac{1}{2} \left[h^{tV}_{l,l+1},h^{W}_{l-2,l}\right] \;,\;
&2\, \frac{1}{2}\left[h^{tV}_{l,l+1},h^{W}_{l+1,l+3}\right] \; , \; \nonumber \\
&\frac{1}{2}\left[h^{tV}_{l,l+1},h^{W}_{l-1,l+1}\right] \;,\;
&\frac{1}{2}\left[h^{tV}_{l,l+1},h^{W}_{l,l+2}\right] \; ,\;
&\frac{1}{2}\left[h^{W}_{l-1,l+1},h^{tV}_{l-2,l-1}\right]\;,\; \nonumber \\
&\frac{1}{2}\left[h^{W}_{l-1,l+1},h^{tV}_{l-1,l}\right]\;,\;
&\frac{1}{2}\left[h^{W}_{l-1,l+1},h^{tV}_{l+1,l+2}\right] \; , \;
&\frac{1}{2}\left[h^{W}_{l,l+2},h^{tV}_{l-1,l}\right] \; ,\; \nonumber \\
&\frac{1}{2}\left[h^{W}_{l,l+2},h^{tV}_{l+1,l+2}\right]\;,\;
&\frac{1}{2}\left[h^{W}_{l,l+2},h^{tV}_{l+2,l+3}\right] \;,\; \nonumber
\end{align}
where the first two terms are to be counted twice in order to pair each commutator uniquely.
Before calculating the explicit values for the above operators, it is useful to separate parts of the ansatz (\ref{jedef}) with $j^E_{l} = \sum_k j^{E_k}_{l}$, leaving the task of regrouping the commutators in order to define all $j^{E_k}_{l}$. In this case, there are $14/2=7$ such contributions to be found.
The structure of Eq. (\ref{onlyV}) allows one to immediately recognize their sum as a difference between operators defined on two contiguous sites
\begin{align}
i \left[h^{tV}_{l,l+1},h^{tV}_{l+1,l+2}\right] &+ i \left[h^{tV}_{l,l+1},h^{tV}_{l-1,l}\right] = \nonumber \\
i \left[h^{tV}_{l,l+1},h^{tV}_{l+1,l+2}\right] &- i\left[h^{tV}_{l-1,l},h^{tV}_{l,l+1}\right] = \nonumber \\
j^{E_1}_{l+1} &- j^{E_1}_{l}
\label{je1}
\end{align}
we thus define the first current $j^{E_1}_{l}$ and look for a similar pattern, which holds for 5 of the 7 pairs. The remaining ones encode a difference between second neighbors.
\begin{align*}
i\frac{1}{2}\left[h^{W}_{l,l+2},h^{tV}_{l+2,l+3}\right] &+
i\frac{1}{2}\left[h^{tV}_{l,l+1},h^{W}_{l-2,l}\right] =\\ \nonumber
i\frac{1}{2}\left[h^{W}_{l,l+2},h^{tV}_{l+2,l+3}\right] &-
i\frac{1}{2}\left[h^{W}_{l-2,l},h^{tV}_{l,l+1}\right] =\\ \nonumber
\bar{j}^{E}_{l+2} &- \bar{j}^{E}_{l}
\end{align*}
The double difference needs to be interpreted as arising from a partial cancellation:
\begin{align*}
\bar{j}^{E}_{l+2} - \bar{j}^{E}_{l} = (\bar{j}^{E}_{l+2} + \bar{j}^{E}_{l+1}) - (\bar{j}^{E}_{l+1} + \bar{j}^{E}_{l}),
\end{align*}
and the contribution to the current for site $l$ is taken as
\begin{align*}
j^{E_6}_{l} = \bar{j}^{E}_{l+1} + \bar{j}^{E}_{l} &= i\frac{1}{2}\left[h^{W}_{l-1,l+1},h^{tV}_{l+1,l+2}\right] + i\frac{1}{2}\left[h^{W}_{l-2,l},h^{tV}_{l,l+1}\right]
\end{align*}
The full list of currents contributing to $j^E_l$ is:
\begin{align*}
j^{E_{1}}_{l} & = \, i \,\left[h^{tV}_{l-1,l},h^{tV}_{l,l+1}\right] \label{jelist} \\
j^{E_{2}}_{l} & = \frac{1}{2} \, i \,\left[h^{tV}_{l-1,l},h^{W}_{l-1,l+1}\right] \\
j^{E_{3}}_{l} & = \frac{1}{2} \, i \,\left[h^{tV}_{l-1,l},h^{W}_{l,l+2}\right] \\
j^{E_{4}}_{l} & = \frac{1}{2} \, i \,\left[h^{W}_{l-2,l},h^{tV}_{l,l+1}\right] \\
j^{E_{5}}_{l} & = \frac{1}{2} \, i \,\left[h^{W}_{l-1,l+1},h^{tV}_{l,l+1}\right] \\
j^{E_{6}}_{l} & = \frac{1}{2} \, i \,\left[h^{tV}_{l-2,l-1},h^{W}_{l-1,l+1}\right]+\frac{1}{2} \, i \,\left[h^{tV}_{l-1,l},h^{W}_{l,l+2}\right] \\
j^{E_{7}}_{l} & = \frac{1}{2} \, i \,\left[h^{W}_{l-2,l},h^{tV}_{l,l+1}\right]+\frac{1}{2} \, i \,\left[h^{W}_{l-1,l+1},h^{tV}_{l+1,l+2}\right]
\end{align*}
The operators thus defined are automatically Hermitian, since they are the commutator of two Hermitian operators multiplied by $i$. The commutators are straightforward to calculate, and follow the pattern of an expression involving the number operators $\tilde{n}_{l}$ and the particle current defined in Eq. (\ref{jn}). The current term from Eq. (\ref{je1}) deviates from the rule and includes a hopping term between second neighbors.
We summarize all the contributions in their full functional form:
\begin{align*}
j^{E_{1}}_{l} & = -t_h^2 \left( i e^{2 i \phi } c^{\dagger }{}_{l+1} c_{l-1} + H.c. \right) \\
&+ \left(\tilde{n}_{l+1} V_l + \frac{\varepsilon_{l}}{2}\right) \,j^N_{l,l-1} + \left(\tilde{n}_{l-1} V_{l-1}+\frac{\varepsilon_{l}}{2}\right) \,j^N_{l+1,l}\\
j^{E_{2}}_{l} & = -\frac{1}{2} \tilde{n}_{l+1} W_{l-1} \,j^N_{l,l-1} \\
j^{E_{3}}_{l} & = \frac{1}{2} \tilde{n}_{l+2} W_l \,j^N_{l,l-1} \\
j^{E_{4}}_{l} & = \frac{1}{2} \tilde{n}_{l-2} W_{l-2} \,j^N_{l+1,l} \\
j^{E_{5}}_{l} & = -\frac{1}{2} \tilde{n}_{l-1} W_{l-1} \,j^N_{l+1,l} \\
j^{E_{6}}_{l} & = \frac{1}{2} \left(\tilde{n}_{l+1} W_{l-1} \,j^N_{l-1,l-2}+\tilde{n}_{l+2} W_l \,j^N_{l,l-1}\right) \\
j^{E_{7}}_{l} & = \frac{1}{2} \left(\tilde{n}_{l-2} W_{l-2} \,j^N_{l+1,l}+\tilde{n}_{l-1} W_{l-1}\, j^N_{l+2,l+1}\right)
\end{align*}
For a homogeneous, translationally invariant system,
the average current $j^{E} = \frac{1}{L} \sum_{l,k} j^{E_k}_{l}$
reduces to Eq. (\ref{je}), with an additional $(-\varepsilon\, j^N_{l+1,l})$ contribution due to a shift of the energy by $\varepsilon$.
\section{Results and discussion}
Using the microcanonical (MC) Lanczos method \cite{mclm}
we generate an approximate initial state $|\Psi(0) \rangle$
with imposed energy $E_0=\langle \Psi(0)| [H(0)|\Psi(0) \rangle$ but also with a small energy uncertainty
$\delta^2 E_0=\langle \Psi(0)| [H(0)-E_0]^2|\Psi(0) \rangle $.
Typically, we take $L=24$ or $26$ sites and $\delta \simeq 0.01$. As required for the MC ensemble, the energy window
is small on macroscopic scale ($\delta E_0/E_0 \ll 1$) but still contains a large number of levels.
The initial inverse temperature
$\beta$ can be estimated from the initial value of the kinetic energy $E^k$ from the high--temperature expansion (HTE) for the canonical ensemble. In particular, for a system
of $N$ fermions on $L$ sites the HTE gives the kinetic energy
\begin{equation}
E^k= -\frac{2\beta N (L-N)}{L-1}.
\label{beff}
\end{equation}
Then, at time $t=0$ the electric field is switched on and
the time evolution $ |\Psi(0) \rangle \rightarrow |\Psi(t) \rangle$
is calculated in small time increments $\delta t < 1$ by step--vise change of $\phi(t)$.
Lanczos propagations method \cite{lantime} is applied to each time interval $(t,t+\delta t)$. An obvious restriction imposed on the time of evolution
is to stay within the time--window $t< \hbar / \delta E_0$, while the time--resolution $\delta t \ll \frac{1}{F}$ is dictated by the need to approximate the Hamiltonian as constant through any $\delta t$.
We start with the energy current driven by a constant electric field in a homogeneous wire. Due the particle--hole symmetry $\langle j^E \rangle$ vanishes for the half--filled case, i.e., for $\langle \tilde{n}_l \rangle=0$. Therefore, when studying the energy current we consider a system consisting of $L=24$ sites with $N=10$ fermions. Further on, time will be expressed in units of $\hbar/t_h$ while $t_h$ will be set as the unit of energy.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics*[width=.7\textwidth]{fig1}
\caption[]{Time--dependence of the energy current for various
electric field $F$ displayed in the legend.The system consists of $N=10$ fermions on $L=24$ sites. Under equilibrium conditions, the interactions $V=1.5$, $W=1$ correspond to a metallic state at any temperature.
The results have been obtained for initial inverse temperature $\beta=0.3$. }
\label{fig:1}
\end{figure}
Fig. \ref{fig:1} shows the time--dependence of the energy current
$\langle j^E \rangle $ in a wire driven by low--to--moderate fields
(upper panel) as well as in the strong field regime (lower panel).
One can see that the ratio $\langle j^E \rangle/F $ is independent of the driving field at the initial stage of the evolution. It is a clear hallmark of the linear--response (LR) regime which always occurs for a sufficiently short time of driving. The stronger the field the sooner $\langle j^E \rangle$ departs from the predictions of the LR theory. It is not easy to obtain the $dc$ LR directly from the real--time calculations, since for any finite $F$ the long--time regime is always beyond the LR theory. The initial slope of the energy current is $\frac{\mathrm d}{\mathrm d t} \langle j^E \rangle_{t=0}=
-F \langle \partial_{\phi} j^E \rangle_{t=0} $. It is interesting to
note that $\langle \partial_{\phi} j^E \rangle_{t=0}$ is a kind of correlated hopping and represents the sum rule for LR in the initial
equilibrium state.
For longer times and/or stronger $F$, the energy current diminishes
and eventually vanishes. In this regime one finds a counterintuitive
result when the energy current is larger when $F$ is weaker. Similar observation has previously been found for the particle current\cite{mierzejewski2011a} and explained as the result of the Joule--heating. As follows from Eq. (\ref{conttest}) driving with electric field increases the energy of the system. This effect
is beyond the LR theory hence it must be at least of the order of $F^2$.
As soon this heating effect becomes visible it strongly depends on the magnitude of driving. Consequently two systems driven within the same time--window by different $F$ have exceedingly different energies. The system driven by weaker $F$ may be much {\em colder} hence it responds much stronger to the external driving.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics*[width=.7\textwidth]{fig2}
\caption[]{Time--dependence of the average energy $E(t)$ (upper panel) as well as the
energy spread $\delta^2 E$
(lower panel) for a system of $N=13$ fermions on $L=26$ sites.
Here, $V=1.4$, $W=1$ and $F=0.1$ while the initial inverse temperature
is indicated in the legend. The horizontal lines show the equilibrium
HTE results for infinite temperature.
}
\label{fig:2}
\end{figure}
The time--dependence of the energy current
becomes very different for even stronger fields as it is shown in the lower panel of Fig. \ref{fig:1}.
Namely, $\langle j^E \rangle$ starts to oscillate and this oscillations share several common features with the well known Bloch oscillations of the particle current \cite{my1}. Namely, the frequency of these oscillations is determined by the electric field while the initial amplitude of the oscillations is $F$--independent.
Finally, we discuss the time--dependence of the average energy $E(t)=\langle H(t) \rangle$ and the energy spread $\delta^2 E =\langle [H(t)-E(t)]^2 \rangle $. Results shown in Fig. \ref{fig:2} have been obtained for a system driven by a weak field. Initially, the
system is in MC state, hence $\delta E \rightarrow 0$. Upon driving, $E(t)$ asymptotically approaches the energy of the system described by a the
canonical ensemble with $\beta=0$. Similarly to this, also the energy spread asymptotically approaches its canonical value.
However, the evolution of $\delta E$ in the low field regime is rather
unexpected since it is determined mostly by the time of driving being quite independent of the instantaneous energy of the system. Such behavior contrasts with the quasiequilibrium evolution of many local observables \cite{mierzejewski2011a} in the regime of low electric field.
Although, the instantaneous values of the latter quantities
change in time they are determined mostly by the instantaneous energy.
Moreover, their expectation values are close to the equilibrium result for such ensemble that $\langle H \rangle_{equilibrium}=E(t)$.
Except from the initial MC state and the asymptotic canonical one,
$E(t)$ and $\delta E(t)$ are independent of each other excluding the quasiequilibrium evolution of the latter quantity.
Although the behavior of the energy spread is irrelevant
for macroscopic systems, it might be quite important for driven nanosystems, where the ratio $\delta E/ E$ is non--negligible.
\acknowledgement
This work has been carried out within
the NCN project "Nonequilibrium dynamics of correlated
quantum systems". D.C. acknowledges a scholarship from the FORSZT project, co-funded by the European Social Fund.
|
\section{Introduction}\label{sec:Introduction}
The search for the next generation magnetic recording media is focusing on the ultrafast magnetization dynamics.\cite{Beaurepaire96,kirilyuk10,Stanciu07,Malinowski08,Vahaplar09} Despite experimental progress, \cite{stamm07,Melnikov08,mueller09,Bigot09,Radu11,Laovorakiat12,Mathias12,Ostler12,Carley12,kampfrathnatnano2013} the microscopic understanding of the ultrafast magnetization dynamics remains an open question. In the last few years, several theories were proposed as possible explanations, \cite{Koopmans05,Carpene08,Krauss09,Zhang09,Koopmans10,Chimata12,Battiato10,Battiato12,Battiato14,Wienholdt2013} and are currently debated. \cite{Carva11nat,Carva11,Carva13,Eschenlohrnatmater2013,Graves13,Vodungbo12,Pfau12,SchellekensPRL13,wei_13} More recently the ultrafast build-up of magnetization in gold was measured,\cite{Melnikov11} and ferromagnetic Fe was found to undergo both an ultrafast decrease or increase of magnetization.~\cite{Rudolf12} Although this last study did not offer any direct measurement of magnetization, the reported effect was inferred from the qualitative differences observed in the experimental T-MOKE spectra at the 3p (M) absorption edge of Fe.~\cite{Rudolf12,Turgut13} For a demagnetized sample, the 3p asymmetry Fe peak is observed to decrease without noticeable changes of shape.~\cite{Rudolf12} For a sample with increased magnetization, instead, the aforementioned peak remains approximately unaltered but a shoulder grows at lower transition energies~\cite{Rudolf12,Turgut13} (shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:expdata} for convenience). While the decrease of a peak, even in the femtosecond timescale, has been already safely assigned to a net decrease of magnetisation, the growth of a shoulder is a new observation, which in Refs.~\onlinecite{Rudolf12,Turgut13} was associated to an increase of magnetization. However, this conjecture has not been fully justified yet, and a few questions remain open. Does the growth of the shoulder come from an increase of the Fe magnetization or from other effects, such as changes in the material response driven by a different element in the sample, or even by processes not involving magnetism?\cite{carvaEPL09} Answering these precise questions is an important task to understand and above all confirm the existence of an ultrafast increase of magnetization, interpret experimental data, and possibly help in designing new experiments and clarifying the very nature of the ultrafast dynamics.
The aim of the present paper is to provide a model to describe the excited states of Fe after the first picosecond of ultrafast magnetization dynamics in order to predict the magnetic response of the material in the picosecond timescale. We will demonstrate that in the picosecond timescale the system has acquired a partial thermal equilibrium that can be described using microcanonical statistics on a subspace of the whole Hilbert space. The partially-equilibrated configurations for decreased and increased magnetizations will be shown to be qualitatively different in microscopic sense, i.e. in terms of local atomic moments. Our results illustrate that after ultrafast demagnetization the system has tilted atomic magnetic moments whose lengths are equal to the equilibrium value. On the contrary, after ultrafast magnetization increase, the magnetic configuration is given by aligned atomic magnetic moments with increased lengths. This microscopic description allows us to compute dielectric tensors for both increased and decreased magnetization. The calculated spectra show the same features observed in the experimentally measured asymmetry. These results offer a strong support to the existence of an ultrafast increase of magnetization in Fe, especially if one considers that in our model increased and decreased magnetizations are treated on an equal footing from the outset. It must be emphasized that our model does not address the mechanisms driving the ultrafast magnetization dynamics, which are active in the femtosecond timescale. As a matter of fact our model shows that the details of the magnetic response are independent on these mechanisms. In a sense that will be clarified in the paper, any theory of the transient process should at the end lead to the same type of configuration.
The article is structured as follows. After this Introduction, in Section \ref{sec:label} we will illustrate our classifications of the excited states in terms of magnetic and electronic configurations, emphasizing the boundaries of the performed approximations. In Section \ref{sec:energy} we will write explicitly the energy of our system with respect to appropriate reference states. Then, in Section \ref{sec:equilibration}, we will illustrate the mechanisms leading to the partial equilibration, in relation to the experimental timescales. In Section \ref{sec:probability}, we will clarify how to evaluate the probability of finding the system in the excited states (presented in Section \ref{sec:label}) when probing the system in the picosecond time scale. The most probable magnetic configurations in the performed approximations and under the selected constraints will be described in Section \ref{sec:mag_configuration}. The treatment of the electronic configurations for the most probable magnetic configurations will be the object of Section~\ref{sec:full_configuration}. Finally, in Section \ref{sec:response}, we will use the previous results to calculate the dielectric response, and compare it to available experimental data. Conclusions and Acknowledgements will close this manuscript.
\begin{figure}[t]
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth]{Fig_1}
\caption
Time dependent magnetic asymmetry. Time-evolution of the area spanned by the 3p asymmetry Fe peak at 53 eV as reported in Ref.~\onlinecite{Turgut13} for increased Fe magnetization. The relevant timescales in the ultrafast magnetization dynamics in this experiment are also shown (a more detailed discussion is done in Sec.~\ref{sec:equilibration}). In the inset the T-MOKE spectra at the M absorption edge are shown before (thin black line) and after (thick red line) the laser excitation, corresponding roughly to -1.0 ps and +0.7 ps\cite{Turgut13}.}\label{fig:expdata}
\end{figure}
\section{Labelling of microstates}\label{sec:label}
Any treatment of the equilibration problem through statistical mechanics requires the analysis of the Hilbert space spanned by all the excited states of the system. One should first classify all possible microstates $\Psi$ of the system, and then calculate the energy $H(\Psi)$ of every microstate. In principle one should use a quantum mechanical classification in terms of excited many-body states, but it is obvious that this treatment is infeasible for present knowledge and computational resources. Therefore, we proceed by grouping microstates according to their spin configuration, in the spirit of the adiabatic approximation suggested in Ref.~\onlinecite{antropov96}. Notice that this approximation is also one of the pillars of atomistic spin dynamics,~\cite{corina_review} but in our case does not imply a total decoupling of spin and electronic system, like e.g. in the three temperature model. We can then classify a given microstate by its magnetic configuration, i.e. the length and orientation of the local magnetic moments on the atoms of the system. We refer to a given atomic moment as ${\bf{m}}_i$ with the coefficient $i$ running from 1 to the number of atoms in the system $N_{\text{at}}$. We instead will refer to the magnetic configuration (all the atoms) as $\left\{ {\bf{m}}_i \right\}$. For simplicity we assume a material with only one atom in the unit cell; the generalisation to more atoms per cell is straightforward. To give an example, we associate to the zero temperature ferromagnetic phase with atomic moments aligned along z, the magnetic configuration $\left\{ {\bf{m}}_i=M_{\text{eq}} \hat{{\bf{z}}} \right\}$. Here and in the following, conditions within the curly brackets are assumed to be valid $\text{ } \forall i$. Moreover, $M_{\text{eq}}$ is the atomic moment length at zero temperature and $\hat{{\bf{z}}}$ is the unit vector along the $z$ direction. A generic magnetic configuration can have moments of different length and oriented in different directions. Note that, even in an itinerant ferromagnet like Fe, the d bands remain fairly localized around each nucleus and an atomic magnetic moment can be defined with very good approximation.~\cite{antropov96,rosengaard97}
Providing the magnetic configuration $\left\{ {\bf{m}}_i \right\}$ alone does not univocally define the microstate $\Psi$, since the electronic degrees of freedom have not been specified yet. In fact any magnetic configuration $\left\{ {\bf{m}}_i \right\}$ identifies a group of microstates, which we refer to as a mesostate. In the following we will refer to one of these mesostates by simply specifying the magnetic configuration $\left\{ {\bf{m}}_i \right\}$. To identify a single microstate within a mesostate one needs to describe the electronic configuration. This would require to solve the electronic many-body problem for a given magnetic configuration, which makes the problem intractable. Therefore we formulate a description of all the electronic states within a mesostate with respect to the microstate with the lowest energy $\Psi_0(\left\{ {\bf{m}}_i \right\})$ for that particular mesostate. The latter can be identified for every mesostate. In particular if the magnetic configuration is $\left\{ {\bf{m}}_i=M_{\text{eq}} \hat{{\bf{z}}} \right\}$, the lowest energy microstate within the mesostate is the ground state $\Psi_{\text{GS}}$ of the system. For a generic magnetic configuration the lowest energy state is not the ground state of the system, but can still be obtained by a constrained minimisation of the energy. In this study we have used constrained DFT, as discussed below, but other techniques may be used as well. We call the minimum energy within a mesostate $E_{\text{min}}(\left\{ {\bf{m}}_i \right\})$. We can now classify the excited states within a mesostate as superpositions of single electron promotions on the rigid band structure of the lowest energy states, as illustrated in Fig.~\ref{fig:dos_magn_conf}. In practical terms this requires first to evaluate the density of states $\rho_0(\left\{ {\bf{m}}_i \right\},\sigma,\epsilon)$ of the lowest energy microstate $\Psi_0(\left\{ {\bf{m}}_i \right\})$ in a given mesostate $\left\{ {\bf{m}}_i \right\}$, where $\sigma$ is the spin and $\epsilon$ the single electron excitation energy. Then, we can fully describe all microstates in the mesostate by specifying the electronic population of the density of states $n(\sigma,\epsilon)$, with the constraint of preserving the total number of majority and minority spin electrons. The state with the lowest energy within a mesostate is associated to the Fermi-Dirac distribution $n_F$ at zero temperature. Therefore, it is convenient to use the difference $\Delta n(\sigma,\epsilon) \equiv n(\sigma,\epsilon) - n_F(\epsilon,T=0)$ to describe the electronic repopulation of the excited states. The constraint of preserving the total number of majority and minority spin electrons now becomes simply
\begin{equation} \label{eq:chargecons}
\int_{-\infty}^{+\infty} \!\!\!\!\!\rho_0(\left\{ {\bf{m}}_i \right\},\sigma,\epsilon)\,\Delta n(\sigma,\epsilon) d\epsilon=0 \:.
\end{equation}
This description of the excited states is fairly good in metals, provided that correlation effects are not too strong and excitation energies not too high. Correlation effects in Fe are indeed moderate~\cite{prl_igor_2009}, even when compared to other $3d$ transition metals~\cite{prb_igor_2012}. Excitation energies in the typical experimental setups we want to address are below a few hundreds of meV per atom.
\section{Hamiltonian of the system}\label{sec:energy}
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=0.3\textwidth]{Fig_2}
\caption
Some examples of rigid band structures $\rho_0(\left\{ {\bf{m}}_i \right\},\sigma,\epsilon)$ associated to given magnetic configurations $\left\{ {\bf{m}}_i \right\}$ as calculated with constrained DFT for Fe. The arrows represent the length and direction of the atomic magnetic moments, and are coloured according to their length (red, yellow and blue corresponding to moments longer, equal or shorter than $M_{eq}$, respectively). The energy dependence of $\rho_0(\left\{ {\bf{m}}_i \right\},\sigma,\epsilon)$ is also shown, on the right side. Majority and minority spins are respectively as positive and negative values of the density of states. The zero of the energy is the Fermi energy.}\label{fig:dos_magn_conf}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth]{Fig_3}
\caption
Pictorial view of the possible microstates in the Hilbert space. The surface represents the subspace satisfying the constraints of fixed energy and fixed magnetization. The coloured regions represent
intersections of mesostates with different magnetic configurations with the constraint of fixed energy and fixed magnetization. As examples, in addition to the ground state of point A, two microstates are shown, belonging to two areas with different magnetic configurations. Point B is a microstate with atomic magnetic moments reduced in amplitude and aligned. Point C is a microstate with magnetic moments with equilibrium length but tilted directions. The insets show the density of states for both majority (red, top) and minority (blue, bottom) spins, together with a cartoon of the orientation and length of the atomic magnetic moments. The arrows are coloured according to their length, as in Fig. \ref{fig:magnet_config}.}\label{fig:phasespace}
\end{figure}
The microstates defined in Section \ref{sec:label} identify the effective Hilbert space (see Fig.~\ref{fig:phasespace} for a pictorial view) which we will use for our statistical analysis. Before that, we must define the energy of each microstate in terms of the magnetic configuration $\left\{ {\bf{m}}_i \right\}$ and the electronic configuration $n(\sigma,\epsilon)$. In the approximations of Section \ref{sec:label}, the energy of a microstate $\Psi$ can be written as:
\begin{equation} \label{eq:hamilton_generallll}
H(\left\{ {\bf{m}}_i \right\},n(\sigma,\epsilon) ) \approx \sum_{\sigma}\int_{-\infty}^{+\infty}\!\!\! \epsilon \,\rho_0(\left\{ {\bf{m}}_i \right\},\sigma,\epsilon)\, n(\sigma,\epsilon)\;d\epsilon .
\end{equation}
Using the state with lowest energy within the mesostate as a reference, i.e. defining
\begin{equation}\label{eq:ham_mag}
E_{\text{min}}(\left\{ {\bf{m}}_i \right\}) \equiv \sum_{\sigma}\int_{-\infty}^{E_F} \epsilon \,\rho_0(\left\{ {\bf{m}}_i \right\},\sigma,\epsilon)\;d\epsilon
\end{equation}
one can rewrite Eq.~\ref{eq:hamilton_generallll} as
\begin{equation} \label{eq:hamilton_general}
H(\left\{ {\bf{m}}_i \right\},n(\sigma,\epsilon) ) \approx\, E_{\text{min}}(\left\{ {\bf{m}}_i \right\}) \, + E_{\text{el}}(\left\{ {\bf{m}}_i \right\},n(\sigma,\epsilon))
\end{equation}
The second term in Eq.~\ref{eq:hamilton_general} is the contribution associated to the electronic repopulation:
\begin{multline}\label{eq:ham_ele}
E_{\text{el}}(\left\{ {\bf{m}}_i \right\},n(\sigma,\epsilon)) \equiv \\
\sum_{\sigma}\int_{-\infty}^{+\infty} (\epsilon - E_F) \,\rho_0 (\left\{ {\bf{m}}_i \right\},\sigma,\epsilon)\, \Delta n(\sigma,\epsilon)\;d\epsilon \:,
\end{multline}
where $E_F$ is the Fermi energy. The equivalence between Eqs.~\ref{eq:hamilton_generallll} and \ref{eq:hamilton_general} can be promptly verified by means of Eq.~\ref{eq:chargecons}. In spite of the fact that the energy above is already derived from a few approximations, its treatment remains extremely complex due to the fact that the density of states $\rho_0(\left\{ {\bf{m}}_i \right\},\sigma,\epsilon)$ still depends in a very complex way on the full details of the magnetic configuration $\left\{ {\bf{m}}_i \right\}$. In practice, this requires the numerical calculation of $\rho_0(\left\{ {\bf{m}}_i \right\},\sigma,\epsilon)$ for almost every $\left\{ {\bf{m}}_i \right\}$. Due to the difficulties in treating directly with Eq.~\ref{eq:hamilton_general}, we approximate this expression even further, by identifying various types of mesostates.
\subsection{Moments of equal length with a large tilting}
We focus first on the magnetic configurations where all magnetic moments are equally long ${\left\{\left| {\bf{m}}_i\right|=m \right\}}$, but may have different directions. For generic tiltings, the lowest microstate energy within the mesostate can be rewritten as the sum of the ferromagnetic reference energy for moments of arbitrary length, a Heisenberg energy which depends only on the orientation of the moments, and the anisotropy energy.~\cite{white_book} For Fe, which is the main object of this work, the anisotropy is very small if compared to the exchange,~\cite{barnstein86} and can therefore be neglected in a first approximation (see also Appendix~\ref{sec:mag_anisotropy}). We can then write:
\begin{equation} \label{eq:equal_len_large_tilt_no_anis}
\begin{split}
E_{\text{min}}(\left\{ {\bf{m}}_i \right\}) & \approx E_{\text{min,FM}}(m) \, + \\
& + \frac{1}{N_{\text{at}}} \sum_{j,k} J_{j,k} (\left\{{\bf{m}}_i\right\}) \,\left(1- \frac{{\bf{m}}_j \cdot {\bf{m}}_k}{\left|{\bf{m}}\right|^2} \right)
\end{split}
\end{equation}
Here $E_{\text{min,FM}}(m)$ is the energy of the ferromagnetic state $\Psi_{0}({\left\{ {\bf{m}}_i=m \hat{{\bf{z}}} \right\}})$, i.e. the minimum energy obtained with the constraint of having all atomic moments aligned and with length $m$. Notice that $m$ can have an arbitrary value and be equal, smaller or bigger than $M_{\text{eq}}$. The $J_{j,k}$ are instead the intersite exchange parameters, which unfortunately for Fe depend on the full magnetic configuration $\left\{{\bf{m}}_i\right\}$.~\cite{attila_prl} This dependence is however not so drastic to reverse the sign of the exchange interaction, and therefore generating a spin wave with large tiltings will always cost a higher energy than a wave with small tiltings. This consideration is going to be sufficient for our present investigation, and it will be shown that all these mesostates contribute marginally to the statistics of the system.
\subsection{Moments of equal length with a small tilting}
For the microstates belonging to mesostates with equally long atomic moments ${\left\{\left| {\bf{m}}_i\right|=m\right\}}$ and a small tilting between neighbours, Eq.~\ref{eq:equal_len_large_tilt_no_anis} can be simplified as:
\begin{equation} \label{eq:equal_len_tilt_no_anis}
\begin{split}
E_{\text{min}}(\left\{ {\bf{m}}_i \right\}) & \approx E_{\text{min,FM}}(m) \, + \\
& + \frac{1}{N_{\text{at}}} \sum_{j,k} J_{j,k}(m) \,\left(1- \frac{{\bf{m}}_j \cdot {\bf{m}}_k}{\left|{\bf{m}}\right|^2} \right)
\end{split}
\end{equation}
Now the $J_{j,k}$ depend only on the value $m$, and not on the full magnetic configuration $\left\{{\bf{m}}_i\right\}$. Moreover, for small tiltings, the \textit{local} density of states of any microstate in the mesostate $\left\{ \bf{m}_i \right\}$ coincides at the leading order with the density of states obtained for all moments aligned, i.e. $\Psi_{0}(\left\{ {\bf{m}}_i=m \hat{{\bf{z}}} \text{ } \right\})$, with the only difference that the spin axis has to be rotated on every atom to align to the local moment ${\bf{m}}_i$. Therefore the electronic population of $\Psi$ can be equivalently specified on the density of states
\begin{equation}
\rho_{\text{FM}}(m,\sigma,\epsilon) \equiv \rho_0(\left\{ {\bf{m}}_i=m \hat{{\bf{z}}} \text{ } \right\},\sigma,\epsilon) \: .
\end{equation}
This greatly simplifies the second term of the Hamiltonian in Eq. \ref{eq:hamilton_general} since the density of states now depends only on the value $m$ and not on the complex details of the magnetic configuration $\left\{{\bf{m}}_i\right\}$. Note that this approximation is very good for small tiltings, corresponding to magnons of long wavelength, but fails for the opposite case. We can now rewrite Eq.~\ref{eq:ham_ele} as:
\begin{equation} \label{eq:electronic_contribution_short}
\begin{split}
&E_{\text{el}}(\left\{ {\bf{m}}_i \right\},n(\sigma,\epsilon)) \approx \\
&\;\;\; \sum_{\sigma}\int_{-\infty}^{+\infty} (\epsilon - E_F) \,\rho_{\text{FM}}(m,\sigma,\epsilon)\, \Delta n(\sigma,\epsilon)\;d\epsilon
\end{split}
\end{equation}
We emphasize that all terms in Eq.~\ref{eq:equal_len_tilt_no_anis} and Eq.~\ref{eq:electronic_contribution_short} can be evaluated \textit{ab initio} by means of constrained DFT,~\cite{Dederichs84} where the constraint is given by having ferromagnetically arranged atomic moments of a specified length (for details see Appendix \ref{sec:computational_details}).
\subsection{Moments of variable length with a small tilting}
Finally we need to address the generic case of magnetic configurations with moments of variable length on neighbouring atoms. For simplicity we focus on small tilting between neighbours. For small variations of the length around an average length $\overline{m}$ we can write:
\begin{equation} \label{eq:min_different_lengths}
\begin{split}
E_{\text{min}}(\left\{{\bf{m}}_i\right\}) \approx& \frac{1}{N_{\text{at}}} \sum_{j,k} J_{j,k}(\overline{m}) \, \left(1- \frac{{\bf{m}}_i}{\left|{\bf{m}}_i\right|} \cdot\frac{{\bf{m}}_j}{\left|{\bf{m}}_j\right|}\right)+ \\
& + \frac{1}{N_{\text{at}}} \sum_{j,k} L_{j,k}(\overline{m}) \;\Big|\left|{\bf{m}}_j\right|-\left|{\bf{m}}_k\right| \Big|+\\
&+ \overline{ E_{\text{min,FM}}}\left(\left|{\bf{m}}_i\right|\right) .
\end{split}
\end{equation}
Here the first term on the right hand side is a Heisenberg energy due to the tilting (transverse fluctuations), while the second term gives the energy increase due to magnetic moments with different lengths on different sites (longitudinal fluctuations). The last term instead represents the average of the energies for the formation of local moments of different length, i.e.
\begin{equation}
\overline{E_{\text{min,FM}}}\left(\left|{\bf{m}}_i\right|\right)=\sum_i E_{\text{min,FM}}\left(\left|{\bf{m}}_i\right|\right)/ N_{\text{at}} \: .
\end{equation}
In principle, we could develop approximations to simplify the dependence of $\rho_0(\left\{{\bf{m}}_i\right\},\sigma,\epsilon)$ on the magnetic configurations but we will show that these mesostates can be neglected.
\section{Partial equilibration}\label{sec:equilibration}
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth]{Fig_4}
\caption
Schematic view of the various mechanisms active for different timescales after the laser pulse.
}\label{fig:timescales}
\end{figure}
We have so far approximated the Hamiltonian for selected microstates but did not say anything about the state of the system. In this Section we will clarify why we can treat the system as partially equilibrated and we will define the type of partial equilibration.
We split the dynamics of the system in two different timescales. For simplicity we will name them sub-picosecond and picosecond dynamics (see Fig.~\ref{fig:timescales}). We must stress that the precise estimation of the temporal length of these two types of dynamics depends on several factors, as for instance the material under study. For sub-picosecond dynamics we intend the time during which the magnetisation changes rapidly. During this timescale the system undergoes a strong electronic excitation after the direct laser absorption. The electrons will then repopulate the density of states tending towards rebuilding a Fermi-Dirac distribution at high temperature.~\cite{Lisowski04,Lisowski05} Within the same timescale the microscopic effects which are responsible for the magnetisation dynamics will also affect the electronic configuration in some way. If the magnetisation dynamics happens before, during or after the electrons have rebuilt an internal thermal equilibrium is completely irrelevant for our discussion. What is important is that when the microscopic mechanism responsible for the ultrafast magnetisation dynamics has stopped being active, the electronic system has already attained an internal thermal equilibrium. This thermalisation happens due to the system exploring the phase space via electron-electron (e-e) scattering. The chaotic behaviour of the electronic motion leads the system to span uniformly a part of the phase space, as we are addressing the dynamics of a closed system. For sake of simplicity, we neglect energy relaxation due to electron-phonon scattering, but its inclusion would lead to the same conclusions (see Appendices~\ref{sec:phonons} and \ref{sec:max_mesostate_prob}). It is now important to understand what is the part of the phase space that is explored via this dynamics. The main effect of the e-e scattering is the reshuffling of the energy positions of the electrons without changing the total energy of the system. The spin-orbit coupling for 3d-levels in Fe is small, which leads to a small probability of transferring spin moment to orbital moment or lattice. Therefore, in the sub-picosecond time scale, the majority of e-e scattering events preserve both the total energy $E$ and a magnetisation ${\bf{M}}=\sum_{i}{\bf{m}}_i / N_{\text{at}}$ that has been set by the microscopic mechanisms driving the ultrafast dynamics. However it should not be forgotten that these events can still lead to the transition from one mesostate $\left\{{\bf{m}}_i\right\}$ to another mesostate $\left\{{\bf{m'}}_i\right\}$, as long as the total magnetization is preserved, i.e. $\sum_{i} {\bf{m}}_i / N_{\text{at}} = \sum_{i} {\bf{m'}}_i / N_{\text{at}}$. This situation is for instance represented by the two microstates B and C in Fig.~\ref{fig:phasespace}. Notice that these transitions are fast: in itinerant ferromagnets, magnon lifetimes are usually very short (tens of femtoseconds).\cite{Zakeri2012}
The above analysis tells us that, at the end of the sub-picosecond dynamics, the system attains a partial equilibrium, where the partial attribute is due to that this system still has a total magnetisation $\bf{M}$ which can be different (either bigger or smaller) than the global equilibrium value at that specific temperature. We can therefore describe the system by doing ensemble averages over the part of the phase space with fixed total energy $E$ and total magnetisation $\bf{M}$. It is fundamental to realise here that if spin-flip scattering events (for instance with phonons) were substantial for the thermalisation process, the system would thermalise to the full equilibrium, i.e. the system would acquire exactly the magnetisation expected at the final temperature. This is not what happens, since it is incompatible with the very existence of both the appearance of magnetisation in non magnetic materials and the increase of magnetisation in Fe. Notice that this, however, does \textit{not} exclude transfer of spin moment to the phonon system during the ultrafast magnetisation dynamics, but simply tells that this transfer cannot be of the same type as the one that leads to equilibration.
After the ultrafast change of magnetisation is finished, the thermalisation mechanism is still active but processes in the picosecond timescale become also important. Now the system undergoes different dynamics: cooling down due to heat diffusion, recovery of the magnetic moment due to the slow spin-phonon equilibration, and precession of the atomic magnetic moments in the magnetic field. The first two processes (cooling and recovery of magnetisation) can be treated as quasi static with respect to the e-e scattering. This implies that the correction to the electronic population coming from these effects can be described as a small perturbation of an associated equilibrium state with time dependent macroscopic magnetisation ${\bf{M}}(t)$ and energy $E(t)$. The precession of the atomic magnetic moments ${\bf{m}}_i(t)$, instead, leads to magnonic oscillations. Instead of focusing on ${\bf{M}}(t)$, one can repeat the discussion above directly for all ${\bf{m}}_i(t)$ and obtain the Landau-Lifshitz description of magnonic oscillations, with parameters that can be computed for the partially equilibrated state rather than for the completely equilibrated one. In this article we are only interested in the state of the system assuming ${\bf{M}}$ and $E$ at a given time $t$. We will see below that this is sufficient to describe the spectroscopy of the system at zeroth order accuracy, without the need of determining the equation of motion of ${\bf{M}}(t)$, $E(t)$ or even ${\bf{m}}_i(t)$.
\section{Most probable mesostate}\label{sec:probability}
We are now ready to analyse the statistical mechanics of our system. As anticipated above, we are going to use the microcanonical statistics as it leads to a simpler approach. However, we stress once more that a treatment through canonical statistics is equally possible and leads to and indeed strengthens the same conclusions, as illustrated in Appendix~\ref{sec:phonons}. The fact that we focus on a closed system allows us to use the constraint of a fixed energy $E$. Moreover, as discussed in Section~\ref{sec:equilibration}, we add a further constraint on the total magnetisation ${\bf{M}}$. Notice that the magnetization as well as the energy are normalized per atom in this manuscript, unless explicitly stated. A macroscopic quantity associated to a microscopic quantity $\xi$ can therefore be evaluated as an average under the constraints of a fixed total energy $E$ and a fixed total magnetic moment ${\bf{M}}$. In more formal terms we have that the ensemble average $\left<\xi\right>$ is given by
\begin{equation}\label{eq:ens_avg}
\left<\xi\right> = {\textstyle \sum_{\xi}} \: \xi\, P\left(\xi|E,{\bf{M}}\right)
\end{equation}
where the sum runs over all possible values of $\xi$ and $P\left(\xi|E,{\bf{M}}\right)$ is the probability of the microscopic quantity having the value $\xi$ under the fixed constraints $E$ and ${\bf{M}}$. For an ergodic system (see Appendix~\ref{sec:ergodicity} for more details), the probability $P$ is proportional to the number of microstates $\mathcal{N} \left(\xi|E,{\bf{M}}\right)$ where the microscopic quantity, the energy and the total magnetisation have the specified values:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:prob_numstat}
P\left(\xi|E,{\bf{M}}\right)=\frac{\mathcal{N} \left(\xi|E,{\bf{M}}\right)}{\sum_{\xi'} \mathcal{N} \left(\xi'|E,{\bf{M}}\right)}.
\end{equation}
Finding the quantity $\xi$ maximizing the probability in Eq.~\ref{eq:prob_numstat} means maximizing the term at the numerator, i.e. $\mathcal{N} \left(\xi|E,{\bf{M}}\right)$. If we consider a given magnetic configuration $\left\{{{\bf{m}}_i}\right\}$ as the microscopic quantity $\xi$, we can exploit that ${\bf{M}}$ depends on $\left\{{{\bf{m}}_i}\right\}$, and write:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:constr_mag}
\mathcal{N} \left(\left\{{\bf{m}}_i\right\}|E,\bf{M}\right)= \mathcal{N} \left(\left\{{\bf{m}}_i\right\}|E\right) \delta_{\sum_i {\bf{m}}_i /N_{\text{at}} , {\bf{M}}}
\end{equation}
where $\delta$ is the Kronecker delta, being 0 if the two arguments are different and 1 if they are equal. The equation above states the obvious fact that if a magnetic configuration consists of moments that do not sum up to the required total magnetic moment there are no microstates within the mesostate that can satisfy the constraints.
Unfortunately the calculation of $\mathcal{N}\left(\left\{{\bf{m}}_i\right\}|E\right)$ in Eq.~\ref{eq:constr_mag} is not as simple, since we need to count the number of microstates with energy $H=E$ within the mesostate $\left\{{\bf{m}}_i\right\}$. From Eq.~\ref{eq:hamilton_general}, we see that this is equivalent to count the number of ways of distributing the energy $E-E_{\text{min}}\left( \left\{{\bf{m}}_i\right\} \right)$ among repopulations of the density of states $\rho_0(\left\{{\bf{m}}_i\right\},\sigma,\epsilon)$. This calculation can be simplified by replacing the density of states with a constant averaged density of states, where the average is taken around the Fermi energy and over a range equal to a few times the energy per electron injected by the laser $\rho_0(\left\{{\bf{m}}_i\right\},\sigma,\epsilon)\approx \overline{\rho}_0(\left\{{\bf{m}}_i\right\},\sigma)$. Although this approximation is very reasonable for the energies involved in a typical experimental setup, the treatment of a density of states of more general shape is also possible, as illustrated in Ref.~\onlinecite{Roccia2010}. In this approximation, and for $N_{\text{at}}\rightarrow\infty$, we obtain (see Appendix \ref{sec:deriv_number_conf} for details) that the number of microstates within the mesostate is:
\begin{equation} \label{eq:microstate_general}
\mathcal{N}\left(\left\{{\bf{m}}_i\right\}|E\right) \propto e^{N_{\text{at}}\sqrt{\overline{\rho}_0(\left\{{\bf{m}}_i\right\}) \, (E-E_{\text{min}}(\left\{{\bf{m}}_i\right\})) }}
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
\overline{\rho}_0(\left\{{\bf{m}}_i\right\}) \equiv \overline{\rho}_0(\left\{{\bf{m}}_i\right\},\uparrow) +\overline{\rho}_0(\left\{{\bf{m}}_i\right\},\downarrow) \:.
\end{equation}
The most probable mesostate can be found from Eq.~\ref{eq:microstate_general} by maximizing the product in the radicand. We notice that, as expected, the most probable mesostate is enormously more probable than any other state, due to the presence of $N_{\text{at}}$ (roughly the Avogadro's number) in the exponent. This is a great simplification since all the averages can be reduced to averages only over the microstates within the most probable mesostate.
For an excitation of arbitrary intensity, particular care must be taken when maximizing the product $\overline{\rho}_0(\left\{{\bf{m}}_i\right\}) \, (E-E_{\text{min}}(\left\{{\bf{m}}_i\right\}))$. The most probable magnetic configuration will in general have some dependence on the total energy $E$, injected by the laser. However, for small excitations a particularly useful limit can be obtained, as illustrated in Appendix \ref{sec:max_mesostate_prob}. In this limit the most probable magnetic configuration is not dependent on the total energy $E$ but simply requires maximizing $E_{\text{min}}(\left\{{\bf{m}}_i\right\})$. This is already an important result, and we will come back to it in the conclusions.
\section{Magnetic configurations}\label{sec:mag_configuration}
\begin{figure}[t]
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth]{Fig_5}
\caption
Magnetic configurations. The top panels show some possible magnetic configurations with a decreased average magnetic moment. In the bottom panels the same type of configurations are shown for an increased average magnetic moment. From left to right: a linear decrease or increase, amplitude spin fluctuations, transverse spin fluctuations. The arrows are coloured according to their length.}\label{fig:magnet_config}
\end{figure}
In this Section, we first identify all the possible magnetic configurations $\left\{{\bf{m}}_i\right\}$ satisfying the constraint on the total magnetic moment $ \sum_{i=1}^{N_{\text{at}}}{\bf{m}}_i / N_{\text{at}} = {\bf{M}}$. Then we will look for the magnetic configurations with the smallest $E_{\text{min}}(\left\{{\bf{m}}_i\right\})$. To cover all possible magnetic configurations it is convenient to divide them into three different groups, which are shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:magnet_config} for decreased and increased magnetization, respectively $\left|{\bf{M}}\right| < M_{\text{eq}}$ and $\left|{\bf{M}}\right| > M_{\text{eq}}$. For simplicity, we have neglected here the magnetic anisotropy and used only scalar values for the magnetization (see also Appendix~\ref{sec:mag_anisotropy}). Moreover, we have shown above that in the limit of large $N_{\text{at}}$ and constant spin-integrated averaged density of states, the energy $E$ does not change the state of the system. Therefore, the dependence on $E$ will be ignored in the following discussion.
\subsection{Decrease of magnetization}
We first focus on a system that underwent an ultrafast decrease of magnetization, i.e. $\left|{\bf{M}}\right| < M_{\text{eq}}$. The first magnetic configuration to consider is
$\left\{ {\bf{m}}_i=M_{\text{eq}} \hat{{\bf{z}}} \right\}$, where all moments are ferromagnetically aligned and of equal (but reduced) length, as depicted in Fig.~\ref{fig:magnet_config}(a). Eq.~\ref{eq:equal_len_tilt_no_anis} shows that for no tilting $E_{\text{min}}(\left\{{\bf{m}}_i\right\})=E_{\text{min,FM}}(|{\bf{M}}|)$. This energy is considerably lower than the energy of the configuration depicted in Fig.~\ref{fig:magnet_config}(b), where all moments are ferromagnetically aligned but of different length. This can be verified by the inspection of Eq.~\ref{eq:min_different_lengths}, keeping in mind that for Fe the coefficients $L_{j,k}\left(\left\{{\bf{m}}_i\right\}\right)$ are positive and especially $E_{\text{min,FM}}(m)$ is a convex function (see e.g. Fig.~\ref{fig:energy_magn_mom}). The latter is not true if the argument $|{\bf{m}}|$ is close to zero, but this extreme case, which is anyway interesting for magnetization switching, is beyond the aim of this article. Next, we consider a magnetic configuration where the moments have a length equal to the equilibrium length $\left\{\left|{\bf{m}}_i\right|=M_{\text{eq}} \right\}$ but are tilted, as depicted in Fig.~\ref{fig:magnet_config}(c). The angles between the moments can vary but must be such to lead to the required total magnetization ${\bf{M}}$. Comparing Eq.~\ref{eq:equal_len_large_tilt_no_anis} for configurations as in Fig.~\ref{fig:magnet_config}(a) and Fig.~\ref{fig:magnet_config}(c) shows that the latter are the most favourable if the following condition is satisfied:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:spin_wave_condition}
\begin{split}
E_{\text{min,FM}}(|{\bf{M}}|)-E_{\text{min,FM}}(M_{\text{eq}}) > \qquad \qquad \qquad \\
\qquad \qquad \qquad \frac{1}{N_{\text{at}}} \sum_{j,k} J_{j,k}(\left\{{\bf{m}}_i\right\}) \,\left(1- \frac{{\bf{m}}_j \cdot {\bf{m}}_k}{\left|{\bf{m}}\right|^2} \right)
\end{split}
\end{equation}
In principle, in a sample of infinite size one can always find a spin wave of arbitrarily long wavelength satisfying the constraint on the magnetization and leading to an arbitrarily small term on the right hand side of Eq.~\ref{eq:spin_wave_condition}. If this were the only relevant mechanism for our problem, the condition in Eq.~\ref{eq:spin_wave_condition} would always be satisfied by the spin wave with the maximum wavelength allowed by the boundary conditions and compatible with the constraint. However, in practice one cannot ignore that the magnetic excitation caused by the laser pulse is initially rather localized in space, and composed of high energy magnons of small wavelength. As discussed in Section~\ref{sec:equilibration}, these magnons will quickly relax to magnons of long wavelength via magnon-magnon scattering. The relaxation time is given by the magnon lifetimes, which are smaller than a few tens of fs for short wavelength.~\cite{Zakeri2012} This means that in the picosecond timescale the state of the system is given by a superposition of spin waves of long wavelength. This in turns define a small interval of allowed lengths $\left|{\bf{m}}_i\right|$ around $M_{\text{eq}}$, if the second term on the left hand side of Eq.~\ref{eq:spin_wave_condition} is allowed to relax its argument. In principle, the precise magnetic configuration at a given time for a given material and a given laser pulse can be obtained via simulations of thermally demagnetised Fe through atomistic spin dynamics.~\cite{Chimata12}. However, this analysis is not relevant for our purposes, as we will show that the knowledge that the most probable magnetic configurations are those with $\left|{\bf{m}}_i\right| \approx M_{\text{eq}}$ and small tiltings between neighbours is sufficient for determining the dielectric response.
\begin{figure}[t]
\includegraphics[width=0.39\textwidth]{Fig_6}
\caption
Constrained ground state energy for ferromagnetic configurations as in Fig.~\ref{fig:magnet_config}(a) and Fig.~\ref{fig:magnet_config}(d) as function of the atomic magnetic moment $m$. The zero of the energy is defined by the equilibrium atomic magnetic moment. The energy deposited by the laser is drawn schematically, and exaggerated for clarity, to emphasize what energy is left available for electronic excitations.}
\label{fig:energy_magn_mom}
\end{figure}
We finally highlight that many degenerate configurations of the shape of Fig.~\ref{fig:magnet_config}(c) can be built by symmetry. As an example, one can consider a given magnetic configuration and shift it by a lattice step. The degeneracy of these configurations implies that they are all equally probable, and must be summed over when calculating macroscopic quantities.
\subsection{Increase of magnetization}
We can now focus on the increase of magnetization, i.e. $\left|{\bf{M}}\right| > M_{\text{eq}}$, and look again for the most favourable type of configurations. For a configuration having ferromagnetically aligned moments of equal length, shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:magnet_config}(d), one obtains from Eq.~\ref{eq:equal_len_tilt_no_anis} that \mbox{$E_{\text{min}}(\left\{{\bf{m}}_i\right\})=E_{\text{min,FM}}(|{\bf{M}}|)$}. This energy is bigger than $E_{\text{min,FM}}(M_{\text{eq}})$ but is still the lowest value obtainable for configurations compatible with the required constraint on the magnetization. Let us look at configurations with moments that are ferromagnetically aligned but of different length, shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:magnet_config}(e). Due to the convexity of $E_{\text{min,FM}}(m)$, the extra energy required to increase some of the moments above $ |{\bf{M}}|$ is bigger than the energy gained by decreasing some other moments. In addition, there is also the energetic cost due to the coefficients $L_{j,k}\left(\left\{{\bf{m}}_i\right\}\right)$, as discussed above. Similar conclusions can be reached when focusing on a configuration where the magnetic moments have equal length but are tilted, shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:magnet_config}(f). Tilted moments must have lengths larger than $|{\bf{M}}|$ to result into an average magnetization ${\bf{M}}$, and therefore the convexity of $E_{\text{min,FM}}(m)$ leads to a higher energy. In addition, there is also an increase of energy due to the coefficients $J_{j,k}\left(\left\{{\bf{m}}_i\right\}\right)$ of Eq.~\ref{eq:equal_len_tilt_no_anis}, which makes the configuration even more costly. Therefore, the magnetic configuration minimising $E_{\text{min}}(\left\{{\bf{m}}_i\right\})$ for an increased magnetization is the one reported in Fig.~\ref{fig:magnet_config}(d), with aligned magnetic moments of increased length.
\section{Full configurations}\label{sec:full_configuration}
We have identified two qualitatively different mesostates minimizing $E_{\text{min}}$ for samples with increased and decreased magnetizations. These mesostates are so enormously more probable than the other ones that we can safely refer to them as the magnetic configurations of the system without involving the relative probabilities. Most importantly, the physical reason for the reported qualitative difference is easy to understand in our model. For reduced magnetization, the minimum energy compatible with the ferromagnetic configuration in Fig.~\ref{fig:magnet_config}(a) is given by the cost associated to the reduction of the length of the atomic moments $|{\bf{m}}_i|$, as shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:energy_magn_mom}. This is basically the intra-site exchange. On the other hand the magnetic configuration in Fig.~\ref{fig:magnet_config}(c) has an energy cost depending on both the inter-site exchange and the magnetic anisotropy energy (here ignored because of its size). The energy price for the inter-site exchange is minimized for fluctuations with a small wave-vector, and is significantly lower than the cost due to intra-site exchange. A rather different situation is observed for increased magnetization. The configuration in Fig.~\ref{fig:magnet_config}(d) has a high $E_{\text{min}}$ because of the energy needed to increase the atomic magnetic moments. However, the configuration in Fig.~\ref{fig:magnet_config}(f) has an even higher $E_{\text{min}}$ because the atomic moments, when tilted, need to be even bigger to achieve the required $|{\bf{M}}|$.
We are now left with an ensemble average over the intersection of the mesostate defined by the most probable magnetic configuration and the specific energy of the system $E$. In Sections~\ref{sec:label} and ~\ref{sec:probability}, the microstates within a mesostate were identified as all the possible repopulations $\Delta n(\sigma,\epsilon)$ of the electronic excitations in the rigid band structure $\rho_0(\left\{{\bf{m}}_i\right\},\sigma,\epsilon)$ with energy $E-E_{\text{min}}(\left\{{\bf{m}}_i\right\})$. Evaluating ensemble averages is analogous to the standard modeling of thermal averages of the response of a system. We will first identify the average population $\left<n(\sigma,\epsilon)\right>$, then note that it is enormously more probable than any other population, and finally compute the response for that population only. By considering an electronic system that has to distribute an external energy $E-E_{\text{min}}(\left\{{\bf{m}}_i\right\})$, one can obtain that the most probable population is simply the Fermi-Dirac distribution $\left<n(\sigma,\epsilon)\right>=n_F (\epsilon, T, \mu_\sigma)$ depending on three parameters, i.e. an effective temperature $T$ and two chemical potentials $\mu_\sigma$, one per each spin channel. These parameters in turn depend on the energy and the magnetic configuration through the following conditions:
\begin{align}
\label{eq:normalization_E} & \sum_{\sigma} \int \epsilon \: n_F (\epsilon, T,\mu_\sigma) \, \rho_0(\left\{{\bf{m}}_i\right\},\sigma,\epsilon) \,d\epsilon = E\\
\label{eq:normalization_M} & \sum_{\sigma} \int \sigma \: n_F (\epsilon, T,\mu_\sigma) \, \rho_0(\left\{{\bf{m}}_i\right\},\sigma,\epsilon) \,d\epsilon = \left|{\bf{M}}\right| \\
\label{eq:normalization_Z} & \sum_{\sigma} \int n_F (\epsilon, T,\mu_\sigma) \, \rho_0(\left\{{\bf{m}}_i\right\},\sigma,\epsilon) \,d\epsilon = Z,
\end{align}
where $Z$ is the electronic change per unit cell. These equations require that energy, magnetic moment and charge take the appropriate value imposed by the constraints.
\section{Dielectric response}\label{sec:response}
We are now able to compute the dielectric tensor $\boldsymbol{\varepsilon}$. The case of an increased magnetization is straightforward, as the density of states $\rho_0(\left\{{\bf{m}}_i\right\},\sigma,\epsilon)$ and the dielectric tensor $\boldsymbol{\varepsilon}$ can be obtained directly from constrained DFT calculations. The effective temperature defined by Eqs.~\ref{eq:normalization_E}-\ref{eq:normalization_Z} affects the calculations only providing a broadening, and can therefore be ignored. The case of decreased magnetisation is a bit more involved. In principle one can determine the precise magnetic configuration via atomistic spin dynamics, and then evaluate the average dielectric response of the resulting spin waves. However, a good insight into the problem can be obtained by simply using the fact that we have identified the most probable magnetic configurations as a superposition of spin waves of long wavelength. In this regime, the small tiltings between neighbouring moments have a negligible influence on the local dielectric tensor. This implies that the dielectric response of the material can be computed as an average of local responses (see Appendix~\ref{sec:mag_anisotropy} for the effect of the anisotropy), which can in turn be directly evaluated from ferromagnetic bulk Fe with a magnetization that is aligned to the local moments. As a result we have to take averages not only over many degenerate (i.e. equally probable) magnetic configurations but also spatially over the local responses. We first compute the response of a single site with a moment tilted by a given angle $\theta$ from the $\hat{{\bf{z}}}$ axis in the $zx$ direction and then rotated by an angle $\phi$ around the same $\hat{{\bf{z}}}$ axis. Calling ${\bf R}(\theta)$ and ${\bf R}(\phi)$ the two rotation matrices, we can write the dielectric response $\boldsymbol{\varepsilon}'$ as (for details refer to Appendix \ref{sec:diel_demagn})
\begin{equation}\label{eq:epsilon_prime}
\boldsymbol{\varepsilon}'={\bf R}(\phi){\bf R}(\theta)\boldsymbol{\varepsilon}{\bf R}^{-1}(\theta){\bf R}^{-1}(\phi)
\end{equation}
In the case of Fe, and for a total magnetization directed along $\hat{{\bf{z}}}$, $\varepsilon_{xz}=\varepsilon_{zx}=\varepsilon_{yz}=\varepsilon_{zy}=0$ and $\varepsilon_{xx}=\varepsilon_{yy}\approx \varepsilon_{zz}$.
Since the total magnetization is directed along the $\hat{{\bf{z}}}$ direction, the allowed magnetic configurations $\left\{{\bf{m}}_i\right\}$ are those where the projections of the atomic moments ${\bf{m}}_i$ in the $xy$-plane cancel out.
Therefore in any ensemble average, by symmetry, the angle $\phi$ can be integrated out. We are left with the ensemble integration of the angle $\theta$ which leads to
\begin{equation}
\left<{\boldsymbol{\varepsilon}}'\right> \approx \begin{pmatrix}
\varepsilon_{xx} & \varepsilon_{xy} \left<\cos{\theta}\right> & 0\\
-\varepsilon_{xy} \left<\cos{\theta}\right> & \varepsilon_{xx}& 0\\
0& 0& \varepsilon_{xx}
\end{pmatrix}\label{eq:lastmatrix}
\end{equation}
where $\left<\cos{\theta}\right>$ is the ensemble average of $\theta$. This can directly be linked to the ratio between the length of the average magnetic moment $\left| {\bf{M}}\right|$ and the length of the equilibrium magnetic moment length $M_{\text{eq}}$, leading simply to
\begin{equation}
\big<{\varepsilon_{xy}'}\big> = \big<{\varepsilon_{xy}}\big> \frac{\left| {\bf{M}}\right|}{M_{\text{eq}}}, \;\;\;\;\; \text{if }\left| {\bf{M}}\right|<M_{\text{eq}}.
\end{equation}
We are now able to compute dielectric tensors for samples with increased and decreased magnetization. Here we focus on the off-diagonal term $\varepsilon_{xy}$, which is approximately proportional to the experimental T-MOKE asymmetry, for a system with cubic symmetry and magnetisation along $\hat{{\bf{z}}}$. These results are illustrated in Fig.~\ref{fig:exytheor}, while more detailed plots for all the components are reported in Appendix~\ref{sec:diel_demagn}. In the lower part of Fig.~\ref{fig:exytheor} we see the effect induced by a demagnetisation of the material, i.e. a simple proportional reduction of the $\varepsilon_{xy}$. Instead, the configuration with increased magnetization consists of increased atomic magnetic moments, which leads to an increased population of the spin majority band and a reduction of the population of the spin minority band. This induces a change in the density of states above the Fermi energy and an increase of the spin splitting of the core levels. As a result, the dielectric response changes only below 52 eV, as highlighted within the red boxes in Fig.~\ref{fig:exytheor}. This behavior compares qualitatively well with the experimental T-MOKE data of Refs.~\onlinecite{Rudolf12,Turgut13}, and partially reported in Fig.~\ref{fig:expdata}, showing that a shoulder grows just below the main Fe peak. This good agreement between experimental and theoretical data offers a strong theoretical support to the very existence of an ultrafast increase of magnetization.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth]{Fig_7}
\caption
Dielectric tensor element. Real and imaginary parts of the off-diagonal term of the dielectric tensor for decreased and increased magnetisations. The shaded grey area identifies those energies where the T-MOKE signals of Fe and Ni overlap, making any comparison with experimental data~\cite{Rudolf12,Turgut13} not meaningful. For increased magnetization a shoulder in the Fe peak is formed, as highlighted within the red box.}\label{fig:exytheor}
\end{figure}
\section{conclusions}
In conclusion, we provided a solid theoretical description of the microscopic states of a system right after ultrafast magnetization dynamics. Our model is based on several assumptions and approximations which reflect the high complexity of the problem under consideration. All these assumptions and approximations have been drawn on the basis of well known theoretical or experimental facts and are therefore not to be considered as a limitation of the model. In this way we are able to formulate a theory of picosecond spectroscopy. This can also be of great importance for the study of the picosecond dynamics of magnetisation, when the system is in an out-of-equilibrium state but the magnetic dynamics can be treated as a quasi-static evolution of a partially equilibrated system.
More in particular, our model allows us to draw four major conclusions. 1) For small excitation energies the most probable magnetic configuration of the system in the picosecond timescale does not depend on energy injected by the laser. 2) For a sample of Fe, which is representative of the experimental setup in Refs.~\onlinecite{Rudolf12,Turgut13}, the state of the system right after the ultrafast demagnetisation can be described as an arrangement of tilted magnetic moments whose moduli correspond to the equilibrium magnetic moment; the state of the system right after an ultrafast increase or appearance of magnetisation can instead be described as an arrangement of aligned magnetic moments whose moduli are equal to each other but larger than the equilibrium value. 3) The dielectric response of Fe in this typical experimental setup can be calculated for the most probable magnetic configuration and a Fermi-Dirac electronic distribution over the magnetically constrained density of states. 4) The qualitative difference observed in the T-MOKE asymmetry measured experimentally for samples with decreased and increased magnetisation can be easily explained in terms of the two different states of the system. The formation of a shoulder in the T-MOKE spectrum is a feature that is also predicted by theory and can be rigorously assigned to an increase of magnetisation.
Finally, the proposed method can be applied to more general situations. Simple cases, like magnetised gold,~\cite{Melnikov11} can be treated following exactly the same arguments described in this work. More complicated cases, as for instance Gd,~\cite{Melnikov08,Carley12} require instead more care. In particular the assumption that breaks in Gd is the possibility of exploring fast enough the full space of magnetic configurations, given that d- and f-spins are expected to interact weakly with each other. We therefore expect that the partial equilibration should be done with two distinct constraints, over d-averaged and f-fixed magnetic moments. The most probable magnetic configurations are likely to be much more complicated that those proposed here for Fe. A similar approach is expected to work even in the alloys used for all-optical switching.~\cite{Stanciu07,Radu11}
\section*{Acknowledgement}
This work was sponsored by the Swedish Research Council (VR), the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences (KVA), and the Knut and Alice Wallenberg foundation (KAW). The computations were performed on resources provided by the Swedish National Infrastructure for Computing (SNIC) at the National Supercomputer Center (NSC). The authors thank D. Rudolf, R. Chimata, O. Eriksson, J. Chico, Y. O. Kvashnin and J. Rusz for valuable discussions.
|
\section{Introduction}
The generative approach to linguistics relies on the notion of a Universal Grammar (UG)
and a related universal list of syntactic parameters. In the Principles
and Parameters model, developed since \cite{Chom},
these are thought of as binary valued parameters or ``switches"
that set the grammatical structure of a given language. Their universality makes it
possible to obtain comparisons, at the syntactic level, between arbitrary pairs of natural languages.
A parametric comparison method (PCM) was introduced in \cite{Longo2} as a
quantitative method in historical linguistics, for comparison of languages within
and across historical families at the syntactic instead of the lexical level. Evidence
was given in \cite{LoGua} and \cite{LGSBC} that the PCM gives reliable information
on the phylogenetic tree of the family of Indo--European languages.
The PCM relies essentially on constructing a metric on a family of languages
based on the relative Hamming distance between the sets of parameters as
a measure of relatedness. The phylogenetic tree is then constructed on the
basis of this datum of relative distances, see \cite{LoGua}.
Our purpose in this paper is to connect the PCM approach to the mathematical
theory of error-correcting codes. We associate a code to any group of languages one
wishes to analyze via the PCM, which has one code word for each language.
If one uses a number $n$ of syntactic parameters, then the code $C$ sits in the
space ${\mathbb F}_2^n$, where the elements of ${\mathbb F}_2=\{ 0,1 \}$ correspond to the two $\mp$
possible values of each parameter, and the code word of a language is the string
of values of its $n$ parameters. We also consider a version with codes on an
alphabet ${\mathbb F}_3$ of three letters which allows for the possibility that some of the
parameters may be made irrelevant by entailment from other parameters. In this
case we use the letter $0 \in {\mathbb F}_3$ for the irrelevant parameters and the nonzero
values $\pm 1$ for the parameters that are set in the language.
In the theory of error-correcting codes, see \cite{TsfaVla}, one assigns to a
code $C\subset {\mathbb F}_q^n$ two code parameters: $R=\log_q(\# C)/n$, the
transmission rate of the code, and $\delta=d/n$ the relative minumum
distance of the code, where $d$ is the miminum Hamming distance between
pairs of distinct code words. It is well known in coding theory that ``good codes"
are those that maximize both parameters, compatibly with several constraints
relating $R$ and $\delta$. In particular, it was proved in \cite{Man} that
there is a curve $R=\alpha_q(\delta)$ in the space of code parameters, the
asymptotic bound, that separates code points that fill a dense region and
that have infinite multiplicity from isolated code points that only have finite
multiplicity. These better but more elusive codes are typically obtained through
algebro-geometric constructions, see \cite{Man}, \cite{TsfaVlaZi}, \cite{VlaDri}.
The asymptotic bound was recently related to Kolmogorov complexity in
\cite{ManMar2}.
Given a collection of languages one wants to compare through their
syntactic parameters, one can ask natural questions about the position
of the resulting code in the space of code parameters and with respect
to the asymptotic bound. The theory of error correcting codes tells us
that codes above the asymptotic bound are very rare, and indeed one
finds that, in all cases we looked at, languages belonging to the
same historical-linguistic family yield codes below the asymptotic
bound (and in fact below the Gilbert--Varshamov curve). This gives
a precise quantitative bound to the possible spread of syntactic
parameters compared to the size of the family, in terms of the number
of different languages belonging to the same historico-linguistic group.
However, we show that, if one considers sets of languages that do
not belong to the same historical-linguistic family, then one can
obtain codes that lie above the asymptotic bound, a fact that reflects
in this code theoretic terms, the much greater variability of syntactic
parameters. The result is in itself not surprising, but the point we
wish to make is that the theory of error-correcting codes provides
a natural setting where quantitative statements of this sort can
be made using methods already developed for the different purposes of
coding theory. We conclude by listing some new linguistic questions that arise
by considering the parametric comparison method under this coding
theory perspective.
\section{Language families as codes}
The Principles and Parameters model of Linguistics assigns to every
natural language $L$ a set of binary values parameters that describe
properties of the syntactic structure of the language.
Let $F$ be a {\em language family}, by which we mean a finite collection
$F=\{ L_1, \ldots, L_m \}$ of languages. This may coincide with a
family in the historical sense, such as the Indo-European family,
or a smaller subset of languages related by historic origin and
development (e.g. the Indo-Iranian, or Balto-Svalic languages), or
simply any collection of language one is interested in comparing
at the parametric level, even if they are spread across different
historical families.
We denote by $n$ be the number of parameters used in the
parametric comparison method. We do not fix, a priori, a
value for $n$, and we consider it a variable of the model.
We will discuss below how one views, in our perspective, the issue
of the independence of parameters.
After fixing an enumeration of the parameters, that is, a bijection
between the set of parameters and the set $\{ 1, \ldots, n \}$, we
associate to a language family $F$ a code $C=C(F)$ in ${\mathbb F}_2^n$,
with one code word for each language $L\in F$, with the code
word $w=w(L)$ given by the list of parameters $w=(x_1, \ldots, x_n)$,
$x_i\in {\mathbb F}_2$ of the language. For simplicity of notation, we just write
$L$ for the word $w(L)$ in the following.
In this model, we only consider binary parameters
with values $\pm 1$ (here identified with letters $0$ or $1$ in ${\mathbb F}_2$)
and we ignore parameters in a neutralized state following
implications across parameters, as in the datasets of \cite{LGSBC}, \cite{LoGua}.
The entailment of parameters, that is, the phenomenon by which a particular
value of one parameter (but not the complementary value) renders another
parameter irrelevant, was addressed in greater detail in \cite{Longo}.
We discuss a version of our coding theory model that does
not incorporate entailment, but we comment in \S \ref{entail} below
how this can be modified to incorporate this phenomenon.
The idea that natural languages can be described, at the level of their
core grammatical structures, in terms of a string of binary characters (code
words) was already used extensively in \cite{ClaRo}.
\subsection{Code parameters}
In the theory of error-correcting codes, one assigns two main
parameters to a code $C$, the {\em transmission rate} and the
{\em relative minimum distance}. More precisely, a binary code
$C\subset {\mathbb F}_2^n$ is an $[n,k,d]_2$-code if the number of code
words is $\# C =2^k$, that is,
\begin{equation}\label{kC}
k = \log_2 \# C,
\end{equation}
where $k$ need not be an integer, and the
minimal Hamming distance between code words is
\begin{equation}\label{dC}
d = \min_{L_1\neq L_2 \in C} d_H(L_1,L_2),
\end{equation}
where the Hamming distance is given by
$$d_H(L_1,L_2) = \sum_{i=1}^n |x_i - y_i|,$$ for $L_1=(x_i)_{i=1}^n$
and $L_2=(y_i)_{i=1}^n$ in $C$. The transmission rate of the code $C$
is given by
\begin{equation}\label{RC}
R = \frac{k}{n} .
\end{equation}
One denotes by $\delta_H(L_1,L_2)$ the
relative Hamming distance
$$ \delta_H(L_1,L_2)= \frac{1}{n} \sum_{i=1}^n |x_i - y_i|, $$
and one defines the relative minimum distance of the code $C$ as
\begin{equation}\label{deltaC}
\delta = \frac{d}{n} = \min_{L_1\neq L_2\in C} \delta_H(L_1,L_2).
\end{equation}
\smallskip
In coding theory, one would like to construct codes that simultaneously
optimize both parameters $(\delta, R)$: a larger value of $R$ represents
a faster transmission rate (better encoding), and a larger value of $\delta$
represents the fact that code words are sufficiently sparse in the ambient
space ${\mathbb F}_2^n$ (better decoding, with better error-correcting capability).
Constraints on this optimization problem are expressed in the form of
bounds in the space of $(\delta,R)$ parameters, see \cite{Man}, \cite{TsfaVla}.
\smallskip
In our setting, the $R$ parameter measures the ratio between the
logarithmic size of the number of languages being encompassing
the given family and the total number of parameters, or equivalently
how densely the given language family is in the ambient
configuration space ${\mathbb F}_2^n$ of parameter possibilities. The parameter
$\delta$ is the minimum, over all pairs of languages in the given
family, of the relative Hamming distance used in the PCM method
of \cite{LGSBC}, \cite{LoGua}.
\subsection{Parameter spoiling}
In the theory of error-correcting codes, one considers {\em spoiling operations}
on the code parameters. Applied to an $[n,k,d]_2$-code $C$, these produce, respectively,
new codes with the following description (see \S 1.1.1 of \cite{ManMar}):
\begin{itemize}
\item A code $C_1=C\star_i f$ in ${\mathbb F}_2^{n+1}$, for a map $f: C \to {\mathbb F}_2$, whose
code words are of the form $(x_1,\ldots, x_{i-1},f(x_1,\ldots,x_n), x_i, \ldots, x_n)$
for $w=(x_1,\ldots,x_n)\in C$. If $f$ is a constant function, $C_1$ is an $[n+1,k,d]_2$-code.
If all pairs $w,w' \in C$ with $d_H(w,w')=d$ have $f(w)\neq f(w')$, then $C_1$ is an
$[n+1,k,d+1]_2$-code.
\item A code $C_2= C\star_i$ in ${\mathbb F}_2^{n-1}$, whose code words are given by the projections
$$(x_1,\ldots, x_{i-1},x_{i+1},\ldots,x_n)$$ of code words $(x_1,\ldots, x_{i-1},x_i,x_{i+1},\ldots,x_n)$
in $C$. This is an $[n-1,k,d-1]_2$-code, except when all pairs $w,w' \in C$ with
$d_H(w,w')=d$ have the same letter $x_i$, in which case it is an $[n-1,k,d]_2$-code.
\item A code $C_3= C(a,i) \subset C \subset {\mathbb F}_2^n$, given by the level set
$C(a,i)=\{ w=(x_k)_{k=1}^n \in C \,|\, \, x_i =a \}$. Taking $C(a,i)\star_i$ gives an
$[n-1, k',d']_2$-code with $k-1\leq k'< k$, and $d'\geq d$.
\end{itemize}
The same spoiling operations hold for $q$-ary codes $C\subset {\mathbb F}_q^n$,
for any fixed $q$.
In our setting, where $C$ is the code obtained from a family of languages, according
to the procedure described above, the first spoiling operation can be seen as the
effect of considering one more syntactic parameter, which is dependent on the other
parameters, hence describing a function $F: {\mathbb F}_2^n \to {\mathbb F}_2$, whose restriction to
$C$ gives the function $f: C \to {\mathbb F}_2$. In particular, the case where $f$ is constant on $C$
represents the situation in which the new parameter adds no useful comparison information
for the selected family of languages. The second spoiling operation consists in forgetting one
of the parameters, and the third corresponds to forming subfamilies of the given family
of languages, by grouping together those languages with a set value of one of the
syntactic parameters. Thus, all these spoiling operations have a clear meaning from
the point of view of the linguistic PCM.
\medskip
\subsection{Examples}
We consider the same list of 63 parameters used in \cite{LoGua} (see \S 5.3.1 and Table A).
This choice of parameters follows the {\em modularized global parameterization}
method of \cite{Longo2}, for the Determiner Phrase module.
They encompass parameters dealing with person, mumber, and gender (1--6 on their list),
parameters of definiteness (7--16 in their list), of countability (17--24), genitive structure (25--31),
adjectival and relative modification (32--14), position and movement of the head noun
(42--50), demonstratives and other determiners (51--50 and 60--63), possessive pronouns (56--59);
see \S\S 5.3.1--5.3.2 of \cite{LoGua} for more details.
Our very simple examples here are just meant to clarify our notation: they
consist of some collections of languages selected from the list of 28,
mostly Indo--European, languages considered in \cite{LoGua}. In each group we
consider we eliminate the parameters that are entailed from others, and we focus on
a shorter list, among the remaining parameters, that will suffice to illustrate our viewpoint.
\begin{ex}\label{ex1}{\rm Consider a code $C$ formed out of the languages $\ell_1=$
Italian, $\ell_2=$ Spanish, and $\ell_3=$ French, and let us consider only the first six
syntactic parameters of Table A of \cite{LoGua}, so that $C\subset {\mathbb F}_2^n$ with $n=6$.
The code words for the three languages are
{\small
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|}
\hline
$\ell_1$ & 1 & 1 & 1 & 0 & 1 & 1 \\
\hline
$\ell_2$ & 1 & 1 & 1 & 1 & 1 & 1 \\
\hline
$\ell_3$ & 1 & 1 & 1 & 0 & 1 & 0 \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
}
}
\end{ex}
This has code parameters $(R=\log_2(3)/6=0.2642, \delta=1/6)$, which satisfy $R< 1-H_2(\delta)$, hence they lie below the GV curve (see \eqref{GVbound} below). We use this code to illustrate the
three spoiling operations mentioned above.
\begin{itemize}
\item Throughout the entire set of
28 languages considered in \cite{LoGua}, the first two parameters are set to the same value $1$,
hence for the purpose of comparative analysis within this family, we can regard a code like
the above as a twice spoiled code $C=C'\star_1 f_1=(C''\star_2 f_2) \star_1 f_1$ where both
$f_1$ and $f_2$ are constant equal to $1$ and $C''\subset {\mathbb F}_2^4$ is the code obtained from
the above by canceling the first two letters in each code word.
\item Conversely, we have $C''=C'\star_2$
and $C'=C\star_1$, in terms of the second spoiling operation described above.
\item To illustrate
the third spoiling operation, one can see, for instance,
that $C(0,4)=\{ \ell_1, \ell_3 \}$, while $C(1,6)=\{ \ell_2, \ell_3 \}$.
\end{itemize}
\smallskip
\subsection{The asymptotic bound}
The spoiling operations on codes were used in \cite{Man} to prove the existence of an
{\em asymptotic bound} in the space of code parameters $(\delta,R)$, see also \cite{Man2},
\cite{ManMar} and \cite{ManMar2} for more detailed properties of the asymptotic bound.
\smallskip
Let ${\mathcal V}_q \subset [0,1]^2\cap {\mathbb Q}^2$ denote the space of code parameters $(\delta,R)$
of codes $C\subset {\mathbb F}_q^n$ and let ${\mathcal U}_q$ be the set of all limit points
of ${\mathcal V}_q$. The set ${\mathcal U}_q$ is characterized in \cite{Man} as
$$ {\mathcal U}_q=\{ (\delta,R) \in [0,1]^2\, |\, R\leq \alpha_q(\delta) \} $$
for a continuous, monotonically decreasing function $\alpha_q(\delta)$ (the asymptotic bound).
Moreover, code parameters lying in ${\mathcal U}_q$ are realized with infinite multiplicity, while
code points in ${\mathcal V}_q\setminus ({\mathcal V}_q\cap {\mathcal U}_q)$ have finite multiplicity and
correspond to the {\em isolated codes}, see \cite{Man}, \cite{ManMar2}.
\smallskip
Codes lying above the asymptotic bound are codes which have extremely good
transmission rate and relative minimum distance, hence very desirable from the
coding theory perspective. The fact that the corresponding code parameters are not
limit points of other code parameters and only have finite multiplicity reflect the fact
that such codes are very difficult to reach or approximate. Isolated codes are known
to arise from algebro-geometric constructions, \cite{TsfaVlaZi}, \cite{VlaDri}.
\smallskip
Relatively little is known about the asymptotic bound: the question of the
computability of the function $\alpha_q(\delta)$ was recently addressed in
\cite{Man2} and the relation to Kolmogorov complexity was investigated in
\cite{ManMar2}. There are explicit upper and lower bounds for the
function $\alpha_q(\delta)$, see \cite{TsfaVla}, including the Plotkin bound
\begin{equation}\label{Plotkin}
\alpha_q(\delta)=0, \ \ \text{ for } \ \ \delta\geq \frac{q-1}{q} ;
\end{equation}
the singleton bound, which implies that $R=\alpha_q(\delta)$ lies below the
line $R+\delta =1$; the Hamming bound
\begin{equation}\label{Hammingbound}
\alpha_q(\delta) \leq 1 - H_q(\frac{\delta}{2}),
\end{equation}
where $H_q(x)$ is the $q$-ary Shannon entropy
$$ x\, \log_q(q-1) - x \log_q(x) - (1-x) \log_q(1-x) $$
which is the usual Shannon entropy for $q=2$,
\begin{equation}\label{Shannon}
H_2(x) = - x \log_2(x) - (1-x) \log_2(1-x).
\end{equation}
One also has a lower bound given by the Gilbert--Varshamov bound
\begin{equation}\label{GVbound}
\alpha_q(\delta) \geq
1 - H_q(\delta)
\end{equation}
\smallskip
The Gilbert--Varshamov curve can be characterized in terms of the
behavior of sufficiently random codes, in the sense of the Shannon
Random Code Ensemble, see \cite{BaFo}, \cite{CoGo},
while the asymptotic bound can be characterized in terms of
Kolmogorov complexity, see \cite{ManMar2}.
\medskip
\subsection{Code parameters of language families}
{}From the coding theory viewpoint, it is natural to ask whether
there are codes $C$, formed out of a choice of a collection of
natural languages and their syntactic parameters, whose
code parameters lie above the asymptotic bound curve
$R=\alpha_2(\delta)$.
\smallskip
For instance, a code $C$ whose code parameters violate the
Plotkin bound \eqref{Plotkin} must be an isolated code above
the asymptotic bound. This means constructing a code $C$
with $\delta \geq 1/2$, that is, such that any pair of code words
$w\neq w' \in C$ differ by at least half of the parameters. A direct
examination of the list of parameters in Table A of \cite{LoGua}
and Figure 7 of \cite{LGSBC} shows that it is very difficult to find,
within the same historic linguistic family (e.g. the Indo--European
family) pairs of languages $L_1$, $L_2$ with $\delta_H(L_1,L_2)\geq 1/2$.
For example, among the syntactic relative distances listed in Figure 7 of
\cite{LGSBC} one finds only the pair $({\rm Farsi}, {\rm Romanian})$ with
a relative distance of $0.5$. Other pairs come close to this value, for
example Farsi and French have a relative distance of $0.483$, but
French and Romanian only differ by $0.162$.
\smallskip
One has better chances of obtaining codes above the asymptotic
bound if one compares languages that are not so closely related
at the historical level.
\begin{ex}\label{L123}{\rm
Consider the set
$C=\{ L_1, L_2, L_3 \}$ with languages $L_1=$ Arabic, $L_2=$ Wolof,
and $L_3 =$ Basque. We exclude from the list of
Table A of \cite{LoGua} all those parameters that are entailed and made
irrelevant by some other parameter in at least one of these three chosen languages.
This gives us a list of 25 remaining parameters, which are those numbered
as 1--5, 7, 10, 20--21, 25, 27--29, 31--32, 34, 37, 42, 50--53, 55--57 in \cite{LoGua},
and the following three code words:
{\small
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{|c||c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|}
\hline
$L_1$ & 1 & 1 & 1 &1 & 1 & 1 & 0 & 1 & 0 & 1 & 0 & 1 & 0 & 1 & 1 & 1 & 1 & 1 & 1 & 0 & 1 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 \\ \hline
$L_2$ & 1 & 1 & 1 &0 & 0 & 1 & 1 & 0 & 1 & 0 & 1 & 0 & 0 & 1 & 0 & 1 & 1 & 0 & 0 & 1 & 1 & 1 & 1 & 1 & 1 \\ \hline
$L_3$ & 1 & 1 & 0 &1 & 0 & 0 & 1 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 1 & 1 & 1 & 0 & 1 & 1 & 0 & 1 & 1 & 1 & 1 & 1 & 1 & 0 & 0 \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
}
}
\end{ex}
\smallskip
This example, although very simple and quite artificial in the choice of languages,
already suffices to produce a code $C$ that lies above the asymptotic bound. In fact, we have
$d_H(L_1,L_2)=16$, $d_H(L_2,L_3)=13$ and $d_H(L_1,L_3)=13$, so that
$\delta=0.52$. Since $R>0$, the code point $(\delta,R)$ violates the Plotkin bound,
hence it lies above the asymptotic bound.
\smallskip
It would be more interesting to find a code $C$ consisting of languages belonging
to the same historical-linguistic family (outside of the Indo--European group), that
lies above the asymptotic bound. Such examples would correspond to linguistic
families that exhibit a very strong variability of the syntactic parameters, in a way that
is quantifiable through the properties of $C$ as a code.
\smallskip
If one considers the 22 Indo-European languages in \cite{LoGua} with their
parameters, one obtains a code $C$ that is below the Gilbert--Varshamov line, hence
below the asymptotic bound by
\eqref{GVbound}. A few other examples, taken from other non Indo-European
historical-linguistic families, computed using those parameters reported in the SSWL database
(for example the set of Malayo--Polynesian languages currently recorded in SSWL)
also give codes whose code parameters lie below the Gilbert--Varshamov curve.
One can conjecture that any code $C$ constructed out of natural languages
belonging to the same historical-linguistic family will be below the asymptotic
bound (or perhaps below the GV bound), which would provide a quantitative
bound on the possible spread of syntactic parameters within a historical family,
given the size of the family. Examples like the simple one constructed above,
using languages not belonging to the same historical family show that, to the
contrary, across different historical families one encounters a greater variability of
syntactic parameters. To our knowledge, no systematic study of parameter variability from this
coding theory perspective has been implemented so far.
\medskip
\subsection{Entailment and dependency of parameters}\label{entail}
In the discussion above we did not incorporate in our model the fact
that certain syntactic parameters can entail other parameters in such
a way that one particular value of one of the parameters renders
another parameter irrelevant or not defined, see the discussion in
\S 5.3.2 of \cite{LoGua}.
One possible way to alter the previous construction to account for
these phenomena is to consider the codes $C$ associated to
families of languages as codes in ${\mathbb F}_3^n$, where $n$ is the
number of parameters, as before, and the set of values is now
given by $\{-1,0,+1\}={\mathbb F}_3$, with $\pm 1$ corresponding to the
binary values of the parameters that are set for a given language
and value $0$ assigned to those parameters that are made
irrelevant for the given language, by entailment from other
parameters, or are not defined. This allows us to consider the
full range of parameters used in \cite{LoGua} and \cite{LGSBC}.
We revisit Example \ref{L123} considered above.
\begin{ex}\label{L123bis}{\rm Let $C=\{ L_1, L_2, L_3 \}$ be
the code obtained from the languages $L_1=$ Arabic, $L_2=$ Wolof,
and $L_3 =$ Basque, as a code in ${\mathbb F}_3^n$
with $n=63$, using the entire list of parameters in \cite{LoGua}.
The code parameters $(R=0.0252,\delta=0.4643)$ of this code
no longer violate the Plotkin bound. In fact, the parameters satisfy $R< 1-H_3(\delta)$
so the code $C$ now also lies below the GV bound. }
\end{ex}
Thus, the effect
of including the entailed syntactic parameters in the comparison spoils the
code parameters enough that they fall in the area below the GV bound.
\smallskip
Notice that what we propose here is different from the counting used in \cite{LoGua},
where the relative distances $\delta_H(L_1,L_2)$ are normalized with respect to the
number of non-zero parameters (which therefore varies with the choice of the pair
$(L_1,L_2)$) rather than the total number $n$ of parameters. While this has the desired
effect of getting rid of insignificant parameters that spoil the code, it has the undesirable
property of producing codes with code words of varying lengths, while counting only
those parameters that have no zero-values over the entire family of languages, as
in Example \ref{L123} avoids this problem. Adapting the coding theory results about
the asymptotic bound to codes with words of variable length may be desirable for
other reasons as well, but it will require an investigation beyond the scope of
the present paper.
\smallskip
More generally, there are various kinds of dependencies among
syntactic parameters. Some sets of hierarchical relations
are discussed, for instance, in \cite{Baker}.
By the spoiling operations $C\star_i f$ of codes described above, we know
that if some of the syntactic parameters considered are functions of other
parameters, the resulting code parameters of $C\star_i f$ are worse than
the parameters of the code $C$ where only independent parameters were
considered.
Part of the reason why code parameters of groups of
languages in the family analyzed in \cite{LoGua} end up in the region
below the asymptotic and the GV bound may be an artifact of the presence
of dependences among the chosen 63 syntactic parameters. From the
coding theory perspective, the parametric comparison method works best
on a smaller set of independent parameters than on a larger set that
includes several dependencies.
\medskip
\section{Conclusions}
We proposed an approach to the linguistic parametric comparison method
of \cite{Longo}, \cite{Longo2} via the mathematical theory of error-correcting
codes, by assigning a code to a family of languages to be analyzed with
the PCM, and investigating its position in the space of code parameters,
with respect to the asymptotic bound and the GV bound. We have shown that
there are examples of languages not belonging to the same
historical-linguistic family that yield isolated codes above the asymptotic bound,
while languages belonging to the same historical-linguistic family appears to
give rise to codes below the bound, though a more systematic analysis would
be needed to map code parameters of different language groups.
We have also shown that, from these coding theory perspective, it is preferable
to exclude from the PCM all those parameters that are entailed and made
irrelevant by other parameters, as those spoil the properties of the resulting
code and produce code parameters that are artificially low with respect
to the asymptotic bound and the GV bound.
\subsection{Questions}
The approach to the PCM based on error-correcting codes proposed here
suggests a few new linguistic questions that may be suitable for treatment
with coding theory methods:
\begin{enumerate}
\item Do languages belonging to the same historical-linguistic family
always yield codes below the asymptotic bound or the GV bound? How often does the
same happen across different linguistic families? How much can code
parameters be improved by eliminating spoiling effects caused by
dependencies and entailment of syntactic parameters?
\item Codes near the GV curve are typically coming from the Shannon
Random Code Ensemble, where code words and letters of code words
behave like independent random variables, see \cite{BaFo}, \cite{CoGo}.
Are there families of languages whose associated codes are located
near the GV bound? Do their syntactic parameters mimic the random
behavior?
\item The asymptotic bound for error-correcting codes was related in
\cite{ManMar2} to Kolmogorov complexity. Is there a suitable complexity
measure associated to a family of natural languages that would relate to the
position of the resulting code above or below the asymptotic bound?
\item Codes and the asymptotic bound in the space of code parameters
were recently studied using methods from quantum statistical mechanics,
operator algebra and fractal geometry, \cite{ManMar}, \cite{MaPe}.
Can some of these mathematical methods be employed in the
linguistic parametric comparison method?
\end{enumerate}
|
\section{Introduction}
For a graph property $\Pi$, the \textsc{$\Pi$ Edge Deletion} problem asks whether there exist at most $k$ edges such that deleting them from the input graph
results in a graph with property $\Pi$. Numerous studies have been done on edge deletion problems from 1970s onwards dealing with various aspects
such as hardness
\cite{yannakakis1981edge,garey1974some,el1988complexity,natanzon2001complexity,alon2009additive,goldberg1995four,margot1994some,karp72,brugmann2009generating,shamir2004cluster},
polynomial-time algorithms\cite{natanzon2001complexity,hadlock1975finding,shamir2004cluster},
approximability \cite{natanzon2001complexity,alon2009additive,shamir2004cluster},
fixed-parameter tractability\cite{cai1996fixed,gramm2003graph},
polynomial problem kernels\cite{guo2007problem,brugmann2009generating,paul2012non,gramm2003graph} and
incompressibility\cite{cai2013incompressibility,kratsch2009two,cai2012polynomial}.
There are not many generalized results on the NP-completeness of edge deletion problems. This is in contrast with the classical result by
Lewis and Yannakakis\cite{lewis1980node} on the vertex counterparts which says that \textsc{$\Pi$ Vertex Deletion} problems are NP-complete if $\Pi$ is non-trivial
and hereditary on induced subgraphs. By a result of Cai\cite{cai1996fixed}, the \textsc{$\Pi$ Edge Deletion} problem is
fixed-parameter tractable for any hereditary property $\Pi$ that is characterized by a finite set of forbidden induced subgraphs. We observe that polynomial problem kernels have been found only for a few parameterized \textsc{$\Pi$ Edge Deletion} problems.
In this paper, we study a subset of \textsc{$\Pi$ Edge Deletion} problems known as \textsc{$\mathcal{H}$-free Edge Deletion} problems where
$\mathcal{H}$ is a set of graphs. The objective is
to find whether there exist at most $k$ edges in the input graph such that deleting them results in a graph with no induced copy of $H\in\mathcal{H}$. In the natural
parameterization of this problem, the parameter is $k$.
In this paper, we give a polynomial problem kernel for parameterized version of \textsc{$\mathcal{H}$-free Edge Deletion} where
$\mathcal{H}$ is any fixed finite set of
connected graphs and when the input graphs are of bounded degree. In this context, we note that \textsc{Triangle-free Edge Deletion}\cite{brugmann2009generating} and \textsc{Custer Edge Deletion($P_3$-free Edge Deletion)}\cite{komusiewicz2011alternative} are NP-complete even for bounded degree
input graphs. We also note that, under the complexity theoretic assumption $coNP\not\subseteq NP/poly$, there exist no polynomial problem kernels for the \textsc{$H$-free Edge Deletion} problems when $H$ is 3-connected but not complete, or when $H$ is a path or cycle of at least 4 edges\cite{cai2013incompressibility}. When the input graph has maximum degree at most $\Delta$ and if the maximum diameter of graphs in $\mathcal{H}$ is $D$, then the number of vertices in the kernel we obtain is at most $2\Delta^{2D+1}\cdot k^{pD+1}$ where $p=\log_{\frac{2\Delta}{2\Delta-1}}\Delta$. Our kernelization consists of a single rule which removes vertices of the input graph that are `far enough' from all induced $H\in \mathcal{H}$ in $G$.
When $\mathcal{H}$ contains $K_{1,s}$, we obtain a stronger result - a polynomial kernel for $K_t$-free input graphs (for any fixed $t> 2$).
Let $s>1$ be the least integer such that $K_{1,s}\in \mathcal{H}$. Then the number of
vertices in the kernel we obtain is at most $8d^{3D+1}\cdot k^{pD+1}$ where $d=R(s,t-1)-1$, $R(s,t-1)$ is the Ramsey number and $p=\log_{\frac{2d}{2d-1}}d$.
We note that \textsc{Claw-free Edge Deletion} and \textsc{Line Edge Deletion} are NP-complete even for $K_4$-free input graphs\cite{yannakakis1981edge}.
As a corollary of our result, we obtain the first polynomial kernels for these problems when the input graphs are $K_t$-free for any fixed
$t>2$. The existence of a polynomial kernel for \textsc{Claw-free Edge Deletion} and \textsc{Line Edge Deletion} were raised as open problems in \cite{cai2013incompressibility,open2013worker}.
We note that for $s>9$, there is an incompressibility result for \textsc{$K_{1,s}$-free Edge Deletion} for general graphs \cite{cai2012polynomial}.
\subsection{Related Work}
Here, we give an overview of various results on edge deletion problems.
\paragraph{NP-completeness:} It has been proved that \textsc{$\Pi$ Edge Deletion} problems
are NP-complete if $\Pi$ is one of the following properties: without cycle of any fixed length $l\geq 3$, without any cycle of length at most $l$ for any fixed $l\geq 4$, connected with maximum degree $r$ for every fixed
$r\geq 2$, outerplanar, line graph, bipartite, comparability\cite{yannakakis1981edge}, claw-free (implicit in the proof of NP-completeness of the \textsc{Line Edge Deletion} problem in \cite{yannakakis1981edge}), $P_l$-free for any fixed $l\geq 3$\cite{el1988complexity}, circular-arc, chordal, chain, perfect, split, AT-free\cite{natanzon2001complexity}, interval\cite{goldberg1995four},
threshold\cite{margot1994some} and
complete\cite{karp72}.
\paragraph{Fixed-parameter Tractability and Kernelization:} Cai proved in \cite{cai1996fixed} that parameterized \textsc{$\Pi$ Edge Deletion} problem is fixed-parameter tractable if $\Pi$ is a hereditary property characterized by a finite set of forbidden induced subgraphs. Hence
\textsc{$\mathcal{H}$-free Edge Deletion} is fixed-parameter tractable for any finite set of graphs $\mathcal{H}$.
Polynomial problem
kernels are known for chain, split, threshold\cite{guo2007problem}, triangle-free\cite{brugmann2009generating}, cograph\cite{paul2012non} and cluster\cite{gramm2003graph} edge deletions. It is proved in \cite{cai2013incompressibility} that for 3-connected $H$, $\textsc{H-free Edge Deletion}$ admits no polynomial kernel if and only if $H$ is not a complete graph, under the assumption $coNP\not\subseteq NP/poly$. Under the same assumption, it is proved in \cite{cai2013incompressibility} that for $H$ being a path or cycle, $\textsc{H-free Edge Deletion}$ admits no polynomial kernel if and only if $H$ has at least 4 edges.
Unless $NP\subseteq coNP/poly$, $\textsc{H-free Edge Deletion}$ admits no polynomial kernel if $H$ is $K_1 \times\ (2K_1\cup 2K_2)$ \cite{kratsch2009two}.
\section{Preliminaries and Basic Results}
We consider only simple graphs. For a set of graphs $\mathcal{H}$, a graph $G$ is $\mathcal{H}$-free if there is no induced copy of $H\in\mathcal{H}$ in $G$. For $V'\subseteq V(G)$,
$G\setminus V'$ denotes the graph $(V(G)\setminus V', E(G)\setminus E')$ where $E'\subseteq E(G)$ is the set of edges incident to vertices in $V'$. Similarly, for $E'\subseteq E(G)$,
$G\setminus E'$ denotes the graph $(V(G), E(G)\setminus E')$. For any edge set $E'\subseteq E(G)$, $V_{E'}$ denotes the set of vertices
incident to the edges in $E'$. For any $V'\subseteq V(G)$, the closed neighbourhood of $V'$, $N_G[V']=\{v: v\in V'\ \text{or}\ (u,v)\in E(G)\ \text{for some}\ u\in V'\}$. In a graph $G$, distance from a vertex $v$ to a set of vertices $V'$ is the shortest among the distances from $v$ to the vertices in $V'$.
A parameterized problem is \textit{fixed-parameter tractable}(FPT) if there exists an algorithm to solve it which runs in time $O(f(k)n^c)$ where $f$ is a computable function, $n$ is the input size, $c$ is a constant and $k$ is the parameter. The idea is to solve the problem efficiently for small parameter values.
A related notion is \textit{polynomial kernelization} where the parameterized problem instance is reduced in polynomial (in $n+k$) time to a polynomial (in $k$) sized
instance of the same problem called \textit{problem kernel} such that the
original instance is a yes-instance if and only if the problem kernel is a yes-instance. We refer to \cite{downey2013fundamentals} for an exhaustive treatment on these topics.
A kernelization rule is \textit{safe} if the answer to the problem instance does not change after the application of the rule.
In this paper, we consider \textsc{$\mathcal{H}$-free Edge Deletion}\footnote{we leave the prefix `parameterized' henceforth as it is evident from the context} which is defined as given below.
\vspace{0.1cm}
\fbox{\parbox{11cm}{
\textsc{$\mathcal{H}$-free Edge Deletion}\\
\textbf{Instance}: A graph $G$ and a positive integer $k$.\\
\textbf{Problem}: Does there exist $E'\subseteq E(G)$ with $|E'|\leq k$ such that $G\setminus E'$ does not contain $H\in\mathcal{H}$ as an induced subgraph.\\
\textbf{Parameter}: $k$
}}
\vspace{0.1cm}
We define an \textit{$\mathcal{H}$ deletion set (HDS)} of a graph $G$ as a set $M\subseteq E(G)$ such that $G\setminus M$ is $\mathcal{H}$-free. The \textit{minimum $\mathcal{H}$ deletion set (MHDS)} is an HDS with smallest cardinality.
We define a partition of an MHDS $M$ of $G$ as follows.
$M_1=\{e: e\in M\ \text{and}\ e\ \text{is part of an induced}\ H\in \mathcal{H}\ \text{in}\ G\}.$
$M_j= \{e: e\in M\setminus \bigcup_{i=1}^{i=j-1}M_i\ \text{and}\ e\ \text{is part of an induced}\ H\in \mathcal{H}\ \text{in}\ G\setminus \bigcup_{i=1}^{i=j-1}M_i\}, \text{for}\ j>1$.
We define the \textit{depth} of an MHDS $M$ of $G$, denoted by $l_M$, as the least integer such that $|M_i|>0$ for all $1\leq i\leq l_M$ and $|M_i|=0$ for all $i>l_M$. Proposition~\ref{prop:depth} shows that this notion is well defined.
\begin{proposition}\label{prop:depth}
\begin{enumerate}
\item $\{M_j\}$ forms a partition of $M$.
\item There exists $l_M\geq 0$ such that $|M_i|>0$ for $1\leq i\leq l_M$ and $|M_i|=0$ for $i > l_M$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
If $i\not = j$ and $M_i$ and $M_j$ are nonempty, then $M_i\cap M_j=\emptyset$. For $i\geq 1$, $M_i\subseteq M$. Assume there is an edge $e\in M$ and $e\notin \bigcup M_j$. Delete all edges in $\bigcup M_j$ from $G$. What remains is an $\mathcal{H}$-free graph. As $M$ is an MHDS, there can not exist such an edge $e$. Now let $j$ be the smallest integer such that $M_j$ is empty. Then from definition, for all $i>j$, $|M_i|=0$. Therefore
$l_M=j-1$.
\end{proof}\qed
We observe that for an $\mathcal{H}$-free graph, the only MHDS $M$ is $\emptyset$ and hence $l_M=0$. For an MHDS $M$ of $G$ with a depth $l_M$,
we define the following terms.
$S_j=\bigcup_{i=j}^{i=l_M}M_j$ for $1\leq j\leq l_M+1$.
$T_j= M\setminus S_{j+1}$ for $0\leq j\leq l_M$.
$V_{\mathcal{H}}(G)$ is the set of all vertices part of some induced $H\in \mathcal{H}$ in $G$.
We observe that $S_1=T_{l_M}=M$, $S_{l_M} = M_{l_M}$, $T_1= M_1$ and $S_{l_M+1}=T_0=\emptyset$.
\begin{proposition}\label{prop:stilleasy}
For a graph $G$, let $E'\subseteq E(G)$ such that at least one edge in every induced $H\in \mathcal{H}$ in $G$ is in $E'$. Then, at least one vertex in every induced $H\in \mathcal{H}$ in
$G\setminus E'$ is in $V_{E'}$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
Assume that there exists an induced $H\in \mathcal{H}$ in $G\setminus E'$ with the vertex set $V'$. For a contradiction, assume that $|V'\cap V_{E'}|=0$. Then, $V'$ induces a copy of $H$ in $G$. Hence, $E'$ must contain some of its edges.
\end{proof}\qed
\begin{lemma}\label{lem:dist}
Let $G$ be the input graph of an \textsc{$\mathcal{H}$-free Edge Deletion} problem instance where $\mathcal{H}$ is a set of connected graphs with diameter at most $D$. Let $M$ be an MHDS of $G$. Then, every vertex in $V_M$ is at a distance at most $(l_M-1)D$ from $V_{\mathcal{H}}(G)$ in $G$ .
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
For $2\leq j\leq l_M$, from definition, at least one edge in every induced $H\in\mathcal{H}$ in $G\setminus T_{j-2}$ is in $M_{j-1}$. Hence by
Proposition~\ref{prop:stilleasy}, at least one vertex in every induced $H\in \mathcal{H}$ in $G\setminus T_{j-1}$ is in $V_{M_{j-1}}$. By definition, every vertex in $V_{M_j}$ is part of some induced $H\in\mathcal{H}$ in $G\setminus T_{j-1}$. This implies every vertex in
$V_{M_j}$ is at a distance at most $D$ from $V_{M_{j-1}}$. Hence every vertex in $V_{M_{l_M}}$ is at a distance at most $(l_M-1)D$ from $V_{M_1}$.
By definition, $V_{M_1}\subseteq V_{\mathcal{H}}(G)$. Hence the proof.
\end{proof}\qed
\begin{lemma}\label{lem:step}
Let $G$ be a graph with maximum degree at most $\Delta$ and $M$ be an MHDS of $G$. Then, for $1\leq j\leq l_M$, $(2\Delta-1)\cdot |M_j|\geq |S_{j+1}|$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
For $1\leq j\leq l_M$, from definition, $M_j$ has at least one edge from every induced $H\in \mathcal{H}$ in $G\setminus T_{j-1}$. Let
$M'_j$ be the set of edges incident to vertices in $V_{M_j}$ in $G\setminus T_{j-1}$. We observe that $(G\setminus T_{j-1})\setminus M'_j$ is $\mathcal{H}$-free and hence $|T_{j-1}\cup M'_j|$ is an HDS of $G$. Clearly, $|M'_j|\leq \Delta |V_{M_j}|\leq 2\Delta |M_j|$. Since $M$ is an MHDS,
$|T_{j-1}\cup M'_j| = |T_{j-1}|+|M'_j|\geq |M|=|T_{j-1}|+|S_j|$. Therefore
$|M'_j|\geq|S_j|$. Hence, $2\Delta |M_j|\geq|S_j|=|M_j|+|S_{j+1}|$.
\end{proof}\qed
Now we give an upper bound for the depth of an MHDS in terms of its size and maximum degree of the graph.
\begin{lemma}\label{lem:lower}
Let $M$ be an MHDS of $G$. If the maximum degree of $G$ is at most $\Delta>0$,
then $l_M\leq 1+\log_{\frac{2\Delta}{2\Delta-1}}|M|$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
The statement is clearly true when $l_M\leq 1$. Hence assume that $l_M\geq 2$. The result follows from repeated application of Lemma~\ref{lem:step}.
\begin{align*}
|M| &= |S_1|=|M_1|+|S_2|\geq \frac{|S_2|}{2\Delta-1}+|S_2|\\
&\geq |S_{l_M}|\left(\dfrac{2\Delta}{2\Delta-1}\right)^{l_M-1}\\
&\geq \left(\dfrac{2\Delta}{2\Delta-1}\right)^{l_M-1} \hspace{0.5cm} \text{[$\because |S_{l_M}|\geq 1$]}
\end{align*}
\end{proof}\qed
\begin{corollary}\label{cor:l}
Let $(G,k)$ be a yes-instance of \textsc{$\mathcal{H}$-free Edge Deletion} where $G$ has maximum degree at most $\Delta>0$. For any MHDS $M$
of $G$,
$l_M\leq 1 + \log_{\frac{2\Delta}{2\Delta-1}}k$.
\end{corollary}\qed
\begin{lemma}\label{lem:gensafe}
Let $\mathcal{H}$ be a set of connected graphs with diameter at most $D$. Let $V'\supseteq V_{\mathcal{H}}(G)$ and let $c\geq 0$.
Let $G'$ be obtained by removing vertices of $G$ at a distance more than $c+D$ from $V'$.
Furthermore, assume that if $G'$ is a yes-instance then there exists an MHDS $M'$ of $G'$ such that every vertex in $V_{M'}$ is at a distance at most $c$ from $V'$ in $G'$. Then $(G,k)$ is a
yes-instance if and only if $(G',k)$ is a yes-instance of \textsc{$\mathcal{H}$-free Edge Deletion}.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let $G$ be a yes-instance with an MHDS $M$. Then $M'=M\cap E(G')$ is an HDS of $G'$ such that $|M'|\leq k$. Conversely, let $G'$ be a yes-instance. By the assumption, there exists an
MHDS $M'$ of $G'$ such that every vertex in $V_{M'}$ is at a distance at most $c$ from $V'$ in $G'$.
We claim that $M'$ is an MHDS of $G$. For contradiction, assume $G\setminus M'$ has an induced $H\in \mathcal{H}$ with a vertex set $V''$. As $G$ and $G'$ has same set of
induced copies of graphs in $\mathcal{H}$, at least one edge
in every induced copy of graphs in $\mathcal{H}$ in $G$ is in $M'$. Then, by Proposition~\ref{prop:stilleasy}, at least one vertex in $V''$ is in $V_{M'}$.
We observe that for every vertex in $G'$ the distance from $V'$ is same in $G$ and $G'$. Hence every vertex in $V''$ is at a distance at most $c+D$ from $V'$ in $G$. Then, $V''$ induces a copy of $H$ in $G'\setminus M'$ which is a
contradiction.
\end{proof}\qed
\begin{lemma}\label{lem:genbound}
Let $G$ be a graph and let $d>1$ be a constant. Let $V'\subseteq V(G)$ such that all vertices in $G$ with degree more than $d$ is in $V'$. Partition $V'$ into $V_1$ and $V_2$ such that $V_1$ contains all the vertices in $V'$ with degree at most $d$ and $V_2$ contains all the vertices with degree more than $d$. If every vertex in $G$ is at a distance at most $c>0$ from $V'$, then $|V(G)|\leq |V_1|\cdot d^{c+1} + |N_G(V_2)|\cdot d^{c}$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
To enumerate the number of vertices in $G$, consider the $d$-ary breadth first trees rooted at vertices in $V_1$ and in $N_G[V_2]$.
\begin{align*}
|V(G')| &\leq |V_1|\left(\dfrac{d^{c+1}-1}{d-1}\right) + |N_G[V_2]|\left(\dfrac{d^{c}-1}{d-1}\right)\\
&\leq |V_1|d^{c+1} + |N_G[V_2]|d^{c}
\end{align*}
\end{proof}\qed
\section{Polynomial Kernels}
In this section, we assume that $\mathcal{H}$ is a fixed finite set of connected graphs with diameter at most $D$. First we devise an algorithm to obtain polynomial kernel for \textsc{$\mathcal{H}$-free Edge Deletion} for bounded degree input graphs. Then we prove a stronger result - a polynomial kernel for $K_t$-free input graphs (for some fixed $t>2$) when $\mathcal{H}$ contains $K_{1,s}$ for some $s>1$.
We assume that the input graph $G$ has maximum degree at most $\Delta>1$ and $G$ has at least
one induced copy of $H$. We observe that if these conditions are not met, obtaining polynomial kernel is trivial.
Now we state the kernelization rule which is the single rule in the kernelization.
\begin{description}
\item[Rule 0:] Delete all vertices in $G$ at a distance more than $(1+\log_{\frac{2\Delta}{2\Delta-1}}k)D$ from $V_{\mathcal{H}}(G)$.
\end{description}
We note that the rule can be applied efficiently with the help of breadth first search from vertices in $V_{\mathcal{H}}(G)$. Now we prove the
safety of the rule.
\begin{lemma}\label{lem:safe}
Rule $0$ is safe.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let $G'$ be obtained from $G$ by applying Rule $0$. Let $M'$ be an MHDS of $G'$. If $G'$ is a yes-instance, then by Lemma~\ref{lem:dist} and Corollary~\ref{cor:l},
every vertex in $V_{M'}$ is at a distance at most $D\log_{\frac{2\Delta}{2\Delta-1}}k$ from $V_{\mathcal{H}}(G')$.
Hence, we can apply Lemma~\ref{lem:gensafe} with $V'=V_{\mathcal{H}}(G)$ and $c=D\log_{\frac{2\Delta}{2\Delta-1}}k$.
\end{proof}\qed
\begin{lemma}\label{lem:bound}
Let $(G,k)$ be a yes-instance of \textsc{$\mathcal{H}$-free Edge Deletion}. Let $G'$ be obtained by one application of Rule 0 on $G$. Then, $|V(G')|\leq (2\Delta^{2D+1}\cdot k^{pD+1})$ where $p=\log_{\frac{2\Delta}{2\Delta-1}}\Delta$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let $M$ be an MHDS of $G$ such that $|M|\leq k$. We observe that every vertex in
$V_{\mathcal{H}}(G)$ is at a distance at most $D$ from $V_{M_1}$ in $G$. Hence, by construction, every vertex in $G'$ is at a distance at most
$(2+\log_{\frac{2\Delta}{2\Delta-1}}k)D$ from $V_{M_1}$ in $G$ and in $G'$. We note that $|V_{M_1}|\leq 2k$. To enumerate the number of vertices in $G'$, we apply Lemma~\ref{lem:genbound} with
$V'=V_{M_1}$, $c=(2+\log_{\frac{2\Delta}{2\Delta-1}}k)D$ and $d=\Delta$.
\begin{align*}
|V(G')| &\leq 2k\Delta^{(2+\log_{\frac{2\Delta}{2\Delta-1}}k)D+1}\\
&\leq 2\Delta^{2D+1}\cdot k^{pD+1}
\end{align*}
\end{proof}\qed
Now we present the algorithm to obtain a polynomial kernel. The algorithm applies Rule 0 on the input graph and according to the number of vertices in the resultant graph it returns the resultant graph or a trivial no-instance.
\vspace{0.1cm}
\fbox{\parbox{11cm}{
Kernelization for \textsc{$\mathcal{H}$-free Edge Deletion}\\
($\mathcal{H}$ is a finite set of connected graphs with maximum diameter $D$)\\
Input:$(G,k)$ where $G$ has maximum degree at most $\Delta$.
\begin{description}
\item[1.] Apply Rule 0 on $G$ to obtain $G'$.
\item[2.] If the number of vertices in $G'$ is more than $2\Delta^{2D+1}\cdot k^{pD+1}$ where $p=\log_{\frac{2\Delta}{2\Delta-1}}\Delta$, then return
a trivial no-instance $(H,0)$ where $H$ is the graph with minimum number of vertices in $\mathcal{H}$. Else return $(G',k)$.
\end{description}
}}
\begin{theorem}\label{thm:correct}
The kernelization for \textsc{$\mathcal{H}$-free Edge Deletion} returns a kernel with the number of vertices at most $2\Delta^{2D+1}\cdot k^{pD+1}$ where $p=\log_{\frac{2\Delta}{2\Delta-1}}\Delta$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Follows from Lemma~\ref{lem:safe} and Lemma~\ref{lem:bound} and the observation that the number of vertices in the trivial no-instance is at most $2\Delta^{2D+1}\cdot k^{pD+1}$.
\end{proof}\qed
\subsection{A stronger result for a restricted case}
Here we give a polynomial kernel for \textsc{$\mathcal{H}$-free Edge Deletion} when $\mathcal{H}$ is a fixed finite set of connected graphs and contains a $K_{1,s}$ for some $s> 1$ and when the input graphs are $K_t$-free, for any fixed
$t> 2$.
It is proved in \cite{le2008stable} that the maximum degree of a $\{\text{claw},K_4\}$-free graph is at most 5. We give a straight forward
generalization of this result for $\{K_{1,s},K_t\}$-free graphs. Let $R(s,t)$ denote the Ramsey number.
Remember that the Ramsey number $R(s,t)$ is the least integer such that every graph on $R(s,t)$ vertices has either an independent set of order
$s$ or a complete subgraph of order $t$.
\begin{lemma}\label{lem:ramsey}
For integers $s> 1,t> 1$, any $\{K_{1,s}, K_t\}$-free graph has maximum degree at most $R(s,t-1)-1$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Assume $G$ is $\{K_{1,s}, K_t\}$-free. For contradiction, assume $G$ has a vertex $v$ of degree at least $R(s,t-1)$. By the definition of the Ramsey number there exist at least $s$ mutually non-adjacent vertices or $t-1$ mutually adjacent vertices in the neighborhood of $v$. Hence
there exist either an induced $K_{1,s}$ or an induced $K_t$ in $G$.
\end{proof}\qed
We modify the proof technique used for devising polynomial kernelization for \textsc{$\mathcal{H}$-free Edge Deletion} for bounded degree graphs to obtain polynomial
kernelization for $K_t$-free input graphs for the case when $\mathcal{H}$ contains $K_{1,s}$ for some $s>1$.
Let $s> 1$ be the least integer such that $\mathcal{H}$ contains $K_{1,s}$. Let $t> 2$, $G$ be $K_{t}$-free and $M$ be an MHDS of $G$. Let $d=R(s,t-1)-1$. Let $D$ be the maximum diameter of graphs in $\mathcal{H}$. We define the following.
\begin{description}
\item[$M_0=$]$\{e: e\in M\ \text{and}\ e\ \text{is incident to a vertex with degree at least}\ d+1\}$.
\item[$V_R(G)=$]$\{v: v\in V(G)\ \text{and}\ v\ \text{has degree at least $d+1$ in $G$}\}$.
\end{description}
\begin{lemma}\label{lem:max}
$G\setminus M_0$ has degree at most $d$ and every vertex in $G$ with degree at least $d+1$ is incident to at least one edge in $M_0$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
As $G\setminus M$ is $\{K_{1,s}, K_t\}$-free and every edge in $M$ which is incident to at least one vertex of degree at least $d+1$ is in $M_0$, the result follows from Lemma~\ref{lem:ramsey}.
\end{proof}\qed
\begin{lemma}\label{lem:stdist}
Let $M$ be an MHDS of $G$. Let $M'=M\setminus M_0$ and $G'=G\setminus M_0$. Then, $M'$ is an MHDS of $G'$ and every vertex in $V_M$ is at a distance at most $Dl_{M'}$ from $V_{\mathcal{H}}(G)\cup V_R(G)$ in $G$ .
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
It is straight forward to verify that $M'$ is an MHDS of $G'$.
By Lemma~\ref{lem:dist}, every vertex in $V_{M'}$ is at a distance at most $(l_{M'}-1)D$ from $V_{\mathcal{H}}(G')$ in $G'$. Every induced $H\in\mathcal{H}$ in $G'$ is either an induced $H$ in $G$ or formed by deleting $M_0$ from $G$. Therefore, every vertex in
$V_{\mathcal{H}}(G')$ is at a distance at most $D$ from $V_{\mathcal{H}}(G)\cup V_R(G)$ in $G'$. Hence, every vertex in $V_{M'}$ is at a distance at most $Dl_{M'}$ from $V_{\mathcal{H}}(G)\cup V_R(G)$ in $G'$. The result follows from the fact $M=M'\cup M_0$.
\end{proof}\qed
The single rule in the kernelization is:
\begin{description}
\item[Rule 1:] Delete all vertices in $G$ at a distance more than $(2+\log_{\frac{2d}{2d-1}}k)D$ from $V_{\mathcal{H}}(G)\cup V_R(G)$ where
$d=R(s,t-1)-1$.
\end{description}
\begin{lemma}\label{lem:stsafe}
Rule $1$ is safe.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let $G'$ be obtained from $G$ by applying Rule $1$. Let $M'$ be an MHDS of $G'$. If $G'$ is a yes-instance, then by Lemma~\ref{lem:stdist} and Corollary~\ref{cor:l}, every vertex in $V_{M'}$ is at a distance at most
$D(1+\log_{\frac{2d}{2d-1}}k)$ from $V_{\mathcal{H}}(G')\cup V_R(G')$ in $G'$. We note that $V_{\mathcal{H}}(G)=V_{\mathcal{H}}(G')$ and $V_R(G)=V_R(G')$. Hence, we can apply Lemma~\ref{lem:gensafe} with $V'=V_{\mathcal{H}}(G)\cup V_R(G)$, $c=D(1+\log_{\frac{2d}{2d-1}}k)$ and $d=R(s,t-1)-1$.
\end{proof}\qed
\begin{lemma}\label{lem:stbound}
Let $(G,k)$ be a yes-instance of \textsc{$\mathcal{H}$-free Edge Deletion} where $G$ is $K_t$-free. Let $G'$ be obtained by one application of Rule 1 on $G$. Then, $|V(G')|\leq 8d^{3D+1}\cdot k^{pD+1}$ where $p=\log_{\frac{2d}{2d-1}}d$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let $M$ be an MHDS of $G$ such that $|M|\leq k$. We observe that every vertex in $V_{\mathcal{H}}(G)$ is at a distance at most $D$ from $V_{M_1}$ in $G$. Hence, by construction, every vertex in $G'$ is at a distance at most
$D(3+\log_{\frac{2d}{2d-1}}k)$ from $V_{M_1}\cup V_R(G)$. Clearly $|V_{M_1}|\leq 2k$. Using Lemma~\ref{lem:max} we obtain $|N[V_R(G)]|\leq 2k(d+2)$. To enumerate the number of vertices in $G'$, we apply Lemma~\ref{lem:genbound} with
$V'=V_{M_1}\cup V_R(G)$, $c=D(3+\log_{\frac{2d}{2d-1}}k)$ and $d=R(s,t-1)-1$.
\begin{align*}
|V(G')| &\leq 2kd^{D(3+\log_{\frac{2d}{2d-1}}k)+1}+2k(d+2)d^{D(3+\log_{\frac{2d}{2d-1}}k)}\\
&\leq 8d^{3D+1}\cdot k^{pD+1}
\end{align*}
\end{proof}\qed
Now we present the algorithm.
\vspace{0.1cm}
\fbox{\parbox{11cm}{
Kernelization for \textsc{$\mathcal{H}$-free Edge Deletion}\\
($\mathcal{H}$ contains $K_{1,s}$ for some $s>1$)\\
Input:$(G,k)$ where $G$ is $K_{t}$-free for some fixed $t>2$.\\
Let $s>1$ be the least integer such that $\mathcal{H}$ contains $K_{1,s}$.
\begin{description}
\item[1.] Apply Rule 1 on $G$ to obtain $G'$.
\item[2.] If the number of vertices in $G'$ is more than $8d^{3D+1}\cdot k^{pD+1}$ where $d=R(s,t-1)-1$ and $p=\log_{\frac{2d}{2d-1}}d$, then return
a trivial no-instance $(K_{1,s},0)$. Else return $(G',k)$.
\end{description}
}}
\vspace{0.1cm}
For practical implementation, we can use any specific known upper bound for $R(s,t-1)$ or the general upper bound
$\binom{s+t-3}{s-1}$.
\begin{theorem}\label{thm:stcorrect}
The kernelization for \textsc{$\mathcal{H}$-free Edge Deletion} when $K_{1,s}\in \mathcal{H}$ and the input graph is $K_t$-free returns a kernel with the number of vertices at most $8d^{1+3D}\cdot k^{1+pD}$ where $d=R(s,t-1)-1$ and $p=\log_{\frac{2d}{2d-1}}d$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Follows from Lemma~\ref{lem:stsafe} and Lemma~\ref{lem:stbound}.
\end{proof}\qed
It is known that line graphs are characterized by a finite set of connected forbidden induced subgraphs including a claw ($K_{1,3}$). Both
\textsc{Claw-free Edge Deletion} and \textsc{Line Edge Deletion} are NP-complete even for $K_4$-free graphs\cite{yannakakis1981edge}.
\begin{corollary}
\textsc{Claw-free Edge Deletion} and \textsc{Line Edge Deletion} admit polynomial kernels for $K_t$-free input graphs for any fixed
$t>3$.
\end{corollary}\qed
We observe that the kernelization for \textsc{$\mathcal{H}$-free Edge Deletion} when $K_{1,s}\in\mathcal{H}$ and the input graph is $K_t$-free works
for the case when $K_t\in \mathcal{H}$ and the input graph is $K_{1,s}$-free.
\begin{theorem}
\textsc{$\mathcal{H}$-free Edge Deletion} admits polynomial kernelization when $\mathcal{H}$ is a finite set of connected graphs, $K_t\in\mathcal{H}$ for some $t>2$ and the input graph is $K_{1,s}$-free for some fixed $s>1$.
\end{theorem}
\section{Concluding Remarks} Our results may give some insight towards a dichotomy theorem on incompressibility of \textsc{$\mathcal{H}$-free Edge Deletion} raised as an open problem in \cite{cai2013incompressibility}.
We conclude with an open problem:
does \textsc{$\mathcal{H}$-free Edge Deletion} admit polynomial kernel for planar input graphs?
\bibliographystyle{plain}
|
\section{Introduction}
\indent Laser Wakefield acceleration (LWFA) exploits the excitation of quasi-electrostatic plasma waves during the propagation of an intense laser pulse through an underdense plasma. \cite{Tajima,Esarey,Popp,Vargas,Pollock,Leemans2006,Wang} The intense accelerating fields that can be achieved ($\approx$ 10s of GV/m, compared to 10 - 100 MV/m in solid-state conventional accelerators) are at the core of important practical applications such as generation of secondary x-ray and gamma-ray radiation \cite{Corde1,Corde2,Puhoc,DiPiazza} and are indeed encouraging towards the construction of ultra-compact high-energy particle accelerators.
\indent Efficient guiding of the laser is necessary in order to ensure acceleration over distances exceeding the laser's Rayleigh range and mm- to cm-scale acceleration is now routinely achieved by using two main classes of gas targets: gas-jets and gas-cells. Gas-jets were first to be developed and operate via up-shooting a supersonic flow of gas from a nozzle. This gas delivery system presents significant limitations in providing a stable gas target: it presents sharp pressure gradients at the gas-vacuum interface, and it excites internal shocks that induce local non-uniformities in the gas density.\cite{Esarey} These limitations are overcome by gas-cell targets, which instead are pre-filled with gas before the interaction with the laser. \cite{Popp, Vargas}
\indent However, experimental and theoretical work has demonstrated that LWFA is affected by significant shot-to-shot fluctuations \cite{Vargas,Popp} in the electron beam pointing and a series of reasons have been identified. These might include: spatial non-uniformity of the laser intensity profile and phase front, mechanical vibrations of the optical components, non-uniformities in the gas density profile, and strong non-linearities in the laser-plasma coupling. These fluctuation might prove detrimental for transport of the beam or for injection in further acceleration stages. \cite{Blumenfeld}
\indent In this paper we report on a detailed study of the main parameters affecting the stability of LWFA electron beams. Confirming other works reported in the literature, we experimentally show that a gas-cell target provides a much smaller shot-to-shot fluctuation in the electron beam pointing if compared to gas-jet targets with equal electron density. Moreover, the pointing stability appears to be virtually independent from the plasma density used, in a regime whereby efficient electron injection is still occurring, suggesting that laser-plasma coupling can be neglected when considering this problem. A consistent offset between the electron beam and laser propagation axis is also measured, and it is found to be directly related to a phase front tilt in the laser beam. In agreement with recent experimental work, \cite{Popp}, we find the laser front tilt directly correlated to a residual angular dispersion introduced by a non perfect alignment of the compressor gratings in the laser chain. Fine tuning of the latter is able to eliminate this offset, proposing this effect as an accurate diagnostic tool for the compression system of ultra-short lasers. Finally we show that, by careful control of all these parameters, it is possible to generated electron beams with sub-mrad pointing fluctuation and virtually exactly parallel to the laser propagation axis.
\indent The structure of the paper is as follows: in Section 2 a description of the experimental setup will be given whereas the main experimental results will be presented in Sections 3 and 4. Finally, a conclusive paragraph will be given in Section 5.
\section{Experimental Setup}
\begin{figure}[h]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{Setup.png}
\caption{Sketch of the experimental setup}
\label{fig:fig1}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\indent The experiment was carried out using the Astra-Gemini Laser at the Rutherford Appleton Laboratory \cite{Gemini}, which delivered a laser beam with a central wavelength of 0.8$\mu$m and a pulse duration of 42 $\pm$ 4 fs. This beam was focussed using a f/20 off axis parabola down to a focal spot with a full width at half maximum of $\sim$ (27 $\pm$ 3) $\mu$ containing 50\% of the initial laser energy (14 J, peak intensity of $\sim$ 2$\times$10$^{19}$W/cm$^{2}$). The laser was linearly polarised in a horizontal direction, i.e. perpendicularly to the main axis of gas outflow from the gas-jet. Figure 1 shows the setup used during the experiment.
\begin{figure}[h]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{spectra.pdf}
\caption{Typical electron spectra obtained during the experiment, for different electron densities.}
\label{fig:fig1}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\indent The gas target was provided by either a gas-cell or a gas-jet and in both cases He with a 1\% doping of N$_2$ was used, in order to operate in an ionisation injection scheme \cite{Esarey,ionization} 15mm-long gas-cell were filled with a gas pressure ranging from 200 to 1000 mbar whereas the gas-jet operated at a backing pressure between 45 and 55 bar. Optical interferometry of the resulting laser-generated plasma indicated an electron density of 1 - 5 $\times10^{18}$ cm$^{-3}$ for the gas-cell and 2 $\times10^{18}$ cm$^{-3}$ for the gas-jet. The main diagnostics used for the experiment were a particle magnetic spectrometer and an on-axis profile imager. The first consisted of a 0.8 T, 10cm long pair of magnets and an off-axis LANEX screen \cite{LANEX}. The spectrometer could resolve electron energies between 120 MeV and 1.2 GeV. The spectrometer was cross-calibrated using absolutely calibrated Imaging Plates \cite{IP}. The profile imager consisted of a LANEX screen placed on the laser propagation axis (distances detailed in Fig. 1). This scintillator was placed 2m away from the exit of the gas target and was imaged by a CCD camera with a 10x magnification, implying a sub-mrad resolution of the electron beam pointing.
\indent Fig. 2 shows the typical electron spectra obtained during the experiment for different gas densities. All spectra present a broad spectrum, extending up to 600 - 700 MeV with a typical charge of the order of hundreds of pC. Stable electron acceleration is achieved in a density window of 1 to 2.5 $\times10^{18}$ cm$^{-3}$ with the latter presenting a much lower maximum energy compared to the others. Even higher pressure failed to produce stable electron beams, a clear indication of significant dephasing of the laser pulse through the gas \cite{Esarey}.
\section{Experimental results: gas-cell vs. gas-jets}
\begin{figure}[b]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{Step1xmrad.png}
\caption{Pointing of the laser-driven electron beam along the axis perpendicular to the laser propagation axis) for different plasma densities. Light blue (dark blue) circles represent single-shot measurements with a gas-jet (gas-cell) target. Triangles and lines represent average and standard deviation, respectively, for each plasma density.}
\label{fig:fig1}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[b]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{Step1ymrad.png}
\caption{Pointing of the laser-driven electron beam along the axis parallel to the laser propagation axis for different plasma densities. Light blue (dark blue) circles represent single-shot measurements with a gas-jet (gas-cell) target. Triangles and lines represent average and standard deviation, respectively, for each plasma density.}
\label{fig:fig1}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\indent Figs. 3 and 4 show the measured pointing of the electron beam for different plasma densities, in respect to the laser propagation axis, in the directions both perpendicular (Fig. 3) and parallel (Fig. 4) to the laser polarisation axis. Gas-cell targets are seen to provide a reasonably small shot-to-shot fluctuation in pointing, which is always smaller than 1 mrad for each gas density in which LWFA was efficiently triggered. Only at a density of 2.6$\times10^{18}$cm$^{-3}$, larger fluctuation are observed, but this relatively large gas density proved to be highly unstable in generating electrons. It must be noted that a slight difference is detected for the axis parallel and perpendicular to the laser polarisation axis (0.8 mrad in the parallel case, compared to an average of 0.3 mrad in the opposite axis) but the difference is too small to provide a statistically significant set of data.
\indent It is worth noticing though that the average angular deviation from the laser propagation axis is zero only for the axis parallel to the laser polarisation but of the order of 1 mrad along the opposite axis. We attribute this deviation to a residual pulse front tilt in the laser beam, and a more detailed characterisation of this phenomenon will be given in the next Section. It is interesting to notice that the pointing fluctuation and deviation from the laser propagation axis appear to be virtually uncorrelated with the plasma density, suggesting that in a density window in which LWFA is efficiently triggered the laser-plasma coupling does not play a significant role in the electron beam pointing.
\indent Gas-jet targets present instead a much larger shot-to-shot fluctuation in pointing (10 mrad and 6 mrad in the parallel and perpendicular axis, respectively). This can be easily understood if we consider that a gas-jet would present a much less uniform plasma density profile and that non-uniformities would be randomly distributed at each shot, in agreement with what observed in Ref. \cite{Vargas}. It is also interesting to notice that the average deviation from the laser polarisation axis appears to be, in this case, significantly different on the two main axis: whilst it is practically comparable to the gas-cell case perpendicularly to the laser propagation axis ($\approx$ 1.7 mrad), it is much larger along the other axis ($\approx$ 13 mrad). We can explain this by considering that a gas-jet would present a round gas distribution with a very sharp density gradient along the laser propagation axis; when the laser encounters such a sharp gradient, it would tend to propagate through regions that locally have a lower refractive index (and, therefore, a lower plasma density) with the possibility of it being steered from the original axis of propagation. This would of course occur only along the axis perpendicular to the gas outflow and, therefore, parallel to the laser propagation axis. On the other hand, a gas-cell would present a flatter density distribution with a much shallower density gradient along the laser propagation axis. This facilitates laser guiding and avoids beam steering.
\section{Experimental results: pulse front tilt effects}
\begin{figure}[h]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{PFT_GS_10072014.pdf}
\caption{Effect of the rotation of the compressor gratings on the pointing of the electron beam. Blue circles represent single shot data, whereas triangles and lines represent average and standard deviation, respectively, for each set of data. Data on the left represent the electron beam pointing parallel to the laser propagation axis whereas the two sets of data on the right indicate the beam pointing perpendicular to the laser propagation axis for different laser pulse front tilts.}
\label{fig:fig1}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\indent The effect of pulse front tilt on the direction of the LWFA electron beams was first experimentally detected by Popp et al. \cite{Popp} and, in order to fully appreciate the results reported here, we will discuss again some of the key theoretical elements.
\indent In a chirped pulse amplified laser beam\cite{Strickland}, a slight deviation from a perfect parallelism between the compressor diffraction gratings will induce an angular chirp, which will result into a laser intensity profile that is tilted with respect to the laser-propagation direction.\cite{Popp,Akturk,Osvay} Following the notation of Popp et al., if we call $\epsilon$ the relative angle between the two gratings, $s$ the groove spacing, $\beta$ the diffraction angle of single grating, and $\alpha$ the laser angle of incidence onto the grating, the angular chirp can be estimated as: d$\phi$/d$\lambda = 2\epsilon\tan\beta / (s\cos\alpha)$. The tilt between the laser propagation axis and its phase front will then be related to the angular chirp by: $\tan \psi = \lambda_0$d$\phi$/d$\lambda$, with $\lambda_0$ being the laser central wavelength. Popp et al. \cite{Popp} have shown that a non-zero pulse front tilt will induce a net deviation of the electron beam axis from the laser propagation axis, in an almost linear fashion.
This suggests that the non-zero deviation from the laser and the electron propagation axis that we observe with the gas-cell, in a direction perpendicular to the laser polarisation axis, might be due to a slight misalignment in the compressor gratings. Indeed, by rotating one of the two compressor gratings by 108 $\mu$rad, this deviation is seen to go down to zero. This is shown in Fig. \ref{}. It must be said that such rotation of the grating will induce a slight temporal stretching of the laser beam of approximately 7.5 fs and that this was corrected using a DAZZLER system.
\indent In the case of our experiment, $s = 750$ nm, $\beta=30^\circ$, and $\alpha=30^\circ$ and, by taking $\epsilon= 108 \mu$rad, we can estimate the angular chirp to be d$\phi$/d$\lambda\approx 0.17 \mu$rad/nm, implying a pulse front tilt of $\psi\approx1.5\times10^{-4}$ rad. Such a pulse front tilt induces in our experiment a deviation of the electron beam axis from the laser propagation axis of approximately 1 mrad, which is in line with the results reported by Popp et al. \cite{Popp}. This is an interesting result, since it seems to suggest that this effect is quite consistent even to very small angles. As expected, a pulse front tilt has an effect only perpendicularly to the laser polarisation axis and has no effect on the other axis. It is interesting to note that this effect artificially amplifies the angular misalignment of the compressor by approximately one order of magnitude: a 108 $\mu$rad misalignment induces approximately a 1 mrad deviation of beam pointing. This suggests that a careful characterisation of the electron beam pointing can represent an efficient diagnostic tool for fine optimisation of the laser compressor, a necessary pre-requisite for ultra-high intensity, ultra-short laser pulses.
\section{Conclusions}
A study of the pointing stability of laser-wakefield accelerated electron beams has been carried out in order to isolate the main parameters that might affect it. A gas-cell target is seen to provide much more stable electron beams if compared to a gas-jet, clear indication that density non-uniformities in the gas density profile significantly affect the electron beam pointing. However, pointing stability is not seen to change across the plasma densities in which laser-wakefield can be triggered, possibly suggesting that laser-plasma coupling is not significantly influencing the electron beam pointing. Moreover, the non-zero average deviation of the electron beam axis with respect to the laser propagation axis has been found to be extremely sensitive to the degree of parallelism between the compressor gratings of the laser. This high degree of sensitivity promotes measurements of the electron beam pointing as an efficient diagnostic tool for the optimisation of laser compressors in ultra-short laser systems.
\section{Acknowledgements}
The authors are grateful for the technical support of the CLF staff. G. Sarri wishes to acknowledge financial support from EPSRC (grant No.: EP/L013975/1).
\section{References}
|
\section{Introduction}
\label{intro}
Distributed parameter estimation from quantized data has been an active area of research \cite{reibman_tcomm93,Marano&etal:07sp,chen_tsp10,chen_tsp10_2,wu:one-bit}. In a typical distributed estimation framework\footnote{In the literature, the terms `distributed' and `decentralized' have often been used interchangeably. In this paper, we use the term `distributed' and it refers to the case when the local sensors perform local processing before sending the data to a central unit.}, local sensors send their data to a fusion center. At the fusion center, an estimation algorithm is applied to estimate the unknown parameter based on the data received from different local sensors. However, due to bandwidth/energy constraints, local observations are often quantized before they are transmitted to the fusion center. Identical quantizers at the sensors have traditionally been used by researchers as it simplifies the design problem \cite{chen_tsp10} \cite{kar_tsp12}. However, relatively little is known about the optimality of these identical quantizers. For decentralized detection, Tsitsiklis \cite{Tsitsiklis88} showed the asymptotic optimality of identical quantizers with conditionally independent and identically distributed sensor observations. In \cite{reibman_tcomm93}, the authors considered the design of optimal quantizers for distributed estimation under different distortion criteria. Using the minimax criterion, optimal quantizers have been found in \cite{wu:one-bit} and \cite{chen_tsp10_2}. The maximum likelihood estimator has been used at the Fusion Center (FC) in \cite{swami_icisip05} for which the optimal quantizers have been shown to be the score functions which depend on the true value of the parameter. A discussion on the design of quantizers with design goals of bandwidth efficiency, scalability, and robustness to network changes can be found in \cite{xiao&etal:06spm}. In \cite{gubner_tit93}, an algorithm was developed for the design of a non-linear multiple-sensor distributed estimation system by partitioning the real line for quantization.
When considering the problem of distributed parameter estimation in sensor networks, besides the energy constraints, we need to be aware of the communication limitations of the network. The amount of information from each sensor is limited by the number of bits it transmits to the fusion center. However, finite channel throughput restricts the number of bits which the sensors can transmit to the fusion center. Chamberland and Veeravalli \cite{Chamberland&Veeravalli:SP03} have addressed the problem of decentralized detection in sensor networks under such a rate-constraint. Ribeiro and Giannakis \cite{gian_tsp06_1,gian_tsp06_2} have also addressed the problem of bandwidth-constrained distributed estimation in wireless sensor networks. However, most of the above works either deal with the case of identical quantizers, or consider the case of estimating a deterministic unknown parameter where the optimal quantizer depends on the unknown itself. In our work, we find the optimality conditions under the widely used assumption of identical quantizers. We also address quantizer design for the
Bayesian setup where average distortion is considered as the cost function, and the optimal quantizers are not dependent on the unknown.
Building on our preliminary work \cite{Vempaty_icassp13_opt}, in this paper, we study the problem of quantizer design in a distributed Bayesian estimation system. The major contributions of this work can be summarized as follows:
\begin{itemize}
\item We derive the optimality conditions for an arbitrary cost function when the observations are conditionally independent. For an efficient and conditionally unbiased estimator at the fusion center, we show that it is optimal to partition the set of sensors into groups, with each group using an identical quantizer.
\item We study quantizer design for distributed estimation under a bit rate constraint in the sensor network and determine the conditions under which it is optimal for the sensors to use binary quantizers. For the case of Gaussian observations, we show that the conditions are satisfied in the low signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) regime.
\item We consider the location parameter estimation problem and design the optimal binary quantizer using calculus of variations. We evaluate the performance limit of such a system and derive the conditions under which the threshold quantizer attains this performance limit.
\item We also consider the dependent observation model and derive the optimality conditions by using a hierarchical dependence framework.
\end{itemize}
The remainder of the paper is organized as follows: In Sec.~\ref{sec:prob}, we describe the distributed estimation model used in the paper and formulate the optimization problem mathematically. We derive the optimality conditions on the quantizers for an arbitrary cost function under the assumption of conditionally independent observations in Sec.~\ref{sec:opt_cond_iid}. In Sec.~\ref{sec:unbiased}, we prove that it is optimal to partition the set of sensors into groups using identical quantizers for conditionally unbiased and efficient estimators. We shift our attention to a capacity constrained wireless sensor network in Sec.~\ref{sec:rate} and determine the conditions under which binary quantizers are optimal. In Sec.~\ref{sec:location}, we consider the location parameter estimation problem and design the optimal binary quantizer. We relax the assumption of conditionally independent observations in Sec.~\ref{sec:dep} and derive the optimality conditions. Concluding remarks are provided in Sec.~\ref{sec:conc}.
\section{Problem formulation}
\label{sec:prob}
Consider a distributed estimation problem where the goal is to estimate a random scalar parameter $\theta$ at the fusion center (FC). The parameter $\theta$ has a prior probability density function
(pdf) $p(\theta)$ where $\theta \in \Theta$. As shown in Fig. \ref{fig:model}, there are a total of $N+1$ sensors $S_0, S_1,\cdots, S_N$ in the network and sensor $S_0$ plays the role of FC whereas the other $N$ sensors are peripheral sensors. Each sensor $S_i$, for $i = 0, 1,\cdots,N$ receives a local observation $Y_i$ which is a noisy realization of the parameter $\theta$ and takes values in a set $\mathcal{Y}_i$. We assume that the joint distribution of $\textbf{Y}=[Y_0,Y_1,\cdots,Y_N]$ conditioned on $\theta$ is known to the FC for all $\theta$. In this paper, until Sec. \ref{sec:dep}, we assume that $Y_i$'s are conditionally independent and identically distributed, hence the overall likelihood function is $p(\textbf{y}|\theta)=\prod_{i=0}^N p(y_i|\theta)$.
\begin{figure}[htb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=2.5in,height=!]{system}
\caption{System model}
\label{fig:model}
\end{figure}
Each sensor $S_i$, $i \neq 0$, quantizes its observation $y_i$, which is a realization of the random variable $Y_i$, using a local quantizer $\gamma_i(\cdot)$. The quantizer output $u_i = \gamma_i(y_i) \in \{1, \cdots,D_i\}$ is transmitted to the FC error free. Let $L$ denote the number of distinct values of $D_i$ (the number of quantization regions for sensor $S_i$). The FC uses $u_1,\cdots, u_N$ along with its own observation $y_0$ (realization of $Y_0$) and estimates the random parameter $\theta$ as $\hat{\theta} = \gamma_0(y_0, u_1,\cdots, u_N) \in \Theta$. Here $\gamma_0:\mathcal{Y}_0\times \prod_{i}\{1,\cdots,D_i\} \to \Theta$ is a function that will be referred to as the estimator. For $i = 1, 2,\cdots,N$, we use $\Gamma_i$ to denote
the set of all possible quantizers of sensor $S_i$. The collection $\gamma = (\gamma_1,\gamma_2,\cdots ,\gamma_N)$ of quantizers will be referred to as a strategy. The estimator is assumed to be given and, therefore, the strategy only involves local quantizers. We let $\Gamma = \Gamma_1\times\Gamma_1\times\cdots \Gamma_N$, which is the set of all strategies. For $i \neq 0$, once a quantizer $\gamma_i \in \Gamma_i$ is fixed, the quantizer output $u_i$ at sensor $S_i$ can be viewed as a realization of a random variable $U_i$ defined by $U_i = \gamma_i(Y_i)$. Clearly, the probability distribution of $U_i$ depends on the distribution of $Y_i$ and on the choice of the quantizer $\gamma_i$. Similarly, once the estimator and the strategy are fixed, the global estimate $\hat{\theta}$ becomes a random variable defined by $\hat{\theta} =\gamma_0(Y_0, U_1,\cdots, U_N)$.
In the most general Bayesian formulation, we define a cost function $C : \Theta\times \prod_i\{1, \cdots,D_i\} \times \Theta \to \mathcal{R}$, with $C(\hat{\theta}, u_1, \cdots, u_N, \theta)$ representing the cost associated with an FC estimate $\hat{\theta}$ and quantizer outputs $u_1, \cdots, u_N$, when the true parameter is $\theta$. For any given strategy $\gamma \in \Gamma$, its Bayesian cost (or risk) $J(\gamma)$ is defined as
\begin{equation}
J(\gamma) = E[C(\hat{\theta}, U_1,\cdots, U_N, \theta)],
\end{equation}
where the arguments of $C(\cdot)$ are all random variables. An equivalent expression for $J(\gamma)$, in which the dependence on $\gamma$ is more explicit is
\begin{align}
\label{cost}
J(\gamma)=\int_\Theta p(\theta)E[C(\gamma_0(Y_0,\gamma_1(Y_1),\cdots,\gamma_N(Y_N)),\gamma_1(Y_1),\cdots,\gamma_N(Y_N),\theta)|\theta]d\theta
\end{align}
\qquad The optimal quantizers are those which minimize $J(\gamma)$, herein referred to as the Bayesian risk function. For a given $\gamma_0(\cdot)$, the problem can be stated as,
\vspace{-.27cm}
\begin{equation}
\label{opt}
\gamma*=\argmin_{\gamma \in \Gamma} J(\gamma).
\end{equation}
\section{Optimality conditions for conditionally independent observations}
\label{sec:opt_cond_iid}
In this section, we provide optimality conditions for quantizers for an arbitrary cost function under the assumption of conditionally independent observations. We first provide a proposition in Sec. \ref{prel} which will be used for deriving the optimality conditions. The results in this section are derived using an approach similar to \cite{Tsitsiklis:bookchapter}.
\subsection{Preliminaries}
\label{prel}
Let $\theta$ be a random parameter to be estimated with prior pdf $p(\theta)$ and $X$ be a random variable, taking values in a set $\mathcal{X}$, with known conditional distribution given $\theta$. Let $D$ be some positive integer, and $\Delta$ be the set of all functions $\delta : \mathcal{X} \to \{1, \cdots ,D\}$. Consistent with our earlier terminology, we shall call such functions quantizers.
\begin{proposition}
\label{prop1}
Let $Z$ be a random variable taking values in a set $\mathcal{Z}$ and assume that, conditioned on $\theta$, $Z$ is independent of $X$. Let $F : \{1, \cdots ,D\} \times \mathcal{Z} \times \Theta \to \mathcal{R}$ be a given cost function. Let $\delta^*$ be an element of $\Delta$. Then $\delta^*$ minimizes $E[F(\delta(X), Z, \theta)]$ over all $\delta \in \Delta$ if and only if
\begin{equation}
\label{prop1_opt}
\delta^*(X)=\argmin_{d=1,\cdots, D}\int_\theta a(\theta ,d)p(\theta|X)d\theta \qquad \text{with probability 1}
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
a(\theta ,d)=E[F(d,Z,\theta)|\theta] \qquad \text{$\forall$ $\theta$, $d$.}
\end{equation}
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
The minimization of $E[F(\delta(X), Z, \theta)]$ over all $\delta \in \Delta$ can be achieved by fixing a value of $X$ and minimizing the expression $E[F(d, Z, \theta)|X]$, over all $d \in \{1,\cdots,D\}$. In other words, the mapping $\delta(X)$ can be determined for every fixed value of $X$. Therefore, it is equivalent to requiring that $\delta(X)$ minimizes $E[F (d, Z, \theta)|X]$, over all $d \in \{1,\cdots , D\}$, with probability 1. The expression being minimized can be re-written as
$$E[E[F(d,Z,\theta)|\theta,X]|X]$$
which by conditional independence of $X$ and $Z$, is equal to
\begin{equation}
E[E[F(d,Z,\theta)|\theta,X]|X]=\int_\theta E[F(d,Z,\theta)|\theta]p(\theta|X)d\theta.
\end{equation}
Therefore, conditional independence decouples the design of $\delta^*(X)$ from $Z$, i.e., $\delta^*(X)$ depends on $Z$ only through $a(\theta,d)$.
\end{proof}
We now use the above result to derive the optimality conditions for the quantizers.
\subsection{Optimality conditions}
\label{cond}
The following proposition gives the necessary conditions for the optimal strategy that minimizes the Bayesian risk $J(\gamma)$ given in \eqref{cost}.
\begin{proposition}
\label{prop2}
For $i\neq0$, suppose that $\gamma_j \in \Gamma_j$ has been fixed for all $j \neq i$. Then $\gamma_i$ minimizes $J(\gamma)$ over the set $\Gamma_i$ only if
\begin{equation}
\label{prop2_opt}
\gamma_i(Y_i)=\argmin_{d=1,\cdots,D_i}\int_\theta a(\theta,d)p(\theta|Y_i)d\theta \qquad \text{with probability 1}
\end{equation}
where for any $\theta$ and $d$,
\begin{align}
a(\theta,d)=E[C(U_0,U_1,\cdots,U_{i-1},d,U_{i+1},\cdots,U_N,\theta)|\theta] ,
\end{align}
and where each $U_i$, $i \neq 0$ is a random variable defined by $U_i = \gamma_i(Y_i)$ and $U_0 = \gamma_0(Y_0, U_1, \cdots , U_{i-1}, d, U_{i+1},\cdots,U_N)$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
Observe that the function to be minimized is
$$E[C(U_0, U_1, \cdots , U_{i-1}, \gamma_i(Y_i), U_{i+1}, \cdots , U_N,\theta)|\theta]$$
over $\gamma_i \in \Gamma_i$ where $U_0 = \gamma_0(Y_0, U_1,\cdots, U_{i-1},\gamma_i(Y_i),U_{i+1}, \cdots , U_N)$. This is of the form considered in Proposition~\ref{prop1} where $X=Y_i$, $d =\gamma_i(X) = \gamma_i(Y_i)$, $Z$ is the random vector given by $Z = (Y_0, U_1,\cdots, U_{i-1}, U_{i+1},\cdots, U_N)$ and
$F(d, Z, \theta) = C(U_0, U_1, \cdots , U_{i-1},\gamma_i(Y_i), U_{i+1}, \cdots , U_N, \theta)$. The result follows from Proposition~\ref{prop1}.
\end{proof}
Simultaneously solving $N$ nonlinear equations, i.e., \eqref{prop2_opt} for $i=1,\cdots, N$, is prohibitively challenging. Thus, typically person-by-person optimization (PBPO) approach is used where each decision rule is optimized while decision rules at all other sensors remain fixed. Convergence, at least to a local optimal point, is guaranteed for this greedy approach. For the remainder of the paper, we consider the design of optimal quantizers for a specific cost function namely the Mean-Square Error (MSE). In other words,
$$C(\hat{\theta}, U_1,\cdots, U_N, \theta) = E[(\hat{\theta} - \theta)^2],$$
where $\hat{\theta} =\gamma_0(Y_0, \gamma_1(Y_1),\cdots, \gamma_N(Y_N))$ and $\theta$ is the true parameter value.
\section{Quantizers for conditionally unbiased and efficient estimators}
\label{sec:unbiased}
In this section, we find the optimal quantizers in distributed estimation for estimators which are efficient and conditionally unbiased. By conditionally unbiased, we mean $E_{x|\theta}[\hat{\theta}] = \theta$ for all $\theta$. The motivation behind such an analysis is that most of the widely used estimators, among them maximum likelihood estimator and maximum a posteriori estimator, are asymptotically unbiased and efficient. In such a scenario, the cost function (MSE) becomes the variance of the estimator which attains the Posterior Cram\'{e}r-Rao Lower Bound (PCRLB). Therefore, the optimization problem can now be formulated as the minimization of PCRLB, or equivalently, the maximization of posterior Fisher Information. Since $\gamma_0(\cdot)$ is assumed to be a fixed efficient, conditionally unbiased estimator, the optimization is now performed over $\gamma = (\gamma_1, \gamma_2, \cdots , \gamma_N)$. While our results hold for any estimator that achieves the PCRLB, the design methodology also applies to cases where no efficient estimator exists; the optimization is therein on performance bounds that are not necessarily attainable but serve as surrogates for estimator performance.
\begin{proposition}
\label{prop3}
Let $\Gamma$ denote the set of all possible strategies for the distributed estimation problem with identical and conditionally independent distributed sensor observations and $\Gamma^I$ denote the set of all strategies in which all peripheral sensors with the same number of decision regions use identical quantizers. If an efficient and unbiased estimator exists at the Fusion Center, there is no loss in estimation performance in terms of MSE by restricting the search space of optimal strategy to $\Gamma^I$. In other words, if an efficient and conditionally unbiased estimator exists at the FC, there exists an optimal strategy wherein all the peripheral sensors with the same bit-constraint use identical quantization rules.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
The posterior Fisher Information under the conditional independence assumption is given by
\begin{eqnarray}
F(\gamma)&=& -E_{\theta,\textbf{U},Y_0}[\nabla_\theta\nabla_\theta^T \ln p(\textbf{U},Y_0,\theta)]\\
&=&-E_{\theta,\textbf{U}}[\nabla_\theta\nabla_\theta^T\ln p(\textbf{U}|\theta)] - E_{\theta,Y_0}[\nabla_\theta\nabla_\theta^T\ln p(Y_0|\theta)]-E_\theta[\nabla_\theta\nabla_\theta^T\ln p(\theta)]\\
&=&F_D+F_0+F_P, \label{FI}
\end{eqnarray}
where $F_D$, $F_0$ and $F_P$ represent the local sensor data's contribution, FC data's contribution and
prior's contribution to $F$ respectively.
Since the prior's contribution to $F$ given by $F_P$ and FC's contribution given by $F_0$ are independent of $\gamma$, the optimization problem can be re-stated as
\begin{align}
\label{re-opt}
\gamma^{opt}=\argmax_{\gamma \in \Gamma} F_D=\argmin_{\gamma \in \Gamma} E_{\theta,\textbf{U}}\left[\frac{\partial^2\ln p(\textbf{U}|\theta)}{\partial\theta^2}\right].
\end{align}
As the sensor observations $(Y_1,\cdots, Y_N)$ are conditionally independent and the quantizers $\gamma_i$ are independent of each other, the quantizer outputs are also conditionally independent, i.e. $\ln p(\textbf{U}|\theta) = \sum_{i=1}^N \ln p(U_i|\theta)$.
The objective function now becomes
\begin{equation}
E_{\theta,\textbf{U}}\left[\frac{\partial^2\ln p(\textbf{U}|\theta)}{\partial\theta^2}\right]=\sum_{i=1}^N E_{\theta,U_i}\left[\frac{\partial^2\ln p(U_i|\theta)}{\partial\theta^2}\right].
\end{equation}
The solution to this problem is
\begin{equation}
\label{coupled}
\gamma^{opt}=\argmin_{\gamma \in \Gamma} \sum_{i=1}^N E_{\theta,U_i}\left[\frac{\partial^2\ln p(U_i|\theta)}{\partial\theta^2}\right].
\end{equation}
Observe that \eqref{coupled} can be decoupled into $N$ optimization problems given by
\begin{equation}
\label{decoupled}
\gamma_i^{opt}=\argmin_{\gamma_i \in \Gamma_i} E_{\theta,U_i}\left[\frac{\partial^2\ln p(U_i|\theta)}{\partial\theta^2}\right] \qquad \text{for $i=1,\cdots,N$}.
\end{equation}
Note that, when all the peripheral sensors have identical statistics, the above $N$ optimization problems can be split into $L$ groups, each consisting of identical optimization problems, where $L$ is the number of distinct values of $D_i$. Each of these optimization problems within a group give identical solutions. Therefore, for an efficient and conditionally unbiased estimator, no loss is incurred when only $L$ different quantizers are used at the local sensors.
\end{proof}
Proposition \ref{prop3} states that, for the special case when all the sensors send the same number of bits, we can constrain all peripheral sensors to use the same quantization rule, without increasing the MSE of the efficient, conditionally unbiased estimator. Furthermore, this optimal quantizer can be found by solving the optimization problem in \eqref{decoupled}. Note that this result holds for any network size $N$. In the next section, we put an additional constraint on the total number of bits that the sensors can transmit to the FC at a given time instant. Under such constraint, we answer the question of whether it is better to have more sensors sending less number of bits/sensor or fewer sensors sending a higher number of bits/sensor?
\section{Quantizer design under rate constraints}
\label{sec:rate}
In the previous sections, we have found that identical quantizers are optimal when all sensors have the same number of decision regions. The next question to be addressed is the form of the quantizer, or in other words, if each sensor uses a $D_i$ level quantizer, what is the optimal value of $D_i$? The above question has been answered for a detection problem by Chamberland and Veeravalli in \cite{Chamberland&Veeravalli:SP03}. This problem can be solved under a rate constraint on the total number of bits that can be transmitted via the multiple access channel available to the sensors. Consider the scenario where the sensor network is limited by the capacity of the wireless channel over which the local sensors are transmitting their data. Although we consider the presence of a wireless channel between local sensors and fusion center, we consider the simplified case of ideal channels here since the goal of this work is to understand the optimal bit allocation for the sensors\footnote{For a discussion on distributed inference under non-ideal channels, the interested reader is referred to \cite{varshney_spmag06}.}.
Let each sensor $S_i$ quantize its local observation $Y_i$ using quantizer $\gamma_i(\cdot)$ and transmit the quantized value $u_i=\gamma_i (y_i) \in 1,\dots, D_i$ to the fusion center. When the channel is only able to carry $R$ bits of information per unit time, quantizer design should be considered under the following bit-rate constraint
\begin{equation}
\sum_{i=1}^N \lceil \log_2 {D_i} \rceil \leq R.
\end{equation}
We write $\Gamma(R)$ to denote the set of all admissible strategies corresponding to a channel with capacity $R$.
Under the conditions discussed in Sec. \ref{sec:unbiased}, when we use conditionally unbiased and efficient estimators, the PCRLB or posterior FI can be considered as the performance metric. Note that, as the sensor observations $Y_i, \dots, Y_N$ are conditionally independent and the quantizers $\gamma_i$ are independent of each other, $F_D$ can be further decomposed as
\begin{eqnarray}
F_D(\gamma) = -\sum_{i=1}^N E_{\theta,U_i}\left[\frac{\partial^2 \ln p(U_i|\theta)}{\partial \theta^2}\right] =\sum_{i=1}^N F_i(\gamma_i),
\end{eqnarray}
where $F_i(\gamma_i)$ is the contribution of sensor $S_i$ to the posterior FI.
For quantization strategy $\gamma_i$, the contribution $F_i(\gamma_i)$ of sensor $S_i$ to $ F(\gamma)$ is bounded above by the Fisher Information $I^*$ contained in one observation $Y$, i.e.,
\begin{equation}
F_i(\gamma_i) \leq I^*,
\end{equation}
where $I^*=-E_{\theta,y}\left[\frac{\partial^2 \ln p(y|\theta)}{\partial \theta^2}\right]$. This is because when the observation $y$ is quantized, there is a potential loss in information. By the data processing inequality for Fisher Information \cite{Zamir98}, the amount of Fisher information contained in the observations cannot increase due to quantization. Therefore, the Fisher information corresponding to the quantized observation is no greater than the Fisher information in the actual observation.
We now state the conditions under which binary quantizers ($D_i=2$, for all $i$) are optimal.
\begin{proposition}
\label{prop:cond}
Suppose there exists a binary quantization function $\hat{\gamma_b} \in \Gamma_b$ ($\Gamma_b$ denotes the set of binary functions on the observation space) such that
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:cond_binary}
F_i(\hat{\gamma_b}) \geq \frac{I^*}{2},
\end{equation}
then having $R$ identical sensors, each sending one bit of information is optimal.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
Let rate $R$ and strategy $\gamma=(\gamma_1, \gamma_2, \dots, \gamma_N) \in \Gamma(R)$ be given. To prove the claim, we construct an admissible binary strategy $\gamma' \in \Gamma(R)$ such that $F(\gamma') \geq F(\gamma)$. First, we divide the collection of decision rules $\gamma=\{\gamma_1, \gamma_2, \dots, \gamma_N\}$ into two sets, the first set contains all the binary functions and the other composed of the remaining quantization rules. We define $S_b$ to be the set of integers for which the function $\gamma_i$ is a binary decision rule
\begin{equation}
S_b=\{i: 1 \leq i \leq N, \gamma_i \in \Gamma_b\}.
\end{equation}
Similarly, we let $S_{b}^c=\{1, 2, \dots, N\}$-$S_b$. We choose a binary decision rule $\hat{\gamma_b} \in \Gamma_b$ such that
\begin{equation}
F_i(\hat{\gamma_b}) \geq \max \{ \max_{i \in S_b} \{F_i(\gamma_i) \}, \frac{I^*}{2} \}.
\end{equation}
Such a function $\hat{\gamma_b}$ always exists by assumption $F_i(\hat{\gamma_b}) \geq \frac{I^*}{2}$. Notice that when $i \in S_{b}^c$, $D_i >2$ which implies that $\lceil \log_2 (D_i) \rceil \geq 2$. We can replace each sensor with index in $S_{b}^c$ by two binary sensors without exceeding the capacity of the channel. Then we consider the alternative scheme $\gamma'$ in which we replace every sensor with index in $S_b$ by a binary sensor with decision rule $\hat {\gamma_b}$.
\begin{eqnarray}
F(\gamma')&=&(|S_b|+2|S_{b}^c|)F_i(\hat{\gamma_b}) \geq |S_b|F_i(\hat{\gamma_b})+|S_{b}^c|I^* \nonumber\\
&\geq& F(\gamma).
\end{eqnarray}
For a fixed decision rule $\hat {\gamma_b}$, the Fisher information at the fusion center is monotonically increasing in the number of sensors. We can, therefore, improve performance by increasing the number of sensors in $\gamma'$ until the rate constraint $R$ is satisfied with equality. The strategy $\gamma$ being arbitrary, we conclude that having $N=R$ identical sensors, each sending one bit of information, is optimal.
\end{proof}
Combining with the result from Sec. \ref{sec:unbiased}, it is optimal for local sensors to use identical binary quantization rules under certain conditions. We now present an example of the widely used Gaussian observations model to show that the above condition can be achieved for this case.
\subsection*{Gaussian Observations}
\label{sec:Gaussian}
Consider a sensor network consisting of sensors which are estimating a parameter $\theta \sim p_{\Theta}(\cdot)$ with mean $\mu_\theta$ and variance $\sigma^2_{\theta}$. Each sensor $S_i$ receives noisy observations $y_i$ which are governed by Gaussian statistics:
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:Gaussian}
p(y_i|\theta)\sim\mathcal{N}(\theta,\sigma^2),
\end{equation}
where $\mathcal{N}(\theta,\sigma^2)$ denotes a Gaussian distribution with mean $\theta$ and variance $\sigma^2$. In order to check the condition \eqref{eq:cond_binary}, we first evaluate the contribution of a single sensor to the total posterior Fisher information in the Gaussian case.
\begin{lemma}
For observations with Gaussian distributions as in \eqref{eq:Gaussian}, the contribution of a single sensor to the posterior Fisher Information is given by $I^*=\frac{1}{\sigma^2}$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
The lemma can be proved by straightforward calculation. Since $p(y|\theta)\sim\mathcal{N}(\theta,\sigma^2)$, we have
\begin{eqnarray}
&&\frac{\partial\ln p(y|\theta)}{\partial \theta}=\frac{(y-\theta)}{\sigma^2}\\
&\implies& \frac{\partial^2 \ln p(y|\theta)}{\partial \theta^2}=-\frac{1}{\sigma^2}
\end{eqnarray}
which gives us the desired result.
\end{proof}
Note that Proposition \ref{prop:cond} states that binary quantizers are optimal if there exists a binary quantizer $\hat{\gamma}_b$ which satisfies the condition \eqref{eq:cond_binary}. Consider the threshold quantizer using threshold $\mu_{\theta}$ as a candidate binary quantizer:
\begin{equation}
\label{threshold_quant_bin}
\hat{\gamma_b}(y)=
\begin{cases}
1, \qquad \text{if $y \geq \mu_\theta$}\\
0, \qquad \text{otherwise}
\end{cases}.
\end{equation}
We find the Fisher information $F_i(\hat{\gamma}_b)$ corresponding to this binary threshold quantizer $\hat{\gamma_b}$.
\begin{lemma}
For sensor $S_i$ using the binary threshold quantizer $\hat{\gamma_b}$, the posterior Fisher information is given by the following:
\begin{equation}
F_i(\hat{\gamma}_b)= \frac{1}{2\pi\sigma^2}E_{\theta}\left[\frac{\exp{\left(-\frac{(\theta-\mu_\theta)^2}{\sigma^2}\right)}}{(1-Q(\frac{\theta-\mu_\theta}{\sigma}))Q(\frac{\theta-\mu_\theta}{\sigma})}\right],
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
Q(x)=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2\pi}}\int_{x}^\infty\exp{\left(-\frac{t^2}{2}\right)}dt
\end{equation}
is the complementary cumulative distribution function of Gaussian distribution.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
The proof follows from the fact that for binary quantizer, the FI is given by \cite{chen_tsp10} \begin{equation}
\label{FI_one}
I(\theta)=\frac{(g'(\theta))^2}{g(\theta)(1-g(\theta))},
\end{equation}
where $g'(\theta)$ represents the first derivative of $g(\theta)=P(U_i=1|\theta)$ with respect to $\theta$. For Gaussian observations, we have $g(\theta)=Q(\frac{\theta-\mu_\theta}{\sigma})$ and using the definition of posterior Fisher information gives the desired result.
\end{proof}
Using the above lemmas, we can find the sufficient condition for binary quantizers to be optimal. Note that this is only a sufficient condition and is not necessary for the optimality of binary quantizers.
\begin{theorem}
For Gaussian observations under low signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) regime $\left(\frac{\sigma^2_{\theta}}{\sigma^2} \leq 2\ln\frac{4}{\pi}\right)$, it is optimal to have identical quantizers at all $R$ sensors, each sending one-bit of information.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
A sufficient condition for binary quantizers to be optimal is \eqref{eq:cond_binary} from Proposition \ref{prop:cond}. We determine the condition under which \eqref{eq:cond_binary} is satisfied. We start by using the following result from \cite{Chamberland&Veeravalli:SP03}: For any $x$,
\begin{equation}
Q(x)Q(-x)\leq\frac{1}{4}e^{(-x^2/2)}.
\end{equation}
From this we have the following set of inequalities
\begin{eqnarray}
F_i(\hat{\gamma}_b)&=&\frac{1}{2\pi\sigma^2}E_{\theta}\left[\frac{\exp{\left(-\frac{(\theta-\mu_\theta)^2}{\sigma^2}\right)}}{(1-Q(\frac{\theta-\mu_\theta}{\sigma}))Q(\frac{\theta-\mu_\theta}{\sigma})}\right]\\
&\geq&\frac{1}{2\pi\sigma^2}E_{\theta}\left[\frac{4\exp{\left(-\frac{(\theta-\mu_\theta)^2}{\sigma^2}\right)}}{\exp{\left(-\frac{(\theta-\mu_\theta)^2}{2\sigma^2}\right)}}\right]\\
&=&\frac{2}{\pi\sigma^2}E_{\theta}\left[\exp{\left(-\frac{(\theta-\mu_\theta)^2}{2\sigma^2}\right)}\right]\\
&\geq&\frac{2}{\pi\sigma^2}\exp{\left(-E_{\theta}\left[\frac{(\theta-\mu_\theta)^2}{2\sigma^2}\right]\right)}\label{eq:jensen}\\
&=&\frac{2}{\pi\sigma^2}\exp{\left(-\frac{\sigma_\theta^2}{2\sigma^2}\right)}\\
&\geq&\frac{2}{\pi\sigma^2}\exp{\left(-\frac{2\ln\frac{4}{\pi}}{2}\right)}=\frac{1}{2\sigma^2}\label{eq:cond_use}
\end{eqnarray}
where, for \eqref{eq:jensen}, we have used Jensen's inequality \cite{cover_inftheory} for the convex exponential function and for \eqref{eq:cond_use}, the condition of low SNR regime $\left(\frac{\sigma^2_{\theta}}{\sigma^2} \leq 2\ln\frac{4}{\pi}\right)$ is used.
\end{proof}
The above theorem states that when the local sensor observations have very low SNR, it is optimal to use identical binary quantizers at local sensors. This is intuitively true because when the SNR is low, the observations do not have a lot of information and, therefore, the sensors do not have to waste their resources and send fine-quantized data. However, this result does not imply that binary quantizers are always optimal. For example, when the observations are correlated, binary quantizers need not be optimal. To illustrate how correlation affects our results, we study the specific case of estimation of mean in equicorrelated Gaussian noise. In this case, the observations have the following distribution
$$p(\mathbf{y}|\theta)\sim\mathcal{N}(\theta\mathbf{1},\mathbf\Sigma),$$
where $\mathbf 1$ is the $N\times 1$ column vector of all ones and $\Sigma$ is the covariance matrix where the diagonal elements are $\sigma^2$ and the off-diagonal elements are $\rho\sigma^2$. Here $\rho$ is the correlation coefficient. The Fisher information obtained from $N$ observations is given by
$2\mathbf{1}^T\Sigma^{-1}\mathbf{1}$. Fig.~\ref{fig:corr} shows the amount of information contained in observations for unit noise variance, $\sigma^2=1$. As the correlation coefficient goes to one, the amount of information contained in $N$ observations approaches the amount of information contained in one observation. Hence, in the limit, having one sensor sending $R$ bits of information is optimal. This suggests that correlation in the observations favors having fewer sensors sending multiple bits, or having nonidentical sensors, rather than employing a set of identical binary
sensors. Similar observations were also made by Chamberland and Veeravalli in \cite{Chamberland&Veeravalli:SP03} for the case of decentralized detection in sensor networks.
\begin{figure}[htb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=3.5in,height=!]{correlated}
\caption{Fisher information contained in $N$ sensor observations as a function of correlation coefficient $\rho$.}
\label{fig:corr}
\end{figure}
\section{The Location Parameter Estimation problem}
\label{sec:location}
Having shown that identical binary quantizers are optimal under certain conditions, in this section, we present a methodology to design this optimal identical binary quantizer for a location parameter estimation problem. Consider the location parameter estimation problem where the observations are corrupted by independent and identically distributed (i.i.d) additive noise with pdf $p_W(w)$.
\begin{equation}
\label{AN}
Y_i = \theta +W_i \qquad \text{for $i = 1,\cdots,N$,}
\end{equation}
where $\theta \sim p_\Theta(\theta)$ and $W_i$ is the i.i.d noise. The local sensors process their own observations locally before sending the processed data ($U_i$ for $i = 1,\cdots,N$) to the FC. The FC then estimates $\theta$ from $\textbf{U} = [U_1 \cdots U_N]$ and $Y_0$. We consider the problem of designing the binary quantizers which we have shown to be optimal under certain conditions. Also, as shown in the previous sections, for an efficient and unbiased estimator at the FC, the identical quantizers are optimal. Let the quantizer be represented by $\gamma(Y)$ which maps the data $Y_i$ to one of the two bit values $\{0, 1\}$. We represent the quantizers probabilistically as
\begin{equation}
\gamma(Y_i)=P(U_i=1|Y_i).
\end{equation}
Thus, $\gamma(Y_i)$ denotes the probability with which the $i^{th}$ local sensor sends a `1' to the FC given its observation, $Y_i$. Stochastic quantizers are employed here as they cover a wide range of possible quantizers including both the threshold quantizers and the dithering quantizers.
\subsection{Posterior Cram\'{e}r Rao lower bound}
For the location parameter estimation problem, $F$ from \eqref{FI} is the posterior Fisher Information \cite{vantrees_bounds} which is a function of the prior distribution $p_\Theta(\theta)$, the quantizer $\gamma(Y)$, and the noise pdf $p_W(w)$. It is given as
\begin{equation}
\label{total_FI}
F(p_\Theta,\gamma, p_W) = F_D + F_0 + F_P,
\end{equation}
where $F_D$, $F_0$ and $F_P$ are as defined before.
As the $N$ observations are conditionally independent, we have
\begin{equation}
\label{FD}
F_D = NE_\theta[I(\theta)],
\end{equation}
where $I(\theta)$ is given by \eqref{FI_one}.
Let $g(\theta)$ denote the probability that the quantizer output is `1' given the true value of $\theta$
\begin{align}
g(\theta)=P(U_i=1|\theta)&=E_{W_i}[\gamma(\theta +W_i)]\\
&=\int_y \gamma(y)p_W(y-\theta)dy.\label{g}
\end{align}
For a binary quantizer, the FI is given by \eqref{FI_one}. From \eqref{total_FI}, \eqref{FD} and \eqref{FI_one}, the posterior FI is given by
\begin{equation}
\label{FI_total}
F(p_\Theta,\gamma,p_W)=N\int_\theta \frac{(g'(\theta))^2}{g(\theta)(1-g(\theta))}p_\Theta(\theta)d\theta + F_0 +F_P.
\end{equation}
\subsection{Optimal quantizer design}
The optimal quantizer $\gamma^*(y)$ minimizes the PCRLB or, equivalently, maximizes $F(p_\Theta,\gamma, p_W)$. Since $F_0$ and $F_P$ are independent of the quantizer, the optimization
problem can be stated as
\begin{align}
\gamma^*(\cdot)=\argmax_{\gamma(\cdot)}F_D=\argmax_{\gamma(\cdot)}\int_\theta \frac{(g'(\theta))^2}{g(\theta)(1-g(\theta))}p_\Theta(\theta)d\theta.
\label{opt_FD}
\end{align}
This problem can be solved by observing that the objective function $F_D$ depends on $\gamma(\cdot)$ only
through $g(\theta)$ given in \eqref{g} which can be re-written as
$$g(\theta)=(\gamma(y)*p_W(-y))(\theta),$$
where `*' represents the convolution operation. Transforming this into frequency domain using the Fourier Transform, we get
$$G(f) = H(f)P_W(-f),$$
where $G(f)$, $H(f)$ and $P_W(f)$ are the Fourier transforms of $g(\cdot),\gamma(\cdot)$ and $p_W(\cdot)$ respectively. Therefore, given the noise pdf $p_W(\cdot)$, the quantizer $\gamma(\cdot)$ can be found (if it exists) as
\begin{equation}
\label{inv_FT}
\gamma(y)=F^{-1}\left[\frac{G(f)}{P_W(-f)}\right],
\end{equation}
where $F^{-1}$ is the Inverse Fourier transform.
The problem now reduces to that of finding the optimal $g(\theta)$ that maximizes the integrand in \eqref{opt_FD}. Note that this optimal $g^*(\theta)$ is independent of the noise pdf $p_W(w)$. Upon obtaining $g^*(\theta)$, the optimal quantizer for a given noise pdf can then be designed using \eqref{inv_FT}. Therefore, the optimization in \eqref{opt_FD} can be re-stated as
\begin{eqnarray}
g^*(\cdot)&=&\argmax_{g(\cdot)}L(g(\cdot))\\
&=&\argmax_{g(\cdot)}\int_\theta I(\theta)p_\Theta(\theta) d\theta,\label{opt_FD_g}
\end{eqnarray}
where $L(g(\cdot))=\int_\theta I(\theta)p_\Theta(\theta) d\theta$ and $I(\theta)$ is given in \eqref{FI_one}.
\begin{proposition}
\label{prop4}
Given the prior distribution $p_\Theta(\theta)$, the optimal $g^*(\theta)$ can be found by solving the following differential equation\footnote{Note that this gives a stationary point which needs to be verified to be a maximum.}
\begin{equation}
\label{diff_eq}
p_\Theta(\theta)(g'(\theta))^2(1-2g(\theta)) = 2g(\theta)(1-g(\theta))(g''(\theta)p_\Theta(\theta)+g'(\theta)p'_\Theta(\theta)),
\end{equation}
where $'$ and $''$ denote respectively the first and the second derivatives with respect to $\theta$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
Define $K(\theta) = I(\theta)p_\Theta(\theta)$ as the function of $\theta$ which is the integrand in \eqref{opt_FD_g}. The optimization problem presented in \eqref{opt_FD_g} is a typical variational calculus problem and it can be solved using the Euler-Lagrange equation \cite{brunt04} stated below
\begin{equation}
\label{EL}
\frac{\partial K}{\partial g}=\frac{d}{d\theta}\frac{\partial K}{\partial g'}.
\end{equation}
From the expression of $I(\theta)$ given in \eqref{FI_one}, we have
\begin{equation}
\label{LHS}
\frac{\partial K}{\partial g}=-\frac{(g')^2p_\Theta (1-2g)}{(g-g^2)^2}
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
\label{RHS}
\frac{\partial K}{\partial g'}=\frac{2g'p_\Theta}{(g-g^2)}.
\end{equation}
Differentiating \eqref{RHS} with respect to $\theta$ and using \eqref{EL}, we get the desired result.
\end{proof}
As can be seen from \eqref{diff_eq}, the differential equation can be solved for a given prior $p_\Theta(\theta)$. After finding this optimal $g^*(\theta)$, the optimal quantizer $\gamma^*(x)$ can be found for a given noise pdf $p_W(w)$ using \eqref{inv_FT}.
\subsection{Example: Least favorable prior}
In this section, we consider a special case of $\theta$ following the least favorable prior and find the optimal
$g^*(\theta)$. Note that when we have a least favorable prior, the Bayesian criterion matches with the minimax criterion. Therefore, the optimal quantizer design is now the following:
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:minimax}
g^*(\theta)=\argmax_{g(\cdot)} \min_{\theta} I(\theta)
\end{equation}
\begin{proposition}
\label{prop}
Given that $\theta$ follows least favorable prior with support $[\theta_{min}, \theta_{max}]$, the solution to the optimization problem in \eqref{eq:minimax}, $g^*(\theta)$ is given by
\begin{equation}
\label{gen_sin}
g^*(\theta)=\frac{1}{2}\left[1+\sin{\pi\left(\frac{\theta-\theta_{min}}{\theta_{max}-\theta_{min}}-\frac{1}{2}\right)}\right], \text{ $\theta \in [\theta_{min},\theta_{max}]$.}
\end{equation}
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
Note that the minimax solution to \eqref{eq:minimax} is the one where the function $I(\theta)$ is a constant.
Therefore,
\begin{eqnarray}
&&I(\theta) = c^2\\
\implies&&\frac{(\frac{dg}{d\theta})^2}{g(\theta)(1-g(\theta))}=c^2\\
\implies&&\frac{dg}{\sqrt{g(1-g)}}=cd\theta,
\end{eqnarray}
where $c$ is a constant. Without loss of generality, assuming the boundary conditions as $g(\theta_{min})=0$ and $g(\theta_{max})=1$, we obtain the result as $g^*(\theta)$ as
\begin{equation}
g^*(\theta)=\frac{1}{2}\left[1+\sin{\pi\left(\frac{\theta-\theta_{min}}{\theta_{max}-\theta_{min}}-\frac{1}{2}\right)}\right], \text{ $\theta \in [\theta_{min},\theta_{max}]$.}
\end{equation}
\end{proof}
Note that the same result was obtained by Chen and Varshney \cite{chen_tsp10} when directly using the minimax CRLB as the performance metric for a distributed estimation problem with deterministic unknown parameter $\theta$.
Without loss of generality, let $\theta_{min} = -1$ and $\theta_{max} = 1$. The optimal $g^*(\theta)$ given in \eqref{gen_sin} becomes
\begin{equation}
\label{canonical}
g^*(\theta)=\frac{1}{2}\left[1+\sin{\frac{\pi\theta}{2}}\right], \qquad \text{ for $\theta \in [-1,1]$}
\end{equation}
\subsubsection{Noiseless observations}
\label{lim}
The performance limit of this distributed estimation problem under the least favorable Bayesian criterion can be characterized by observing the performance when the observations are noiseless. When these observations at the local sensors prior to quantization are noiseless, i.e., the observation model is perfect, $p_W(w) = \delta(w)$. The optimal quantizer, for this case, is given by the sine quantizer
\begin{equation}
\label{sine_quant}
\gamma^*(y)=\frac{1}{2}\left[1+\sin{\frac{\pi y}{2}}\right], \qquad \text{ for $y \in [-1,1]$}
\end{equation}
In this case, the Fisher information is $F = \frac{N\pi^2}{4}$ and the CRLB is $\frac{4}{N\pi^2}$, where $N$ is the total number of sensors. This represents the performance limit under the Bayesian criteria for the distributed location parameter estimation problem with least favorable prior.
\subsubsection{Optimality of threshold quantizers}
Threshold quantizers are the most widely used quantizers due to their simplicity \cite{gian_tsp06_1}. A threshold quantizer is given by
\begin{equation}
\label{threshold_quant}
\gamma_T(y)=
\begin{cases}
1, \qquad \text{if $y \geq T$}\\
0, \qquad \text{otherwise}
\end{cases}.
\end{equation}
An interesting question is to find the conditions on the noise pdf $p_W(w)$ for which the threshold quantizers attain the performance limit as described in Sec. \ref{lim} which is the performance when the
observations are noiseless (refer to the discussion after \eqref{sine_quant}). For the optimality condition
to be satisfied, the threshold quantizer and the noise distribution should satisfy the following constraint
\begin{align}
g^*(\theta)&=\int_y\gamma_T(y)p_W(y-\theta)dy\\
&=\int_{y=T}^\infty p_W(y-\theta)dy=1-F_W(T-\theta),
\end{align}
where $F_W(w)$ is the cumulative distribution function of noise and $g^*(\theta)$ is given by \eqref{sine_quant}. Differentiating both sides and using the fact $\frac{dF_W(w)}{dw} = p_W(w)$, we get the sufficient condition for the threshold quantizer $\gamma_T(y)$ to achieve performance limit when the noise pdf is
\begin{align}
\label{thresh_cond}
p_W(w)=
\begin{cases}
\frac{\pi}{4}\cos{\frac{\pi}{2}(w-T)}, \qquad &\text{for $w \in [T-1, T+1]$}\\
0, \qquad &\text{otherwise}
\end{cases}.
\end{align}
Threshold quantizers can still be optimal for a wide range of noise distributions (as shown in \cite{kar_tsp12} for minimax CRLB criterion) but the performance limit can be reached only for the above noise pdf. We now show via simulations that when the observations are corrupted by the above noise pdf, using threshold quantizers allows us to achieve the performance limit when the estimator is conditionally unbiased and efficient.
\paragraph*{Simulation Results}
For the sake of tractability, we consider the maximum likelihood estimator (MLE) at the FC, which is asymptotically conditionally unbiased and efficient. Therefore, as $N\to\infty$, the MSE of the estimate should attain the performance limit. The MLE of $g(\theta)$ is given by
\begin{equation}
\hat{g}(\theta)=\frac{\sum_{i=1}^Nu_i}{N}.
\end{equation}
By invariance property of MLE \cite{kay_est}, we get the ML estimate of $\theta$, as
\begin{equation}
\hat{\theta}=\frac{2}{\pi}\sin^{-1}\left(2\frac{\sum_{i=1}^Nu_i}{N}-1\right).
\label{estimate}
\end{equation}
Consider noisy observations of the location parameter corrupted by additive noise with distribution given in \eqref{thresh_cond} with $T=0$. The local sensors quantize their observations using the threshold quantizer with threshold $T=0$. The FC uses the estimator $\hat{\theta}$ of \eqref{estimate} to estimate the unknown parameter $\theta$. In Fig. \ref{fig:performance}, we plot the MSE of $N_{mc}=5000$ Monte-Carlo runs as a function of the number of sensors. As the figure shows, the MSE reaches the performance limit as $N\to\infty$. This is expected since the estimator at the FC, ML estimator, is asymptotically unbiased and efficient. Therefore, threshold quantizer is asymptotically optimal among all quantizers.
\begin{figure}[htb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=3.5in,height=!]{MSE_perf}
\caption{MSE of ML estimator approaching the performance limit (PCRLB or minimax CRLB) as $N\to\infty$}
\label{fig:performance}
\end{figure}
\section{Optimality conditions for conditionally dependent observations}
\label{sec:dep}
In this section, we relax the assumption of conditionally independent observations and address the quantizer design problem when the observations are conditionally dependent across sensors. For convenience, we consider the case when the FC does not make any observations of its own and, therefore, the observations are $\textbf{Y}=[Y_1,\cdots, Y_N]$. We derive the optimality conditions by considering the hierarchical conditional independence (HCI) model proposed by Chen~\textit{et.~al.} in \cite{Chen_dep}. This framework introduces a hidden random variable which simplifies the analysis of the system. Consider the distributed estimation system shown in Fig. \ref{fig:model}. When the FC does not make its own observation, the system follows the following Markov Chain:
\begin{equation}
\theta \to \textbf{Y} \to \textbf{U} \to \hat{\theta}.
\end{equation}
Now when the observations are conditionally independent, the conditional distribution factorizes as $p(\textbf{y}|\theta)=\prod_{i=1}^N p(y_i|\theta)$. However, when the observations are not conditionally independent, we cannot factorize the conditional distribution of the observations. Instead, the proposed HCI framework introduces a new hidden random variable $\lambda$ such that the following Markov chain holds:
\begin{equation}
\theta \to \lambda \to \textbf{Y} \to \textbf{U} \to \hat{\theta}
\end{equation}
and the observations are conditionally independent given this hidden random variable $\lambda$. In other words,
\begin{equation}
p(\textbf{y}|\lambda)=\prod_{i=1}^N p(y_i|\lambda)
\end{equation}
even if $p(\textbf{y}|\theta)\neq\prod_{i=1}^N p(y_i|\theta)$. The equivalence between any general distributed inference model and the HCI model has been discussed in \cite{Chen_dep}. Under this framework, we now derive the optimality conditions of the quantizer for any cost function $C(\hat{\theta},u_1,\cdots,u_N,\theta)$. We first provide a proposition which will be used for deriving the optimality conditions. The results in this section are derived in a manner similar to Sec. \ref{sec:opt_cond_iid}.
Let $\theta$ be a random parameter to be estimated with prior pdf $p(\theta)$ and let $X$ be a random variable, taking values in a set $\mathcal{X}$, with known conditional distribution given $\theta$. Let $D$ be some positive integer, and let $\Delta$ the set of all functions $\delta : \mathcal{X} \to \{1, \cdots ,D\}$. Consistent with our earlier terminology, we shall call such functions quantizers.
\begin{proposition}
\label{prop1_dep}
Let $Z$ be a random variable taking values in a set $\mathcal{Z}$ and assume that, conditioned on $\lambda$, $Z$ is independent of $X$. Let $F : \{1, \cdots ,D\} \times \mathcal{Z} \times \Theta \to \mathcal{R}$ be a given cost function. Let $\delta^*$ be an element of $\Delta$. Then $\delta^*$ minimizes $E[F(\delta(X), Z, \theta)]$ over all $\delta \in \Delta$ if and only if
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{prop1_opt}
\delta^*(X)=\argmin_{d=1,\cdots, D}\int_{\theta,\lambda} a(\theta ,\lambda, d)p(\theta,\lambda|X)d\theta d\lambda \\
\text{with probability 1}\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
where
\begin{equation}
a(\theta, \lambda, d)=E[F(d,Z,\theta)|\theta,\lambda] \qquad \text{$\forall$ $\theta$, $\lambda$, $d$.}
\end{equation}
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
The proof is similar to the proof of Proposition \ref{prop1} with the inclusion of $\lambda$. The minimization of $E[F(\delta(X), Z, \theta)]$ over all $\delta \in \Delta$ is equivalent to requiring that $\delta(X)$ minimize $E[F(d, Z, \theta)|X]$, over all $d \in \{1,\cdots,D\}$, with probability 1. The expression being minimized can be re-written as
$$E[E[F(d,Z,\theta)|\theta,\lambda,X]|X]$$
which by conditional independence of $X$ and $Z$ given $\lambda$, is equal to
\begin{equation}
E[E[F(d,Z,\theta)|\theta,\lambda,X]|X]=\int_{\theta,\lambda} E[F(d,Z,\theta)|\theta,\lambda]p(\theta,\lambda|X)d\theta d\lambda
\end{equation}
Therefore, conditional independence decouples the design of $\delta^*(X)$ from $Z$, i.e., $\delta^*(X)$ depends on $Z$ only through $a(\theta,\lambda)$.
\end{proof}
We now use the above result to derive the optimality conditions for the quantizers when observations are conditionally dependent.
\begin{proposition}
\label{prop2_dep}
Fix $i$ and suppose that $\gamma_j \in \Gamma_j$ has been fixed for all $j \neq i$. Then $\gamma_i$ minimizes $J(\gamma)$ over the set $\Gamma_i$ only if
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{prop2_opt_dep}
\gamma_i(Y_i)=\argmin_{d=1,\cdots,D_i}\int_{\theta,\lambda} a(\theta,\lambda,d)p(\theta,\lambda|Y_i)d\theta d\lambda \\
\text{with probability 1,}\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
where for any $\theta$, $\lambda$, and $d$,
\begin{align}
a(\theta,\lambda,d)=E[C(U_0,U_1,\cdots,U_{i-1},d,U_{i+1},\cdots,U_N,\theta)|\theta,\lambda]
\end{align}
and where each $U_i$, $i \neq 0$ is a random variable defined by $U_i = \gamma_i(Y_i)$ and $U_0 = \gamma_0(U_1, \cdots , U_{i-1}, d, U_{i+1},\cdots,U_N)$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
Observe that the minimization is of
$$E[C(U_0, U_1, \cdots , U_{i-1}, \gamma_i(Y_i), U_{i+1}, \cdots , U_N,\theta)|\theta],$$
over $\gamma_i \in \Gamma_i$ where $U_0 = \gamma_0(U_1,\cdots, U_{i-1},\gamma_i(Y_i),U_{i+1}, \cdots , U_N)$. This is of the form considered in Proposition~\ref{prop1_dep} where $X=Y_i$, $d =\gamma_i(X) = \gamma_i(Y_i)$, $Z$ is the random vector given by $Z = (U_1,\cdots, U_{i-1}, U_{i+1},\cdots, U_N)$ and
$F(d, Z, \theta) = C(U_0, U_1, \cdots , U_{i-1},\gamma_i(Y_i), U_{i+1}, \cdots , U_N, \theta)$. The result follows from Proposition~\ref{prop1_dep}.
\end{proof}
Proposition \ref{prop2_dep} is similar to Proposition \ref{prop2} and provides the necessary conditions for optimal quantizers for an arbitrary cost function $C(\cdot)$. We would like to note that the other results derived in the case of conditionally independent observations may not always be true when the observations are dependent. For example, when the observations are dependent, it can be easily seen that identical quantizers are not optimal in general. Consider the following simple example: there are $N=2^n-1$ sensors in the network which send binary quantized version of their observations to the FC. The local sensor observation model is given as follows:
$$y_i=\theta+v_i$$
where $\theta\in[-1,1]$ and $v_i=\delta(v-v_0)$ for all $i$. In other words, the single-peak noise is perfectly correlated across sensors. When all sensors use an identical quantizer $\gamma$, the quantized observation received from every sensor is the same (say all 1). On the other hand, we can easily design non-identical quantizers which provide additional information as follows: split the region $[-1,1]$ into $2^n$ equal regions, and the sensor $i$ uses a threshold quantizer to test whether $\theta$ lies in the first $i$ regions or not. In this way, we can determine the exact region among the $2^n$ regions where $\theta$ lies. Therefore, identical quantizers are not optimal in this example when observations are dependent. We have also shown in Sec.~\ref{sec:rate} that binary quantizers are not optimal when observations are correlated. Study on the optimal quantizer design for dependent observations will be considered in our future work.
\section{Conclusion}
\label{sec:conc}
In this work, we considered the problem of quantizer design for distributed estimation under the Bayesian criterion. We showed that for conditionally unbiased efficient estimators, when all the sensors have the same number of decision regions, identical quantizers are optimal. Considering a communication rate constraint on the network, we derived the conditions for the optimality of binary quantizers. We have shown that when the observations are Gaussian, identical binary quantizers are optimal in the low SNR regime. For the location parameter estimation problem with a given prior distribution, we have found the optimal binary quantizer by solving a differential equation. We have found the sufficient condition on the noise distribution for which the threshold quantizers attain the performance limit. By relaxing the assumption of conditionally independent observations at the sensors, we also derived the optimality conditions for quantizers with conditionally dependent observations. In the future, we will further study the open problem of quantizer design in a distributed estimation framework with dependent observations.
\bibliographystyle{IEEEtran}
|
\section{Introduction}
A key ingredient of quantum computation and quantum communication is quantum memory, which may be implemented in many physical systems, such as cold atomic gases~\cite{duan2001long, Kuzmich}, nuclear spin systems~\cite{loss1998quantum}, semiconductor quantum dots (QD)~\cite{Taylor03,RevModPhys.79.1217,PhysRevLett.103.010502, PhysRevB.76.045218, wang2012self}, and so on. Among these systems, the QD-based quantum memory, which uses both electron spin and nuclear spins, exhibits potential advantages: Long storage time, fast encoding and retrieval of the stored quantum state, and ready to scale-up with current semiconductor fabrication techniques~\cite{Merkulov02,kane1998silicon,loss1998quantum,Taylor03,Dobrovitski06}.
The quantum memory protocol proposed for a QD utilizes the easy controllability of the electron spin and the long coherence time of the nuclear spins~\cite{Taylor03,Salis2001, elzerman2004single}. For the perfectly polarized nuclear spins, the fidelity of a quantum state after encoding, storage, and retrieval is approaching 100\%. While for partially polarized nuclear spins, the fidelity reduces linearly with the decrease of the average nuclear polarization~\cite{Dobrovitski06,Khaetskii2002,Prokofev2000}. In order to achieve a reasonable fidelity, for example 80\%, the average nuclear polarization is required to be above 80\%, which is beyond the availability of current QD experiments whose record is 68\% with optical pumping methods~\cite{gammon2001electron,dnp2009,Asshoff11,PhysRevB.15.5780,imamoglu2003}.
To alleviate the high nuclear polarization requirement while keeping the reasonable fidelity, it is a possible way to employ the inhomogeneous nuclear polarization, which could be prepared through dynamic nuclear polarization~\cite{Reilly08, Dixon1997, PhysRevLett.100.067601, Lukin10, Zhang10, Zhang13arxiv}. On one hand, the nuclear polarization after dynamic nuclear polarization is proportional to the square of the local hyperfine coupling constant at short times and is saturated at long times, so the polarizations of the strongly coupled nuclear spins are much higher than those of the weakly coupled ones. On the other hand, the strongly coupled nuclear spins play a more important role in encoding and retrieval process than the weakly coupled nuclear spins. The effective polarization for a quantum memory must be weighted by the local hyperfine coupling constants in a certain way. In contrast to a QD with homogeneously polarized nuclear spins, the effective polarization is higher for a QD with inhomogeneously polarized nuclear spins. Thus, the fidelity of a quantum memory with inhomogeneous polarization may be higher than that of a quantum memory with homogeneous polarization.
In this paper, we investigate systematically with numerical method the performance of a QD-based quantum memory with homogeneous or inhomogeneous polarization. The minimal fidelity of an arbitrary quantum state after the encoding and retrieval process is compared quantitatively for the homogeneous and inhomogeneous polarizations. To understand the superiority of the inhomogeneously polarized QD, we further numerically investigate the von Neumann entropy change of each nuclear spin from the viewpoint of quantum information theory~\cite{nielsen2010quantum}.
The paper is organized as follows.
In Sec.~\ref{sec:qm}, we briefly review the quantum memory protocol for a QD. Detailed comparisons of numerical results for homogeneous and inhomogeneous polarizations are presented in Sec.~\ref{sec:nr}. In Sec.~\ref{sec:iepy}, we discuss the entropy change of nuclear spins during the encoding stage, in order to understand the superior performance of a QD with inhomogeneous polarization. Finally, the conclusion is drawn in Sec.~\ref{sec:con}.
\section{Quantum memory protocol for a QD}
\label{sec:qm}
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=3.25in]{fig1.eps}
\caption{\label{fig:qmp} (Color online) Three stages of a quantum memory protocol for an {\it inhomogeneously} polarized QD. (I) Encoding: mapping a quantum state of the electron spin onto a collective state of nuclear spins. (II) Storage: ejecting the electron from the QD and the nuclear spin state is preserved for a required period. (III) Retrieval: injecting another electron spin in $|\downarrow\rangle$ state and mapping back the initial quantum state. The external magnetic field is tuned on resonance with the Overhauser field during the encoding and retrieval stages. Strongly coupled nuclear spins play more important roles in this quantum memory protocol.}
\end{figure}
The goal of a quantum memory is to first encode a quantum state into a well-isolated system, whose coherence time is long~\cite{duan2001long,opinhomo12,PhysRevA.84.063810}, for instance, cold atomic gases~\cite{Kuzmich} or nuclear spins~\cite{Taylor03}. After a desired storage time, the state is then retrieved with a high fidelity. For a QD, the combination of the highly controllable electron spin and the long coherence-time nuclear spins makes it an ideal candidate for a quantum memory.
In a QD, a complete quantum memory cycle consists of three steps, as shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:qmp}. The first step is to encode the information carried by the electron spin, i.e., an arbitrary initial state $\alpha |\uparrow\rangle + \beta |\downarrow\rangle$, into a collective state of nuclear spins in the QD. The dynamics of the electron and $N$ nuclear spins during the encoding (and the retrieval) stage is governed by the following Hamiltonian,
\begin{equation}\label{eq:ham}
H = g_e^* \mu_B B_0 S^z + \sum_{k=1}^N A_k {\mathbf I}_k \cdot {\mathbf S}
\end{equation}
where the first term corresponds to the Zeeman energy of the electron spin $\mathbf S$ in an external magnetic field $B_0$ along $z$-axis, with $g_e^*$ being the g-factor of the electron and $\mu_B$ the Bohr magneton. The second term corresponds to the Fermi contact hyperfine interaction where $A_k = A v_0 |\psi({\mathbf r}_k)|^2$ ($k=1,2, \cdots, N$) is the coupling strength between the electron spin and the $k$th nuclear spin, with $A$ being the one-electron hyperfine interaction constant, $v_0$ the volume of a unit cell, and $|\psi({\mathbf r}_k)|^2$ the electron density profile at site ${\mathbf r}_k$ which usually varies in a Gaussian form in a QD under typical experimental conditions~\cite{johnson2005triplet, Koppens2005, Petta2005}.
To efficiently encode the electron spin state into the nuclear spins, the magnetic field $B_0$ is tuned on resonance with the Overhauser field $B_{\rm{over}} = \sum_k A_k \langle I_k^z \rangle$. As shown for perfectly polarized nuclear spins~\cite{Taylor03}, the effective Hamiltonian becomes
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:sham}
H = \sum_{k=1}^N {(A_k/2)({I}_k^+ {S}^- + {I}_k^-{S}^+)}
\end{equation}
which dominates spin exchange between the electron and nuclear spins. The raising and lowering operators are defined as $S^{\pm}=S^x{\pm}iS^y$, and $I_k^{\pm}=I_k^x{\pm}iI_k^y$. After half a period of Rabi oscillations between two basis states $|\uparrow\rangle_e \otimes |0\rangle_n$ and $|\downarrow\rangle_e \otimes |1\rangle_n$, where $|0\rangle_n \equiv |\downarrow\downarrow\cdots\downarrow\rangle_n$ and $|1\rangle_n\equiv (1/\Omega) \sum _{k=1}^N A_k |\downarrow \cdots \uparrow_k \cdots \downarrow \rangle_n$ with $\Omega = (\sum_{k=1}^N |A_k|^2)^{1/2}$ being the Rabi angular frequency, the state becomes $|\downarrow\rangle_e\otimes(\alpha|1\rangle_n+i\beta|0\rangle_n)$ and the initial electron spin state is mapped onto the final collective nuclear spin state.
Once the electron spin state is mapped onto the nuclear spins, the electron is ejected from the QD. The collective nuclear spin state is preserved for a desired period~\cite{Taylor03,Dobrovitski06}. The following retrieval process is in fact an inverse of the encoding process, i.e., another electron spin in $|\downarrow\rangle$ state is injected into the QD and the whole system evolves under the same Hamiltonian Eq.~(\ref{eq:ham}) for half a period of the Rabi oscillations. The initial electron spin state is then restored after the complete quantum memory protocol.
In a real QD, the required perfect nuclear polarization is impossible to realize. To estimate the effect of imperfect nuclear polarization, studies have been done both analytically with an assumption of uniform hyperfine coupling and numerically with nonuniform hyperfine coupling~\cite{Taylor03,Dobrovitski06}. These results indicate that the minimal fidelity of the quantum memory protocol in the worst case decays linearly with the decrease of the polarization. Noticeably, the minimal fidelity drops below 80\% even at a pretty high nuclear polarization of 80\%. To keep the minimal fidelity but reduce the nuclear polarization to an experimentally accessible value (68\%), further efforts are needed.
We notice that the hyperfine coupling is nonuniform in a QD and the nuclear polarization is not necessarily uniform after dynamic nuclear polarization (the strongly coupled nuclear spins actually acquire higher polarization)~\cite{Zhang10, Lukin10, Zhang13arxiv, Lukin13, Yao_EPL_2010}. To fully utilize the dynamically polarized nuclear spins, we next investigate the performance of the quantum memory protocol with an inhomogeneous polarization, hopefully to reduce the average polarization while keeping the same minimal fidelity.
\section{Effect of inhomogeneous polarizations}
\label{sec:nr}
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=3in]{fig2.eps}
\caption{\label{fig:sd} Typical evolutions of (a) $s_z$, (b) $s_0$, and (c) $s_T$ for $\Delta P$=0.2 and $N$=20. The solid and dashed lines denote the results for the inhomogeneous and homogeneous polarization cases, respectively. The vertical dotted and dash-dotted lines denote respectively the ejection time $t_e$ and the retrieval time $t_r$. After the whole process, the retrieved state is closer to the initial electron spin state in the inhomogeneous case. }
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=3in]{fig3.eps}
\caption{\label{fig:fm} Minimal fidelity as a function of $\Delta P$ for four cases: (I) Inhomogeneous polarization with a narrow width of $A_k$ (solid line with circles); (II) Inhomogeneous polarization with a normal width of $A_k$ (solid line); (III) Homogeneous polarization with a normal width of $A_k$ (dashed line); (IV) Homogeneous polarization with a narrow width of $A_k$ (dashed line with circles). Obviously, a quantum memory with inhomogeneous polarization exhibits better performance.}
\end{figure}
For an inhomogeneously polarized QD with nonuniform hyperfine couplings, it is challenging to obtain analytical solution to the encoding and retrieval dynamics~\cite{PhysRevB.70.195340,exsolution07,gaudin1976diagonalization,Faribault13}. We thus employ numerical method to simulate the encoding and retrieval stages of the quantum memory protocol.
The initial nuclear spins are prepared in an inhomogeneously polarized state with the $k$th spin's polarization as $p_k = \tanh(\beta A_k^2)$, where $\beta$ is an adjustable parameter. Theoretical predictions show that such an initial state may be experimentally realized by employing the dynamic nuclear polarization method under the condition of short enough period~\cite{Zhang10,Zhang13arxiv}. We numerically obtain this state by acting the operator $\exp(\beta \sum_k A_k^2 I_k^z)$ on an initial random state $|r\rangle$ of the nuclear spins~\cite{Dobrovitski06}, where $|r\rangle = \sum_{i=1}^{2^N} c_i |i\rangle$ is a linear combination of basis states of all nuclear spins and $c_i$ are independent identically distributed random complex numbers obeying $\sum_{i=1}^{2^N} |c_i|^2 = 1$. Such a superposition is an exponentially accurate representation of the maximally mixed state and in our simulations creates errors of about $0.1\%$. To find the minimal fidelity $F_{\rm{min}}=\min_{\psi_0}[\langle \psi_0 | \rho(t_r) |\psi_0\rangle]$ with $|\psi_0\rangle$ being the initial electron state and $\rho(t_r)$ the final mixed electron state, two states initially along $z$ and $x$ axes, respectively, are simulated.
At the beginning of the encoding stage, the external magnetic field is tuned numerically to reach the largest value of $F_{\rm{min}}$ for a given nuclear polarization (more details are presented in the Appendix~\ref{sec:mf}). This magnetic field is fixed during the later encoding and retrieval stages. The value of this optimized magnetic field is close to the Overhauser field $B_{\rm{over}}$. For the small system size that we consider here, $N=20$, the external magnetic field is slightly larger than $B_{\rm{over}}$ and depends weakly on the nuclear polarization, due to the finite size effect.
In order to clearly illustrate the advantages of the inhomogeneous polarization, we adopt the same $A_k$'s as in Ref.~\onlinecite{Dobrovitski06}, where $N=4\times 5$ nuclear spins are placed in a rectangular lattice with the lattice constants $a_x$ and $a_y$. The constant $A_k$ is in a two-dimension Gaussian form with the widths $w_x$ and $w_y$ and a shifted centre, $A_k \propto \exp[-(x-x_0)^2/w_x^2 - (y-y_0)^2/w_y^2]$ with $x_0 = 0.1 a_x$ and $y_0 = 0.2 a_y$. Two widths of the Gaussian form are employed. For a normal width, $w_x/a_x = 3/2$ and $w_y/a_y = 2$ along $x$ and $y$ axes, respectively, with the largest constant $A_k$ being 0.96. For a narrow width, $w_x/a_x = 3/(2\sqrt{2})$ and $w_y/a_y = \sqrt{2}$, with the largest $A_k$ being 0.92.
We employ the method of the Chebyshev polynomial expansion of the evolution operator to evolve the coupled many-spin system~\cite{Dobrovitski03}. With this method, we may simulate the dynamics of up to 30 spins. As discussed in Ref.~\onlinecite{Dobrovitski06}, the results for 20 nuclear spins are almost identical to the results for $10^4$ nuclear spins within a Rabi oscillation, so $N=20$ is reliable to simulate the realistic QD cases. Therefore, we also consider $N=20$ nuclear spins in this paper. To extract the minimal fidelity, we need to monitor the following three observables, $s_{x,y,z} = \rm{tr}\{\hat S^{x,y,z} \rho(t)\}$, where $\rho(t)$ is the density matrix of the coupled system at time $t$. We also define the transverse and longitudinal components of the electron spin $s_T = \sqrt{s_x^2 + s_y^2}$ and $s_0=s_z$, for the specific initial electron state along the $x$ direction.
Typical evolution of the electron spin in the encoding and retrieval stages is illustrated in Fig.~\ref{fig:sd}. The ejection time $t_e$ corresponds to the minimal $s_z$ during the encoding stage. The nonunitary ejection of the electron is calculated numerically as a von Neumann projection and the left nuclear spin state is
$\rho_n(t_e) = tr_e[\rho(t_e)]=\langle\uparrow|\,\rho\,|\uparrow\rangle+\langle\downarrow|\,\rho\,|\downarrow\rangle$, which traces out the electron's degree of freedom. Right after the injection of the second electron in $|\downarrow \rangle$ state at the beginning of the retrieval stage, the density matrix of the coupled system becomes $|\downarrow\rangle \langle \downarrow| \otimes \rho_n(t_e)$. The final retrieval time $t_r$ is located at the largest value of $F_{\rm{min}}$. By employing the idea of quantum process tomography and using the decomposition of an arbitrary $2\times 2$ matrix into the Pauli matrices and the identity matrix, as proved in Ref.~\onlinecite{Dobrovitski06}, the minimal fidelity $F_{\rm{min}}$ is straightforwardly calculated by finding the minimum value of the following three quantities,
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
&f_1=\frac{1+s_z}{2},\\
&f_2=\frac{1+s_z-2s_0}{2},\\
&f_3=\frac{1}{2}\left[1+s_T-{s_0^2\over 4(s_z-s_0-s_T)}\right].
\end{aligned}
\nonumber
\end{equation}
Figure~\ref{fig:sd}(a) shows the longitudinal component of the electron spin $s_z$ for $\Delta P = 0.2$ with inhomogeneous and homogeneous polarizations, where $\Delta P = 1- (1/N)\sum_{k=1}^N p_k$ is the deviation from the perfect polarization. The initial electron spin state is along the $z$ axis. Comparing the value of $s_z$ at time $t_r$ to the initial value for the two cases, we find that the inhomogeneous one is closer. Similarly, for an initial state along the $x$ axis, as shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:sd}(b) and (c), $s_0$ and $s_T$ both show closer value at time $t_r$ to their initial value in the inhomogeneous case. We also note that the oscillation amplitude in the inhomogeneous case is larger than that in the homogeneous one, indicating that more information is encoded into the nuclear spins in the inhomogeneous case.
The minimal fidelity $F_{\rm{min}}$ calculated with $s_z$, $s_0$, and $s_T$ at time $t_r$ are presented in Fig.~\ref{fig:fm} for various $\Delta P$'s in homogeneous and inhomogeneous cases. The dashed lines in Fig.~\ref{fig:fm} corresponding to the homogeneous cases are essentially the reproduction of the main results in Ref.~\onlinecite{Dobrovitski06}. As a comparison to our results for inhomogeneous polarizations in this paper (solid lines in Fig.~\ref{fig:fm}): First, $F_{\rm{min}}$'s in the inhomogeneous cases are larger than in the homogeneous cases; Second, for the inhomogeneous cases with different widths, the narrow width situation exhibits larger $F_{\rm{min}}$'s than the normal width, while for the homogenous cases $F_{\rm min}$ is almost independent of the width. Noticeably, in the case of inhomogeneous polarization with narrow width of $A_k$'s, the value of $F_{\rm{min}}$ is still above 80\% even at $\Delta P = 0.5$, which corresponds to a nuclear polarization well below the experimentally accessible value 68\%.
To explain the superior performance in the inhomogeneous case, we notice that the errors, $1-F_{\rm{min}}$, are mainly caused by the strongly coupled nuclear spins in the case of homogeneous polarization~\cite{Dobrovitski06}. While in the inhomogeneous case, these strongly coupled nuclear spins have higher polarization than the average, so the main contribution to the errors is significantly suppressed and the minimal fidelity becomes larger. Similarly, the narrower the distribution of the inhomogeneous polarization is, the higher the minimal fidelity is.
\section{Entropy change of nuclear spins during encoding stage}
\label{sec:iepy}
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=3.25in]{fig4.eps}
\caption{\label{fig:epy} Dependence of $\Delta \tilde H_k$ on $A_k$ for various polarizations at optimal magnetic fields during the encoding stage. $A_k$ is in a Gaussian form with a normal width. Insert: Comparison of original $\Delta H_k$ for $\Delta P=0.4$ with homogeneous (crosses) and inhomogeneous (circles) polarizations. Strongly coupled and highly polarized nuclear spins acquire more information during the encoding stage. }
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=3.25in]{fig5.eps}
\caption{\label{fig:epya} (Color online) Dependence of $\Delta \tilde H_k$ on $A_k$ for the perfect polarization. $A_k$'s are normalized to their largest value. The solid line, which is indistinguishable from the dash-dotted line for $N=31\times 41$, stands for the analytical limiting solution at $N\rightarrow \infty$. }
\end{figure}
During the encoding stage in the case of inhomogeneous polarization, as shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:sd}, the larger amplitude of the Rabi oscillation of the electron spin indicates that more information is written into the nuclear spins, which inspires us to further quantify the information acquired by the nuclear spins.
To measure the information acquired by each nuclear spin, we employ the change of the von Neumann entropy,
\begin{equation}
\Delta H_k=H_k(t_e)-H_k(0)
\end{equation}
where $H_k(t)=-\rm{tr}[\rho_k(t) \ln \rho_k(t)]$, with $\rho_k(t)$ being the reduced density matrix of the $k$th nuclear spin at time $t$. To compare the $\Delta H_k$'s behaviors for different polarizations, we normalize them to their largest value, i.e., $\Delta \tilde H_k = \Delta H_k / \max(\Delta H_k)$ for each nuclear polarization $\Delta P$.
We plot in Fig.~\ref{fig:epy} the normalized change of the von Neumann entropy $\Delta \tilde H_k$ for each nuclear spin as a function of the coupling strength $A_k$ for various inhomogeneous nuclear polarizations with the initial electron spin along the $z$ axis. As shown clearly in the figure, strongly coupled (also highly polarized) nuclear spins change their state more drastically, i.e., with larger $\Delta \tilde H_k$. It reveals that these nuclear spins acquire more information from the electron during the encoding stage. This results hold for all polarizations and are more prominent for larger $\Delta P$'s. For example, the difference of $\Delta \tilde H_k$ at larger $A_k$'s and at smaller $A_k$'s for $\Delta P = 0.4$ is larger than that for $\Delta P = 0.0$ or $0.2$. By comparing $\Delta H_k$ of the homogeneous and inhomogeneous polarizations for $\Delta P = 0.4$ in the inset of Fig.~\ref{fig:epy}, we observe that the strongly coupled nuclear spins acquire much more information in the inhomogeneous case. This may explain why the quantum memory performance is better in the inhomogeneous polarization. As a thumb rule, we note here that the overall $\Delta H_k$ becomes smaller for larger $\Delta P$'s.
For the perfectly polarized nuclear spins, we may investigate the entropy change during the encoding stage for much more nuclear spins by utilizing the conservation of the $z$ component of the total spins $S^z + \sum_{k=1}^N I_k^z$. We increase the number of nuclear spins by shrinking the lattice constant to $1/4$ and $1/10$ of their original values but keep the profile of the electron density fixed. For a consistent comparison, we normalize not only $\Delta H_k$ by the maximum $\max(\Delta H_k)$ but also $A_k$ by the maximum $\max(A_k)$.
The results for the perfect polarization are presented in Fig.~\ref{fig:epya} for three QD sizes. These curves are remarkably close to each other, manifesting that the conclusions drawn from $N=20$ nuclear spins may also applicable to larger QD sizes. For $N\rightarrow \infty$, we are actually able to obtain analytical solution.
As $N\rightarrow \infty$, the resonance condition is in fact always satisfied, so the Hamiltonian is further simplified to Eq.~(\ref{eq:sham}). For an initial state $|\uparrow\rangle_e \otimes |0\rangle_n$, the state becomes $|\downarrow\rangle_e \otimes |1\rangle_n$ after a time of $\pi/\Omega$. The reduced density matrix of each nuclear spin is expressed as
\begin{equation}
\rho _k=\frac{1}{2}\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
1+p_k & 0 \\
0 & 1-p_k \\
\end{array}
\right)
\end{equation}
where $p_k = 2\langle I_k^z \rangle = 1-2a_k^2$, with $a_k = A_k / \Omega$, is the polarization of the $k$th nuclear spin. Finally, we obtain the entropy change of each nuclear spin
\begin{equation}
\Delta H_k=-\left(1-{a_k^2}\right)\ln \left(1-{a_k^2}\right)-{a_k^2}\ln \left({a_k^2}\right).
\end{equation}
The solid line in Fig.5 shows this analytical result. As shown in the figure, this analytical curve looks indistinguishable from the one for $N=31\times 41$.
\section{Conclusion}
\label{sec:con}
To conclude, we have investigated the effect of the inhomogeneous nuclear polarization on the performance of a QD-based quantum memory. Compared with the homogeneous nuclear polarization, a QD-based quantum memory has a much higher minimal fidelity with the inhomogeneous polarization. Remarkably, the minimal fidelity can reach above 80\% even at a nuclear polarization as low as 50\%. We ascribe the superior performance in inhomogeneous polarization to the suppression of the errors mainly caused by the strongly coupled nuclear spins, whose polarizations are higher than the average polarization. We further carry out the calculations of the entropy change during the encoding stage and the results show that the strongly coupled nuclear spins indeed dominate at this stage for QD sizes varying from 20 to above 2000 nuclear spins. Our results indicate a practical way to experimentally realize a QD-based quantum memory with inhomogeneous nuclear polarizations.
\begin{acknowledgments}
This work is supported by the National Basic Research Program of China (Grant No. 2013CB922003 and 2014CB921401), the National Natural Science Foundation of China under Grant No. 11275139 and 91121015, the NSAF Grant No. U1330201, and the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities.
\end{acknowledgments}
|
\section{\label{Section:Introduction}Introduction}
The Standard Model (SM) contains a well-known \ic{hierarchy problem}\cite{Gildener:1976ai,Susskind:1978ms}. The problem has two puzzling facets:%
\begin{inparaenum}[(1)]
\item\label{hp:magnitude} why is the magnitude of the electroweak (EW) scale much less than the Planck scale, $\mweak\ll\mplanck$?~and
\item\label{hp:stability} why is the EW scale stable despite massive quadratic corrections, $\Delta\mweak^2\sim\mplanck^2$?
\end{inparaenum}
Weak-scale supersymmetry (SUSY)\cite{Salam:1974yz,Haber:1984rc,Nilles:1983ge} solves the \ic{stability} aspect of the hierarchy problem by positing a \ic{mirror} of the SM fields with spins differing by one-half. Massive quadratic corrections from scalars cancel with identical corrections from fermions \see{Martin:1997ns,Baer:2006rs,Dine:2007zp}. Because residual corrections are similar to the SUSY breaking scale, $\Delta\mweak^2\sim\msusy^2$, the SUSY breaking scale should be close to the EW scale\cite{Barbieri:1987fn,Ellis:1986yg}.
Minimal SUSY, however, aggravates the \ic{magnitude} aspect of the hierarchy problem. \ic{Supersymmetrizing} the SM with minimal field content, the EW scale is function of a SUSY breaking scale, \mhu, and a SUSY preserving scale, $\mu$,
\begin{equation}
\label{Eqn:MZ}
\frac12 \mz^2 \simeq -\mu^2 - \mhu^2|_{\text{EW}}
\end{equation}
where $\mu$ is protected from massive quadratic corrections by a supersymmetric non-renormalization theorem but is unrelated to a symmetry breaking scale, whereas the SUSY breaking up-type Higgs mass, $\mhu^2$, receives massive radiative corrections proportional to the supersymmetric top (stop) mass, $\Delta\mhu^2\sim m_{\s{t}}^2$.\footnote{In \refeq{Eqn:MZ}, $\mhu^2|_{\text{EW}}$ is negative. The quantity $\mhu^2$ is a parameter in the soft-breaking Lagrangian; it is not the square of a parameter.}
This is the \ic{$\mu$-problem}\cite{Kim:1983dt}. It would be preferable if the EW scale were a function of only the SUSY breaking scale so that explaining the magnitude of the EW scale would be equivalent to explaining the magnitude of the SUSY breaking scale, which presumably originates from a hidden sector. This is realized with an extra gauge singlet superfield\cite{Fayet:1974pd}; the $\mu$-parameter is generated spontaneously by SUSY breaking parameters.
This picture is, however, spoiled by experimental results from the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) that suggest that the SUSY breaking scale is not close to the EW scale, including the measurement of the Higgs mass $\mh\simeq126\gev$\cite{Beringer:1900zz,Chatrchyan:2012ufa,Aad:2012tfa} and
the absence of SUSY in ATLAS\cite{TheATLAScollaboration:2013fha} and CMS\cite{Chatrchyan:2014lfa} searches.
In minimal supersymmetric models \see{Martin:1997ns},
\begin{equation}
\mh^2 \simeq \cos^2 2\beta\,\mz^2 + \Delta\mh^2,
\end{equation}
where $\tanb = \langle H_u \rangle/\langle H_d \rangle$ and the loop-corrections
\begin{equation}
\Delta\mh^2=\frac{3}{4\pi^2} \cos^2\alpha\, y_t^2 m_t^2 \ln\left(\frac{m_{\tilde{t}}^2}{m_t^2}\right).
\end{equation}
Because $\mh\simeq126\gev$, the loop-corrections, $\Delta\mh$, and thus stop masses, $m_{\tilde{t}}$, must be appreciable. Heavy stops \ic{poison} the prediction for the EW scale in \refeq{Eqn:MZ}. By contributing radiatively to $\mhu^2$, heavy stops result in $-\mhu^2 \gg \mz^2$.
The separation between the SUSY breaking scale and the EW scale in \ic{next-to-minimal} models, however, could be smaller than that in minimal models. In \ic{next-to-minimal} models \see{Maniatis:2009re,Ellwanger:2009dp}, there is an additional tree-level contribution to the Higgs mass;
\begin{equation}
\label{Eqn:N_Higgs}
\mh^2 \simeq \cos^2 2\beta\,\mz^2 + \lambda^2 v^2 \sin^2 2\beta+ \Delta\mh^2,
\end{equation}
where $\lambda$ originates from a cubic interaction in the superpotential and $v\simeq174\gev$. The loop-corrections and thus stop masses in \ic{next-to-minimal} models could be smaller than those in minimal models, because of the extra tree-level contribution to the Higgs mass\cite{BasteroGil:2000bw,Ellwanger:2011mu,Perelstein:2012qg,King:2012tr,Kim:2013uxa,Gherghetta:2012gb,Agashe:2012zq}.
Let us examine both facets of the hierarchy problem, including the $\mu$-problem, in a \ic{next-to-minimal} and in a minimal SUSY model in light of LHC results. With Bayesian statistics, we will calculate whether a \ic{next-to-minimal} model is more credible than a minimal model, and if so, we will quantify its superiority with Bayesian evidence. With the Bayesian posterior density, we will find the most probable regions of their parameter spaces in light of experimental data and Bayesian naturalness considerations. We will show that the $\mu$-problem significantly influences our findings.
\section{\label{Section:Models}Models}
We consider two models, the CMSSM and the CNMSSM, defined below to clarify our parameterization. Our notation is similar to that of \refcite{Martin:1997ns}.
\subsection{CMSSM}
Our minimal model is the Constrained Minimal Supersymmetric SM (CMSSM)\cite{Chamseddine:1982jx,Arnowitt:1992aq,Kane:1993td}. The model's superpotential is
\begin{equation}
\label{Eqn:MSSM}
\superp[MSSM] = \bar u \bm{y_u} Q H_u - \bar d \bm{y_d} Q H_d - \bar e \bm{y_e} L H_d + \mu H_u H_d.
\end{equation}
The model's soft-breaking Lagrangian at the Grand Unification (GUT) scale is
\begin{align}
\begin{split}
\label{Eqn:MSSM_soft}
\lag[soft]^\text{MSSM} = &-\frac12 \mhalf \(\s{b}\s{b}+\s{W}\s{W}+\s{g}\s{g} + \cc\)\\
&-\mzero^2 \(\sd{Q}\s{Q}+\sd{L}\s{L}+\sbar{u}\sbd{u}+\sbar{d}\sbd{d}+\sbar{e}\sbd{e}+H_u^*H_u+H_d^*H_d\)\\
&-\azero \(\sbar{u}\bm{y_u}\s{Q}H_u-\sbar{d}\bm{y_d}\s{Q}H_d-\sbar{e}\bm{y_e}\s{Q}H_d + \cc\)\\
&-b H_u H_d + \cc
\end{split}
\end{align}
Thus the model is described by five parameters: four SUSY breaking parameters,
\begin{equation}
\text{\mhalf, \mzero, \azero, and $b$},
\end{equation}
and the $\mu$-parameter in the superpotential.\footnote{The CMSSM is also described by Yukawa couplings in the superpotential. We consider the Yukawa couplings in the CMSSM and CNMSSM as \ic{nuisance} parameters: model parameters that are not of particular interest.} In a phenomenological parameterization of the CMSSM, $b$ and $\mu^2$ are traded for $\tan\beta$ and $\mz$ via EW symmetry breaking conditions.
The CMSSM contains two Higgs doublets with eight real degrees of freedom. In EW symmetry breaking, the $W$- and $Z$-bosons \ic{eat} three degrees of freedom from the Higgs doublets. The five remaining degrees of freedom are equivalent to five physical Higgs bosons: a light SM-like Higgs, $h$, a heavy neutral Higgs, $H$, a heavy charged Higgs, $H^\pm$, and a neutral \cp-odd Higgs, $A$.
After EW symmetry breaking, off-diagonal masses \ic{mix} bino, wino and Higgsino fields into mass eigenstates called \ic{neutralinos,} \neut. The phenomenology of the four neutralinos is rich. If the lightest neutralino is the lightest supersymmetric particle (LSP) and if it cannot decay to SM particles, dark matter (DM) could be the lightest neutralino \see{2010pdmo.book..142E}.
\subsection{CNMSSM}
Our \ic{next-to-minimal} model is the Constrained \ic{Next-to-minimal} Supersymmetric SM (CNMSSM or C(M$+1$)SSM) with an extra gauge singlet superfield, $S$ \see{Maniatis:2009re,Ellwanger:2009dp}. The superpotential contains extra terms with the singlet superfield;
\begin{equation}
\label{Eqn:MSSM_super}
\superp[NMSSM] = \superp[MSSM]|_{\mu=0} + \lambda S H_u H_d + \frac13 \kappa S^3.
\end{equation}
The $\mu$-term that was permitted in the MSSM, a singlet bilinear and a singlet tadpole are forbidden by a discrete $\mathbb{Z}_3$ symmetry or classical scale invariance. Because the superpotential is protected by a non-renormalization theorem, such terms cannot be generated by radiative corrections.
The model's soft-breaking Lagrangian at the GUT scale is
\begin{align}
\begin{split}
\label{Eqn:NMSSM_soft}
\lag[soft]^\text{NMSSM} = &\lag[soft]^\text{MSSM}|_{b=0}\\
&-\msinglet^2 S^*S\\
&-\azero\(\lambda SH_u H_d - \frac13\kappa S^3 + \cc\).
\end{split}
\end{align}
Bilinear and tadpole, $tS$, terms are forbidden by a discrete $\mathbb{Z}_3$ symmetry. A tadpole term would be problematical\cite{Ellwanger:1983mg}; if $S$ were a singlet under all symmetries, radiative corrections from any heavy fields would result in $t\gg\mweak^3$. Each trilinear coupling in the soft-breaking Lagrangian is proportional to the corresponding trilinear coupling in the superpotential in analogy with the MSSM in which \eg $\bm{a_u}=A_u \bm{y_u}$.
If the scalar field $S$ obtains a non-zero vacuum expectation value (VEV), the discrete $\mathbb{Z}_3$ symmetry and classical scale invariance are spontaneously broken, but SUSY is preserved as the vacuum expectation of the scalar potential remains zero, and an effective $\mu$-term $\mueff=\lambda\langle S\rangle H_u H_d$ is spontaneously generated in \refeq{Eqn:MSSM_super}. The magnitude of $\langle S \rangle$ is determined from a symmetry breaking constraint, $\indpartial{V}{S}=0$.
That the discrete $\mathbb{Z}_3$ symmetry is spontaneously broken is problematic. During spontaneous symmetry breaking, topologically stable field configurations, known as domain walls, would form at the spatial boundaries of degenerate vacua. The spatial variation in the field between the degenerate vacua represents a considerable energy density. Because domain walls could dominate the energy density of the Universe, domain walls could spoil successful predictions of inflation and nucleosynthesis.
The NMSSM's additional gauge singlet superfield modifies the neutralino and Higgs sectors of the MSSM with two on-shell fermionic and two on-shell scalar degrees of freedom. The two scalar degrees of freedom result in two extra Higgs bosons and alter the mixing angles between the physical Higgs bosons and the gauge eigenstates. In general, the NMSSM Higgs-sector violates \cp-symmetry at tree-level. If, however, complex phases are forbidden, the Higgs sector respects \cp. There are three \cp-even neutral Higgs bosons, $H_1$, $H_2$ and $H_3$; two \cp-odd neutral Higgs bosons, $A_1$ and $A_2$; and one charged Higgs boson, $H^\pm$. Unlike in the CMSSM, in the CNMSSM several Higgs bosons could be near the EW scale. The observed Higgs boson need not be the lightest \cp-even neutral Higgs boson in the CNMSSM. Were the lightest Higgs boson's couplings small, it could have evaded searches for Higgs bosons at LEP, the Tevatron and the LHC \see{Higgs:PDG}.
The singlet superfield's two fermionic degrees of freedom are a Majorana \ic{singlino.} After EW symmetry breaking, off-diagonal masses mix the singlino with the two neutral Higgsinos (which are mixed with the two neutral gauginos), resulting in five neutralinos. The Higgsino-singlino mixing is proportional to $\lambda$. If $\lambda$ is small, the singlino decouples, resulting in four MSSM-like neutralinos and a singlino. If the singlino soft-breaking mass, \msinglet, is substantial and the singlino is decoupled, it might be difficult to distinguish the MSSM and NMSSM neutralino sectors.
The model is described by six parameters: four SUSY breaking parameters,
\begin{equation}
\text{\mhalf, \mzero, \msinglet and \azero},
\end{equation}
and the $\lambda$ and $\kappa$ SUSY preserving parameters in the superpotential. The number of free parameters in the CNMSSM is \emph{one greater} than that of the CMSSM.
The singlet SUSY breaking mass is not unified at the GUT scale, $m_S\neq\mzero$. This choice is partly pragmatic --- evolving $m_S=\mzero$ to the EW scale with correct EW symmetry breaking is difficult --- and partly theoretical\cite{Hugonie:2007vd,Djouadi:2008uj}. Suppose that at the Planck scale, $\mplanck\sim10^{18}\gev$, supersymmetry breaking is mediated by gravitational interactions with a hidden sector, and that the superfields are embedded into representations of a GUT group, broken at $\mgut\sim10^{16}\gev$. If SUSY breaking is universal (as in minimal supergravity), $\msinglet=\mzero$ at the Planck scale. If the singlet superfield resides in a different representation of the GUT group, renormalization group running between the Planck scale and the GUT scale will result in non-universal SUSY breaking masses at the GUT scale\cite{Polonsky:1994sr}. Moreover, SUSY breaking interactions might discriminate the singlet from the other fields.
\section{\label{Section:Bayes}Bayesian naturalness}
Our goal is to measure the \ic{Bayesian naturalness} of the EW scale and experimental data in the CMSSM and the CNMSSM, \eg is $\mweak\sim100\gev$ a generic prediction or does it require that the model parameters are \ic{fine-tuned?}\footnote{Where there is an important distinction between traditional and Bayesian interpretations of naturalness, in a Bayesian context, we refer to \emph{Bayesian} naturalness and credibility; whereas, in a general context, we refer to naturalness.}
To measure Bayesian naturalness, we will utilize Bayesian statistics. \refcite{Cabrera:2008tj,Cabrera:2009dm,Fichet:2012sn,Fowlie:2014xha} argued that naturalness and fine-tuning arguments are Bayesian in nature. Let us briefly recapitulate this argument \see{Fowlie:2014xha}.
In Bayesian statistics, probability is a numerical measure of our degree of belief in a proposition, rather than the frequency at which outcomes occur in repeated trials. We must calculate the probability that our model is correct, given experimental data, \eg the measured EW scale. By Bayes' theorem, we may write this probability as a function of the \textit{Bayesian evidence,} $\ev\equiv\pg{\data}{\model}$; our belief in the model prior to seeing the experimental data, $\p{\model}$; and an unknown normalization constant, $\p{\data}$;
\begin{equation}
\label{Eqn:Bayes}
\pg{\model}{\data} = \frac{\pg{\data}{\model} \times \p{\model}}{\p{\data}}.
\end{equation}
To eliminate the normalization constant in \refeq{Eqn:Bayes},\footnote{
Alternatively, we could assume that there exists a finite set of alternative models one of which is true, in which case we could calculate the normalization constant;
\begin{equation}
\p{\data} = \sum_i \pg{\data}{\model_i} \times \p{\model_i}.
\end{equation}
}
we consider the ratio of probabilities for our two models, the CMSSM and the CNMSSM;
\begin{equation}
\label{Eqn:Odds}
\underbrace{\frac{\pg{\text{CMSSM}}{\data} }{ \pg{\text{CNMSSM}}{\data}}}_{\text{Posterior odds, }\theta^\prime} = \underbrace{\frac{\pg{\data}{\text{CMSSM}} }{ \pg{\data}{\text{CNMSSM}}}}_{\text{Bayes-factor, }B} \times \underbrace{\frac{ \p{\text{CMSSM}} }{\p{\text{CNMSSM}}}}_{\text{Prior odds, }\theta}.\\
\end{equation}
Our \textit{prior odds}, $\theta$, is a numerical measure of our relative belief in the CMSSM over the CNMSSM, \textit{prior} to seeing the experimental data.
The Bayes-factor, $B$, updates our \textit{prior odds,} $\theta$, with the experimental data, resulting in our \textit{posterior odds,} $\theta^\prime$. Our \textit{posterior odds} is a numerical measure of our relative belief in the CMSSM over the CNMSSM, \textit{after} seeing the experimental data. The Bayes-factor is the ratio of the models' evidences.
If the Bayes-factor is greater than (less than) one, the model in the numerator (denominator) is favored. The interpretation of Bayes-factors is somewhat subjective, though we have chosen the Jeffreys' scale, \reftable{Table:Jeffreys_Scale}, to ascribe qualitative meanings to Bayes-factors. If a Bayes-factor is sufficiently large, all investigators will conclude that a particular model is favorable, regardless of their prior odds for the models.
\begin{table}[ht]
\centering
\begin{ruledtabular}
\begin{tabular}{llll}
Grade & Bayes-factor, $B$ & Preference for model in numerator\\
\hline
0 & $B\le1$ & Negative\\
1 & $1<B\le3$ & Barely worth mentioning\\
2 & $3<B\le20$ & Positive\\
3 & $20<B\le150$ & Strong\\
4 & $B>150$ & Very strong\\
\end{tabular}
\end{ruledtabular}
\caption{The Jeffreys' scale for interpreting Bayes-factors\cite{nla.cat-vn759870,Kass1995}, which are ratios of evidences. We assume that the favored model is in the numerator, though this could be readily inverted.}
\label{Table:Jeffreys_Scale}
\end{table}
The Bayes-factor quantitatively incorporates a Bayesian interpretation of \ic{naturalness}\cite{2009arXiv0903.4055G,Barbieri:1987fn,Ellis:1986yg}. Consider the evidence $\ev = \pg{\data}{\model}$ a function of the data normalized to unity\cite{MacKay91}. Natural models \ic{spend} their probability mass near the obtained data, \ie a large fraction of their parameter space agrees with the data. Complicated models squander their probability mass away from the obtained data. For example, the SM is unnatural because its generic prediction for the EW scale is $\mweak\sim\mplanck$. See \eg \refcite{Fowlie:2014xha} for elaboration.
With Bayes' theorem, it can be readily shown that the evidence is an integral over the \emph{likelihood} --- the probability of obtaining data given a particular point in a model's parameter space, $\likef{\point}\equiv\pg{\data}{\point,\model}$ --- times the \emph{prior} --- our prior belief in the model's parameter space, $\priorf{\point}\equiv\pg{\point}{\model}$;
\begin{equation}
\label{Eqn:Evidence}
\ev = \int \likef{\point}\times\priorf{\point}\pd x.
\end{equation}
\subsection{Bayesian posterior}
A probability density function (PDF) for the model's parameter space in light of the experimental data --- the \emph{posterior} --- is a by-product of the calculation of the Bayesian evidence. By Bayes' theorem, the posterior density for a point \point in a model's parameter space is
\begin{align}
\label{Eq:Posterior}
\begin{split}
\pg{\point}{\model,\,\data} &= \frac{\pg{\data}{\point,\,\model} \times \pg{\point}{\model}}{\pg{\data}{\model}}\\
&\equiv \frac{\likef{\point}\times\priorf{\point}}{\ev}.
\end{split}
\end{align}
The evidence, \ev, is merely a normalization constant in this instance. The likelihood, \like, updates our prior belief with experimental data, resulting in our posterior.
The posterior in \refeq{Eq:Posterior} is a PDF of all of the model's parameters. To find the PDF for \eg two of the model's parameters, we \ic{marginalize} the posterior;
\begin{equation}
\pg{x_1, x_2}{\model,\,\data} = \int \pg{\point}{\model,\,\data}\,\text{d}{x_3}\text{d}{x_4}\cdots
\end{equation}
Marginalization incorporates \ic{fine-tuning.} If for fixed $(x_1,\,x_2)$, few combinations of $x_3,\,x_4,\ldots$ result in an appreciable posterior density, \pg{\point}{\model,\,\data}, the marginalized posterior at $(x_1,\,x_2)$ will be small. For further details, see \eg \refcite{Fowlie:2014awa}.
\section{\label{Section:Method}Methodology}
Our calculation of the evidence from \refeq{Eqn:Evidence} requires two ingredients: our priors, which contain our prior beliefs about the model's parameter space, and our likelihood function, which contains relevant experimental data. We supply our priors and our likelihood functions to the nested sampling algorithm with importance sampling implemented in \texttt{(Py)MultiNest-3.4}\cite{Feroz:2008xx,Buchner:2014nha}, which returns the models' Bayesian evidences and posterior PDFs.
This investigation is similar to that in \refcite{Allanach:2006jc,Allanach:2007qk,Cabrera:2008tj,Cabrera:2009dm,Cabrera:2012vu,Fowlie:2014xha}, in which the posterior PDF is calculated for the CMSSM with naturalness priors, \refcite{LopezFogliani:2009np,Kowalska:2012gs}, in which the posterior PDF is calculated for the CNMSSM but without naturalness priors, and \refcite{Kim:2013uxa}, in which a naturalness prior is calculated for the CNMSSM. The posterior PDF for the CNMSSM with naturalness priors and the Bayes-factor for the CNMSSM versus the CMSSM are, however, absent in the literature.
\subsection{\label{sec:like}Likelihood function}
Our likelihood function includes data from relevant laboratory measurements:
\begin{enumerate}[label={(\arabic*)}]
\item The measured $Z$-boson mass, $\mz=91.1876\gev$\cite{Beringer:1900zz}, with a Dirac likelihood function.
\item Measurements and searches for Higgs bosons at LEP, the Tevatron and the LHC with a $2\gev$ theoretical uncertainty in the Higgs mass\cite{Allanach:2004rh}. The likelihood is from \texttt{HiggsSignals-1.2.0}\cite{Bechtle:2013xfa,Bechtle:2008jh,Bechtle:2011sb,Bechtle:2013gu,Bechtle:2013wla} with the \ic{latest results} dataset (see Fig.~2 of \refcite{Bechtle:2013xfa} for a summary of the experimental data).
\texttt{HiggsSignals-1.2.0} confronts the whole Higgs sector --- all Higgs bosons --- with data. We do not need to separately consider different interpretations of the SM-like Higgs boson in the CNMSSM.
\item The \texttt{ATLAS-CONF-2013-047}\cite{TheATLAScollaboration:2013fha} 0 leptons + 2-6 jets + MET search with a hard-cut on the \pmm $95\%$ confidence limit. The \pmm confidence limit is approximately independent of \pat\cite{Allanach:2011ut,Bechtle:2011dm,Fowlie:2012im} and the extra CNMSSM singlet superfield\cite{Kowalska:2012gs}.
\item The magnetic moment of the muon calculated with \texttt{SuperIso-3.3}\cite{Mahmoudi:2007vz,Mahmoudi:2008tp,Mahmoudi:2009zz}.
\item $B$-physics rare decays --- \bsmm, \bsg and \btn~ --- calculated with \texttt{SuperIso-3.3}.
\end{enumerate}
For the numerical values of the constraints, see \reftable{Table:Data}. We calculate mass spectra for the CMSSM and CNMSSM with \texttt{SOFTSUSY-3.4.1}\cite{Allanach:2001kg,Allanach:2013kza}. Our codes for the CNMSSM are consistent with our codes for the CMSSM. Unfortunately, the precise Higgs mass calculation in \texttt{FeynHiggs-2.10.0}\cite{Heinemeyer:1998yj,Heinemeyer:1998np,Degrassi:2002fi,Frank:2006yh} is unavailable in the CNMSSM. We omit observables that we cannot consistently calculate, \eg EW precision observables.
We exclude DM experiments from our likelihood, \eg the Planck measurement of the DM density from the cosmic microwave background (CMB)\cite{Ade:2013zuv} and the LUX search for DM with an underground detector\cite{Akerib:2013tjd}, because fine-tuning related to DM might cloud our understanding of the fine-tuning of the EW scale. If we were to include DM experiments, we would invoke particular DM annihilation mechanisms by fine-tuning the supersymmetric particle (sparticle) masses and the mixing angles between mass and gauge eigenstates. Including DM experiments would, furthermore, require additional assumptions and uncertainties \see{Baer:2012uya}.
\begin{table}[ht]
\centering
\begin{ruledtabular}
\begin{tabular}{ccc}
Quantity & Experimental data, $\mu\pm\sigma$ & Theory error, $\tau$\\
\hline
\mz & $91.1876\gev$\cite{Beringer:1900zz}\\
\damu & $(28.8\pm8.0) \times10^{-10}$\cite{Beringer:1900zz} & $1.0\times10^{-10}$\cite{Heinemeyer:2004gx}\\
\bsmm & $(3.2\pm1.5)\times10^{-9}$\cite{Beringer:1900zz} & $14\%$\cite{deAustri:2006pe}\\
\bsg & $(3.43\pm0.22)\times10^{-4}$\cite{Amhis:2012bh} & $0.21\times10^{-4}$\cite{Misiak:2006zs}\\
\btn & $(1.14\pm0.22)\times10^{-4}$\cite{Amhis:2012bh} & $0.38\times10^{-4}$\cite{Trotta:2008bp}\\
\hline
\multicolumn{2}{l}{\texttt{ATLAS-CONF-2013-047}\cite{TheATLAScollaboration:2013fha} search for SUSY in $\sim20\invfb$ at \roots{8}.}\\
\multicolumn{2}{l}{LHC, Tevatron and LEP Higgs searches. See Fig.~2 of \refcite{Bechtle:2013xfa}.}\\
\end{tabular}
\end{ruledtabular}
\caption{Experimental data included in our likelihood function.}
\label{Table:Data}
\end{table}
\subsection{Priors}
We pick \ic{naturalness priors}\cite{Allanach:2006jc,Allanach:2007qk,Cabrera:2008tj,Cabrera:2009dm,Cabrera:2012vu,Fichet:2012sn,Kim:2013uxa,Fowlie:2014xha} for the model parameters. That is, we pick priors for the model parameters in the soft-breaking Lagrangian and superpotential at the GUT scale and transform to parameters at the EW scale \eg \tanb, obtained after EW symmetry breaking, with the appropriate Jacobian.
Traditionally, fine-tuning of the EW scale is measured with partial derivatives of the EW scale with respect to Lagrangian parameters, \eg the Barbieri-Giudice-Ellis measure\cite{Barbieri:1987fn,Ellis:1986yg}. As discussed in \eg \refcite{Fowlie:2014xha}, traditional fine-tuning measures of the EW scale approximate naturalness priors; however, traditional fine-tuning measures lack a probabilistic meaning.
Naturalness priors are an \ic{honest} prior choice. The $(\mz,\,\tanb)$ parameters are output from the fundamental Lagrangian parameters. We are not ignorant of their origin. Our priors ought to reflect that. Typical Bayesian analyses in the literature, \eg \refcite{Kowalska:2012gs,Roszkowski:2014wqa}, pick a linear prior for \tanb and no explicit prior for $\mu$. The implicit prior for $\mu$ in such analyses is that $\mu$ is always such that $\mz=91.1876\gev$\cite{Beringer:1900zz}, \ie
\begin{equation}
\priorf{\mu} \propto \delta\(\mu - \mu_Z(\mzero, \mhalf, \azero, \tanb, \ldots)\),
\end{equation}
where $\mu_Z$ is the numerical value of $\mu$ resulting in the experimentally measured value of \mz for particular input parameters. This is a \ic{dishonest,} informative prior choice.
We pick logarithmic priors for the models' soft-breaking and superpotential parameters, because we are ignorant of their scale, but transform to \tanb and \mz with an appropriate Jacobian. Working with $(\mz,\,\tanb)$ as our input parameters, we are guaranteed to find points with the correct EW scale. The Jacobian in the CMSSM results from trading $(\mu^2,\,b)\to(\mz,\,\tanb)$;
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{J}^\text{CMSSM} = \dpartial{\mu^2}{\mz}\dpartial{b}{\tanb} - \dpartial{b}{\mz}\dpartial{\mu^2}{\tanb} = \dpartial{\mu^2}{\mz}\dpartial{b}{\tanb}.
\end{equation}
The sign of the $\mu$-parameter, \sgnmu, is a discrete input parameter.
In the CNMSSM, we trade $(\msinglet^2,\,\kappa)\to(\mz,\,\tanb)$ resulting in the Jacobian
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{J}^\text{CNMSSM} = \dpartial{\kappa}{\mz}\dpartial{\msinglet^2}{\tanb} - \dpartial{\msinglet^2}{\mz}\dpartial{\kappa}{\tanb}.
\end{equation}
In addition, we trade $\text{sign}\,\lambda\to\sgnmueff$. The sign of the singlet VEV, $\langle S \rangle$, is unphysical and can be chosen to be always positive, such that $\text{sign}\,\lambda=\sgnmueff$. This transformation, traditional in the literature, simply renames a parameter; there is no associated Jacobian.
We find our naturalness priors by recognizing that if $\priorf{\vec x}$ is a PDF, then
\begin{equation}
\priorf{\vec f(\vec x)} = \priorf{\vec x} \times \mathcal{J} \qquad\text{where}\qquad \mathcal{J} = \left|\det \dpartial{x_i}{f_j}\right|.
\end{equation}
Our naturalness priors for $(\mz,\,\tanb)$ in the CMSSM are
\begin{equation}
\label{Eq:MSSM_prior}
\priorf{\mz,\tanb} = \priorf{\mu^2,b} \times \mathcal{J}^\text{CMSSM} \propto \frac{1}{b\mu^2} \times \dpartial{\mu^2}{\mz}\dpartial{b}{\tanb}.
\end{equation}
Similarly, our naturalness priors for $(\mz,\,\tanb)$ in the CNMSSM are
\begin{equation}
\label{Eq:NMSSM_prior}
\priorf{\mz,\tanb} = \priorf{\msinglet^2,\kappa} \times \mathcal{J}^\text{CNMSSM} \propto \frac{1}{\msinglet^2\kappa} \times \mathcal{J}^\text{CNMSSM}.
\end{equation}
We implement such priors by scanning the models in their $(\mz,\,\tanb)$ parameterizations with naturalness priors. We calculate the Jacobians with numerical differentiation by modifying \texttt{SOFTSUSY-3.4.1} and \texttt{NMSSMSpec-4.2.1}. The naturalness priors for the CNMSSM were recently studied in \refcite{Kim:2013uxa}.
Our prior ranges are in \reftable{Table:Priors}. We pick SUSY breaking masses less than $20\tev$; \refcite{Fowlie:2014awa,Kowalska:2013hha} indicate that the posterior PDF and evidence beyond $20\tev$ is insignificant. If one wishes to enlarge our priors for the SUSY breaking masses beyond $20\tev$, the evidence can be scaled to correct the denominator in the evidence calculation in \refeq{Eqn:Ev_Long} \see{Fowlie:2014xha};
\begin{equation}
\ev(\text{Enlarged priors}) = \ev(\text{Priors with $\msusy\le20\tev$}) \times \frac{\text{Volume with $\msusy\le20\tev$}}{\text{Volume of enlarged priors}}.
\end{equation}
Because the Bayes-factor is a ratio of evidences, this correction cancels for the CMSSM versus the CNMSSM.
We pick the CMSSM $\mu$-parameter less than the Planck scale. By permitting $\mu\gg\msusy$, we incorporate the $\mu$-problem in our analysis. In the CNMSSM, the effective $\mu$-parameter is a function of the SUSY breaking scale. In the CMSSM, the $\mu$-parameter could be far from the SUSY breaking scale. If we picked $\mu\sim\msusy$ in our priors for the CMSSM, we would hide the $\mu$-problem.
We assign zero prior probability to \ic{unphysical} points, \eg points that result in incorrect EW symmetry breaking, an LSP which is not the lightest neutralino, or a Landau pole below the GUT scale. In the CNMSSM, we minimize the occurrence of Landau poles below the GUT scale in $\lambda$ by choosing $\lambda\le4\pi$ at the GUT scale in our priors in \reftable{Table:Priors}.
\begin{table}[ht]
\centering
\begin{ruledtabular}
\begin{tabular}{cc}
Parameter & Distribution\\
\hline
CMSSM\\
\hline
\mzero & Log, $0.3\dash20\tev$\\
\mhalf & Log, $0.3\dash10\tev$\\
\azero & Flat, $-20\dash20\tev$\\
$\mu$ & Log, $1\gev\dash\mplanck$\\
$b$ & Log, $0.3\dash20\tev$\\
\sgnmu & $\pm1$ with equal probability\\
\hline
CNMSSM\\
\hline
\mzero & Log, $0.3\dash20\tev$\\
\mhalf & Log, $0.3\dash10\tev$\\
\azero & Flat, $-20\dash20\tev$\\
$\lambda$ & Log, $0.001\dash4\pi$\\
\msinglet & Log, $0.3\dash20\tev$\\
$\kappa$ & Log, $0.001\dash4\pi$\\
\sgnmueff & $\pm1$ with equal probability\\
\hline
SM\\
\hline
\mb & Gaussian, $4.18\pm0.03\gev$\cite{Beringer:1900zz}\\
\mt & Gaussian, $173.07\pm0.89\gev$\cite{Beringer:1900zz}\\
\invalpha & Gaussian, $127.944\pm0.014$\cite{Beringer:1900zz}\\
\alphas & Gaussian, $0.1196\pm0.0017$\cite{Beringer:1900zz}\\
\hline
Phenomenological\\
\hline
\tanb & Effective, \refeq{Eq:MSSM_prior}, $2\dash62$\\
\mz & Effective, \refeq{Eq:MSSM_prior}, $91.1876\gev$\cite{Beringer:1900zz}\\
\end{tabular}
\end{ruledtabular}
\caption{Priors for the CMSSM and CNMSSM model parameters.}
\label{Table:Priors}
\end{table}
\subsection{Evidence}
Let us clarify the calculation of the Bayesian evidence. In the CMSSM, we wish to calculate the evidence by picking priors in the $(\mu^2,\,b)$ parameterization;
\begin{equation}
\label{Eqn:Ev_Long}
\ev = \frac{\int_{R(\mu^2,\,b)}\text{d}\mu^2\text{d}b\,\int\text{d}\cdots\,\likef{\mu^2,b,\cdots} \times\priorf{\mu^2,b\cdots}}
{\int_{R(\mu^2,\,b)}\text{d}\mu^2\text{d}b\,\int\text{d}\cdots\,\priorf{\mu^2,b,\cdots}}.
\end{equation}
The ellipses represent the model's other parameters. The priors, \prior, are unnormalized, hence the denominator. The region of integration, $R(\mu^2,\,b)$, is the prior ranges in \reftable{Table:Priors}.
We could compute the integral in the numerator of \refeq{Eqn:Ev_Long} with Monte Carlo (MC) integration; however, because few points would predict the correct EW scale, finding modes in the likelihood function would be time-consuming. If we change variables to $(\mz,\,\tanb)$, we guarantee that points predict the correct EW scale;
\begin{equation}
\label{Eqn:Ev_Calc}
\ev = \frac{\int_{R(\mz,\,\tanb)}\text{d}\mz\text{d}\tanb\,\int\text{d}\cdots\,\likef{\mz,\tanb,\cdots}\times\priorf{\mu^2,b,\cdots}\times\mathcal{J}}
{\int_{R(\mu^2,\,b)}\text{d}\mu^2\text{d}b\,\int\text{d}\cdots\,\priorf{\mu^2,b,\cdots}}.
\end{equation}
The change of variables introduces the Jacobian that we calculate for our naturalness priors. For the change in the integration region to $R(\mz,\,\tanb)$, we make an approximation. We pick $R(\mz,\,\tanb)$ to be the region in $(\mz,\,\tanb)$ in which the likelihood is appreciable. The regions in $(\mz,\,\tanb)$ in which the likelihood is not appreciable cannot significantly contribute to the integral. We trust that the original $R(\mu^2,\,b)$ region spans at least that region in $(\mz,\,\tanb)$.
For reproducibility, we note that if one includes naturalness priors in a \ic{likelihood} supplied to \texttt{(Py)MultiNest-3.4}, it returns
\begin{equation}
\label{Eqn:Ev_MN}
\ev^\prime = \frac{\int_{R(\mz,\,\tanb)}\text{d}\mz\text{d}\tanb\,\int\text{d}\cdots\,\likef{\mz,\tanb,\cdots}\times\priorf{b,\mu,\cdots}\times\mathcal{J}}
{\int_{R(\mz,\,\tanb)}\text{d}\mz\text{d}\tanb\,\int\text{d}\cdots\,\priorf{\cdots}},
\end{equation}
\ie without a Jacobian in the denominator. The difference between \refeq{Eqn:Ev_Calc} and \refeq{Eqn:Ev_MN} must be corrected by hand;
\begin{equation}
\ev = \ev^\prime \times \frac{%
\int_{R(\mz,\,\tanb)}\text{d}\mz\text{d}\tanb%
}{%
\int_{R(\mu^2,b)}\text{d}\mu^2\text{d}b\,\priorf{\mu^2,b}%
}.
\end{equation}
In the CNMSSM, our calculation is similar.
\section{\label{Section:Results}Results}
\subsection{Posterior}
We inspect the posterior in the CMSSM and CNMSSM by plotting $1\sigma$ and $2\sigma$ credible regions on marginalized two-dimensional planes. Our $1\sigma$ and $2\sigma$ credible regions are the smallest regions that contain $68\%$ and $95\%$ of the posterior; the regions in which the posterior is most dense. One can always draw credible regions; the existence and size of the credible regions is not indicative of agreement with data or the absence of fine-tuning.
Let us compare the CMSSM and CNMSSM side-by-side, beginning with their \pmm planes in \reffig{fig:m0m12}. The posterior favors gaugino masses as light as is permitted by the exclusion contour from the LHC, approximately $\mhalf\gtrsim0.5\tev$; however, the $1\sigma$ credible region extends to $\mhalf\lesssim6\tev$. The $1\sigma$ credible region for the unified scalar mass spans $5\tev\lesssim\mzero\lesssim15\tev$. The difference between the CNMSSM's and the CMSSM's \pmm planes is small; in the CNMSSM, \mhalf is slightly larger and \mzero is slightly smaller than that in the CMSSM.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\subfloat[][CMSSM.]{\label{fig:m0m12:i}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\linewidth]{m0m12.pdf}
}
\subfloat[][CNMSSM.]{\label{fig:m0m12:ii}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\linewidth]{N_m0m12.pdf}
}
\caption{The \pmm planes of the \protect\subref{fig:m0m12:i} CMSSM and \protect\subref{fig:m0m12:ii} CNMSSM showing the $68\%$ (red) and $95\%$ (orange) credible regions of the marginalized posterior. The $95\%$ exclusion from \texttt{ATLAS-CONF-2013-047}\cite{TheATLAScollaboration:2013fha} is shown with a solid line. The expected discovery reaches of future hadron colliders from \refcite{Fowlie:2014awa} are also shown with dashed lines.}
\label{fig:m0m12}
\end{figure}
\latin{Prima facie,} that $\mzero\gtrsim5\tev$ is surprising; scalar masses closer to the EW scale, in \eg the \stauc\cite{Ellis:1998kh} and $A$-funnel\cite{Drees:1992am} DM annihilation regions, are permitted by the likelihoods, but excluded by the posterior. The discovery reaches in \reffig{fig:m0m12} from \refcite{Fowlie:2014awa} indicate that the \roots{14} LHC and a \roots{33} High-Energy LHC (HE-LHC) might struggle to discover the CMSSM or CNMSSM, but that a \roots{100} Very Large Hadron Collider (VLHC) would probably discover the CMSSM or CNMSSM were nature described by either model.
The posterior favors $5\tev\lesssim\mzero\lesssim15\tev$ because of \ic{focusing} in the renormalization group (RG) equations for the soft-breaking masses\cite{Feng:1999zg,Feng:2000bp,Feng:2011aa}. With focusing in the RG equations, the up-type soft-breaking Higgs mass at the EW scale is similar to the EW scale,
\begin{equation}
\mhu|_{\text{EW}} \sim \mweak,
\end{equation}
and is approximately independent of the initial values of the soft-breaking masses at the GUT scale.\footnote{Focusing is not, however, a fixed point in the RG flow \see{Feng:2000bp}.} The RG running of \eg squark and slepton soft-breaking masses is not focused to the EW scale; the squarks and sleptons could be much heavier than the EW scale. Regions of parameter space in which the up-type Higgs mass is focused generically predict the correct EW scale via \refeq{Eqn:MZ} without fine-tuning; they are natural. The modes in the posterior at $5\tev\lesssim\mzero\lesssim15\tev$ in \reffig{fig:m0m12} are \ic{focus points.}
On the CMSSM's \pat plane in \reffig{fig:a0tanb:i}, the $1\sigma$ credible region spans a wide range of trilinear, $|\azero|\lesssim20\tev$, but a restricted range of \tanb, $\tanb\lesssim30$ and $\tanb\lesssim15$ if $|\azero|\gtrsim10\tev$. This behavior is expected; large \tanb is unnatural. By the derivatives in the Jacobians in \refeq{Eq:MSSM_prior} and \refeq{Eq:NMSSM_prior}, our naturalness priors disfavor large \tanb. \refcite{Cabrera:2009dm} explains this simply; from EW symmetry breaking conditions,
\begin{equation}
\tanb \simeq \left.\frac{\mhu^2 + \mhd^2 + 2\mu^2}{b}\right|_{\text{EW}}.
\end{equation}
In the denominator, the radiative corrections to $b$ from the RG flow are proportional to $\mu\msusy$, whereas the numerator is proportional to $\msusy^2$; rearranging,
\begin{equation}
\label{Eqn:tanb}
\msusy \sim \mu\tanb.
\end{equation}
Large \tanb implies a hierarchy between the soft-breaking masses and the $\mu$-parameter. The EW scale, however, results from a cancellation between the soft-breaking masses and the $\mu$-parameter; thus large \tanb implies fine-tuning. Because $b\propto\tanb$, our logarithmic prior for $b$ also disfavors large \tanb. \tanb could, however, enhance focusing by affecting the top and bottom Yukawa couplings.
On the CNMSSM's \pat plane in \reffig{fig:a0tanb:ii}, however, \tanb is larger than in the CMSSM at $1\sigma$ in \reffig{fig:a0tanb:i}, with $\tanb\lesssim50$. We cannot apply our previous argument, that large \tanb is unnatural, to the CNMSSM, because the $\mu$-parameter is a function of the SUSY breaking scale. Because large \tanb in the CNMSSM does not imply a hierarchy between scales or fine-tuning, it is not penalized by our effective priors.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\subfloat[][CMSSM.]{\label{fig:a0tanb:i}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\linewidth]{a0tanb.pdf}
}
\subfloat[][CNMSSM.]{\label{fig:a0tanb:ii}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\linewidth]{N_a0tanb.pdf}
}
\caption{The \pat planes of the \protect\subref{fig:a0tanb:i} CMSSM and \protect\subref{fig:a0tanb:ii} CNMSSM showing the $68\%$ (red) and $95\%$ (orange) credible regions of the marginalized posterior.}
\label{fig:a0tanb}
\end{figure}
We compare the sparticle and Higgs masses in the CMSSM and CNMSSM in \reffig{fig:mass}. In both models, the lightest neutralino is typically Higgsino-like or a mixture of Higgsino and gaugino gauge eigenstates, because $\mu$ is small. The sleptons, squarks and gluino are between approximately $5\tev$ and $15\tev$, though slightly heavier in the CMSSM than in the CNMSSM. With such heavy squarks, the Higgs mass is $\mh\simeq126\gev$, in agreement with experiment. In the CNMSSM, the Higgs with a mass of about $126\gev$ is always the lightest Higgs. As anticipated, $\mh\simeq126\gev$ is achieved in the CNMSSM with slightly lighter sparticles than in the CMSSM, because of the CNMSSM's additional tree-level contribution to the Higgs mass in \refeq{Eqn:N_Higgs}.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\subfloat[][CMSSM.]{\label{fig:mass:i}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\linewidth]{masses.pdf}
}
\subfloat[][CNMSSM.]{\label{fig:mass:ii}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\linewidth]{N_masses.pdf}
}
\caption{Sparticle masses in the \protect\subref{fig:mass:i} CMSSM and \protect\subref{fig:mass:ii} CNMSSM.
The red and orange bars are the $68\%$ and $95\%$ credible regions for the sparticle masses.
The green and blue bars are the $68\%$ and $95\%$ credible regions for the Higgs mass; note that the Higgs mass has a separate scale.
The circles are the posterior means.}
\label{fig:mass}
\end{figure}
We further examine the Higgs mass in \reffig{fig:higgs}, in which we plot the one-dimensional PDF for the Higgs mass in the CMSSM and in the CNMSSM. The PDF in the CMSSM and CNMSSM are nearly identical.\footnote{Minor differences in the PDF could result from statistical noise.} Whilst \refeq{Eqn:N_Higgs} indicates that the Higgs mass in the CNMSSM ought to be heavier than that in the CMSSM, the similarity in the PDFs is unsurprising. Our likelihood included a requirement that $\mh\sim126\gev$.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\subfloat[][CMSSM.]{\label{fig:higgs:i}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\linewidth]{higgs.pdf}
}
\subfloat[][CNMSSM.]{\label{fig:higgs:ii}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\linewidth]{N_higgs.pdf}
}
\caption{The predicted Higgs mass in the \protect\subref{fig:higgs:i} CMSSM and \protect\subref{fig:higgs:ii} CNMSSM. The orange line is the marginalized posterior PDF. The green and blue bars are the $68\%$ and $95\%$ credible regions for the Higgs mass. The circles are the posterior means. So that the PDFs can be fairly compared, both PDFs are normalized such that their integrals are identical.}
\label{fig:higgs}
\end{figure}
Let us instead examine whether the additional tree-level contribution to the Higgs mass in the CNMSSM in \refeq{Eqn:N_Higgs},
\begin{equation}
\label{Eq:N_dhiggs}
\Delta\mh = \lambda v \sin 2\beta,
\end{equation}
is appreciable. This contribution is added in quadrature, $\mh^2 + \Delta\mh^2$, weakening its impact. We plot $\Delta\mh$ and the relevant parameters, \tanb and $\lambda$, in \reffig{fig:N_dhiggs}. The additional tree-level contribution in the CNMSSM in \reffig{fig:N_dhiggs:i} is negligible; with one tail at $1\sigma$, $\Delta\mh\lesssim0.25\gev$. The smallness of this contribution stems from the smallness of $\lambda$ in \reffig{fig:N_dhiggs:ii}; $\lambda\lesssim0.1$ is favored, although $\lambda$ as large as $4\pi$ is permitted.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\subfloat[][Additional tree-level contribution to Higgs mass.]{\label{fig:N_dhiggs:i}
\includegraphics[width=0.33\linewidth]{N_dhiggs.pdf}
}
\subfloat[][$(\lambda,\tanb)$ plane.]{\label{fig:N_dhiggs:ii}
\includegraphics[width=0.33\linewidth]{N_lambda_tanb.pdf}
}
\subfloat[][$(\lambda,\mh)$ plane.]{\label{fig:N_dhiggs:iii}
\includegraphics[width=0.33\linewidth]{N_scatter.pdf}
}
\caption{\protect\subref{fig:N_dhiggs:i} The additional tree-level contribution to Higgs mass in the CNMSSM. The orange line is the marginalized posterior PDF. The green and blue bars are the $68\%$ and $95\%$ credible regions. \protect\subref{fig:N_dhiggs:ii} The $(\lambda,\tanb)$ plane in the CNMSSM showing the $68\%$ (red) and $95\%$ (orange) credible regions of the marginalized posterior. \protect\subref{fig:N_dhiggs:iii} Samples with appreciable posterior weight scattered on the $(\lambda,\mh)$ plane. The relationship between $\lambda$, \tanb and $\Delta m_h$ is in \refeq{Eq:N_dhiggs}.}
\label{fig:N_dhiggs}
\end{figure}
The smallness of $\lambda$ was remarked upon in previous Bayesian studies of the CNMSSM\cite{LopezFogliani:2009np,Kowalska:2012gs,Kim:2013uxa}, in which it was posited that small $\lambda$ minimized the occurrence of tachyonic Higgs bosons. Furthermore, \refcite{Kim:2013uxa} suggests that for $\mh\sim126\gev$ and $\tanb\gtrsim10$, naturalness priors might favor small $\lambda$ (see \eg Fig.~3 in \refcite{Kim:2013uxa}).
\refcite{Ellwanger:2009dp} remarks that if $A_\lambda$ is large, increases in $\lambda$ might decrease the Higgs mass. Because we always select $\mh\sim126\gev$, this behavior is difficult to study; however, \reffig{fig:N_dhiggs:iii}, a scatter plot on the $(\lambda,\mh)$ plane, indicates that this behavior occurs. The highest Higgs mass achieved decreases as $\lambda$ is increased. We caution the reader that the scatter plot is misleading, however, because the density of points cannot be resolved. There are many more points, and much more posterior weight, with $\lambda\lesssim0.1$. In fact, with one tail at $2\sigma$, $\lambda\lesssim0.08$.
With the Bayesian evidence, fine-tuning is a property of a \ic{neighborhood} in a model's parameter space, \ie the evidence in a \ic{neighborhood} is a probability density multiplied by a volume element. By itself, a probability density is not a well-defined property of an individual point, because it is not \eg invariant under reparameterizations. \refcite{Kowalska:2014hza,Mustafayev:2014lqa,Baer:2014ica} present individual points with small fine-tuning measures. We refrain from presenting such points, because they have no particular probabilistic meaning.
\subsection{Evidence}
Let us recapitulate our aim. We wanted to find the Bayes-factor for the CNMSSM versus the CMSSM. The Bayes-factor measures how our relative belief in the CNMSSM versus the CMSSM ought to change in light of the experimental data. Bayesian naturalness of the EW scale is automatically incorporated in the Bayes-factor. We interpret the Bayes-factor with the Jeffreys' scale in \reftable{Table:Jeffreys_Scale}.
If the Bayes-factor is greater than (less than) one, the CNMSSM (CMSSM) is favored. The Bayes-factor was
\begin{equation}
B\(\text{CNMSSM}/\text{CMSSM}\) = 10^{+100}_{-5}.
\end{equation}
The large uncertainty results from the evidence calculation in the CNMSSM. With a reasonable computer time, \texttt{(Py)MultiNest-3.4} found the CNMSSM's evidence with an upper bound one order of magnitude greater than its estimate and the CMSSM's evidence to within a factor of one half. These uncertainties could be reduced with extensive computing resources. Fortunately, the uncertainty in the Bayes-factor corresponds to an uncertainty of a single grade on the Jeffreys' scale in \reftable{Table:Jeffreys_Scale}. The Bayes-factor is \ic{positive} or \ic{strong} evidence in favor of the CNMSSM versus the CMSSM. \ic{Positive} evidence is two grades below \ic{very strong} evidence and one grade above \ic{barely worth mentioning.}
A factor of about $5$ in this ratio, however, resulted from the difference in the prior volume of $\mu$ in the CMSSM and $\kappa$ in the CNMSSM in \reftable{Table:Priors};
\begin{equation}
\frac{\ln\left(\frac{\mplanck}{1\gev}\right)}{\ln\left(\frac{4\pi}{0.001}\right)} \approx 5.
\end{equation}
This factor is related to the $\mu$-problem \see{Fowlie:2014xha}. Without this factor, the evidence in favor of the CNMSSM versus the CMSSM is \ic{barely worth mentioning} or \ic{positive.} The naturalness of the CNMSSM is overstated in the literature. The difference in the credibility of the CNMSSM and CMSSM is \ic{barely worth mentioning} or \ic{positive,} unless one considers the $\mu$-problem. If one ignores the $\mu$-problem, the evidence in favor of the CNMSSM is unlikely to be \ic{strong} and is certainly not \ic{very strong.}
We anticipated that the CNMSSM would be more credible than the CMSSM, because additional tree-level contributions to the Higgs mass in \refeq{Eqn:N_Higgs} might permit lighter stops. Whilst the stops in the CNMSSM were slightly lighter than the stops in the CMSSM, the stops were $3\tev\lesssim m_{\s{t}} \lesssim 15\tev$ in each model (see \reffig{fig:mass}). We found \ic{barely worth mentioning} to \ic{positive} evidence that the agreement between generic predictions and experimental data in the CNMSSM is better than that in the CMSSM, if one ignores the $\mu$-problem, and \ic{positive} to \ic{strong} evidence if one considers the $\mu$-problem.
The final step, which we omit, is multiplying the Bayes-factor by one's prior odds to find one's relative belief in the CNMSSM versus the CMSSM, in light of experimental data, \ie the posterior odds in \refeq{Eqn:Odds}. When picking prior odds, one must discard knowledge of the EW scale, all experimental data, the fact that the CNMSSM solves the $\mu$-problem of the CMSSM, and any other naturalness considerations that originate from knowledge of the EW scale. To include such knowledge in one's prior odds would be \ic{double-counting;} it is already included in the Bayes-factor.
Calculating Bayesian evidences is numerically challenging and we acknowledge that our evidences suffered from substantial uncertainties. To help judge those uncertainties, we list our \texttt{MultiNest-3.4} settings in \reftable{Table:MN_Settings}. We followed the recommendations in \refcite{Feroz:2011bj} for an accurate calculation of the Bayesian evidence, with the exception of the stopping criteria (the evidence tolerance) in the CNMSSM. Satisfying the stopping criteria recommended in \refcite{Feroz:2011bj} in the CNMSSM would require extensive computing resources. As a consequence, there is an appreciable uncertainty in the evidence in the CNMSSM, as already discussed.
\begin{table}[ht]
\centering
\begin{ruledtabular}
\begin{tabular}{lll}
& CMSSM & CNMSSM\\
\hline
Samples in posterior distribution & $40\,000$ & $40\,000$\\
Total likelihood evaluations & $400\,000$ & $1\,100\,000$\\
Evidence tolerance & $0.5$ & $8$\\
\hline
\texttt{MultiNest} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{\texttt{v3.4} with \texttt{gcc}}\\
Importance sampling & \multicolumn{2}{c}{True}\\
Multimodal & \multicolumn{2}{c}{False}\\
Constant efficiency & \multicolumn{2}{c}{False}\\
Efficiency & \multicolumn{2}{c}{$1$}\\
Live points & \multicolumn{2}{c}{$4000$}\\
\end{tabular}
\end{ruledtabular}
\caption{Our settings for the \texttt{MultiNest} algorithm. For details, see the \texttt{MultiNest} documentation\cite{Feroz:2008xx}.}
\label{Table:MN_Settings}
\end{table}
\subsection{Possible impact of DM}
As mentioned in \refsec{sec:like}, to avoid extra assumptions and sources of fine-tuning, we omitted DM observables from our likelihood. One might wonder, however, how DM observables might impact our conclusions, were we to assume that the LSP accounted for all of the DM in the Universe.
In the CNMSSM, because we find that in our results the singlino is decoupled, the singlino is probably irrelevant to DM. We conjecture that DM observables could impact the posterior PDF on the \pmm plane in the CNMSSM and in the CMSSM. Common DM annihilation mechanisms, such as coannihilation or resonances, preclude focusing of the EW scale, and would be disfavored. Focus point regions in which the LSP is a fine-tuned bino-Higgsino mixture could satisfy DM constraints\cite{Feng:2011aa}. Such regions would be favored.
It is unclear, however, how DM observables might impact the Bayes-factor, \ie whether DM might favor a particular model. Because the singlino is decoupled in the CNMSSM, in each model, the most probable DM is a fine-tuned bino-Higgsino mixture. We find insufficient reason to believe that such a fine-tuned mixture could be more readily achieved in a particular model. As such, we conjecture that the inclusion of DM observables might not significantly impact the Bayes-factor.
\section{\label{Section:Conclusions}Conclusions}
We calculated the posterior PDF and evidence for the CNMSSM and the CMSSM with naturalness priors, including relevant data from the LHC. Previous calculations of the posterior PDF for the CNMSSM picked informative priors for $(\mz,\,\tanb)$ at the EW scale. We picked \ic{honest} priors for the model parameters in the Lagrangian and superpotential at the GUT scale. Whilst such priors were calculated for the CNMSSM in \refcite{Kim:2013uxa}, the posterior PDF and evidence for the CNMSSM with such priors are absent in the literature.
We examined the credible regions of the CMSSM and CNMSSM, finding which regions of parameter space were favored by Bayesian naturalness. Mechanisms that focus Higgs SUSY breaking masses to the EW scale were favored. In each model, the SUSY breaking masses were $\mhalf\lesssim8\tev$ and $\mzero\lesssim15\tev$, with squarks and sleptons $\sim10\tev$. The discovery prospects at the LHC were limited; with $3000\invfb$ of data, it is unlikely that the LHC could discover either the CMSSM or the CNMSSM. Contrariwise, the HE-LHC would probably discover the CMSSM or CNMSSM, were nature described by either model.
We computed the Bayes-factor for the CNMSSM versus the CMSSM. The calculation involved moderate uncertainties that could be resolved with extensive computing resources. We found that the evidence in favor of the CNMSSM versus the CMSSM is \ic{positive} to \ic{strong} on the Jeffreys' scale, but that if one ignores the $\mu$-problem, the evidence is \ic{barely worth mentioning} to \ic{positive.} \ic{Positive} evidence is two grades below \ic{very strong.} We conclude that the credibility of the CNMSSM is perhaps overstated in the literature and that the $\mu$-problem must be considered in a comparison between the CNMSSM and CMSSM.
\acknowledge
|
\section{Main results}
If $S$ is an ordered semigroup, for a subset $X$ of $S$, the set
$$Q:={\Bigg (}X\cup {\Big( }(XS]\cap (SX]{\Big )}{\Bigg ]}$$is the
quasi-ideal of $S$ generated by $X$. It is mentioned without proof in
[9]. In spite of whatever we already said at the beginning of the
introduction which gives a complete proof of our argument, we think
it is interesting to give an independent detailed proof which is the
following:
1) $(QS]\cap (SQ]\subseteq Q$. Indeed:
\begin{eqnarray*}QS&=&{\Bigg (}X\cup {\Big( }(XS]\cap (SX]{\Big
)}{\Bigg ]}S={\Bigg (}X\cup {\Big( }(XS]\cap (SX]{\Big )}{\Bigg
]}(S]\\&\subseteq& {\Big (}X\cup (XS]{\Big ]}(S]\subseteq
{\Bigg(}{\Big(}X\cup (XS]{\Bigg)}S{\Bigg]}\\&=&{\Big(}XS\cup
(XS]S{\Big]}.
\end{eqnarray*}Since $(XS]S=(XS](S]\subseteq (XS^2]\subseteq (XS]$,
we have$$QS\subseteq {\Big(}XS\cup
(XS]{\Big]}={\Big(}(XS]{\Big]}=(XS],$$so $(QS]\subseteq
{\Big(}(XS]{\Big]}=(XS]$. Similarly we get so $(SQ]\subseteq (SX]$,
thus we have\begin{eqnarray*}(QS]\cap (SQ]&\subseteq&(XS]\cap
(SX]\subseteq X\cup {\Big(}(XS]\cap (SX]{\Big)}\\&\subseteq &
{\Bigg(}X\cup {\Big(}(XS]\cap (SX]{\Big)}{\Bigg ]}=Q.\end{eqnarray*}
2) If $a\in Q$ and $S\ni b\le a$, then $b\in Q$. In fact:\\
Since $a\in Q:={\Bigg (}X\cup {\Big( }(XS]\cap (SX]{\Big )}{\Bigg
]}$, we have$$b\le a\le t \mbox { for some } t\in X\cup {\Big(
}(XS]\cap (SX]{\Big )}.$$If $t\in X$, then $b\le t\in X$, then $b\in
(X]\subseteq {\Bigg(}X\cup {\Big( }(XS]\cap (SX]{\Big
)}{\Bigg]}=Q$.\\If $t\in (XS]\cap (SX]$, then $b\le t\in (XS]\cap
(SX]$, so $$b\in {\Big (}(XS]\cap (SX]{\Big ]}\subseteq {\Bigg(}X\cup
{\Big (}(XS]\cap (SX]{\Big )}{\Bigg]}=Q.$$[Instead of 2), we could
also write $((Q]]=(Q]$ (as this holds for any subset of $S$)].
3) If $T$ is a quasi-ideal of $S$ such that $T\supseteq X$, then
$$Q:={\Bigg (}X\cup {\Big( }(XS]\cap (SX]{\Big )}{\Bigg ]}\subseteq
{\Bigg (}T\cup {\Big( }(TS]\cap (ST]{\Big )}{\Bigg ]}=(T]=T.$$
$\hfill\Box$
The sufficient condition of Proposition 2 in [8] is the following: \\
Suppose $X\cap Q\cap Y\subseteq (YQX]$ for every right ideal $X$,
every left ideal $Y$ and every quasi-ideal $Q$ of $S$. Then $S$ is
intra-regular.\\Here is its corrected proof: Let $X\subseteq S$.
Denote by $r(X)$, $l(X)$, $q(X)$ the right ideal, left ideal and the
quasi-ideal of $S$, respectively, generated by $X$. By hypothesis, we
have\begin{eqnarray*}X&\subseteq&r(X)\cap q(X)\cap l(X)\subseteq
{\Big(}l(X)q(X)r(X){\Big]}\\&=&{\Bigg(}(X\cup SX]{\Bigg (}X\cup
{\Big( }(XS]\cap (SX]{\Big )}{\Bigg ]}(X\cup XS]{\Bigg
]}\\&=&{\Bigg(}(X\cup SX){\Bigg (}X\cup {\Big( }(XS]\cap (SX]{\Big
)}{\Bigg )}(X\cup XS){\Bigg ]}\\&\subseteq &{\Bigg(}(X\cup SX){\bigg
(}X\cup (XS]{\bigg )} (X\cup XS){\Bigg ]}\\&=&{\Bigg(}{\bigg(}X^2\cup
SX^2\cup X(XS]\cup SX(XS]{\bigg )}(X\cup XS){\Bigg ]}\end{eqnarray*}
Since $X(XS]\subseteq (X](XS]\subseteq (X^2S]$ and $SX(XS]\subseteq
(SX](XS]\subseteq (SX^2S]$, we get\begin{eqnarray*}X&\subseteq&
{\Bigg(}{\bigg(}X^2\cup SX^2\cup (X^2S]\cup (SX^2S]{\bigg )}(X\cup
XS){\Bigg ]}\\&=&{\Big(}X^3\cup SX^3\cup (X^2S]X\cup (SX^2S]X\cup
X^3S\cup SX^3S\cup (X^2S]XS\cup (SX^2S]XS{\Bigg ]}.\end{eqnarray*}
Since
$(X^2S]X\subseteq (X^2S](X]\subseteq (X^2SX]\subseteq (X^2S]$,
$(SX^2S]X\subseteq (SX^2S](X]\subseteq (SX^2SX]\subseteq (SX^2S]$,
$(X^2S]XS\subseteq (X^2S](XS]\subseteq (X^2SXS]\subseteq (X^2S]$ and
$(SX^2S]XS\subseteq (SX^2S](XS]\subseteq (SX^2SXS]\subseteq (SX^2S]$,
we obtain$$X\subseteq {\Big(}X^3\cup SX^2S\cup (X^2S]\cup
(SX^2S]{\Big]}={\Big(}X^3\cup (SX^2S]\cup
(X^2S]{\Big]}.$$Then\begin{eqnarray*}X^3&\subseteq&{\Big(}X^3\cup
(SX^2S]\cup (X^2S]{\Big]}X^2\subseteq {\Big(}X^3\cup (SX^2S]\cup
(X^2S]{\Big]}(X^2]\\&\subseteq&{\Bigg(}{\Big(}X^3\cup (SX^2S]\cup
(X^2S]{\Big)}X^2{\Bigg]}\\&=&{\Big(}X^5\cup (SX^2S]X^2\cup
(X^2S]X^2{\Big]}.\end{eqnarray*}Since
$X^5\subseteq SX^2S$
$(SX^2S]X^2\subseteq (SX^2S](X^2]\subseteq (SX^2SX^2]\subseteq
(SX^2S]$ and
$(X^2S]X^2\subseteq (X^2S](X^2]\subseteq (X^2SX^2]\subseteq (X^2S]$,
we have$$X^3\subseteq {\Big(}SX^2S\cup (SX^2S]\cup (X^2S]{\Big]}=
{\Big(}(SX^2S]\cup (X^2S]{\Big]}.$$Then\begin{eqnarray*}
X&\subseteq&{\Big(}X^3\cup (SX^2S]\cup (X^2S]{\Big]}\\&\subseteq&
{\Bigg(}{\Big(}(SX^2S]\cup (X^2S]{\Big]}\cup (SX^2S]\cup
(X^2S]{\Bigg]}\\&=&{\Bigg(}{\Big(}(SX^2S]\cup
(X^2S]{\Big]}{\Bigg]}\\&=&{\Big(}(SX^2S]\cup
(X^2S]{\Big]},\end{eqnarray*}and hence\begin{eqnarray*}X^2&\subseteq&
X{\Big(}(SX^2S]\cup (X^2S]{\Big]}\subseteq (X]{\Big(}(SX^2S]\cup
(X^2S]{\Big]}\\&\subseteq&{\Bigg(}X{\Big(}(SX^2S]\cup
(X^2S]{\Big)}{\Bigg]}={\Big(}X(SX^2S]\cup
X(X^2S]{\Big]}\\&\subseteq&{\Big(}(X](SX^2S]\cup (X](X^2S]{\Big]}
\subseteq{\Big(}(XSX^2S]\cup
(X^3S]{\Big]}\\&\subseteq&{\Big(}(SX^2S]{\Big]}=(SX^2S],\end{eqnarray*}
$X^2S\subseteq (SX^2S]S=(SX^2S](S]\subseteq (SX^2S^2]\subseteq
(SX^2S]$ and
$(X^2S]\subseteq {\Big(}(SX^2S]{\Big]}=(SX^2S]$.\medskip
\noindent Thus we have$$X\subseteq {\Big(}(SX^2S]\cup
(X^2S]{\Big]}={\Big(}(SX^2S]{\Big]}=(SX^2S],$$ and $S$ is
intra-regular.$\hfill\Box$\medskip
Combining this result with the Proposition 2 in [8], we get the
following theorem:\medskip
\noindent{\bf Theorem 1.} {\it Let $S$ be an ordered semigroup. The
following are equivalent:\begin{enumerate}
\item[$(1)$] S is intra-regular;
\item[$(2)$] For every right ideal X, every left ideal Y and every
bi-ideal B of S, we have $X\cap B\cap Y\subseteq (YBX]$;
\item[$(3)$] For every right ideal X, every left ideal Y and every
quasi-ideal Q of S, we have $X\cap Q\cap Y\subseteq
(YQX]$.\end{enumerate} }\medskip
As we already know, the theory of ordered semigroups based on ideals
and the theory of $le$-semigroups based on ideal elements are
parallel to each other. All the results on $le$-semigroups based on
ideal elements are expressed in ordered semigroups in terms of
ideals, and conversely. It is surprising that, for the results on
ordered semigroups based on ideals points do not play any essential
role but the sets [8], as we have also seen in the results above. In
this respect, the Theorem 1, in case of
$le$-semigroups is the following:\medskip
\noindent{\bf Theorem 2.} (cf. also [5]) {\it Let S be an
$le$-semigroup. The following are equivalent:\begin{enumerate}
\item[$(1)$] S is intra-regular;
\item[$(2)$] For every right ideal element x, every left ideal
element y and every bi-ideal element b of S, we have $x\wedge
b\wedge y\le ybx$;
\item[$(3)$] For every right ideal element x, every left ideal
element y and every quasi-ideal element q of S, we have $x\wedge
q\wedge y\le yqx$.\end{enumerate} }\medskip
Let us first give the necessary definitions, and then we will prove
the theorem. A $poe$-semigroup is an ordered semigroup (:
$po$-semigroup) $S$ having a greatest element usually denoted by
$``e"$ (that is, $e\ge a$ for all $a\in S$) [4]. An $le$-semigroup is
a $poe$-semigroup which is at the same time a lattice (under the
operations $\vee$ and $\wedge$) such that $a(b\vee c)=ab\vee ac$ and
$(a\vee b)c=ac\vee bc$ for all $a,b,c\in S$ [1, 2]. An element $a$ of
an ordered semigroup $S$ is called a right (resp. left) ideal element
if $ax\le a$ (resp. $xa\le a$) for all $x\in S$ [1]. If $S$ is a
$poe$-semigroup, then $a$ is a right (resp. left) ideal element of
$S$ if and only if $ae\le a$ (resp. $ea\le a$) [4]. An element $a$ of
a $poe$-semigroup $S$ is called a bi-ideal element of $S$ if $aea\le
a$, and it is called a quasi-ideal element of $S$ if the element
$ae\wedge ea$ exists (in $S$) and $ae\wedge ea\le a$ [3]. For an
$le$-semigroup, we denote by $r(a)$, $l(a)$, $q(a)$ the right ideal
element, the left ideal element and the quasi-ideal element of $S$,
respectively, generated by $a$. We have $r(a)=a\vee ae$, $l(a)=a\vee
ea$. A $poe$-semigroup $S$ is called intra-regular if $a\le ea^2e$
for all $a\in S$ (cf., for example [4]). The element $a\vee (ae\wedge
ea)$ is the quasi-ideal element of $S$ generated by $a$ ($a\in S$).
In fact:
$${\Big(}a\vee (ae\wedge ea){\Big)}e\wedge e{\Big(a\vee (ae\wedge
ea)}{\Big)}={\Big(}ae\vee (ae\wedge ea)e{\Big)}\wedge {\Big(}ea\vee
e(ae\wedge ea){\Big)}.$$Since $ae\wedge ea\le ae$, we have $(ae\wedge
ea)e\le ae^2\le ae$. Since $ae\wedge ea\le ea$, we have $e(ae\wedge
ea)\le e^2a\le ea$. Thus we have$${\Big(}a\vee (ae\wedge
ea){\Big)}e\wedge e{\Big(a\vee (ae\wedge ea)}{\Big)}=ae\wedge ea\le
a\vee (ae\wedge ea).$$Clearly, $a\vee (ae\wedge ea)\ge a$. If $t$ is
a quasi-ideal element of $S$ such that $t\ge a$, then $a\vee
(ae\wedge ea)\le t\vee (te\wedge et)\le t$. \bigskip
\noindent{\bf Proof of the theorem.} $(1)\Longrightarrow (2)$. If $S$
is intra-regular, then for any element $a$ of $S$, we have$$a\le
ea^2e=eaae\le e(ea^2e)(ea^2e)e\le ea^2ea^2e.$$Let now $x$ be a right
ideal element, $y$ a left ideal element and $b$ a bi-ideal element of
$S$. Then, for the element $x\wedge b\wedge y$ of $S$, we
have\begin{eqnarray*}x\wedge b\wedge y&\le& e(x\wedge b\wedge
y)(x\wedge b\wedge y)e(x\wedge b\wedge y)(x\wedge b\wedge
y)e\\&\le&(ey)(beb)(xe)\le ybx.
\end{eqnarray*}$(2)\Longrightarrow (3)$. This is because the
quasi-ideal elements of $S$ are bi-ideal elements of $S$ as well.
Indeed, if $q$ is a quasi-ideal element of $S$, then $qeq\le qe\wedge
eq\le q$.\\$(3)\Longrightarrow (1)$. Let $a\in S$. Then $a\le ea^2e$.
In fact: By hypothesis, we have\begin{eqnarray*}a&\le&r(a)\wedge
q(a)\wedge l(a)\le l(a)q(a)r(a)\\&=&(a\vee ea){\Big(}a\vee (ae\wedge
ea){\Big)}(a\vee ae)\\&\le&(a\vee ea)(a\vee ea)(a\vee
ae)\\&=&(a^2\vee ea^2\vee aea\vee eaea)(a\vee ae)\\&=&a^3\vee
ea^3\vee aea^2\vee eaea^2\vee a^3e\vee ea^3 e\vee aea^2e\vee
eaea^2e\\&\le&a^3\vee ea^2e\vee ea^2\end{eqnarray*}Then $$a^3\le
(a^3\vee ea^2e\vee ea^2)a^2=a^5\vee ea^2ea^2\vee ea^4\le ea^2e.$$Thus
we have $$a\le ea^2e\vee ea^2, \;a^2\le ea^2ea\vee ea^3\le ea^2e,\;
ea^2\le ea^2e.$$ Thus we get $a\le ea^2e$, and $S$ is
intra-regular.$\hfill\Box$ \medskip
\noindent{\bf Remark.} The implication $(1)\Rightarrow (2)$ of
Theorem 2 holds in a $poe$-semigroup $S$ in general for which for any
right ideal element $x$, every left ideal element $y$ and every
bi-ideal element $b$ of $S$, the element $x\wedge b\wedge y$ exists.
{\small
|
\section{Introduction}
The \emph{Hawkes process}~\citep{Hawkes1971_orig,Hawkes1971} is a linearly self-exciting conditional Poisson point process. It can be mapped onto a a branching process in which initial \emph{immigrant events} can produce subsequent \emph{offspring events}. Further, all realized offspring may produce offspring in the same way. Thus each immigrant along with its multi-generational tree of offspring forms a \emph{cluster}. This model has attracted a lot of attention since it parsimoniously combines exogenous activity (immigration) with endogeneous self exciting dynamics (offspring).
\\
The seminal application of the Hawkes model was within seismology~\citep{KKno1981,KKno1987,Ogata1988}, where its spatio-temporal marked extension is being successfully used for modeling so-called triggered seismicity: the self-generated aftershock sequence after individual earthquakes (see for instance review in~\cite{Ogata2013}). Recent applications include: modeling genomic events along DNA~\citep{ReynaudBouret2010}; neural spike trains~\citep{Krumin2010}; brain seizures~{\citep{Sornette2010epileptic}}; and the spread of violence~\citep{LewisMohler2010} and crime~\citep{Mohler2011}. In financial and econometrical applications, the Hawkes process is becoming the gold standard for modeling high frequency fluctuations of financial prices (see for instance~\citep{Bowsher2007,Bauwens2009,FilimonovSornette2012_Reflexivity,Muzy2013hawkes}).
\\
In the theory of Hawkes processes, the immigration process, i.e., the location of clusters, is a Poisson process. This implies that the cluster locations are independent. In this form, the likelihood of the Hawkes model can be evaluated and thus Maximum Likelihood Estimation (MLE) can be performed. An extension of this model with inhomogenous Poisson immigration~\citep{LewisMohler2010} may also be estimated by maximum likelihood.
\\
Poissonian immigration corresponds to exponentially distributed waiting times between immigrants. Here we introduce a natural extension: the~\emph{Hawkes process with renewal process immigration}. The renewal immigration process, like the Poisson process, has i.i.d (independent and identically distributed) waiting times, but with a general waiting time distribution instead of the exponential distribution. The exponential distribution has a dispersion index value of one (the ratio of the variance to the mean of interevent times), and is thus called equi-dispersed. The renewal process can describe both under- and over- dispersed immigration (dispersion index less than and greater than $1$, respectively). For instance, with a Weibull waiting time distribution, one obtains this flexibility by introducing only one extra parameter relative to the Poisson process. This flexibility comes at the cost of making the evaluation of the likelihood impossible, thus making direct MLE practically impossible.
\\
To the best of our knowledge, there are no existing mathematical papers focused on this Hawkes model with Renewal immigration and more generally for renewal cluster processes and branching process with renewal process immigration. There have been some similar models proposed for applications in climatology but with either very restrictive model assumptions, or less desirable estimation properties. In~\cite{Cowpertwait2000}, a renewal cluster model was proposed for clustering of rainfall events. In this model, clusters are separated, from the end point of the last cluster to the starting point of the next cluster, by a renewal process. Thus no overlap in clusters is allowed, which is a severe assumption in many applications. This simplification makes maximum likelihood estimation easy. Further, using Bartlett-Lewis type clustering~\citep{CoxIsham1980}, only the most recent generation point is fertile in this model. That is, the offspring are distributed after their immigrant in a finite renewal process with random termination size. In~\cite{Salim2003}, a Bartlett-Lewis cluster process with renewal process immigration was considered for clustering of rainfall events. Introducing overdispersion into the immigration process was motivated by the occasional observation of long periods without rainfall. The authors maximized a quasi-likelihood to estimate the model.
\\
In the present paper, we propose a novel way to calibrate such generalized renewal Hawkes processes using the \emph{Expectation Maximization} (EM) algorithm~\citep{Dempster1977}. We show that the problem of missing data (the branching structure), which is necessary for the derivation of the complete data likelihood function, can be easily addressed within the EM approach. The EM algorithm has already been used for the estimation of the standard Hawkes process ~\citep{Marsan2008,Veen2008,LewisMohler2011}. Here we extend this approach to the case of renewal process immigration, and introduce another EM algorithm with a reduced set of missing data.
\\
The structure of the paper is as follows. Section 2 presents the general structure of the standard Hawkes process with Poisson immigration together with the Hawkes process with renewal immigration. Section 3 introduces the complete data EM algorithm for the estimation of Hawkes process with renewal immigration. Section 4 introduces the semi-complete data EM algorithm using a minimal set of missing data. In Section 5, the computation of likelihood and performance of goodness of fit tests for estimates of the Hawkes model with renewal immigration are discussed. Section 6 presents results of Monte Carlo studies of the complete data EM algorithm including starting point selection, non-parametric methods, consistency, model selection, and robustness of branching ratio estimation under immigrant process misspecification. In Section 7, the semi-complete data EM algorithm is shown to be a computationally efficient method for the estimation of the Hawkes process with inhomogeneous Poissonian immigration. In section 8, we conclude with a discussion on the significance and relevance of our findings, and directions for further research.
\section{The Hawkes Process With Renewal Immigration}
Consider a sequence of random event times $\{T_{i}\}_{i\in \mathbb{N}}$, such that $T_i<T_{i+1}$ with \emph{inter-event waiting times} $W_i=T_i-T_{i-1}$. This sequence defines an \emph{univariate point process} with \emph{counting process} $N(t)=\sum_i 1_{t_i\leq t}$. Denote a realization of the point process $\boldsymbol{t}_{1:n}=\{t_{1},\dots,t_{n}\}$ on $(0,r]$ with \emph{stopping time} $r$ where $n=N(r)$. When necessary, we denote the \emph{history} of the process $\mathcal{H}_{t-}=\{t_{1},\dots,t_{i}: t_{i}<t\}$ on time window $(0,t]$. A point process $\{T_{i}\}$ can be defined by its \emph{conditional intensity} $\lambda(t|\mathcal{H}_{t-})$ which is the instantaneous conditional probability of an event occurring~\citep{VereJones2003_vol1}. The \emph{compensator} of the point process is the expected value of the counting process at time $t$: $\Lambda(t|\mathcal{H}_{t-})=\int_{0}^{t}\lambda(s|\mathcal{H}_{s-})ds=\mathrm{E}[N(t)|\mathcal{H}_{t-}]$.
\\
The Hawkes process~\citep{Hawkes1971_orig,Hawkes1971} is a self-exciting conditional Poisson process with the following linear conditional intensity function~\mbox{\citep{Hawkes1971_orig,Hawkes1971}}:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:HawkesCondInt}
\lambda(t|\mathcal{H}_{t-})= \mu + \Phi(t|\mathcal{H}_{t-}),
\end{equation}
where $\mu\in(0,\infty)$ is the \emph{background intensity} and the conditional self-exciting term is $\Phi(t|\mathcal{H}_{t-})$ where
\begin{equation}\label{eq:HawkesPhi}
\Phi(t|\mathcal{H}_{t-})= \sum_{i:t_{i}<t} \eta h(t-t_i).
\end{equation}
The function $\eta h(t-t_{N(t)})$ is the intensity of an inhomogeneous Poisson process originating at each observed point, $t_i$. It is also called the \emph{memory kernel}. The function $h(.)$ is the \emph{offspring density}, a pdf (probability density function) only giving mass to positive support. The parameter $\eta$ is the \emph{branching ratio}, a non-negative constant determining the strength of self-excitation.
\\
The Hawkes process can also be considered as a branching process: $\mu$ is the \emph{immigration intensity}, and $\eta h(t-t_{N(t)})$ is the \emph{offspring intensity} -- an inhomogeneous Poisson process triggered by each observed point. The branching ratio $\eta$ is the expected number of offspring of each point, and the offspring density provides the law for the parent-child inter-event times. Due to the autoregressive nature of the process, it becomes non-stationary for $\eta > 1$ (the case
$\eta =1$ is borderline stationary with non-standard scaling properties \citep{SaichevSor14}).
The branching process is constructed as follows: the Poissonian immigration process $\{T_{i}^{(0)}\}$ introduces immigrant points into the zeroeth generation; each immigrant generates a subsequent offspring process, which introduces first-generation \emph{offspring} events $\{T_{i}^{(1)}\}$; each offspring may introduce second-generation offspring $\{T_{i}^{(2)}\}$ in the same way; and so on over many generations. The union of the immigrants and offspring of multiple generations defines the Hawkes process ($\{T_{i}^{(0)}\}\cup\{T_{i}^{(1)}\}\cup\dots$). Further, by summing the mutually independent immigration and offspring intensities, one recovers the conditional intensity~\eqref{eq:HawkesPhi}. A realization of this conditional intensity is in the top panel of Fig.~1.
\\
\begin{figure}[t!]
\begin{center}
\centerline{\includegraphics[width=10cm]{fig1.eps}}
\caption{Illustration of the conditional intensity functions for (I) the Hawkes process~\eqref{eq:HawkesCondInt} and (II) the Hawkes process with over-dispersed renewal process immigration~\eqref{eq:HawkesRenewalCondInt}. The dotted line represents the intensity of immigration, and the solid line corresponds to the total intensity. The arrows indicate parenthood and the numbers in parentheses indicate the generation of offspring. }
\end{center}
\label{fig1}
\end{figure}
The standard definition of the Hawkes process~\eqref{eq:HawkesCondInt} assumes constant or time-varying but deterministic immigration intensity $\mu(t)$, or in other words a Poissonian immigration process $\{T_{i}^{(0)}\}$. Here we extend the definition by introducing the \emph{Hawkes Process with Renewal immigration}. For this, we allow the immigration process $\{T_{i}^{(0)}\}$ to be a general Renewal process, where waiting times $W_i>0$ are i.i.d from some pdf $g(w)$ that is not necessary exponential. The conditional intensity of this process is then given by:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:HawkesRenewalCondInt}
\lambda(t|\mathcal{H}_{t-},I[N(t)]) = \mu(t-t_{I[N(t)]}) + \Phi(t|\mathcal{H}_{t-}),
\end{equation}
where we have defined the index function for immigrants
\begin{equation}
I[N(t)]=k\in {1,\dots,N(t)}~,
\label{def_indexmostrecent}
\end{equation}
which provides the point index $k$ of the most recent immigrant event $t_k$ before $t$ in the Hawkes realization $\boldsymbol{t}_{1:n}$. The conditional intensity of offspring $\Phi$ is given by the same equation~\eqref{eq:HawkesPhi}, and the intensity $\mu(w)$ of the renewal immigration process is defined with
\begin{equation}\label{eq:renewalInt}
\mu(w)=\frac{ g(w) }{ 1-G(w) },
\end{equation}
where $G(w)=\int_0^w g(s)ds$ is the CDF (cumulative distribution function) of waiting times $\{W_i\}$. The density $g$ may be expressed using expression~\eqref{eq:intereventDensity} below. Constant intensity then corresponds to a Poisson process with exponentially distributed inter-event times that are equi-dispersed, and a strictly decaying intensity will provide a sub-exponential distribution of inter-event times that are over-dispersed. The intensity $\mu(t)$ integrates to infinity and thus the process does not go extinct. A realization of this process together with renewal immigrantion is presented in the lower panel of Figure~1.
\\
Where an immigrant together with its associated offspring form a cluster, the Hawkes process is a \emph{Poisson cluster process}, and the Hawkes process with renewal immigration is thus a \emph{Renewal cluster process}. Thus, the model~\eqref{eq:HawkesRenewalCondInt} introduces ``nearest neighbour'' dependence into the location of clusters, allowing for both under- and over-dispersion in the immigration process itself. In some sense, the over-dispersed renewal process, having ``one step memory'', can be considered as the simplest case of a self-exciting process. Thus, the Hawkes process with renewal immigration is a step towards a model with two stages of self excitation.
\\
A challenging aspect of this model is the estimation procedure. The general form of the log-likelihood of a realization $\boldsymbol{t}_{1:n}$ on $(0,r]$ is given by~\cite{VereJones2003_vol1}:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:lik}
\log \text{L}(\boldsymbol{\theta};\boldsymbol{t}_{1:n})=\sum_{i=1}^{n}\log\lambda(t_{i}|\mathcal{H}_{t-})-\Lambda(r|\mathcal{H}_{t-}),
\end{equation}
where $\boldsymbol{\theta}$ is the parameter vector of the model. Maximizing this log likelihood~\eqref{eq:lik} with respect to $\boldsymbol{\theta}$ has the interpretation of maximizing the intensity at observed points and minimizing intensity where no points are observed. For the standard Hawkes model, the conditional intensity~\eqref{eq:HawkesCondInt} can be evaluated and thus MLE can be performed. For the Hawkes process with renewal immigration, to evaluate the intensity~\eqref{eq:HawkesRenewalCondInt} and thus the likelihood~\eqref{eq:lik}, one needs to know which events are immigrants. Since this information is unobserved (all events --- immigrants and descendants --- are identical), direct MLE using~\eqref{eq:lik} is not possible. In order to account for this missing data, in the following section we will employ an Expectation Maximization (EM) algorithm.
\\
It is worth explaining the structure of the likelihood as the details are relevant in the following sections. The likelihood~\eqref{eq:likelihood},
\begin{equation}\label{eq:likelihood}
\text{L}(\boldsymbol{\theta};\boldsymbol{t}_{1:n})=f(\boldsymbol{t}_{1:n};\boldsymbol{\theta})\text{Pr}_{\boldsymbol{\theta}}\left[ N(r)-N(t_{n})=0 | \boldsymbol{t}_{1:n} \right],
\end{equation}
is the product of the \emph{joint inter-event time density} and the probability that no events occur between the last point and the stopping time. The joint inter-event time density within \eqref{eq:likelihood} can be factored into a product of conditional Poisson marginal inter-event time densities,
\begin{equation}\label{eq:intereventDensity}
\text{f}(t|\mathcal{H}_{t-})=\lambda(t|\mathcal{H}_{t-})\text{exp}\left( -\int_{t_{N(t)}}^{t}\lambda(s|\mathcal{H}_{s-})ds \right),
\end{equation}
which is the conditional probability of observing a point at $t$ times the probability of no points between the previous point $t_{N(t)}$ and $t$. For an inhomogeneous Poisson process, the density \eqref{eq:intereventDensity} becomes unconditional and, for a homogeneous Poisson process, it becomes an exponential density.
\section{Complete Data EM Algorithm for the Hawkes Process with Renewal Immigration}
\label{sec:EM}
\subsection{General description of EM algorithms for Hawkes processes}
An Expectation Maximization (EM) algorithm, first introduced in~\cite{Dempster1977}, is an iterative algorithm for performing MLE in the presence of missing data that, if known, would simplify the likelihood. Consider the \emph{complete data} likelihood function $L(\boldsymbol{\theta};\boldsymbol{X},\boldsymbol{Z})$ that has an explicit form for known sets of \emph{observed data} $\boldsymbol{X}$ and \emph{missing data} $\boldsymbol{Z}$. Set $\boldsymbol{X}$ together with set $\boldsymbol{Z}$ forms the \emph{complete data}. Maximization of $\log \text{L}(\boldsymbol{\theta};\boldsymbol{X},\boldsymbol{Z})$ with respect to $\boldsymbol{\theta}$ then results in parameter estimates. When $\boldsymbol{Z}$ is unknown, one can account for the missing data probabilistically using the following iterative procedure.
\\
First, one needs to guess the initial parameter estimates $\boldsymbol{\hat\theta}^{[0]}$. Then each $m$'th iteration consists of two steps. Given the estimates of parameters $\boldsymbol{\hat\theta}^{[m]}$ in the \emph{expectation (E) step}, one needs to calculate the expected value of the complete data log-likelihood with respect to the conditional distribution of missing data~$\boldsymbol{Z}$, given the observed data $\boldsymbol{X}$ and current estimates of parameters $\boldsymbol{\hat\theta}^{[m]}$:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:Q_complete_}
\text{Q}(\boldsymbol{\theta}|\boldsymbol{X},\boldsymbol{\hat\theta}^{[m]})=
\mathrm{E}_{\boldsymbol{Z}|\boldsymbol{X},\boldsymbol{\hat\theta}^{[m]}}
\Big[\log \text{L}(\boldsymbol{\theta};\boldsymbol{X},\boldsymbol{Z})\Big].
\end{equation}
The conditional expectation~\eqref{eq:Q_complete_} requires the derivation of the conditional pdf
$f(\boldsymbol{Z}|\boldsymbol{X},\boldsymbol{\hat\theta}^{[m]})$, which is nothing more than the likelihood function for estimation of missing data~$\boldsymbol{Z}$ given~$\boldsymbol{\hat\theta}^{[m]}$ and~$\boldsymbol{X}$.
In the \emph{maximization (M) step}, the expected likelihood~\eqref{eq:Q_complete_} is maximized to obtain new estimates of parameters $\boldsymbol{\hat\theta}^{[m+1]}$:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:M}
\boldsymbol{\hat\theta}^{[m+1]}=\arg\max_{\boldsymbol{\theta}}Q(\boldsymbol{\theta}|\boldsymbol{X},\boldsymbol{\hat\theta}^{[m]}).
\end{equation}
The algorithm then proceeds by iterating the E and M steps until the parameter estimates $\boldsymbol{\hat\theta}^{[m]}$ stabilize. With each iteration, parameter estimates are guaranteed not to make the observed data likelihood worse~\citep{Dempster1977}.
\\
An EM algorithm for the Hawkes process was identified in \cite{Marsan2008} and formalized in \cite{Veen2008,Mohler2011}. In particular, this EM algorithm has had strong convergence results proven and tested \citep{Mohler2011}, and in practice converges in less than 50 iterations, given sensible initial parameter estimates. Here this algorithm is extended to the case of Renewal process immigration, and an algorithm with a reduced set of missing data is also presented in Section \ref{sec:semiEM}.
\\
For the case of the Hawkes process with renewal immigration,
$\boldsymbol{X}$ is given by $\boldsymbol{t}_{1:n}$, and unobserved data $\boldsymbol{Z}$ is given by the \emph{branching structure} of the process, which contains information of: (i) immigrant events and (ii) parenthood of offspring events (see Figure~1).
This branching structure is typically described with the lower-triangular matrix $\boldsymbol{Z}_{n\times n}$ with diagonal elements $Z_{i,i}=1$ if point $t_{i}$ is an immigrant and $Z_{i,i}=0$ if not; and sub-diagonal elements $Z_{i,j}=1,~j<i$ if point $t_{j}$ is direct parent to point $t_{i}$. Since a point can be either an immigrant or an offspring of a single parent, then each row of the matrix has only one unit element, and the rest of the entries are zero.
\\
Consider the joint density $f(\boldsymbol{t}_{1:n},\boldsymbol{Z}_{n\times n})=f(\boldsymbol{t}_{1:n}|\boldsymbol{Z}_{n\times n})f(\boldsymbol{Z}_{n\times n})$. When the branching structure~$\boldsymbol{Z}_{n\times n}$ for the self-excited Hawkes process with renewal immigrants~\eqref{eq:HawkesRenewalCondInt} is known, the conditional density $f(\boldsymbol{t}_{1:n}|\boldsymbol{Z}_{n\times n})$ can be split into a product of marginal inter-event time densities for independent inhomogeneous Poisson sub-processes (i.e., densities of the form~\eqref{eq:intereventDensity}):
\begin{equation}\label{eq:cond_pdf}
f(\boldsymbol{t}_{1:n}|\boldsymbol{Z}_{n\times n})=
\prod_{i=1}^{n} \prod_{j={1}}^{i-1} \left[ \mu(t_i-t_j)e^{-\int_{t_j}^{t_i}\mu(s-t_j)ds} \right]^{ Z_{i,i} 1_{\lbrace I[i]=j \rbrace} }
\prod_{i=1}^{n} \prod_{j=J[i]}^{i-1}
\left[ \eta h(t_i-t_j)e^{-\int_{t_j}^{t_i} \eta h(s-t_j)ds} \right]^{ Z_{i,j} }
\end{equation}
The first term in square brackets is the immigrant inter-event time density $g$ introduced in relation with expression~\eqref{eq:renewalInt}) and $I[i]$ is defined in~\eqref{def_indexmostrecent}. When a lag $t_i - t_j, j<i=1,\dots,n$ is an immigrant inter-event time (i.e., $Z_{i,i} 1_{\lbrace I[i]=j \rbrace}=1$) then $g$ is evaluated at that lag. The second term in the square brackets is the \emph{offspring intevent time density}. When a lag $t_i - t_j, j<i=1,\dots,n$ is a parent-child inter-event time (i.e., $Z_{i,j}=1$) then the offspring inter-event time density is evaluated at that lag. To avoid undefined values of~\eqref{eq:cond_pdf}, the offspring inter-event time density is only evaluated at lags within the support of the offspring density $h$. This is done by defining this index function
\begin{equation}
J[i]:=\min(j\in \lbrace 1, \dots, i-1 \rbrace~:~h(t_i-t_j)>0)
\label{defindexfun}
\end{equation}
that takes the index $i=1,\dots,n$ of point $t_i$ and returns the index of the most distant previous point $t_j$ with $t_i$ in the support of its offspring density $h(t-t_{j})$. This issue is not present for $g$ since the immigration intensity never vanishes.
\\
Following~\eqref{eq:likelihood}, the complete data likelihood $L(\boldsymbol{\theta} ; \boldsymbol{t}_{1:n},\boldsymbol{Z}_{n\times n})$ is constructed as a product of the joint pdf of observed events $f(\boldsymbol{t}_{1:n},\boldsymbol{Z}_{n\times n})$ and a compensator term which accounts for the probability of observing no event after the last event in each independent subprocess. Thus, after substituting~\eqref{eq:cond_pdf} into ~\eqref{eq:likelihood} and rearranging, the complete data log-likelihood of the Hawkes process with renewal immigration is written as:
\begin{multline}\label{eq:completelogLik}
\log \text{L}(\boldsymbol{\theta} ; \boldsymbol{t}_{1:n} , \boldsymbol{Z}_{n\times n}) =
\log \text{f}(\boldsymbol{Z}_{n\times n})+
\left[\sum_{i=1}^{n} \sum_{j=J[i]}^{i-1} Z_{i,j} \log \eta h(t_{i}-t_{j})
- \int_{0}^{r}\Phi(s|\mathcal{H}_{s-})ds \right] \\
+ \left[\sum_{i=1}^{n} \sum_{j=1}^{i-1} Z_{i,i} 1_{\lbrace I[i]=j \rbrace} \log\mu(t_{i}-t_{j})
-\sum_{i=1}^{n+1}\sum_{j=1}^{i-1} 1_{\lbrace I[i]=j \rbrace}\int_{t_{j}}^{t_{i}}\mu(s-t_{j})ds \right].
\end{multline}
For compact notation in~\eqref{eq:completelogLik}, we have also denoted $t_{0}=0$ as the starting time and $t_{n+1}=r$ as the stopping time. Neither of these points are included in the sample. As it is seen, the complete data log likelihood is decoupled into a sum of independent terms for offspring and immigrant processes (in square brackets). Thus for a given branching structure $\boldsymbol{Z}_{n\times n}$, the estimation of parameters $\boldsymbol{\theta}$ for the model amounts to independent estimation from i.i.d (independent and identically distributed) samples of immigrant inter-event times and parent-child inter-event times respectively.
\\
The following subsections describe the E step and M step for the corresponding EM-algorithm that accounts for the unobserved branching structure $\boldsymbol{Z}_{n\times n}$.
\subsection{E Step}
The E step involves evaluating the Q function~\eqref{eq:Q_complete}, which is the expected value of the complete data log-likelihood~\eqref{eq:completelogLik} given the observed data $\boldsymbol{t}_{1:n}$ and previous estimates of parameters $\boldsymbol{\hat\theta}^{[m]}$:
\begin{eqnarray}\label{eq:Q_complete}
Q(\boldsymbol{\theta}|\boldsymbol{t}_{1:n},\boldsymbol{\hat\theta}^{[m]}) &=&
\mathrm{E}_{\boldsymbol{Z}_{n\times n}|\boldsymbol{t}_{1:n},\boldsymbol{\hat\theta}^{[m]}}
\Big[\log \text{L}(\boldsymbol{\theta};\boldsymbol{t}_{1:n},\boldsymbol{Z}_{n\times n})\Big]\propto
\nonumber \\
&& \left[\sum_{i=1}^{n} \sum_{j=J[i]}^{i-1} \mbox{Pr}[Z_{i,j}=1|\boldsymbol{t}_{1:i},\widehat{\boldsymbol{\theta}}^{[m]}] \log\eta h(t_{i}-t_{j}) - \int_{0}^{r}\Phi(s|\mathcal{H}_{s-})ds \right]\nonumber \\
&& + \left[\sum_{i=1}^{n} \sum_{j=1}^{i-1} \mbox{Pr}[ Z_{i,i} 1_{\lbrace I[i]=j \rbrace}=1 |\boldsymbol{t}_{1:i},\widehat{\boldsymbol{\theta}}^{[m]} ]\log\mu(t_{i}-t_{j})
\right.\nonumber \\
&& \left.-\sum_{i=1}^{n+1}\sum_{j=1}^{i-1} \mbox{Pr}[I[i]=j|\boldsymbol{t}_{1:i},\widehat{\boldsymbol{\theta}}^{[m]}]\int_{t_{j}}^{t_{i}}\mu(s-t_{j})ds \right],
\end{eqnarray}
where we have omitted the expectation of the first term in~\eqref{eq:completelogLik}, which is constant with respect to $\boldsymbol{\theta}$ and is thus irrelevant to the determination of the parameters $\boldsymbol{\theta}$.
\\
To compute~\eqref{eq:Q_complete}, the missing data $\boldsymbol{Z}_{n\times n}$ should be defined probabilistically. We denote the probability weights as
\begin{equation}
\pi_{i,j}=\mbox{Pr}(Z_{i,j}=1|\boldsymbol{t}_{1:i})
\label{defprobwes}
\end{equation}
and introduce the abbreviation $\pi_{i}=\pi_{i,i}$ for immigrant probabilities. By definition, the weights sums to one: $\sum_{j=1}^{i}\pi_{i,j}=1$, $i=1,..,n$.
The first event ($i=1$) has $\pi_1=\pi_{1,1}=1$ and is thus an immigrant. The second event ($i=2$) has $\pi_{2,2}+\pi_{2,1}=1$ and thus can either be an immigrant or an offspring with the respective probabilities.
Each next event has one more parameter in the probability distribution than its predecessor. All these probabilities for the $n$ observed points can be presented as a lower-triangular matrix $\boldsymbol{\Pi}_{n \times n}$ that is, at each iteration of the EM algorithm, equal to the expected value of the branching structure matrix:
\begin{equation}
\boldsymbol{\Pi}^{[m]}_{n \times n}=\mathrm{E}[ \boldsymbol{Z}_{n\times n} | \boldsymbol{t}_{1:n},\boldsymbol{\hat\theta}^{[m]}]~.
\label{defbranaverastr}
\end{equation}
Finally, we denote conditional probability weights: $\pi_{i,j|k}=\mbox{Pr}[ Z_{i,j}=1 | t_{1:i},I[i]=k ],~j\leq i$ that are abbreviated $\pi_{i|k}=\pi_{i,i|k}$ for immigrants.
In this notation, probabilities in~\eqref{eq:Q_complete} can be written in the form:
\begin{eqnarray} \label{eq:Q_weights}
&& \mbox{Pr}[ Z_{i,j}=1|\boldsymbol{t}_{1:i} ] = \pi_{i,j} \nonumber \\
&& \mbox{Pr}[ I[i]=j |\boldsymbol{t}_{1:i} ] :=\omega_{i,j}
= \pi_{j}\bar{\pi}_{j+1|j}\dots \bar{\pi}_{i-1|j} \nonumber \\
&& \mbox{Pr}[ Z_{i,i} 1_{\lbrace I[i]=j \rbrace}=1 |\boldsymbol{t}_{1:i} ] = \mbox{Pr}[ I[i]=j |\boldsymbol{t}_{1:i} ]\pi_{i|j}=\omega_{i,j}\pi_{i|j},
\end{eqnarray}
where we have introduced weights $\omega_{i,k}$ and the bar denotes the complementary probability: $\bar\pi_{i,j|k}=1-\pi_{i,j|k}$. The first line of (\ref{eq:Q_weights})
is just the definition (\ref{defprobwes}). The second line defines the probability
that $j$ is the last immigrant in the series of $i$ events up to time $t_{i}$ as the product of the probability $\pi_{j}$ that $j$ is an immigrant times the probabilities that all following events are not immigrants (conditional on j being an immigrant). The third line defines the probability
that $j$ is the last immigrant before immigrant $i$ in the series of $i$ events up to time $t_{i}$.
\\
To derive the probability weights $\pi_{i,j}$ defined by (\ref{defprobwes}),
we will exploit the branching structure of the Hawkes process with Renewal immigration~\eqref{eq:HawkesRenewalCondInt}, which consists of a superposition of independent subprocesses. According to the thinning property~\citep{VereJones2003_vol1} (that was originally exploited for a similar purpose of ``stochastic declustering'' in~\cite{Zhuang2002}), the probability that an observed event $t_i$ comes from one of the subprocesses is equal to the proportion of the subprocess' conditional intensity at $t_i$ in the total conditional intensity at the same time $t_i$.
\\
Conditional probability weights $\pi_{i,j|k}$ can be calculated using the \emph{complete data conditional intensity}~\eqref{eq:HawkesRenewalCondInt}, where the immigrant events $\{t_{i}^{(0)}\}$ are known. To derive unconditional probability weights $\pi_{i,j}$, one needs to introduce the \emph{incomplete data conditional intensity}:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:incompl_lambda}
\lambda_{*}(t_i|\mathcal{H}_{t_{i-}}) = \mu_{*}(t_i|\mathcal{H}_{t_{i-}}) +\Phi(t_i|\mathcal{H}_{t_{i-}}),
\end{equation}
where the incomplete data conditional intensity of immigration $\mu_{*}(t_i|\mathcal{H}_{t_{i-}})$ is a weighted mixture of immigrant intensities
\begin{equation}\label{eq:incompl_mu}
\mu_{*}(t|\mathcal{H}_{t_{i-}})=\sum_{j=1}^{N(t)} \omega_{N(t),j}\cdot \mu(t-t_{j}),
\end{equation}
with weights $\omega_{N(t),j}$~\eqref{eq:Q_weights} equal to the probability that the event $j$ at time $t_j$ is the most recent immigrant before $t_{N(t)}$.
\\
Finally, the estimation of probability weights for given observed data $\boldsymbol{t}_{1:n}$ and parameters $\boldsymbol{\hat\theta}^{[m]}$ can be written in the following form:
\begin{eqnarray}\label{eq:probs}
\pi_{i}=\frac{\mu_{*}(t_{i}|\mathcal{H}_{t_{i-}})}
{\mu_{*}(t_{i}|\mathcal{H}_{t_{i-}})+\Phi(t_{i}|\mathcal{H}_{t_{i-}})},
&~&\pi_{i|k}=\frac{\mu(t_{i}-t_{k})}
{\mu(t_{i}-t_{k})+\Phi(t_{i}|\mathcal{H}_{t_{i-}})},\quad k<i=2,...,N
\nonumber \\
\pi_{i,j}=\frac{\eta h(t_{i}-t_{j})}
{\mu_{*}(t_{i}|\mathcal{H}_{t_{i-}})+\Phi(t_{i}|\mathcal{H}_{t_{i-}})},
&~&\pi_{i,j|k}=\frac{\eta h(t_{i}-t_{j})}
{\mu(t_{i}-t_{k})+\Phi(t_{i}|\mathcal{H}_{t_{i-}})},\quad j,k<i,~i=2,...,N
\end{eqnarray}
Probability weights $\pi$ and $\omega$, which enter the Q function~\eqref{eq:Q_complete}, can be jointly computed in a recursive way, iterating over all observed events. For each event $i$ at time $t_i$, we denote the probability weight vectors $\boldsymbol{\pi}_{i}=(\pi_{i,1},\dots,\pi_{i,i})$ and $\boldsymbol{\omega}_{i}=\left(\omega_{i,1},...,\omega_{i,i-1}\right)$. The first event is set to be an immigrant ($\pi_{1,1}=1,~\omega_{2,1}=1$). Looking at the weight vector makes the recursive relation clear:
\begin{eqnarray}\label{eq:recursive}
\boldsymbol{\omega}_{i}&=&\left(
\pi_{1}\bar\pi_{2|1}\dots\bar\pi_{i-1|1} ~ , ~ \dots ~ , ~ \pi_{j}\bar\pi_{j+1|j}\dots\bar\pi_{i-1|j}~ , ~ \dots ~ , \pi_{i-1}
\right)
\nonumber \\
&=& \left( \left( \boldsymbol{\omega}_{i-1} \circ (\bar\pi_{i-1|1},...,\bar\pi_{i-1|j},...,\bar\pi_{i-1|i-2}) \right)~,~\pi_{i-1} \right)
\end{eqnarray}
This recursive equation~\eqref{eq:recursive} expresses that the weight vector $\boldsymbol{\omega}_{i}$ is the Hadamard product (e.g., $(a,b)\circ(c,d)=(ac,bd)$) of the previous weight vector $\boldsymbol{\omega}_{i-1}$ and a vector of complement probabilities; and with $\pi_{i-1}$ concatenated on the end of the product. That is, taking the weight vector $\boldsymbol{\omega}_{i}$, discarding the last element from the vector, and then removing the last $\pi$ probability weight from each remaining element of the vector, one obtains the previous weight vector $\boldsymbol{\omega}_{i-1}$. Having the weight vector $\boldsymbol{\omega}_{i-1}$ then makes it possible to compute the necessary $\pi$ probablility weights (using~\eqref{eq:probs}) to compute the next weight vector $\boldsymbol{\omega}_{i}$. This iteration is done for $i=2,\dots, n$, producing all necessary probability weights for the E step.
\subsection{M Step}
After the estimates of probability weights $\pi$ and $\omega$ for the given estimates of parameters $\boldsymbol{\hat\theta}^{[m]}$ and observed data $\boldsymbol{t}_{1:n}$ are obtained,
one can maximize the expected complete data log-likelihood (Q function)~\eqref{eq:Q_complete} with respect to the parameter vector $\boldsymbol{\theta}$ to obtain new estimates $\boldsymbol{\hat\theta}^{[m+1]}$. However rather than perform multivariate optimization of~\eqref{eq:Q_complete}, one can exploit the decoupling of the immigrant and offspring terms in~\eqref{eq:Q_complete}.
Decomposition of the Q function~\eqref{eq:Q_complete} into the expected log-likelihood of the immigration process intensity $\mu(.)$ and the offspring process intensity $\eta h(.)$ allows one to estimate the two processes independently when they do not share any common parameters.
\\
By recalling the form of an inter-event time density for an inhomogeneous Poisson process \eqref{eq:intereventDensity}, it can be seen that the M step estimation of the immigration process intensity $\mu(.)$ -- i.e., maximization of the expected complete data log-likelihood presented in the second square brackets in~\eqref{eq:Q_complete} -- is simply the maximization of the expected complete data log-likelihood for the inter-event times $t_i^{(0)}-t_{i-1}^{(0)}$ of the inter-event time density $g(w;\boldsymbol{\theta}_g)$ with parameter vector $\boldsymbol{\theta}_g,$
\begin{equation}\label{eq:gMstep}
\boldsymbol{\hat\theta}_g
=\arg \max_{\boldsymbol{\theta}_g} \sum_{i=1}^{n}\sum_{j=1}^{i-1}
\omega_{i,j}\pi_{i|j}\log g(t_i-t_j;\boldsymbol{\theta}_g),
\end{equation}
where the weights $\omega_{i,j}\pi_{i|j}$ denote the probability $\mbox{Pr}[ Z_{i,i} 1_{\{ I[i]=j\}}=1 |\boldsymbol{t}_{1:i} ]$ that $t_j$ and $t_i$ are immigrants with no other immigrant events between them
as defined by expression~\eqref{eq:Q_weights}. In other words, expression~\eqref{eq:gMstep} is the maximum likelihood density estimation with a weighted i.i.d. sample. With the determination of the
estimate $\widehat{g}$, the immigrant intensity can then be computed using~\eqref{eq:renewalInt}. A non-parametric estimate of the density is possible, but numerical stability issues arise when computing the estimate for $\mu(.)$ as the denominator becomes very small.
\\
Estimation of the offspring intensity, requiring maximization of the expected complete data log-likelihood presented in the first brackets in~\eqref{eq:Q_complete}, is perfomed by separately estimating the branching ratio $\eta$ and the offspring density $h(.)$.
\\
The explicit MLE for the branching ratio parameter~$\eta$ can be obtained by analytically maximizing \eqref{eq:Q_complete} with respect to $\eta$:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:etaEM}
\widehat{ \eta }=\frac{ \sum_{i=1}^{n}\sum_{j=1}^{i-1} \widehat{\pi}_{i,j} }{ \sum_{i=1}^{n}\widehat{H}(r-t_{i}) }=\frac{ n- \sum_{i=1}^{n} \widehat{\pi}_{i} }{ \sum_{i=1}^{n}\widehat{H}(r-t_{i}) }~,
\end{equation}
where $H$ is the CDF: $H(t)=\int_0^t h(s)ds$.
The estimated branching ratio~\eqref{eq:etaEM} is the ratio of the expected number of offspring to a number, which is slightly smaller than the total number $n$. The denominator inflates the estimate
of the number of offspring in the finite observation window to account for unobserved offspring expected to occur after the stopping time $r$ \citep{SaiSorintervent1,SaiSorintervent2,SaiSorintervent3}.
\\
Estimation of the offspring density $h(t;\boldsymbol{\theta}_h)$, parameterized by $\boldsymbol{\theta}_h$, is density MLE with an i.i.d sample with sample weights,
\begin{equation}\label{eq:hMstep}
\boldsymbol{\hat\theta}_h
=\arg \max_{\boldsymbol{\theta}_h} \sum_{i=1}^{n}\sum_{j=J[i]}^{i-1}
\pi_{i,j}\log \text{h}(t_i-t_j;\boldsymbol{\theta}_h),
\end{equation}
where the sample weights $\pi_{i,j}$ are the probability that $t_j$ is parent to $t_i$~\eqref{eq:probs}. Non-parametric estimation of the offspring density $h(.)$ is straight-foward, for example assuming it to be a piecewise-constant function on intervals of length $\Delta$. The estimator is then given by
\begin{equation}\label{eq:histEM}
\widehat{h}(t)=\frac{1}{n \Delta }\sum_{i=1}^{n}\sum_{j=1}^{i-1} \pi_{i,j}
1_{t_{i}-t_{j}\in(t-\Delta /2,t+\Delta /2)}.
\end{equation}
\subsection{Computational Efficiency \& Approximations }\label{sec:compEff}
In the proposed EM algorithm, one needs to store $O(n^2)$ probability weights and inter-event times
for the estimation of the offspring density from i.i.d data, as shown from expression \eqref{eq:hMstep}. Estimation of the immigration density~\eqref{eq:gMstep} and the branching ratio~\eqref{eq:etaEM} only require the immigrant probabilities, i.e., $O(n)$ probability weights and inter-event times. One approach to address the quadratic complexity of the estimation of $h(.)$ is to consider a reduced set of missing data. This is done in the following section. However, within the current algorithm, there are two approaches that may be taken to speed up the estimation of $h(.)$.
\\
The first one is a Monte Carlo approach, which works as follows. Choose an ``effective sample size'', e.g., the expected number of offspring points $n_h =\lfloor n - \sum_{i=1}^{n} \pi_i \rfloor$, take a sample (with replacement) of size $n_h$ from all positive inter-event times $t_i-t_j, j<i=1,\dots,n$ where the probability of selecting an inter-event time is proportional to its corresponding sample weight $\pi_{i,j}$. Then estimate $h(.)$ on this unweighted sample. In~\eqref{eq:histEM} and other simple non-parametric density estimation techniques, the inclusion of sample weights is easy. However, this approach also allows for other non-parametric techniques where considering sample weights is not as natural.
Thus, more complicated and potentially less suitable non-parametric estimation methods -- for example choosing a smoothness penalty for the estimate and solving for the estimate using variational calculus as in \cite{LewisMohler2010} -- should not be necessary.
\\
The second approach assumes that the offspring density has finite memory, i.e., a finite support with upper endpoint $t_f$. Then, take $n_f =\max(\lbrace N(t_i)-N(t_j) :~t_i-t_j<t_f) \rbrace)$ to be the largest number of points observed within the support of the density. Thus, the E step and M step only need to be performed on lags $t_i-t_j,~i=1,\dots,n,~j=\max (1,i-n_f),\dots,i-1$. This reduces the memory requirements and computational complexity from $O(n^2)$ to $O(n n_f)$ with $n_f\leq n$ without introducing error into the procedure. Taking $n_f$ too small will bias downward the estimation of the branching ratio -- this is clear from~\eqref{eq:etaEM} where the denominator will be too large. However, for Hawkes processes with light tailed offspring distributions, this may provide a good approximation. Further, $n_f$ may be adaptively chosen at each iteration of the EM algorithm as one obtains an idea on which support most of the mass is distributed.
\section{The Semi-Complete-Data EM Algorithm }\label{sec:semiEM}
In this section, an alternative EM algorithm with a reduced set of missing data is proposed. It may be used for more computationally efficient estimation of the Hawkes process with renewal process immigration. It may also be used to estimate the Hawkes process with deterministic inhomogeneous Poissonian immigration intensity $\mu(t)$ -- the most efficient implementation allowing this to be done in linear time (see Sec. \ref{sec:study2}).
\\
Instead of the missing data being the entire branching matrix, here it is reduced to only the diagonal elements $\mathrm{diag}(\boldsymbol{Z}_{n\times n})=\lbrace Z_{i,i} \rbrace_{i=1,\dots,n}$; i.e., it is
reduced to the indicator variables for if a point is an immigrant or not. This is abbreviated by $\boldsymbol{Z}_{1:n}$ and called the \emph{immigrant vector}. Thus, given the \emph{semi-complete data} $\lbrace \boldsymbol{t}_{1:n},\boldsymbol{Z}_{1:n} \rbrace$, the \emph{semi-complete data log-likelihood}~\eqref{eq:semiCompletelogLik} may be written:
\begin{eqnarray}\label{eq:semiCompletelogLik}
&& \log \text{L}(\boldsymbol{\theta}; \boldsymbol{t}_{1:n},\boldsymbol{Z}_{1:n} ) \propto \nonumber \\
&& \sum_{i=1}^{n} (1-Z_{i}) \log \Phi(t_{i}|\mathcal{H}_{t_{i-}}) - \int_{0}^{r}\Phi(s|\mathcal{H}_{s-})ds \nonumber \\
&& + \sum_{i=1}^{n}\sum_{j=1}^{i-1} Z_{i} 1_{\lbrace I[i]=j \rbrace} \log \mu(t_{i}-t_{j}) - \sum_{i=1}^{n+1}\sum_{j=1}^{i-1} 1_{\lbrace I[i]=j \rbrace}\int_{t_{j}}^{t_{i}}\mu(s-t_{j})ds
\end{eqnarray}
The derivation is similar to that of the complete data log-likelihood~\eqref{eq:completelogLik}. Here immigration and offspring processes are separated, but the offspring processes are not decoupled from each-other, unlike in~\eqref{eq:completelogLik} where they are decoupled. The Q function follows by taking the expectation of~\eqref{eq:semiCompletelogLik} with respect to $\boldsymbol{Z}_{1:n}$ given the observations and parameter values. The full expression is omitted for brevity (its structure is already known from~\eqref{eq:semiCompletelogLik}). Because the parts of~\eqref{eq:completelogLik} and~\eqref{eq:semiCompletelogLik} concerning immigration are identical, the immigration part of $Q$ is identical to the immigration part in~\eqref{eq:Q_complete}. The offspring part will be discussed shortly. For the E-step, the weights are computed using~\eqref{eq:probs}, except that only the immigrant-specific probabilities $\pi_i$ and $p_{i|k}$ are needed. Thus the E-step memory requirements here are $O(n)$ rather than $O(n^2)$ as in the complete data case. Regarding the M-step, estimation of $\mu(.)$ will be the same as in the complete-data case~\eqref{eq:gMstep}. The offspring density $h(.)$ and the branching ratio $\eta$ will be jointly estimated by numerically maximizing the part of the Q function concerning the memory kernel:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:semiM}
(\widehat{\boldsymbol{\theta}}_{h},\widehat{\eta})=\arg\max_{(\boldsymbol{\theta}_{h},\eta)} \sum_{i=1}^{n}
(1-\pi_{i}) \log\left( \sum_{j:t_{j}<t}\eta h(t_i-t_j;\boldsymbol{\theta}_{h}) \right) - \int_{0}^{r} \sum_{j:t_{j}<s}\eta h(s-t_j;\boldsymbol{\theta}_{h})ds.
\end{equation}
While this method is very useful for parametric estimation (see Sec. \ref{sec:study2}), the non-parametric estimation of $h(.)$ will be difficult, due to the fact that, for example, unit mass and positivity must be enforced. Moreover, the offspring density must be evaluated at $O(n^2)$ lags $t_i-t_j$. The Monte Carlo approach proposed in Sec. \ref{sec:compEff} cannot reduce the computation here since $\pi_{i,j},~j<i$ are unknown. However, the second trick of assuming finite support of $h(.)$ can reduce the computation to $O(n n_{h})$. Further, using an exponential offspring density (or any linear combination of them), a recursive relationship \citep{Ozaki1979} reduces the complexity to $O(n)$.
\section{Inference and Goodness of Fit}\label{sec:GoF}
\subsection{Computation of likelihoods and p-values}
Computing likelihoods and performing goodness of fit tests to obtain p-values for estimates of the Hawkes model with Renewal immigration requires evaluating the complete data conditional intensity~\eqref{eq:HawkesRenewalCondInt}.
Thus the immigrant vector $\boldsymbol{Z}_{1:n}=\lbrace Z_{i,i} \rbrace_{i=1,\dots,n} \in \lbrace0,1\rbrace^{n} $ must be known.
\\
As will be shown, likelihoods and p-values must be computed for each immigrant vector, and aggregated. In general, there are $2^{n-1}$ possible valid immigrant vectors (the first point is set to be an immigrant). Immigrant vectors are indexed as $\boldsymbol{z}^{(i)}_{1:n},~i=1,\dots,2^{n-1}$, where the index i is one more than the decimal representation of the binary number in the immigrant vector excluding the first element, i.e., $\boldsymbol{z}^{(1)}_{1:n}=(1,0,\dots0,0)$ ,$\boldsymbol{z}^{(2)}_{1:n}=(1,0,\dots0,1)$, $\boldsymbol{z}^{(3)}_{1:n}=(1,0, \dots,1,0)$, etc. To simplify computation, a Monte Carlo approach can be used where sample averages of likelihoods and p-values are taken. Specifically, given the probabilistic description of the branching structure obtained in the E step (probability weights~\eqref{eq:Q_weights}), an ensemble of realizations of the immigrant vector may be generated, and likelihoods and p-values computed for each realization. Ensemble average likelihoods and p-values may then be taken. A Monte Carlo study of the inferential power of these statistics is conducted in Sec. \ref{sec:caseComplete}.
\subsection{Simulating the Immigrant Vector}
One needs to simulate realizations $\boldsymbol{z}_{1:n}=(z_1,\dots,z_n)$ of the random variable $\boldsymbol{Z}_{1:n}$ with binary state space of dimension $n$. For this, an acceptance-rejection thinning type algorithm \citep{Lewis1979} is used :
Initialize by setting $\boldsymbol{z}_{1:n}=(1,0,\dots,0)$ since the first point is treated as an immigrant. Next, for each following event $t_i$, $i=2,\dots, n$, Bernoulli random variables with probabilities $\pi_{i|1}$~\eqref{eq:probs} are generated, and the first success is taken (at $i=k$) as the second immigrant (so $z_{k}=1$); then the third immigrant is selected in the same way with probabilities $\pi_{i|k},~i=k+1,\dots,n$; and so on. This thinning procedure is repeated until the stopping time $r$ is reached, resulting in a realization $\boldsymbol{z}_{1:n}=\boldsymbol{z}_{1:n}^{(a)}$ where $a\in \lbrace 1,\dots,2^{n-1} \rbrace$. This procedure can be repeated $l$ times, and the sample set $\lbrace a_i \rbrace_{i=1,\dots,l}$ contains the (possibly repeating) indices of the sampled immigrant vectors.
\subsection{Likelihood}
We now present a way to calculate a likelihood value for the Hawkes model with renewal immigration. This procedure is valid for both the complete and semi-complete data EM algorithms. The goal is to have a function by which Hawkes models with and without renewal immigration may be compared in an objective statistical way. To accomplish this, we treat the renewal process immigration as an inhomogeneous Poisson process with (deterministic) intensity,
\begin{equation}\label{eq:renewalInhom}
\mu^{(j)}(t)=\mu(t-t_{I[N(t)]}|\boldsymbol{z}_{1:n}^{(j)}),
\end{equation}
which can be evaluated knowing the immigrant index vector $\boldsymbol{z}_{1:n}^{(j)}$. Thus, plugging in the Hawkes conditional intensity~\eqref{eq:HawkesCondInt} with inhomogeneous Poisson immigration intensity~\eqref{eq:renewalInhom} into the log-likelihood equation~\eqref{eq:lik}, and then transforming to a likelihood, one obtains the \emph{conditional incomplete data likelihood}
\begin{equation}\label{eq:jLik}
\text{L}(\boldsymbol{\theta};\boldsymbol{t}_{1:n}|\boldsymbol{z}_{1:n}^{(j)}) =
\prod_{i=1}^{n} \left( \mu^{(j)}(t_i)+ \Phi(t_i|\mathcal{H}_{t_{i-}}) \right)
\text{exp}\left(-\int_{0}^{r}\mu^{(j)}(s)+\Phi(s|\mathcal{H}_{s-})ds\right).
\end{equation}
for the immigrant vector j. By conditioning, the incomplete data likelihood may then be written,
\begin{equation}\label{eq:LikAgg}
\text{L}(\boldsymbol{\theta};\boldsymbol{t}_{1:n}) =
\sum_{j=1}^{2^{n-1}}\text{L}( \boldsymbol{\theta};\boldsymbol{t}_{1:n}|\boldsymbol{z}_{1:n}^{(j)} )
\mathrm{Pr}[ \boldsymbol{Z}_{1:n}=\boldsymbol{z}_{1:n}^{(j)} | \boldsymbol{\theta} ],
\end{equation}
which is a weighted sum of the conditional incomplete data likelihood~\eqref{eq:jLik}. The weighting probabilities in~\eqref{eq:LikAgg} may be computed by probabilities from the E step~\eqref{eq:Q_weights}. However, this is computationally burdensome. Instead, a Monte Carlo approximation of the likelihood~\eqref{eq:LikAgg} ,
\begin{equation}\label{eq:LikAggMC}
\text{L}(\boldsymbol{\theta};\boldsymbol{t}_{1:n}) \approx \frac{1}{l}\sum_{i=1}^{l} \text{L}\left( \boldsymbol{\theta} ; \boldsymbol{t}_{1:n} | \boldsymbol{z}_{1:n}^{(a_i)} \right) ,
\end{equation}
may be done with sampled immigrant vector indices $\lbrace a_i \rbrace_{i=1,\dots,l}$. The approximate log-likelihood may be obtained by taking the logarithm of this average~\eqref{eq:LikAggMC}. One must be careful with the implementation of these calculations as numerical precision issues may be encountered in the averaging. The logarithm of the incomplete data likelihood~\eqref{eq:LikAgg} or its approximation~\eqref{eq:LikAggMC} may be directly compared with the log-likelihood of the standard Hawkes process~\eqref{eq:lik}.
\subsection{$p$-Values}
To perform a hypothesis test for an estimated point process model, one often does \emph{residual analysis} \citep{Ogata1988} based on the \emph{time change property} \cite{Papangelou1972}: for point process $\lbrace T_{i} \rbrace_{i \in \mathbb{N}}$ with compensator $\Lambda(t|\mathcal{H}_{t-})$, the set of \emph{transformed times} $\lbrace \tilde{T_i}\rbrace_{i \in \mathbb{N}}$, $\tilde{T_i}=\Lambda(T_{i}|\mathcal{H}_{t-})$, are generated by a unit rate Poisson process. Thus for an observed realization $\boldsymbol{t}_{1:n}$, one can estimate its conditional intensity, transform it to $\tilde{\boldsymbol{t}}_{1:n}$ and test if the resultant process is unit Poissonian. For instance, one can test if the transformed inter-event times are standard exponential distributed. A popular Portmanteau-type test for this is the Kolmogorov Smirnoff (KS) test \citep{Massey1951}. This test measures the \emph{KS distance} between the empirical transformed inter-event time distribution and the standard exponential null distribution. Under the null hypothesis, the distribution of the KS distance is known and thus a p-value may be computed.
\\
More generally, define the \emph{test statistic} (e.g., the KS distance) as a random variable $S:=S(\boldsymbol{T}_{1:n},\boldsymbol{Z}_{1:n})$, which, under the null hypothesis, has known \emph{reference distribution} $F_0$. Here the observed test statistic $S(\boldsymbol{t}_{1:n},\boldsymbol{z}^{(j)}_{1:n})$ transforms a realization of points $\boldsymbol{t}_{1:n}$, given the immigrant vector for those points $\boldsymbol{z}^{(j)}_{1:n}$. For semi-complete data sets $\lbrace \boldsymbol{t}_{1:n},\boldsymbol{z}^{(j)}_{1:n} \rbrace$, the null hypothesis $H_0^{(j)}$ is an event where the model is true for $\boldsymbol{Z}_{1:n}=\boldsymbol{z}^{(j)}_{1:n}$. Then the \emph{semi-complete data p-values} are
\begin{equation}\label{eq:p_i}
p^{(j)}=\mathrm{Pr}[S > S( \boldsymbol{t}_{1:n}, \boldsymbol{Z}_{1:n} ) | H_0^{(j)} ]=1-F_{0}(S(\boldsymbol{t}_{1:n},\boldsymbol{z}^{(j)}_{1:n})) ,~j=1,\dots,2^{n-1}.
\end{equation}
For the incomplete data set $\lbrace \boldsymbol{t}_{1:n} \rbrace$, the null hypothesis $H_0$ is that the model is true. The test statistic for this, $S(\boldsymbol{t}_{1:n},\boldsymbol{Z}_{1:n})$, is unknown because the immigrant vector is unknown. Thus, by conditioning, the \emph{incomplete data p-value} is
\begin{equation}\label{eq:p}
p=\mathrm{Pr}[ S > S(\boldsymbol{t}_{1:n} , \boldsymbol{Z}_{1:n}) | H_0 ]= \sum_{j=1}^{2^{n-1}} \mathrm{Pr}[\boldsymbol{Z}_{1:n}=\boldsymbol{z}_{1:n}] p^{(j)},
\end{equation}
which may be expressed in terms of the semi-complete data $p$-values~\eqref{eq:p_i}. A Monte-Carlo approximation of the $p$-value~\eqref{eq:p} may be done,
\begin{equation}\label{eq:pMC}
p \approx \frac{1}{l}\sum_{j=1}^{l} p^{(a_j)},
\end{equation}
by taking the average of the semi-complete data $p$-values, having their indices in the sampled set $\lbrace a_j \rbrace_{j=1,\dots,l}$.
\section{Monte Carlo Study of the Complete Data EM Algorithm}
\label{sec:caseComplete}
In this section, we discuss the convergence of the EM algorithm (consistency), the power of the goodness of fit test of Sec. \ref{sec:GoF}, and the robustness of Hawkes process estimation in the case of mis-specification of the immigration process.
\subsection{Parametrization of the Hawkes process with Renewal immigrants}
We consider a particular type of renewal process for immigration, namely a renewal process whose inter-event durations $W$ have a Weibull distribution with conditional intensity
\begin{equation}\label{eq:weib_haz}
\mu(t)=\frac{\kappa}{\beta}\left(\frac{t}{\beta}\right)^{\kappa-1}, \quad t\ge0~,
\end{equation}
parametrized with the \emph{shape parameter} $\kappa>0$ and \emph{scale parameter} $\beta>0$. In this case, the pdf of inter-event times $W$ is given by:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:weib_pdf}
g(w)=\mu(w) \exp \left(-\int_{0}^{w}\mu(s)ds \right)
=\frac{\kappa}{\beta}\left(\frac{w}{\beta}\right)^{\kappa-1}\exp \left( - \left(\frac{w}{\beta}\right)^{\kappa}\right).
\end{equation}
The case $\kappa=1$, for which the intensity~\eqref{eq:weib_haz} is constant, corresponds to the standard Hawkes process~\eqref{eq:HawkesCondInt} with $\mu=1/\beta$. When $\kappa<1$, the intensity decays implying that the inter-event time density~\eqref{eq:weib_pdf} is sub-exponential. In this case, the immigration process is over-dispersed in comparison with the respective Poisson process for $\kappa=1$. On the other hand, as $\kappa\to \infty$, the inter-event density~\eqref{eq:weib_pdf} weakly converges to a delta-function $g(w)=\delta(w-\beta)$, and the immigration process becomes deterministic with regular event spacing $\beta$.
\\
For the offspring density, $h(t)$, we consider both the exponential pdf, originally suggested by Hawkes~\citep{Hawkes1971_orig}:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:exp}
h_{exp}(t)=\frac{1}{\tau_{0}}\exp\left(-\frac{t}{\tau_{0}}\right)\mathrm{1}_{t\ge0},
\end{equation}
with shape parameter $\tau_{0}>0$; and the Omori-type heavy-tailed pdf \citep{Ogata1988}:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:pow}
h_{Omori}(t)=\frac{\alpha c^\alpha}{(t+c)^{1+\alpha}}\mathrm{1}_{t\ge0},
\end{equation}
with shift parameter $c>0$ and Pareto tail index $\alpha>0$.
\\
The exponential offspring density~\eqref{eq:exp}, which is typical for financial and econometric applications~\citep{Bowsher2007,Bauwens2009,FilimonovSornette2012_Reflexivity,Embrechts2011,AitSahalia2011}, ensures Markovian properties to the model~\citep{Oakes1975}. With respect to calibration, it reduces the computational complexity of evaluation of the log-likelihood from $O(n^2)$ to $O(n)$ by taking advantage of a recursive relation~\citep{Ozaki1979} and is more robust to outliers than heavy tailed alternatives~\citep{FilimonovSornette2013_apparent}. A heavy-tailed offspring density~\eqref{eq:pow} is typical for seismological applications~\citep{Ogata2013}, where it accounts for the power law decay of aftershock activity with time (\emph{Omori's law}) in the so-called \emph{Epidemic-Type Aftershock Sequence (ETAS)} models. While the computational complexity of evaluation of the log-likelihood is $O(n^2)$ and cannot be reduced, in practical applications, one can approximate the power law~\eqref{eq:pow} with a sum of weighted exponential functions~\citep{HardimanBouchaud2013}.
\subsection{Starting Points, Convergence, \& Nonparametrics}
We now discuss the sensitivity to starting values, the speed of convergence, and the use of non-parametric estimation in the complete data EM algorithm. The EM algorithm is iterative and requires starting parameter estimates. Further, EM algorithms in general can get stuck in local optima and have a linear rate of convergence~\citep{Dempster1977}. Thus, selecting reasonable starting points, and understanding the speed of convergence are important. However, it was shown in~\cite{Mohler2011} that the EM algorithm for the standard Hawkes process is a projected gradient descent algorithm with superlinear convergence. But, the speed of convergence worsens (towards linear convergence) as clusters are increasingly overlapping. This is intuitively clear, as the branching structure becomes less obvious as clusters overlap. This was explored in detail in~\cite{SornetteUtkin2009}. A comprehensive study of this phenomenon will not be done for this extended algorithm as new insights are not expected. Instead a couple of illustrative examples are given:
\\
{\bf Example I}: A realization of 1000 points of a standard Hawkes process~\eqref{eq:HawkesCondInt} ($\mu=1,~\eta=0.8,~h=0.2 \text{exp}(-t/5)$) with high branching ratio was simulated. Then the Hawkes model with renewal immigration~\eqref{eq:HawkesRenewalCondInt} was estimated on this data using the complete data EM algorithm. The initial parameter estimates were chosen to be very close to a pure Weibull renewal process with parameters estimated by MLE ($\kappa\approx0.6$, $\beta\approx 0.1$). A small offspring component was included in the initial estimate with uniform density on a large support ($\eta=0.05,~h(t)=0.01\lbrace0 <t\leq 100 \rbrace$).
\\
{\bf Example II}: A realization of 1000 points of a Hawkes process with Weibull renewal immigration~\eqref{eq:HawkesRenewalCondInt},~\eqref{eq:weib_pdf} $~(\kappa=0.7,~\beta=1,~\eta=0.2,~h=0.2 \text{exp}(-t/5))$ with low branching ratio is simulated. Then the Hawkes model with renewal immigration was estimated on this data using the complete data EM algorithm. The initial parameter estimates included Poissonian immigration, a higher branching ratio, and a uniform offspring density ($\kappa=1,~\beta=2, \eta=0.5,~h(t)=0.01\lbrace0 <t\leq 100 \rbrace$).
\\
The results are shown in Fig. 2
with example I in the top row and example II in the bottom row. The estimates of the parameters and the offspring density converge well within 50 iterations, however they do not become completely stable. This is due to the nonparametric density estimation, discussed below. Despite the convergence from poor starting estimates for these different synthetic examples, for analysis of real data the authors recommend taking multiple starting points and keeping the best result.
\\
\begin{figure}[h!]
\begin{center}
\centerline{\includegraphics[width=13cm]{fig2.eps}}
\caption{ Convergence of complete data EM estimates of the Hawkes process with renewal immigration for simulated data. Row (I) corresponds to example I, and (II) to example II. The first column provides the difference between the estimated parameter and the true value with parameters $\kappa$, $\beta$, and $\eta$ being represented by k, b, and e respectively. The right column provides the estimated offspring density $\widehat{h}$. The starting value is the dotted line, and the true function is the bold dashed line. Over iterations, the estimated functions (solid lines) become increasingly dark. }
\end{center}
\label{fig:convergence}
\end{figure}
The local likelihood non-parametric density estimation technique (implemented in R as locfit) was used \citep{Loader}. This flexible technique estimates the log density using splines in a locally adaptive way. The technique budgets function complexity, only allowing the estimated function to be complex in regions where the data suggests that this is necessary -- avoiding over-fitting and over-smoothing. However it still requires the selection of a smoothing bandwidth parameter. If insufficient smoothness is required, over-fitting will occur. The risk of over-fitting is worsened by the iterative nature of the algorithm. But, the locfit method allows for an effective measure of the degrees of freedom of the estimated function to be computed. With this, one can use, e.g., AIC for the estimated Hawkes model to select the smoothing parameter. Sample weights were considered by using the Monte Carlo method explained in Sec. \ref{sec:compEff}. Thus, from iteration to iteration, the parameter estimates will never become completely stable.
\\
In the examples above, only an exponential offspring density was considered for the data generating process. Heavy tailed (sub-exponential) offspring densities will be difficult to estimate non-parametrically. For instance, most non-parametric density estimation techniques will estimate the tail poorly due to sparse observations. The inclusion of mass in the estimate ``beyond the data'' can be achieved only by requiring a degree of smoothness from the estimated function. However, the assumption of high smoothness will cause problems when estimating regions of the density with high curvature (e.g., a steep mode). If a heavy tailed density is suspected, it may be worth starting with a parametric density such as the Weibull~\eqref{eq:weib_pdf}.
\subsection{Consistency}
This section discusses the bias and efficiency of the Complete Data EM estimator for the Hawkes process with renewal immigration~\eqref{eq:HawkesRenewalCondInt}.
\\
We have considered synthetic realizations of the process~\eqref{eq:HawkesRenewalCondInt} with parameters $\kappa$ and $\eta$ presented in Table~\eqref{tab:well}. The Weibull shape parameter $\kappa$ was given values $\{0.5,0.75,1,1.25,1.5\}$ ranging from highly over-dispersed to highly under-dispersed. For each value of $\kappa$, the scale parameter $\beta$ was chosen such that the expected immigrant inter-event time was equal to 10, i.e., $\beta$ was given values in $\{5, 8.4, 10, 10.7, 11.1\}$. The characteristic time $\tau_0$ of the exponential offspring density~\eqref{eq:exp} was chosen to be $\tau_0=3$.
\\
For each combination of parameters, 50 independent realizations each of size 500 events were simulated. Efficient simulation was performed using the algorithm of \cite{Moller2005} which exploits the branching process formulation of the Hawkes process. The model parameters $\hat\kappa$, $\hat\beta$, $\hat\eta$, $\hat\tau_0$ were then estimated using the EM algorithm. We intentionally chose ``bad'' starting values for the estimation procedure to demonstrate the convergence of the method: we selected $\hat\kappa^{[0]}=1$; the scale parameter $\hat\beta^{[0]}$ was chosen as the true value $\beta$ multiplied by a uniform random number in $[0.25,4]$; the branching ratio $\hat\eta^{[0]}$ was chosen as a uniform random number in $[0.1,0.9]$; and the characteristic time of the offspring density $\tau_0$ was chosen as a uniform random number in $[0.5,10]$.
\\
The bias and standard deviation of the estimates are presented in Table~\ref{tab:well}. In general, most parameters were well estimated, especially the branching ratio $\eta$.
Due to the fixed sample size of 500 points, when $\eta$ is larger, the expected number of immigrants $\mbox{E}[N^{(0)}(r)]$ is smaller. Thus the bias and the variance of estimates of immigration process parameters $\hat\kappa$ and $\hat\beta$ are larger with larger $\eta$ and are worst for $\eta=0.9$, i.e., when the $\mbox{E}[N^{(0)}(r)]=50$. Another factor that introduces
systematic error into the results is when $\eta$ is large and thus clusters are overlapping. Intuitively it is clear that when clusters triggered by different immigrant events significantly overlap, it is hard to discern the branching structure. Systematic studies have confirmed that both MLE and EM estimation of the Hawkes process are indeed worse in the case of overlapping clusters~\citep{SornetteUtkin2009,Mohler2011}. However, the bias decreases with increasing sample size.
\\
\begin{table}[t!]
\caption{ Results of the EM estimation (Section~\ref{sec:EM}) of the Hawkes Process with Weibull Renewal immigration~\eqref{eq:HawkesRenewalCondInt} and exponential offspring density on synthetic data. For each combination of parameters, this table presents the average bias and standard deviation (in brackets) of estimates over 50 synthetic realizations.}\label{tab:well}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{ c c c | c c c c }
\toprule
$\kappa$&$\eta$&$\mbox{E}[N_{(0)}(\tau)]$ &$\widehat{\kappa}-\kappa$&$\widehat{\beta}-\beta$&$\widehat{\eta}-\eta$&$\widehat{\tau_0}-\tau_0$ \\
\midrule
0.5 & 0.1 & 450 &0.02 (0.02) & 0.55 (0.74) & 0.02 (0.06) & -0.05 (2.04) \\
& 0.5 & 250 &0.06 (0.03) & 1.70 (1.32) & 0.03 (0.06) & -0.41 (0.52) \\
& 0.9 & 50 &0.16 (0.15) & 0.89 (2.13) & -0.04 (0.05)& -0.46 (0.51) \\
\midrule
0.75 & 0.1 & 450 &0.04 (0.04) & 1.01 (1.22) & 0.06 (0.06) & 0.31 (1.51) \\
& 0.5 & 250 &0.06 (0.07) & 1.16 (1.52) & 0.02 (0.06) & -0.25 (0.48) \\
& 0.9 & 50 &0.12 (0.13) & -1.00 (3.14)& -0.05 (0.05)& -0.52 (0.37) \\
\midrule
1 & 0.1 & 450 &0.02 (0.05) & 0.46 (0.76) & 0.03 (0.04) & 1.71 (2.97) \\
& 0.5 & 250 &-0.02 (0.07)& -0.66(1.08) & -0.03 (0.05) & -0.08 (0.48) \\
& 0.9 & 50 &0.02 (0.15) & -1.58 (2.99)& -0.04 (0.05) & -0.28 (0.60) \\
\midrule
1.25 & 0.1 & 450 &-0.03 (0.08) & 0.04 (0.63) & 0.01 (0.04) & 6.23 (6.59) \\
& 0.5 & 250 &-0.06 (0.11) & -0.69 (1.21) & -0.04 (0.07)& -0.05 (0.59) \\
& 0.9 & 50 &-0.12 (0.20) & -3.16 (2.53) & -0.07 (0.05) & -0.30 (0.49) \\
\midrule
1.5 & 0.1 & 450 &-0.06 (0.09) & -0.09 (0.6) & 0.00 (0.03) & 3.91 (5.35) \\
& 0.5 & 250 &-0.15 (0.10) & -0.79 (1.09) & -0.03 (0.06) & 0.03 (0.56) \\
& 0.9 & 50 &-0.29 (0.26) & -3.17 (2.96) & -0.05 (0.05) & -0.36 (0.42) \\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\end{table}
\subsection{Model Selection}
In this section, we address the question of model selection when the immigration process is unknown. For this, we simulate the Hawkes Process with Weibull Renewal immigration~\eqref{eq:HawkesRenewalCondInt} and exponential offspring density~\eqref{eq:exp}, and then test the null hypothesis ($H_0$) that observed events $\{\boldsymbol{t}_{1:n}\}$ are generated with the standard Hawkes model with Poisson immigration~\eqref{eq:HawkesCondInt} versus the alternative hypothesis ($H_1$) that $\{\boldsymbol{t}_{1:n}\}$ are generated from a Hawkes Process with Weibull Renewal immigration~\eqref{eq:HawkesRenewalCondInt}. In both models ($H_0$ and $H_1$), the offspring density is assumed to be exponential~\eqref{eq:exp}.
\\
We consider three statistical test: (i) comparison of the AIC values of $H_0$ and $H_1$, (ii) the Wilks likelihood ratio test with level 0.05~\citep{Wilks1938} where $H_0$ is nested in $H_1$ and (iii) the KS test of residuals (transformed time events) with level 0.05 for $H_0$ discussed in Section~\ref{sec:GoF}. The option (iii) is not a test of $H_0$ against alternative $H_1$, but the Portmanteau-type test of $H_0$ against the alternative hypothesis $\tilde H_1$, that is loosely specified (i.e. ``not $H_0$'').
\\
The parameters for the process~\eqref{eq:HawkesRenewalCondInt},~\eqref{eq:weib_haz} were chosen as follows: the Weibull shape parameter $\kappa$ was given values $\{0.5,0.75,1,1.25,1.5\}$ and other parameters were not swept, taking values of $\beta=1$, $\eta=0.6$ and $\tau_0=0.3$. For each combinations of these parameters, we have simulated 100 independent realizations of size 250, 500, 750, and 1000 events. Then both models were estimated on each sample: the true model~\eqref{eq:HawkesRenewalCondInt}, which corresponds to $H_1$, is estimated using the complete-data EM algorithm, and the misspecified model~\eqref{eq:HawkesCondInt}, which corresponds to $H_0$, is estimated using straightforward maximization of the log-likelihood~\eqref{eq:lik}. The monte-carlo approximation of the likelihood for the true model~\eqref{eq:LikAggMC} was done with 200 sampled likelihoods.
\\
Table~\ref{tab:power} summarizes the results. In general, the larger the sample, and the further from equidispersed immigration (when $\kappa$ is away from 1), the more powerful the test. AIC provides a very powerful decision rule for comparing the models, even for small sample sizes (e.g., $n=250$) and moderately over and under dispersed immigration (e.g., $\kappa=0.75$ and $\kappa=1.25$ respectively). When the null model is true (i.e., $\kappa=1$), both models provide approximately equal AIC. For this reason, the more complex model should be chosen when the difference in AIC is ``significantly'' greater than zero, otherwise the AIC decision would have a high level. The Wilks test is very powerful in general for sample sizes with 500 or more points, and at even smaller sample sizes given high over or underdispersion (e.g., $\kappa=0.5$ and $\kappa=1.5$ respectively) in the immigration. However, for simulations from the null model (when $\kappa=1$), the Wilks test has too low a level, often rejecting less than 5 percent of the time. This could be because of limited accuracy in the approximation of the likelihood using~\eqref{eq:LikAggMC} with $l=100$ samples, or numerical imprecision when averaging the likelihoods. The KS test is understandably the least powerful as it specifies no alternative model. Even on large sample sizes ($n=1000,~E[N^{(0)}(r)]=400$) and for significant immigrant overdispersion ($\kappa=0.5$), the test has very low power, less than 0.5.
\\
\begin{table}[h!]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{ c c c | c c c c c }
\toprule
Test & n & $E[N^{(0)}(r)]$ &$\kappa=0.5$& $\kappa=0.75$ & $\kappa=1$ & $\kappa=1.25$ & $\kappa=1.5$ \\
\midrule
AIC & 250 & 100 & 0.99 &0.58 &0.06 &0.35 &0.81 \\
& 500 & 200 & 1 &0.79 &0.07 &0.6 &0.95 \\
& 750 & 300 & 1 &0.93 &0.12 &0.68 &0.99 \\
& 1000 & 400 & 1 &0.96 &0.2 &0.83 &1 \\
\midrule
Wilks & 250 & 100 & 0.97 &0.35 &0.01 &0.19 &0.54 \\
& 500 & 200 & 1 &0.67 &0.01 &0.32 &0.87 \\
& 750 & 300 & 1 &0.85 &0.04 &0.5 &0.95 \\
& 1000 & 400 & 1 &0.9 &0.05 &0.65 &1 \\
\midrule
KS & 250 & 100 & 0.08 &0.05 &0.03 &0.06 &0.1 \\
& 500 & 200 & 0.17 &0.04 &0.03 &0.08 &0.17 \\
& 750 & 300 & 0.30 &0.04 &0.06 &0.13 &0.22 \\
& 1000 & 400 & 0.46 &0.06 &0.05 &0.14 &0.22 \\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\caption{ Results of model selection tests. $\mbox{E}[N^{(0)}(r)]$ denotes the expected number of immigrant events in the sample. AIC provides the fraction of the 50 repetitions in which the $H_{1}$ model had superior AIC to the $H_{0}$ model. Wilks provides the fraction of the 50 repetitions in which the $H_{0}$ model was rejected when compared to the $H_{1}$ model using the Wilks test at level 0.05. KS provides the fraction of the 50 repetitions in which the $H_{0}$ model was rejected when using the KS test at level 0.05.
}\label{tab:power}
\end{center}
\end{table}
Following from the analysis presented above, model selection can be successfully resolved using AIC and/or the Wilks test. In the following section, we will see that misspecification of the model (misspecification of the immigration process) can significantly bias parameter estimates.
\subsection{Robustness of Branching Ratio Estimation under Mis-specification of the Immigration Process}\label{sec:robust}
In this section, we explore the robustness of the estimation of the branching ratio~\eqref{eq:etaEM} when the immigrant process is mis-specified in the Hawkes model. For this, we consider again the Hawkes Process with Weibull Renewal immigration~\eqref{eq:HawkesRenewalCondInt},\eqref{eq:weib_haz} and exponential offspring density~\eqref{eq:exp}. We fixed parameters $\eta=0.5$ and $\tau=0.1$ and varied the immigration shape parameter $\kappa$ from highly over-dispersed 0.4 to under-dispersed 1.4. As before, the scale parameter $\beta$ was chosen so that, for any given $\kappa$, the expected immigrant inter-event time was fixed (in this case $\mbox{E}[T^{(0)}_{i}-T^{(0)}_{i-1}]=4$).
\\
For each value of $\kappa$, we have simulated 50 independent realizations. Each realization was used for parametric MLE of the standard Hawkes process with Poisson immigration~\eqref{eq:HawkesCondInt} and (i) exponential offspring density~\eqref{eq:exp} and (ii) Omori-type density~\eqref{eq:pow}.
Figure 3
presents results of the estimation of the branching ratio $\hat\eta$ as a function of the shape parameter $\kappa$ of the underlying immigration process.
\\
\begin{figure}[h!]
\begin{center}
\centerline{\includegraphics[width=7cm]{fig3.eps}}
\caption{Estimates of the branching ratio $\hat\eta$ \eqref{eq:etaEM} using the Hawkes model with Poissonian immigration and exponential offspring density (black) and Omori-type density (grey) when the true process is generated with the Hawkes model with Weibull Renewal immigration with shape parameter $\kappa$. The true branching ratio (0.5) is presented with a horizontal dashed line. Solid lines correspond to median values and dotted lines present quartiles of estimates for both kernels.}
\end{center}
\label{fig:varying_k}
\end{figure}
As seen from Figure 3,
both models with Poisson immigration have a significant bias in the estimation of $\hat\eta$. In the case of under-dispersed immigration ($\kappa>1$), one observes a relatively small negative bias which is similar for exponential~\eqref{eq:exp} and Omori-type~\eqref{eq:pow} offspring densities. In contrast, for over-dispersed immigration ($\kappa<1$) the bias is positive and much stronger. For instance, when $\kappa=0.5$, the branching ratio has median positive bias of 0.17 and 0.31 for the Hawkes process with exponential and Omori-type offspring densities respectively.
\section{Monte Carlo Study of The Semi-Complete Data EM Algorithm}
\label{sec:study2}
In this section, a Monte Carlo study is done, using the semi-complete-data EM algorithm to estimate the standard Hawkes process~\eqref{eq:HawkesCondInt} with deterministic immigration intensity $0<\mu(t)<\infty,~\forall t$. Of course, this algorithm may also estimate the Hawkes process with Renewal process immigration. For computational efficiency, an exponential offspring density~\eqref{eq:exp} is chosen. In this case, both the E and M steps of the semi-complete-data EM algorithm are $O(n)$ and it thus becomes possible to estimate the model on large datasets with a standard PC (e.g., estimation on a sample of tens of thousands of points takes a few minutes). The immigration intensity will be estimated using kernel estimation
\begin{equation}\label{eq:semiMu}
\widehat{\mu(t)}= \sum_{i=1}^{n} \pi_{i} k(t-t_{i};b) 1_{\lbrace 0<t<r \rbrace} + c(t)~,
\end{equation}
where the kernel function $k(t;b)$ is a pdf with bandwidth parameter $b$. This estimator~\eqref{eq:semiMu} distributes mass $\pi_{i}$ around each point $t_{i}$. The higher the bandwidth, the more dispersed the mass is. One practical issue is that mass may be distributed outside of the interval $(0,r]$. This may easily be solved by symetrically ``reflecting'' any mass outside of the interval back into the interval. This operation is denoted by the term $c(t)\geq 0,~0<t\leq r$. Another practical issue is the selection of a kernel density and the bandwidth. In general, this involves managing the trade off between model complexity and goodness of fit. For more detail on how to select the bandwidth, see~\cite{Silverman1986,Turlach1993}. A nice feature of this estimator~\eqref{eq:semiMu}) is that $\int_{0}^{r} \widehat{\mu(t)}=\sum_{i=1}^{n}\pi_i$, i.e., it is an unbiased estimator for the total number of immigrant points in the sample. An important consequence of this is that there is not systematic error in the estimation of the branching ratio~\eqref{eq:etaEM}.
\\
\begin{figure}[h!]
\begin{center}
\centerline{\includegraphics[width=8cm]{fig4.eps}}
\caption{
The solid thin black line is the true sinusoidal immigration intensity used in simulation. Lines are also plotted for the median (heavy solid), quartiles (dashed), and 0.05 and 0.95 quantiles (dotted) of all estimates.
}
\end{center}
\label{fig:inhomo_mu}
\end{figure}
This Monte Carlo study involves simulating the Hawkes process with sinusoidal immigration intensity $\mu(t)=\sin( 2\pi t/250 )+1.5$, exponential offspring density~\eqref{eq:exp}
with scale parameter $\tau_0=0.1$, and branching ratio values $\eta$ sweeping 0.1 to 0.9 by 0.1. For each set of parameters, 50 simulations of this process on one period of the immigration intensity $(0,250]$ were performed. The median sample size was 1200 with quartiles 520 and 1310. Two models were estimated on each realization using the Semi-Complete Data EM algorithm (see section \ref{sec:semiEM}): the first being the true model, and the second (the false model) being the true model but with homogeneous immigration (i.e., $\mu(t)=\mu$). The initial parameter estimates were randomly chosen uniformly at random in the following intervals $\eta \in (0.1,0.9)$, $\tau_0 \in (0.1,10)$ and $\mu\in (0.1,5)$. The EM algorithm was allowed to perform 200 iterations, but in 90 percent of the time converged in less than 100 iterations. The convergence criterion was that the cumulative sum of the absolute differences of estimated parameters for the previous 3 iterations were within $10^{-6}$.
\\
In Fig.~4,
the true immigration intensity and a summary of the estimated immigration intensity across all samples is given for the estimated true model. The immigration intensity is well estimated, including cases when most of the points are offspring (when $\eta=0.9$).
\\
In Fig.~5,
the errors in the estimation of the branching ratio for the true model (grey) and the false model (black) are summarized. For the true model, estimation is consistent and efficient. For the false model, the branching ratio is consistently overestimated, in particular for low values of the branching ratio -- i.e., an upward bias of more than 0.6 when the true branching ratio $\eta=0.1$, and still an upward bias of approximately 0.1 when $\eta=0.5$. The overestimation is due to the fact that the inter-event time process of the inhomogeneous immigration is over-dispersed and contains apparent clustering. Estimation improves with increasing $\eta$ because, as the number of offspring points increases, the memory of the estimated offspring becomes concentrated on the shorter offspring timescale. As a consequence, the dispersion / clustering in the immigration process can no longer be attributed to the memory kernel.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\begin{center}
\centerline{\includegraphics[width=8cm]{fig5.eps}}
\caption{
The difference between the estimated branching ratio and the true branching ratio from repeated simulation and estimation. The horizontal axis is the value of the true branching ratio. The grey lines are for the true model and the black lines are for the false model. The median (heavy solid), quartiles (dashed), and 0.05 and 0.95 quantiles (dotted) of all estimates are given.
}
\end{center}
\label{fig:inhomo_eta}
\end{figure}
\section{Discussion}
In this article, the Hawkes process with renewal immigration~\eqref{eq:HawkesRenewalCondInt} was proposed and estimation was made possible by the introduction of two expectation-maximisation (EM) algorithms, the first being an extension of \cite{Veen2008}. These estimation techniques were shown to be consistent in simulation studies, and easily allow for non-parametric estimation (more easily than in \cite{LewisMohler2010}). Further, a computationally efficient implementation of the semi-complete data EM algorithm was shown to be useful for estimating an inhomogeneous Poissonian background intensity. The importance of correctly specifying the immigration process on branching ratio estimation was highlighted -- indicating strong potential for the overestimation of the branching ratio when poissonian immigration is falsely assumed.
\\
As has been discussed, the Hawkes model has been used in many areas. We recommend as a best practice that the Hawkes process with renewal immigration be considered as an alternative model in such studies, in particular, when quantification of the branching ratio is of interest and one observes highly dispersed locations of clusters in the data. Alternatively, when one observes that the rate of events is changing, the inhomogeneous specification of the immigration process should be chosen.
\\
Let us finish by providing a few examples of the relevance of the results of this paper to the existing literature. Attempts to quantify the branching ratio for high frequency prices fluctuations of the S\&P 500 e-mini futures contracts where the rate of events changes significantly over the day~\citep{FilimonovSornette2012_Reflexivity,HardimanBouchaud2013} can profit from using the semi-complete data EM algorithm with non-parametric estimation of the inhomogeneous Poissonian background intensity. Further, in~\cite{FilimonovSornette2013_apparent}, it was shown that the empirical inter-event time distribution of the S\&P 500 e-mini futures contracts price fluctuations has too heavy of a tail to be explained by a Hawkes process with Poissonian immigration. Allowing for overdispersed renewal immigration could be helpful here. Either of these approaches should lower the estimated branching ratio from the levels reported in~\cite{HardimanBouchaud2013}. For the modeling of rainfall, this approach provides a richer model than \cite{Cowpertwait2000} and superior estimation to \cite{Salim2003}.
\\
There are a number of further methodological research directions suggested by this paper. In general, the EM algorithm enables the maximum likelihood estimation of multi-type point processes, where the type is unobserved; for instance, in other types of cluster processes, potentially with renewal process immigration. Within the Hawkes model, the EM algorithm may also be extended to the case of the marked Hawkes model -- in which the size of an event influences its expected number of offspring via its fertility function -- allowing for easy non parametric estimation of the fertility function. Additionally, the Hawkes model could be further extended to have self-exciting immigration, that is, a model with two stages of clustering.
\bibliographystyle{plainnat}
|
\section{Introduction}
In a series of seminal papers~\cite{Landau}, Landau formulated a very elegant macroscopic theory of normal Fermi liquids~\cite{Nozieres,Platzman_and_Wolff,shankar_rmp_1994,Giuliani_and_Vignale}. In his theory, the response to external perturbations of a system of interacting fermions (whose ground state is continuously connect to the ground state of the free Fermi gas) can be written in terms of a small set of dimensionless parameters known as ``Landau parameters".
``Quasiparticles'', i.e.~dressed electrons, are the key players in a normal Fermi liquid. They move with a renormalized Fermi velocity $v^\star_{\rm F}$ and interact through the so-called Landau interaction function $f_{\sigma\sigma'}(\cos(\theta))$, where $\sigma$ and $\sigma'$ denote spin labels and $\theta$ is the angle between two wave vectors ${\bm k}$ and ${\bm k}'$ lying on the Fermi circle, i.e.~$|{\bm k}| = |{\bm k}'| = k_{\rm F}$, where $k_{\rm F}$ is the Fermi wave number. Interactions between two quasiparticles can be conveniently expanded in terms of dimensionless quantities $F^{{\rm s}, {\rm a}}_\ell$, where ``s" (``a") refers to the spin symmetric (antisymmetric) channel and $\ell = 0, 1, 2, \dots$ to the angular momentum channel. The quantities $F^{{\rm s}, {\rm a}}_\ell$ are the so-called Landau parameters.
The response of a system of interacting fermions to a perturbation that couples to circularly symmetric deformations of the 2D Fermi surface is controlled by the $\ell =0$ channel only. A well-known example is that of the compressibility $K$, which can be expressed as~\cite{Nozieres,Platzman_and_Wolff,shankar_rmp_1994,Giuliani_and_Vignale}
\begin{equation}\label{eq:Fermiliquid}
\frac{K}{K_{0}} = \frac{v_{\rm F}/v^\star_{\rm F}}{1+ F^{\rm s}_0}~.
\end{equation}
Microscopically, the compressibility $K$ is given by the following thermodynamic derivative: $n^2 K = \partial n/\partial \mu$. Here $\mu$ is the chemical potential,
\begin{equation}\label{eq:mudef}
\mu = \frac{\partial [n \varepsilon(n)]}{\partial n}~,
\end{equation}
with $\varepsilon(n)$ the ground-state energy per particle of the system of interacting fermions and $n$ is the density. Finally, $K_0$ is the compressibility of the non-interacting system. The compressibility is therefore a quantity of pivotal importance, since it is directly related to the ``equation of state'' $\varepsilon(n)$, carrying precious information about exchange and correlation contributions to the ground state energy per particle of the interacting system.
In a two-dimensional (2D) parabolic-band electron gas in an ordinary semiconductor quantum well, exchange tends to enhance the charge response~\cite{Giuliani_and_Vignale} driving a change of sign of $\partial \mu/\partial n$ at a density $n^\star = 2 a^{-2}_{\rm B}/\pi^3$, where $a_{\rm B} = \hbar^2 \epsilon/(m_{\rm b}e^2)$ is the material Bohr radius with $\epsilon$ a suitable dielectric constant and $m_{\rm b}$ the solid-state mass---for example, for GaAs $\epsilon \sim 13$ and $m_{\rm b} = 0.067~m_{\rm e}$, where $m_{\rm e}$ is the bare electron mass in vacuum. At the same density $K/K_0$ diverges. The sign change of the charge response of the 2D electron gas in a GaAs quantum well was measured for example by Eisenstein and collaborators~\cite{eisenstein_prl_1992,eisenstein_prb_1994} and the measured compressibility was found to be in excellent quantitative agreement with a simple Hartree-Fock estimate that takes into account the non-zero thickness of the GaAs quantum well.
The ability to isolate 2D ``atomic crystals''---like graphene and its derivatives---though micromechanical cleavage of their three-dimensional parent materials~\cite{kostya_pnas_2005,geim_naturemater_2007,Katsnelsonbook} has offered us an entirely new class of 2D electron systems with a number of exotic many-body properties~\cite{kotov_rmp_2012}.
In particular, the thermodynamic density-of-states (TDOS) $\partial n/\partial \mu$ of few-layer graphene sheets has been the subject of a number of a large number of experimental studies~\cite{martin_naturephys_2008,xia_naturenano_2009,xia_apl_2010,ponomarenko_prl_2010,henriksen_prb_2010,weitz_science_2010,young_prb_2012,yu_pnas_2013}.
Martin {\it et al.}~\cite{martin_naturephys_2008} were the first to present experimental data for single-layer graphene, which were obtained through the use of a scanning single-electron transistor. Data in this work were rather noisy due to the high level of disorder of the used samples, which were exfoliated graphene sheets deposited on ${\rm SiO}_2$. The main conclusion of this work was that the measured TDOS could be fit by a simple non-interacting formula for 2D massless Dirac fermions (MDFs),
\begin{equation}\label{eq:noninteracting}
n^2 K_0 = \left.\frac{\partial n}{\partial \mu}\right|_0 = \frac{2 \varepsilon_{\rm F}}{\pi \hbar^2 v^2_{\rm F}}~,
\end{equation}
where $\varepsilon_{\rm F} = \hbar v_{\rm F} k_{\rm F}$ is the Fermi energy, $v_{\rm F}$ is the density-independent Fermi velocity, and $k_{\rm F} = \sqrt{\pi |n|}$ is the Fermi wave number. The absolute value in the previous expression ensures the applicability of Eq.~(\ref{eq:noninteracting}) to both electron- and hole-doped samples. The only quantity that can be used as a fitting parameter in Eq.~(\ref{eq:noninteracting}) is the Fermi velocity $v_{\rm F}$. By fitting the experimental data, the authors of Ref.~\onlinecite{martin_naturephys_2008} obtained the value $v^\star_{\rm F} = 1.1 \times 10^{6}~{\rm m}/{\rm s}$, which is larger than the bare value of the Fermi velocity given by tight-binding theory~\cite{castroneto_rmp_2009} or by density-functional theory at the level of the local-density approximation (LDA)~\cite{yang_prl_2009,schilfgaarde_prb_2011,attaccalite_PSSB_2009}. The Fermi velocity enhancement is a well understood phenomenon stemming from electron-electron interactions~\cite{gonzalez_prb_1999,polini_ssc_2007,borghi_ssc_2009,elias_naturephys_2011} and is not captured by LDA~\cite{polini_ssc_2007}.
More recently, the TDOS of the 2D MDF liquid has been measured~\cite{yu_pnas_2013} in high-quality graphene sheets encapsulated in hexagonal Boron Nitride (hBN). The authors of Ref.~\onlinecite{yu_pnas_2013} adopted a fitting procedure similar to that used in Ref.~\onlinecite{martin_naturephys_2008}. The quality of the used samples and the experimental accuracy was so high, however, that they were able to unravel a non-trivial dependence of the quasiparticle velocity $v^\star_{\rm F}$, i.e.~the fitting parameter, on carrier density $n$. In particular, they found a logarithmic increase of $v^\star_{\rm F}$ upon lowering the carrier density towards the charge neutrality point. These results are in agreement with earlier results by Elias {\it et al.}~\cite{elias_naturephys_2011} for the quasiparticle velocity enhancement measured from the temperature dependence of the amplitude of the Shubnikov-de Haas oscillations in a weak magnetic field and in a suspended sample.
Theoretically, several calculations of the TDOS of the 2D MDF fluid in doped few-layer graphene sheets have appeared in the literature~\cite{barlas_prl_2007,hwang_prl_2007,abergel_prb_2009,borghi_prb_2010,abergel_prb_2011}.
In particular, Barlas~{\it et al.}~\cite{barlas_prl_2007} pointed out that exchange interactions in a 2D MDF fluid tend to {\it suppress} the charge response, rather then enhancing it. They presented numerical results for the ratio $K/K_0$ calculated within the random phase approximation (RPA), showing clearly that $K/K_0<1$ in a 2D MDF fluid. RPA correlations were shown~\cite{barlas_prl_2007} not to be strong enough to counteract exchange interactions.
The aim of this Article is twofold. We first present numerical results based on the RPA for the TDOS of a doped graphene sheet in the presence of a nearby metal gate. We demonstrate that the role of the metal gate is completely negligible for graphene sheets encapsulated between two insulators with equal dielectric constants (such as in the case of Ref.~\onlinecite{yu_pnas_2013}) and propose experiments where the role of screening exerted by the metal gate is predicted to play a much more important role. We then present a microscopic theory that quantifies the {\it difference} between $K/K_0$ and the quasiparticle velocity enhancement $v^\star_{\rm F}/v_{\rm F}$, highlighting the role of the spin- and circularly-symmetric Landau parameter $F^{\rm s}_0$. We propose an experiment that allows to measure $F^{\rm s}_0$, which will greatly help to clarify the role of vertex corrections in the many-body physics of doped graphene sheets.
Our Article is organized as following. In Sect.~\ref{sect:model} we present our electrostatic model to deal with the presence of a metal gate close to a graphene sheet and we briefly summarize the theoretical approach we have used to calculate separately $K/K_0$ and $v^\star_{\rm F}/v_{\rm F}$. We report our main numerical results in Sect.~\ref{sect:numericalresults}, while our conclusions are reported in Sect.~\ref{sect:conclusions}.
\section{Modelling of the metal gate, basic physical parameters, and theoretical approach}
\label{sect:model}
We focus on the setup depicted in Fig.~\ref{fig:one}, which exemplifies the one employed in recent experimental work~\cite{yu_pnas_2013}. The setup is composed by a metal gate located at a distance $d$ from a graphene sheet, which is encapsulated between two insulators with dielectric constants $\epsilon_1$ and $\epsilon_2$. In Ref.~\onlinecite{yu_pnas_2013} $\epsilon_1 = \epsilon_2 = 4.5$ since the graphene sheet was there encapsulated in hBN. Below we present numerical results for this case but also for $\epsilon_1 \neq \epsilon_2$.
\begin{figure}[t]
\begin{center}
\tabcolsep=0cm
\begin{tabular}{c}
\includegraphics[width=1.0\linewidth]{fig1}
\end{tabular}
\caption{(Color online) A graphene sheet is located at $z = 0$. A metal gate is located at $z = d$. The region of space $0 < z < d$ is filled with an insulator of thickness $d$ with dielectric constant $\epsilon_1$. The region of space $z<0$ is filled with an insulator with dielectric constant $\epsilon_2$. In the experiments of Ref.~\onlinecite{yu_pnas_2013} $\epsilon_1 = \epsilon_2 = 4.5$ corresponding to a graphene sheet encapsulated in hBN. In this work we carry out calculations also for the general case $\epsilon_1 \neq \epsilon_2$.\label{fig:one}}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
Treating the metal gate as a perfect conductor, one can derive from elementary electrostatics the following
effective interaction~\cite{tomadin_prb_2013,carrega_njp_2012}
between two electrons bound to the graphene sheet:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:channelpotential}
V_q= \frac{2 \pi e^2}{{\bar \epsilon} q}\frac{1 - \exp{(-2 q d)}}{\displaystyle 1 + \frac{\epsilon_{1} - \epsilon_{2}}{\epsilon_{1} + \epsilon_{2}} \exp(-2 q d)} \equiv v_q{\cal F}(qd)~,
\end{equation}
where ${\bar \epsilon} \equiv (\epsilon_{1} + \epsilon_{2})/2$ and
\begin{equation}
{\cal F}(x) \equiv \frac{1 - \exp{(-2 x)}}{\displaystyle 1 + \frac{\epsilon_{1} - \epsilon_{2}}{\epsilon_{1} + \epsilon_{2}} \exp(-2 x)}~.
\end{equation}
Note that $V_q$ reduces to the 2D Fourier transform $v_q \equiv 2\pi e^2/({\bar \epsilon} q)$ of the usual bare Coulomb interaction in the limit $d \to \infty$.
In a setup like the one depicted in Fig.~\ref{fig:one}, one can accurately measure the capacitance $C$, which can be easily shown~\cite{eisenstein_prl_1992,eisenstein_prb_1994,yu_pnas_2013} to contain two contributions ``in series'', i.e.
\begin{equation}\label{eq:series}
\frac{1}{C} \equiv \frac{1}{C_{\rm c}} + \frac{1}{C_{\rm q}}~,
\end{equation}
where $C_{\rm c} = S \epsilon_1/(4\pi d)$ is the classical capacitance and $C_{\rm q} \equiv Se^2 \partial n/\partial \mu$ is the so-called quantum capacitance. Here $S$ is the 2D electron system area.
In passing, we note that the {\it Hartree} contribution to the capacitance
\begin{equation}\label{eq:Hartree}
\frac{1}{C_{\rm H}} \equiv \frac{1}{Se^2}\lim_{q \to 0} V_{q} = \frac{1}{C_{\rm c}}
\end{equation}
coincides with the classical capacitance.
\subsection{Microscopic theory of the TDOS}
With the effective interaction in Eq.~(\ref{eq:channelpotential}) we can calculate the ground-state energy $\varepsilon(n)$ of the 2D MDF fluid in the graphene flake by employing the well-known~\cite{Giuliani_and_Vignale} fluctuation-dissipation and Hellman-Feynman theorems. This approach has been used by Barlas {\it et al.}~\cite{barlas_prl_2007} to calculate the TDOS of a 2D system of MDFs in the {\it absence} of a metal gate, i.e.~for $V_q \to 2\pi e^2/({\bar \epsilon} q)$ in Eq.~(\ref{eq:channelpotential}).
When the 2D MDF model is used to describe a doped graphene sheet, the quantity $\varepsilon(n)$ needs to be regularized~\cite{barlas_prl_2007} by subtracting off the (infinite) ground-state energy of the filled sea of negative energy states that the unbounded linear dispersion allows. Following Ref.~\onlinecite{barlas_prl_2007}, we therefore introduce the ground-state energy per excess electron (hole) $\delta \varepsilon(n)$, which is defined as the difference between $\varepsilon(n)$ and the ground-state energy of the charge neutral system.
We find that $\delta \varepsilon(n) \equiv \delta \varepsilon_{\rm x}(n) + \delta \varepsilon_{\rm c}(n)$, where
\begin{equation}\label{eq:exchange}
\delta \varepsilon_{\rm x}(n) = -\frac{\hbar}{2\pi n}\int \frac{d^2 {\bm q}}{(2\pi)^2}~V_q \int_0^{+\infty}
d\Omega~\delta \chi_0(q,i\Omega)
\end{equation}
is the exchange contribution (i.e.~the first order contribution in powers of the electron-electron interaction potential $V_q$) and
\begin{widetext}
\begin{equation}\label{eq:correlation}
\delta \varepsilon_{\rm c}(n) = \frac{\hbar}{2\pi n}\int \frac{d^2 {\bm q}}{(2\pi)^2}\int_0^{+\infty}d\Omega\left\{V_q \delta \chi_0(q,i\Omega)+
\ln{\left[\frac{1-V_q\chi_0(q,i\Omega)}{1-V_q\left.\chi_0(q,i\Omega)\right|_{\varepsilon_{\rm F}=0}}\right]}\right\}
\end{equation}
\end{widetext}
is the RPA correlation contribution. Here
\begin{equation}
\delta \chi_0(q,i\Omega) = \chi_0(q,i\Omega) - \left.\chi_0(q,i\Omega)\right|_{\varepsilon_{\rm F}=0}~,
\end{equation}
where $\chi_0(q,i\Omega)$ is the well-known~\cite{barlas_prl_2007} non-interacting density-density response function of a system of 2D MDFs on the imaginary frequency axis and at finite density $n$, while
\begin{equation}
\left.\chi_0(q,i\Omega)\right|_{\varepsilon_{\rm F}=0} = -\frac{N_{\rm f} q^2}{16\hbar}\frac{1}{\sqrt{\Omega^2 + v^2_{\rm F} q^2 }}
\end{equation}
is the same quantity for an undoped system. Here, $N_{\rm f} = 4$ is the number of fermion flavors in graphene (spin and valley degrees of freedom).
The integrals over $\Omega$ in Eqs.~(\ref{eq:exchange})-(\ref{eq:correlation}) are finite while the integrals over $q$ have logarithmic ultraviolet
divergences. As explained in Ref.~\onlinecite{barlas_prl_2007}, these divergences are physical and follow from the interaction between
electrons near the Fermi energy and electrons very far from the Fermi
energy. We introduce an ultraviolet cutoff for the wavevector integrals,
\begin{equation}\label{eq:cutoff}
k_{\rm c} = \sqrt{\frac{2\pi}{{\cal A}_0}}~,
\end{equation}
where ${\cal A}_0=3\sqrt{3} a^2_0/2 \simeq 0.052~{\rm nm}^2$ is the area of the unit cell in the honeycomb lattice, $a_0 \simeq 1.42$~\AA~being the carbon-carbon distance. The 2D MDF model is useful for carrier densities such that $k_{\rm F} \ll k_{\rm c}$.
The TDOS can be easily calculated from Eq.~(\ref{eq:mudef}) with $\varepsilon(n) \to \delta \varepsilon(n)$. Note that the regularization scheme we have employed, i.e.~the definition of $\delta \varepsilon(n)$, does not affect the dependence of $\mu$ on $n$ since Eq.~(\ref{eq:mudef}) is sensitive only to changes of the ground-state energy with excess electron or hole density and not to the absolute magnitude of the ground-state energy.
\subsection{Microscopic theory of the quasiparticle velocity}
We now turn to summarize the microscopic theory~\cite{polini_ssc_2007} we have used to calculate the renormalized quasiparticle velocity $v^\star_{\rm F}$. We start from a microscopic expression for the quasiparticle Matsubara self-energy $\Sigma_s({\bm k},i\omega_n)$ in which this quantity is expanded to first order in the dynamically screened
Coulomb interaction $W$ (setting $\hbar=1$):
\begin{widetext}
\begin{equation}\label{eq:sigma_rpa}
\Sigma_s({\bm k},i\omega_n)=-\frac{1}{\beta}\sum_{s' = \pm 1}
\int \frac{d^2{\bm q}}{(2\pi)^2}\sum_{m=-\infty}^{+\infty}
W(q,i\Omega_m)\left[\frac{1+s s'\cos{(\theta_{{\bm k},{\bm k}+{\bm q}})}}{2}\right]G^{(0)}_{s'}({\bm k}+{\bm q},i\omega_n+i\Omega_m)~,
\end{equation}
\end{widetext}
where $s=+$ for electron-doped systems and $s=-$ for
hole-doped systems, $\beta=1/(k_{\rm B} T)$,
\begin{equation}\label{eq:ex+corr}
W(q,i\Omega)=V_q+V^2_q\chi_{nn}(q, i\Omega)~,
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}\label{eq:chi_RPA}
\chi_{nn}(q,i\Omega) =
\frac{\chi_0(q,i\Omega)}{1-V_q\chi_0(q,i\Omega)} \equiv \frac{\chi_0(q,i\Omega)}{\varepsilon(q,i\Omega)}
\end{equation}
is the RPA density-density response function and $\varepsilon(q,i\Omega)$ is the RPA dielectric function.
In Eq.~(\ref{eq:sigma_rpa}) $\omega_n=(2n+1)\pi/\beta$ is a fermionic Matsubara frequency, while the sum runs over all the bosonic Matsubara frequencies $\Omega_m=2m\pi/\beta$.
The first and second terms in Eq.~(\ref{eq:ex+corr}) are responsible for the exchange interaction between a quasiparticle and the occupied Fermi sea (including the negative energy component),
and for the interaction with particle-hole and collective virtual fluctuations, respectively.
The factor
in square brackets in Eq.~(\ref{eq:sigma_rpa}), which depends on the angle $\theta_{{\bm k},{\bm k}+{\bm q}}$ between ${\bm k}$ and ${\bm k}+{\bm q}$, captures
the dependence of Coulomb scattering on the relative chirality $s s'$ of the interacting electrons. Finally, the Green's function
\begin{equation}\label{eq:greensfunction}
G^{(0)}_{s}({\bm k},i\omega) = \frac{1}{i\omega - \xi_s({\bf k})}
\end{equation}
describes the free propagation of states with wave vector ${\bm k}$, Dirac energy $ \xi_s({\bm k})=s \hbar v_{\rm F} k-\mu$ (relative to the chemical potential) and chirality $s=\pm 1$.
In the absence of the metal gate, this approach captures~\cite{polini_ssc_2007}
the Gonz\'alez-Guinea-Vozmediano logarithmic behavior of the quasiparticle velocity $v^\star_{\rm F}$ at low densities~\cite{gonzalez_prb_1999}, while at the same time taking into account dynamical screening at the RPA level.
Once again, the presence of a metal gate is here taken into account by employing the screened e-e interaction in Eq.~(\ref{eq:channelpotential}).
\subsection{Analytical results at the exchange-only level}
Before turning to the presentation of our main numerical results, we would like to derive some useful analytical results for the TDOS to leading order in the limit $k_{\rm c} \gg k_{\rm F}, 1/d$ and at the exchange-only level.
We start by evaluating the exchange contribution to the ground-state energy. After simple algebraic manipulations on Eq.~(\ref{eq:exchange}) we arrive at the following result:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:exchange-explicit}
\delta \varepsilon_{\rm x}(n) = -\frac{\varepsilon_{\rm F}}{\pi}\alpha_{\rm ee}\int_0^{\Lambda}d{\bar q}~{\cal F}({\bar q}dk_{\rm F})~\ell({\bar q})~,
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
\Lambda \equiv \frac{k_{\rm c}}{k_{\rm F}}
\end{equation}
is the ultraviolet cutoff measured in units of the Fermi wave number and
\begin{equation}
\ell({\bar q}) \equiv \int_0^{+\infty}d{\bar \Omega}~\delta {\bar \chi}_0({\bar q}, i {\bar \Omega})
\end{equation}
with ${\bar q} = q/k_{\rm F}$ and ${\bar \Omega} = \hbar\Omega/\varepsilon_{\rm F}$. Finally, $\delta {\bar \chi}_0({\bar q}, i {\bar \Omega}) = \delta \chi_0({\bar q}, i {\bar \Omega})/N(\varepsilon_{\rm F})$ where $N(\varepsilon_{\rm F}) = N_{\rm f} \varepsilon_{\rm F}/(2\pi \hbar^2 v^2_{\rm F})$ is the density-of-states at the Fermi energy.
It is possible to show~\cite{barlas_prl_2007} that
\begin{equation}\label{eq:Laurent}
\lim_{{\bar q}\to \infty}\ell({\bar q}) = -\frac{\pi}{6 {\bar q}} + {\cal O}(1/{\bar q}^{2})~.
\end{equation}
Let us first review the behavior of $\delta \varepsilon_{\rm x}(n)$ in the absence of a metal gate ($d \to \infty$). In this case the form factor ${\cal F}(x) = 1$. We find the following asymptotic behavior in the limit $\Lambda \gg 1$ ands in the absence of a metal gate~\cite{barlas_prl_2007}:
\begin{equation}
\delta \varepsilon_{\rm x}(n) = \frac{\alpha_{\rm ee}}{6}\ln(\Lambda) + {\rm regular~terms}~,
\end{equation}
where ``regular terms'' denotes terms that are {\it finite} in the limit $\Lambda \gg 1$. To this order of perturbation theory and to leading order in the limit $\Lambda \gg 1$ we therefore find
\begin{equation}\label{eq:K-leading}
\frac{K_0}{K} = 1+ \frac{\alpha_{\rm ee}}{4}\ln(\Lambda)~.
\end{equation}
It is very well known~\cite{gonzalez_prb_1999,polini_ssc_2007,borghi_ssc_2009} that the leading-order asymptotic expansion for $\Lambda \gg1 $ on the right-hand side of Eq.~(\ref{eq:K-leading}) coincides with the expansion of the quasiparticle velocity. We are therefore led to conclude that, to first order in $e^2$ and to leading order in $\ln(\Lambda)$ in the limit $\Lambda \gg 1$, $K_0/K = v^\star_{\rm F}/v_{\rm F}$. This agrees with Eq.~(\ref{eq:Fermiliquid}) since $F^{\rm s}_0$ is zero to first order in electron-electron interactions. The suppression of the compressibility of the interacting system, i.e.~$K$, is tied to the quasiparticle velocity enhancement~\cite{barlas_prl_2007}.
In the presence of a metal gate, however, Eq.~(\ref{eq:K-leading}) may change.
For sake of simplicity, we focus on the case $\epsilon_1 = \epsilon_2$. In this case ${\cal F}(x) = 1 -\exp(-2x)$. We therefore find
\begin{equation}\label{eq:logd}
\delta \varepsilon_{\rm x}(n) = -\frac{\varepsilon_{\rm F}}{\pi}\alpha_{\rm ee}\int_0^{\Lambda}d{\bar q}~[1 - \exp(-2{\bar q} \eta)]~\ell({\bar q})~,
\end{equation}
where we have introduced the dimensionless parameter $\eta = d k_{\rm F}$. Using Eq.~(\ref{eq:Laurent}) in Eq.~(\ref{eq:logd}) we find
\begin{eqnarray}\label{eq:calculation}
\lim_{k_{\rm c} \to \infty} \delta \varepsilon_{\rm x}(n) &=& \frac{\varepsilon_{\rm F}}{6}\alpha_{\rm ee}\int_{\Lambda_0}^{\Lambda}d{\bar q}~\frac{1 - \exp(-2{\bar q} \eta)}{\bar q}\nonumber\\
&=&\frac{\varepsilon_{\rm F}}{6}\alpha_{\rm ee}\int_{2\Lambda_0\eta}^{2dk_{\rm c}}dx~\frac{1 - e^{-x}}{x}~,
\end{eqnarray}
where we have introduced an infrared cutoff $\Lambda_0$, whose precise value is completely irrelevant to end of calculating the leading behavior of $\delta \varepsilon_{\rm x}(n)$ in the limit $k_{\rm c} \to \infty$. We now consider the case of a nearby gate, i.e.~the limit in which $\eta \to 0$ or, more explicitly, $d \ll 1/k_{\rm F}$. In this case, Eq.~(\ref{eq:calculation}) yields
\begin{equation}\label{eq:new_limit}
\delta \varepsilon_{\rm x}(n) =\frac{\varepsilon_{\rm F}}{6}\alpha_{\rm ee}\ln(d k_{\rm c}) + {\rm regular~terms}~,
\end{equation}
and, therefore,
\begin{equation}\label{eq:K-leading-metal-gate}
\frac{K_0}{K} = 1+ \frac{\alpha_{\rm ee}}{4}\ln(d k_{\rm c})~.
\end{equation}
We note that, as expected, the suppression of the compressibility $K$ with respect to the non-interacting value $K_0$ in the case of a nearby gate ($dk_{\rm F} \ll 1$) is less severe than in the case of a distant gate ($dk_{\rm F} \gg 1$).
\section{Numerical results}
\label{sect:numericalresults}
\begin{figure}[t]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=1.0\linewidth]{fig2}
\caption{(Color online) The TDOS $\partial n/\partial \mu$ (in units of ${\rm meV}^{-1}\times 10^{10} {\rm cm}^{-2}$) is plotted as a function of carrier density $n$ in the range $1.0 \times 10^{10}~{\rm cm}^{-2} \leq n \leq 1.0 \times 10^{12}~{\rm cm}^{-2}$. Different curves correspond to different values of the graphene/metal gate distance $d$. The numerical results in this figure have been obtained by setting $\epsilon_1 = \epsilon_ 2 = 4.5$, corresponding to a graphene sheet encapsulated in hBN~\cite{yu_pnas_2013}. We note that in this case the dependence on the distance $d$ between graphene and the metal gate is negligible.\label{fig:two}}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
Figs.~\ref{fig:two}-\ref{fig:three} display our main numerical results for the TDOS of a graphene sheet in the presence of a metal gate.
In Fig.~\ref{fig:two} we illustrate the dependence of the TDOS $\partial n/\partial \mu$ on carrier density $n$ in the range $n = 1.0 \times 10^{10}~{\rm cm}^{-2}$ - $1.0 \times 10^{12}~{\rm cm}^{-2}$. This plot refers to the case $\epsilon_1 = \epsilon_2 = 4.5$. Different curves refer to different values of $d$. We see that in this case the TDOS displays a very weak dependence on $d$. The asymptotic result for a graphene sheet in the absence of a metal gate (curve labeled by $d = \infty$) is practically reached immediately. On the scale of the plot, results for a gate as close as $d = 3~{\rm nm}$ (roughly corresponding to $10$ hBN layers) are indistinguishable from the $d = \infty$ results.
\begin{figure}[t]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=1.0\linewidth]{fig3}
\caption{(Color online) Same as in Fig.~\ref{fig:two} but for $\epsilon_1 = 4.5$ and $\epsilon_2 = 1.0$. In this case the TDOS in the presence of the metal gate is quite different from the one in the absence of a gate (curve labeled by $d = \infty$).\label{fig:three}}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
The situation is rather different in the case $\epsilon_1 \neq \epsilon_2$. In this general case, the effective interaction (\ref{eq:channelpotential}) leads to a larger dependence of the TDOS on $d$. In Fig.~\ref{fig:three}, for example, we illustrate our predictions for $\partial n/\partial \mu$ in the case $\epsilon_1 = 4.5$ and $\epsilon_2 = 1$. In this case, even gates located as far as $30~{\rm nm}$ from the graphene sheet represent a severe obstacle in the quest of the asymptotic $d = \infty$ result.
We now turn to a brief discussion of the Landau parameter $F^{\rm s}_{0}$. This quantity can be easily accessed experimentally by measuring in the same setup {\it both} the TDOS $\partial n/\partial \mu$ and the quasiparticle velocity enhancement $v^\star_{\rm F}/v_{\rm F}$. Our numerical results for $v^\star_{\rm F}/v_{\rm F}$ are reported in Fig.~\ref{fig:four}. Data shown in this plot refer to the case $\epsilon_1 = \epsilon_2 = 4.5$.
Our predictions for $F^{\rm s}_{0}$ are shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:five}. These results have been obtained from
\begin{equation}\label{eq:Fzeros}
F^{\rm s}_{0} = \frac{v_{\rm F}/v^\star_{\rm F}}{K/K_0} -1~,
\end{equation}
which trivially descends from the Fermi-liquid formula (\ref{eq:Fermiliquid}).
\begin{figure}[t]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=1.0\linewidth]{fig4}
\caption{(Color online) The quasiparticle velocity enhancement $v^\star_{\rm F}/v_{\rm F}$ is plotted as a function of carrier density $n$. As in Figs.~\ref{fig:two}-\ref{fig:three}, different curves refer to different values of the graphene/metal gate distance $d$. Data in this plot refer to the case~\cite{yu_pnas_2013} $\epsilon_1 = \epsilon_2 = 4.5$. As expected, decreasing $d$ for a fixed carrier density results in a decrease of the ratio $v^\star_{\rm F}/v_{\rm F}$.\label{fig:four}}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[t]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=1.0\linewidth]{fig5}
\caption{(Color online) Theoretical predictions for the Landau parameter $F^{\rm s}_{0}$ of a 2D MDF fluid. The dimensionless quantity $F^{\rm s}_{0}$ calculated from Eq.~(\ref{eq:Fzeros}) is plotted as a function of carrier density $n$. Data in this plot refer to the case~\cite{yu_pnas_2013} $\epsilon_1 = \epsilon_2 = 4.5$.\label{fig:five}}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\section{Summary and conclusions}
\label{sect:conclusions}
In summary, we have presented extensive numerical calculations based on the random phase approximation of the quantum capacitance and the spin- and circularly-symmetric Landau parameter of a two-dimensional fluid of massless Dirac fermions in a doped graphene sheet.
With reference to recent experiments~\cite{yu_pnas_2013}, we have quantified the role of a metal gate, discovering that the quantum capacitance of a graphene sheet encapsulated between two media with identical (or similar) dielectric constants is nearly insensitive to the presence of the gate---see results in Fig.~\ref{fig:two}.
Finally, we have pointed out that the combination of Shubnikov-de Haas transport experiments in a weak magnetic field {\it and} quantum capacitance measurements in the same sample allows to extract the value of the spin- and circularly-symmetric Landau parameter $F^{\rm s}_0$ of a two-dimensional fluid of massless Dirac fermions. These experiment may shed light on the role of vertex corrections in the many-body theory of two-dimensional massless Dirac fermion fluids. Our predictions for $F^{\rm s}_0$ are reported in Fig.~\ref{fig:five}.
In passing, we would like to remark that the thermodynamic density of states can also be calculated from an exact identity~\cite{katsnelson_prb_2000}, which can be easily derived from the sole use of the Luttinger theorem and Ward identities~\cite{Nozieres,Platzman_and_Wolff,shankar_rmp_1994,Giuliani_and_Vignale}. This is not the route we have followed here. The thermodynamic density of states calculated from the derivative of the random-phase-approximation ground-state energy with respect to density does {\it not} coincide e.g.~with the one that can be calculated from the value of the retarded $G_0W$ self-energy (\ref{eq:sigma_rpa}) on the Fermi surface. We remind the reader that the quasiparticle self-energy has been used in this work to calculate the renormalized quasiparticle velocity $v^\star_{\rm F}$. This lack of ``internal consistency'' in the theory of the Fermi-liquid properties of 2D quantum electron liquids can be bypassed, at least in the charge channel where Luttinger theorem holds, by using the exact identities in Eqs.~(10)-(11) of Ref.~\onlinecite{katsnelson_prb_2000}.
\acknowledgements
This work was supported by the E.U. through the Graphene Flagship program (contract no. CNECT-ICT-604391) (M.I.K. and M.P.) and the ERC Advanced Grant No. 338957 FEMTO/NANO (M.I.K.), and the Italian Ministry of Education, University, and Research (MIUR) through the programs ``FIRB - Futuro in Ricerca 2010" - Project PLASMOGRAPH (Grant No. RBFR10M5BT) and ``Progetti Premiali 2012" - Project ABNANOTECH (M.P.).
|
\section{Introduction}
Various forms of distinguishing problems in graphs arising from several applications have been studied. Imagine a setting where one wants to detect a hazard in a network (graph) using simple local detectors. Every network node should be within reach of some detector, say at graph distance at most~$1$: in this case the detectors must form a dominating set. If, in addition, one wants to be able to precisely locate the hazard, every node must be uniquely determined by the set of detectors monitoring (dominating) it. This is the notion of a locating-dominating set or an identifying code (depending on whether the detector nodes should be distinguished themselves).
Since the introduction of locating-dominating sets by Slater~\cite{S87,S88} and identifying codes by Karpovsky, Chakrabarty and Levitin~\cite{KCL98}, these concepts have been widely studied and applied to hazard- or fault-detection in networks and facilities~\cite{KCL98,UTS04}, routing~\cite{LTCS07}, as well as in relation with graph isomorphism~\cite{B80} and logical characterizations of graphs~\cite{KPSV04}. An online bibliography on these topics is maintained by Lobstein~\cite{biblio}. We remark that these problems belong to the more general set of distinguishing or separating problems in graphs and hypergraphs; see the concept of hypergraph \emph{separating systems}~\cite{BS07,R61} (which is also known under the name of \emph{test covers}~\cite{DHHHLRS03,MS85} or \emph{discriminating codes}~\cite{CCCHL08}, and is related to a celebrated theorem of Bondy~\cite{B72}).
In this paper, we study locating-dominating sets and identifying codes in graphs of girth at least~$5$ (that is, containing no triangle or $4$-cycle). Their behaviour in this class is quite different from the class of graphs with girth~$3$ or~$4$. We are able to give upper bounds on the smallest size of such sets in terms of the order of the graph, and discuss the tightness of our bounds.
\medskip
\noindent\emph{Definitions.} All graphs in this paper will be undirected and finite. The order of a graph will be denoted by the letter $n$. The open and closed neighbourhoods of a vertex $x$ are denoted $N(x)$ and $N[x]$, respectively, and the \emph{degree} of $x$ is the size of its open neighbourhood. A graph is \emph{cubic} if all its vertices have degree~$3$. A path along vertices $x_1,\ldots,x_k$ is denoted $x_1-\ldots-x_k$. The \emph{order} of a path is the number of its vertices, and its \emph{length} is the number of its edges (that is, its order minus one). We may also denote the concatenation of two paths $P,P'$ by $P-P'$. A \emph{Hamiltonian path} of a graph is a path containing all its vertices. Given a set $X$ of vertices in a graph $G$, $G[X]$ denotes the subgraph of $G$ induced by $X$. A graph $G$ is \emph{vertex-transitive} if, given any two vertices $x$ and $y$, there is an automorphism of $G$ mapping $x$ to $y$.
In a graph $G$, a vertex \emph{dominates} itself and all its neighbours. A set $D$ of vertices dominates vertex $x$ if some vertex of $D$ dominates $x$. Similarly, $D$ \emph{2-dominates} $x$ if at least two distinct vertices of $D$ dominate $x$. Set $D$ is called a \emph{dominating set} if $D$ dominates all vertices in $V(G)$. If a vertex $x$ belongs to the symmetric difference $N[u]\Delta N[v]$ (i.e. $x$ dominates exactly one of $u,v$) we say that $x$ \emph{separates} $u$ from $v$.
We have the following definitions of the core concepts of this paper:
\begin{definition}[\cite{KCL98,S87,S88}]
Given a graph $G$, a subset $C$ of vertices of $V(G)$ which is both a dominating set and such that all vertex-pairs in $V(G)\setminus C$ are separated by some vertex of $C$ is called a \emph{locating-dominating set} of $G$. If \emph{all} vertex-pairs in $V(G)$ are separated by some vertex of $C$, it is called an \emph{identifying code} of $G$.
\end{definition}
Note that a graph always has a locating-dominating set, but it has an identifying code (it is \emph{identifiable}) if and only if it has no \emph{twins}, i.e. vertices with the same closed neighbourhood. However, for triangle-free graphs (and thus for graphs of girth at least~$5$), twins cannot have any common neighbour, leading to the following observation:
\begin{observation}
A triangle-free graph is identifiable if and only if it has no connected component with two vertices.
\end{observation}
The minimum size of a dominating set, a locating-dominating set, and an identifying code of a graph $G$ are called the \emph{domination number} $\gamma(G)$, the \emph{location-domination number} $\gamma^{\text{\tiny{LD}}}(G)$ and the \emph{identifying code number} $\gamma^{\text{\tiny{ID}}}(G)$ of $G$, respectively. If $G$ is identifiable we have $\gamma(G)\leq\gamma^{\text{\tiny{LD}}}(G)\leq\gamma^{\text{\tiny{ID}}}(G)$.
\medskip
\noindent\emph{Related work.} A classic result in domination due to Ore~\cite{O62} is that for every graph $G$ of order $n$ with minimum degree at least~$1$, $\gamma(G)\leq\frac{n}{2}$. Later, McCuaig and Shepherd~\cite{MS89} proved that besides seven exceptional graphs, if $G$ is connected and has minimum degree at least~$2$, then $\gamma(G)\leq\frac{2n}{5}$. For minimum degree at least~$3$, Reed~\cite{R96} proved the bound $\gamma(G)\leq\frac{3n}{8}$. More generally, it is known that any graph $G$ with minimum degree~$\delta$ has domination number $\gamma(G) = O\left(\frac{\log\delta}{\delta}\right)n$ (see~\cite{AS08}), and this bound is asymptotically tight \cite{A90}. On the other hand, for connected cubic graphs with $n\geq 9$, Kostochka and Stodolsky~\cite{KS09} proved that $\gamma(G)\leq\frac{4n}{11}$.
A bound of this form does not exist for locating-dominating sets or identifying codes. Indeed, $d$-regular graphs with locating-dominating number and identifying code number of the form $n\left(1-\frac{1}{\Theta(d)}\right)$ were constructed by the second author and Perarnau~\cite{FP11}. However, these constructions contain either triangles or $4$-cycles, and the same authors showed that for any graph $G$ of order $n$, girth at least~$5$ and minimum degree~$\delta$, an (asymptotically tight) upper bound of the form $\gamma^{\text{\tiny{LD}}}(G)\leq\gamma^{\text{\tiny{ID}}}(G) = O\left(\frac{\log\delta}{\delta}\right)n$ (similar to the one for dominating sets) holds. However, for small values of $\delta$ the bound of~\cite{FP11} is not meaningful; when $\delta=2$, the second author showed the bound $\gamma^{\text{\tiny{ID}}}(G)\leq\frac{7n}{8}=0.875n$ in his PhD thesis~\cite{F}.
In this paper, we study the following question:
\begin{question}
What are tight upper bounds on $\gamma^{\text{\tiny{LD}}}(G)$ and $\gamma^{\text{\tiny{ID}}}(G)$ for graphs $G$ of given (small) minimum degree $\delta\geq 2$ and girth at least~$5$?
\end{question}
\renewcommand{\arraystretch}{0.9}
\begin{table}[ht!]
\centering
\scalebox{0.85}{
\begin{tabular}{c||c|c|c||c|c|c}
& \multicolumn{3}{c}{\textbf{Location-domination number}} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{\textbf{Identifying code number}}\\
& \multicolumn{3}{|c||}{} & \multicolumn{3}{|c}{}\\
& \multicolumn{2}{c|}{largest known examples} & & \multicolumn{2}{c|}{largest known examples} & \\[0.1cm]
& & & upper bound & & & upper bound\\
& small & arb. large & & small & arb. large & \\[0.2cm]
\hline
\hline
& & & & & & \\[-0.2cm]
\multirow{2}*{$\delta=2$} & $0.5$ & $0.5-\epsilon$ & \multirow{5}*{\minitab[c]{$0.5$\\Thm.~\ref{thm:vdp-LD}}} & $\frac{5}{7}$ & $0.6-\epsilon$ & \multirow{5}*{\minitab[c]{$\frac{5}{7} < 0.715$\\Thm.~\ref{thm:vdp-ID-delta-2}}}\\
& $C_6$ \cite{S88} & Prop.~\ref{prop:example-LD-n/2} & & $C_7$ \cite{BCHL04} & Prop.~\ref{prop:example-ID-3n/5} & \\
& & & & & & \\[-0.3cm]\cline{1-3}\cline{5-6}
& & & & & & \\[-0.2cm]
\multirow{2}*{$\delta\geq 3$} & \multirow{5}*{\minitab[c]{$\frac{3}{7}>0.428$\\Prop.~\ref{prop:heawood-LD}}} & $\frac{4}{11}-\epsilon>0.363$ & & \multirow{5}*{\minitab[c]{0.5\\Prop.~\ref{prop:G12-ID}}} & $\frac{5}{11}-\epsilon>0.454$ & \\
& & Prop.~\ref{prop:example-LD-conn-4/11} & & & Prop.~\ref{prop:example-ID-5n/11} & \\
& & & & & & \\[-0.3cm]\cline{3-4}\cline{6-7}\cline{1-1}
& & & & & & \\[-0.2cm]
\multirow{2}*{cubic} & & $\frac{1}{3}$ & $\frac{22}{45}<0.489$ & & $0.4$ & $\frac{31}{45}<0.689$\\
& & Thm.~\ref{th:LB-Delta} \cite{S95} & Cor.~\ref{cor:LD} & & Thm.~\ref{th:LB-Delta} \cite{KCL98} & Cor.~\ref{cor:ID}\\
\end{tabular}
}
\caption{Upper bounds and largest known ratios (in terms of the graph's order) of location-domination and identifying code numbers in connected graphs of girth at least~$5$ and minimum degree $\delta$.}
\label{tab:bounds}
\end{table}
\noindent\emph{Our results and structure of the paper.} We study the cases where the minimum degree $\delta\in\{2,3\}$, and also the case of cubic graphs. In Section~\ref{sec:UB}, we give upper bounds on parameters $\gamma^{\text{\tiny{LD}}}$ and $\gamma^{\text{\tiny{ID}}}$ for these graph classes, and discuss their tightness by constructing examples with large values of $\gamma^{\text{\tiny{LD}}}$ and $\gamma^{\text{\tiny{ID}}}$ in Section~\ref{sec:cons}. We briefly conclude in Section~\ref{sec:conclu}. A summary of our results is given in Table~\ref{tab:bounds}. To obtain the upper bounds, we use the technique of building vertex-disjoint paths of the graph, that was introduced by Reed~\cite{R96} for dominating sets and was used in related works, see e.g.~\cite{KS09,XSC06}.
\section{Upper bounds using vertex-disjoint path covers}\label{sec:UB}
This section contains the proofs of our upper bounds. We start with some preliminary tools.
\subsection{Preliminary lemmas and definitions}
Next, we give useful characterizations of locating-dominating sets and identifying codes in graphs of girth~$5$.
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma:girth5-LD}
Let $G$ be a graph of girth at least~5, and let $C$ be a dominating set of $G$. Let $X= \{x \in V(G) \setminus C \; : \; |N(x) \cap C| = 1\}$. Then $C$ is a locating-dominating set of $G$ if and only if there is an injective function $f:X \rightarrow C$ such that $f(x) \in C \cap N(x)$ for all $x \in X$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
If $C$ is a locating-dominating set, $N(x) \cap C \neq N(y) \cap C$ for each pair $x, y$ of vertices of $X$. Then clearly the function $f:X \rightarrow C$ such that $f(x) = N(x) \cap C$ is injective (if there are two vertices $x,y\in X$ with $y\neq x$ and $f(x)=f(y)$, then $x,y$ would not be separated, a contradiction).
For the sufficiency, suppose that there is an injective function $f:X \rightarrow C$ such that $f(x) \in C \cap N(x)$ for all $x \in X$. Let $Y = V(G) \setminus (C \cup X)$ and let $u, v$ be distinct vertices of $V(G) \setminus C$. If $u, v \in X$, evidently $f(u) \neq f(v)$ and thus $N(u) \cap C \neq N(v) \cap C$. If $u \in X$ and $v \in Y$, then $|N(u) \cap C| = 1$ and $|N(v)\cap C| \ge 2$ and thus $N(u) \cap C\neq N(v)\cap C$. Lastly, if $u, v \in Y$, then $|N(u) \cap C| \ge 2$ and $|N(v) \cap C| \ge 2$. But then $N(u) \cap C \neq N(u) \cap C$ since otherwise there would be a cycle of length~$4$. Thus, $C$ is a locating-dominating set.
\end{proof}
Lemma~\ref{lemma:girth5-LD} means that in a graph of girth~5, the fact that a dominating set is also locating only depends on the vertices that are dominated by exactly one vertex.
The following is a more complicated version of Lemma~\ref{lemma:girth5-LD} for identifying codes. It is a more precise extension of a lemma used by the second author and Perarnau in~\cite{FP11}.
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma:girth5-ID}
Let $G$ be an identifiable graph of girth at least~5. Let $C$ be a dominating set of $G$ and let $C_{\geq 3}$ be the set of vertices of $C$ belonging to a connected component of $G[C]$ of size at least $3$. Then, $C$ is an identifying code of $G$ if and only if the following conditions hold:\\ (i) None of the components of $G[C]$ have size $2$;\\
(ii) For $X = \{x \in V(G)\setminus C \; : \; |N(x) \cap C| = 1\}$, there is an injective function $f:X \rightarrow C$ such that $f(x) \in C_{\geq 3} \cap N(x)$ for all $x \in X$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
First, assume that $C$ is an identifying code of $G$. Then,
Property~(i) is clear (otherwise the two vertices of some component
$C_i$ of order~2 would not be separated). The proof that Property~(ii) holds is similar as for Lemma~\ref{lemma:girth5-LD} (by letting $f(x) = N(x) \cap C$ for each $x\in X$). Observe that $f(x)\in C_{\geq 3}$, otherwise $x$ and $f(x)$ would not be separated.
For the other side, assume that $C$ is a dominating set fulfilling Properties~(i) and~(ii) and, by contradiction, assume that there are two distinct vertices $x,y$ that are not separated by $C$, i.e. $N[x] \cap C = N[y] \cap C$.
Assume first that $x$ and $y$ are adjacent. As $N[x] \cap C = N[y] \cap C \neq \emptyset$, it follows that $N[x] \cap C = N[y] \cap C\subseteq \{x,y\}$ (since there is no triangle in $G$). If both $x,y$ belong to $C$, $x$ and $y$ induce a component of $G[C]$ of size $2$, a contradiction. Otherwise, exactly one of them belongs to $C$ (say $x$). But then $y$ is only dominated by $x$, which does not belong to $C_{\geq 3}$, a contradiction to Property~(ii).
Thus, $x$ and $y$ are non-adjacent and, since there are no $4$-cycles, $|N(x) \cap N(y)| \le 1$. Hence, there is a vertex $z$ with $N(x) \cap C = N(y) \cap C = \{z\}$. It follows that $x, y \in X$ but $f(x) = z=f(y)$, a contradiction.
\end{proof}
We now define the key concept of vertex-disjoint path cover of a graph, and introduce some related notation.
\begin{definition}
A \emph{vertex-disjoint path cover} (\emph{vdp-cover} for short) of $G$ is a partition of $V(G)$ into sets of vertices, each of them inducing a graph with a Hamiltonian path.
For $0\leq i\leq 4$, a path whose order is congruent to $i$ modulo~$5$ is called an \emph{$(i\bmod 5)$-path}, and a path of order~$j$ is a $j$-path (an empty path is a $0$-path). Given a vdp-cover $\mathcal S$, we will denote by $\mathcal S_i$ the set of $(i\bmod 5)$-paths in $\mathcal S$, and by $\mathcal T_i$, the set of $i$-paths in $\mathcal S$.
\end{definition}
The following result of Reed~\cite{R96} will be used.
\begin{theorem}[\cite{R96}]\label{thm:reed-vdp}
Every connected cubic graph of order $n$ has a vdp-cover with at most $\frac{n}{9}$ sets.
\end{theorem}
\subsection{Locating-dominating sets}\label{sec:LD-upperbounds}
The bound given in the following theorem also follows from a stronger result in a recent paper by Garijo, Gonz\'alez and M\'arquez~\cite{GGM} (see there Proposition 6.6). However, we give an independent proof by a completely different method, which is a good and simple illustration of this technique that will be used several times in this paper.
\begin{theorem}\label{thm:vdp-LD}
Let $G$ be a graph of order $n$, girth at least~5 and minimum degree at least~$2$. Then $\gamma^{\text{\tiny{LD}}}(G)\leq\frac{n}{2}$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Let $\mathcal S$ be a vdp-cover of $G$ and let $\mathcal{T}_1$ and $\mathcal{T}_3$ be the sets of paths of order~$1$ and~$3$ in $\mathcal{S}$, respectively. Let $\mathcal{S}$ be chosen such that $2|\mathcal T_1|+|\mathcal T_3|$ is minimized. Without loss of generality, we can assume that all paths in $\mathcal S$ have length at most~$5$, since otherwise we can split any longer path into paths of lengths~$2$ or~$5$ without affecting the minimality condition. For each path $P \in \mathcal S$ of length $1 \le r \le 5$, we define an order $P = x_0-x_1- \ldots-x_{r-1}$ with $x_i$ adjacent to $x_{i+1}$ for $0\leq i< r-1$. Let $D$ be the set of vertices containing all vertices of the paths of $\mathcal S$ of odd index (i.e. all $x_1$'s and all $x_3$'s). Note that $D$ clearly dominates all vertices, except possibly the vertices in a $1$-path. Also, we define a function $f$ on all vertices with index~$0$ or~$4$ in the following way. If $P= x_0-x_1-\ldots-x_{r-1}$ is an $r$-path with $2 \le r \le 5$, then $f(x_0) = x_1$ and, if $r = 5$, $f(x_4) = x_3$. According to Lemma \ref{lemma:girth5-LD}, if the end-vertices of the $3$-paths in $\mathcal{S}$ have, besides of their neighbour on the path, a second neighbour in $D$ and if all vertices of the $1$-paths from $\mathcal S$ have two neighbours in $D$, then the restriction of $f$ to the set of $1$-dominated vertices is injective and therefore $D$ is a locating-dominating set.
We will show that every vertex of a $1$-path and every end-vertex of a $3$-path has no neighbour outside of $D$; which by the previous discussion suffices for $D$ being a locating-dominating set. Herefor, we say that a vertex $x$ is a $(p,q)$-vertex if it belongs to a path $P$ of order $p+q+1$ of $\mathcal S$ and the two paths obtained from $P$ by removing $x$ have orders $p$ and $q$. Observe that a $(p,q)$-vertex is the same as a $(q,p)$-vertex. Further, we say that, for fixed~$p$ and~$q$, the $(p,q)$-vertices are \emph{good} if they all belong to $D$, otherwise they are \emph{bad}. Taking into account that $p+q+1 \le 5$, we have the following pairs $(p,q)$ such that $(p,q)$-vertices are bad: $(0,0), (0,1), (0,2), (0,3), (0,4), (1,2)$ and $(2,2)$.
Let $P = x \in \mathcal{T}_1$ be a $1$-path. If $x$ is adjacent to a $(0,q)$-vertex for some $q \in \{0,1,2,3,4\}$, then we can replace the $1$-path and the $(q+1)$-path by a $(q+2)$-path, obtaining in all cases a lower value for the sum $2|\mathcal T_1|+|\mathcal T_3|$, a contradiction. Hence suppose that $x$ is adjacent to either a $(1,2)$-vertex or to a $(2,2)$-vertex. Then we can substitute the $1$-path and the $4$- or $5$-path by a $2$-path and a $3$- or $4$-path, obtaining in each case a lower value for the sum $2|\mathcal T_1|+|\mathcal T_3|$, which is a contradiction. Hence, $x$ has to be adjacent only to good vertices. As $\delta(G) \ge 2$, it follows that $x$ is adjacent to two vertices from $D$. Completely analogous we obtain a contradiction when $P$ is a $3$-path having an end-vertex adjacent to a bad vertex. Altogether, it follows that all vertices not in $D$ have either an assignment via $f$ or two neighbours in $D$. Hence, by Lemma \ref{lemma:girth5-LD}, $D$ is a locating-dominating set. Since each path from $S$ has at most half of its vertices in $D$, we obtain $\gamma^{\text{\tiny{LD}}}(G)\leq |D| \leq \frac{n}{2}$.
\end{proof}
Theorem~\ref{thm:vdp-LD} is tight for the cycles $C_6$ and $C_8$, which can easily be seen to have location-domination numbers~$3$ and~$4$, respectively (see also~\cite{S88}). In Proposition~\ref{prop:example-LD-n/2}, we will give a construction of arbitrarily large connected graphs based on copies of $C_6$.
Next, given a vdp-cover $\mathcal S$ of a graph $G$ with girth~5, we will show how to construct a set $D(\mathcal{S})$ and an injective function $f:X\rightarrow D(\mathcal{S})$ (where $X$ is the set of $1$-dominated vertices of $V(G)\setminus D(\mathcal{S})$) meeting the conditions of Lemma~\ref{lemma:girth5-LD}. We will build $D(\mathcal{S})$ by taking roughly two vertices out of five in each path of $\mathcal S$, then adding a few vertices for each path whose length is nonzero modulo~$5$.
\begin{definition}\label{def:D(S)} Let $G$ be a graph of girth at least~$5$ and $\mathcal S$ be a vdp-cover of $G$. Then, the set $D(\mathcal S)$ and the function $f_{D(\mathcal S)}$ are constructed as follows.
For each path $P=x_0-\ldots-x_{p-1}$ in $\mathcal S$, we do the following. Assume that $P\in \mathcal S_i$ ($0\leq i\leq 4$), that is, $p=5k+i$ for some $k\geq 0$. If $k\geq 1$, $D(\mathcal S)$ contains the set $\{x_j\in V(P), j=1,3\bmod 5, j< 5k\}$.
Now, if $k\geq 0$ and $P$ belongs to $\mathcal S\setminus \mathcal S_0$, we add some vertices to $D(\mathcal S)$ according to the following case distinction:
\begin{itemize}
\item If $P\in \mathcal S_1$, we let $D(\mathcal S)$ contain $x_{p-1}$.
\item If $P\in \mathcal S_2$, $D(\mathcal S)$ also contains
$x_{p-2}$ and $f_{D(\mathcal S)}(x_{p-1})=x_{p-2}$.
\item If $P\in \mathcal S_3$, $D(\mathcal S)$ also contains
$\{x_{p-3},x_{p-2}\}$ and $f_{D(\mathcal S)}(x_{p-1})=x_{p-2}$.
\item If $P\in \mathcal S_4$, $D(\mathcal S)$ also contains
$\{x_{p-3},x_{p-1}\}$ and $f_{D(\mathcal S)}(x_{p-4})=x_{p-3}$.
\end{itemize}
To finish the construction of the function $f_{D(\mathcal S)}$, for $j< 5k$, if $x_j\notin D(\mathcal S)$ and $j=0\bmod 5$, $f_{D(\mathcal S)}(x_j)=x_{j+1}$; if $j=4\bmod 5$, $f_{D(\mathcal S)}(x_j)=x_{j-1}$.
\end{definition}
An illustration of Definition~\ref{def:D(S)} is given in Figure~\ref{fig:D(S)}.
\begin{figure}[!htpb]
\centering
\scalebox{0.9}{\begin{tikzpicture}[join=bevel,inner sep=0.5mm,scale=1.0,line width=0.5pt]
\path (0,4) node[draw,shape=circle] (a) {};
\draw (a)+(-1.5,0) node {$P\in\mathcal S_0$:};
\draw (a) node[above=0.1cm] {$x_0$};
\path (1,4) node[draw,shape=circle,fill=black] (b) {};
\draw (b) node[above=0.1cm] {$x_1$};
\path (2,4) node[draw,shape=circle] (c) {};
\draw (c) node[above=0.1cm] {$x_2$};
\path (3,4) node[draw,shape=circle,fill=black] (d) {};
\draw (d) node[above=0.1cm] {$x_3$};
\path (4,4) node[draw,shape=circle] (e) {};
\draw (e) node[above=0.1cm] {$x_4$};
\draw (e)+(1,0) node {\ldots};
\draw (a) -- (b) -- (c) -- (d) -- (e) -- ++(0.5,0);
\path (0,3) node[draw,shape=circle] (a) {};
\draw (a)+(-1.5,0) node {$P\in\mathcal S_1$:};
\draw (a) node[above=0.1cm] {$x_0$};
\path (1,3) node[draw,shape=circle,fill=black] (b) {};
\draw (b) node[above=0.1cm] {$x_1$};
\path (2,3) node[draw,shape=circle] (c) {};
\draw (c) node[above=0.1cm] {$x_2$};
\path (3,3) node[draw,shape=circle,fill=black] (d) {};
\draw (d) node[above=0.1cm] {$x_3$};
\path (4,3) node[draw,shape=circle] (e) {};
\draw (e) node[above=0.1cm] {$x_4$};
\draw (e)+(1,0) node {\ldots};
\path (6,3) node[draw,shape=circle,fill=black] (f) {};
\draw (f) node[above=0.1cm] {$x_{p-1}$};
\draw (a) -- (b) -- (c) -- (d) -- (e) -- ++(0.5,0)
(f) -- ++(-0.5,0);
\path (0,2) node[draw,shape=circle] (a) {};
\draw (a)+(-1.5,0) node {$P\in\mathcal S_2$:};
\draw (a) node[above=0.1cm] {$x_0$};
\path (1,2) node[draw,shape=circle,fill=black] (b) {};
\draw (b) node[above=0.1cm] {$x_1$};
\path (2,2) node[draw,shape=circle] (c) {};
\draw (c) node[above=0.1cm] {$x_2$};
\path (3,2) node[draw,shape=circle,fill=black] (d) {};
\draw (d) node[above=0.1cm] {$x_3$};
\path (4,2) node[draw,shape=circle] (e) {};
\draw (e) node[above=0.1cm] {$x_4$};
\draw (e)+(1,0) node {\ldots};
\path (6,2) node[draw,shape=circle,fill=black] (f) {};
\draw (f) node[above=0.1cm] {$x_{p-2}$};
\path (7,2) node[draw,shape=circle] (g) {};
\draw (g) node[above=0.1cm] {$x_{p-1}$};
\draw (a) -- (b) -- (c) -- (d) -- (e) -- ++(0.5,0)
(g) -- (f) -- ++(-0.5,0);
\path (0,1) node[draw,shape=circle] (a) {};
\draw (a)+(-1.5,0) node {$P\in\mathcal S_3$:};
\draw (a) node[above=0.1cm] {$x_0$};
\path (1,1) node[draw,shape=circle,fill=black] (b) {};
\draw (b) node[above=0.1cm] {$x_1$};
\path (2,1) node[draw,shape=circle] (c) {};
\draw (c) node[above=0.1cm] {$x_2$};
\path (3,1) node[draw,shape=circle,fill=black] (d) {};
\draw (d) node[above=0.1cm] {$x_3$};
\path (4,1) node[draw,shape=circle] (e) {};
\draw (e) node[above=0.1cm] {$x_4$};
\draw (e)+(1,0) node {\ldots};
\path (6,1) node[draw,shape=circle,fill=black] (f) {};
\draw (f) node[above=0.1cm] {$x_{p-3}$};
\path (7,1) node[draw,shape=circle,fill=black] (g) {};
\draw (g) node[above=0.1cm] {$x_{p-2}$};
\path (8,1) node[draw,shape=circle] (h) {};
\draw (h) node[above=0.1cm] {$x_{p-1}$};
\draw (a) -- (b) -- (c) -- (d) -- (e) -- ++(0.5,0)
(h) -- (g) -- (f) -- ++(-0.5,0);
\path (0,0) node[draw,shape=circle] (a) {};
\draw (a)+(-1.5,0) node {$P\in\mathcal S_4$:};
\draw (a) node[above=0.1cm] {$x_0$};
\path (1,0) node[draw,shape=circle,fill=black] (b) {};
\draw (b) node[above=0.1cm] {$x_1$};
\path (2,0) node[draw,shape=circle] (c) {};
\draw (c) node[above=0.1cm] {$x_2$};
\path (3,0) node[draw,shape=circle,fill=black] (d) {};
\draw (d) node[above=0.1cm] {$x_3$};
\path (4,0) node[draw,shape=circle] (e) {};
\draw (e) node[above=0.1cm] {$x_4$};
\draw (e)+(1,0) node {\ldots};
\path (6,0) node[draw,shape=circle] (f) {};
\draw (f) node[above=0.1cm] {$x_{p-4}$};
\path (7,0) node[draw,shape=circle,fill=black] (g) {};
\draw (g) node[above=0.1cm] {$x_{p-3}$};
\path (8,0) node[draw,shape=circle] (h) {};
\draw (h) node[above=0.1cm] {$x_{p-2}$};
\path (9,0) node[draw,shape=circle,fill=black] (i) {};
\draw (i) node[above=0.1cm] {$x_{p-1}$};
\draw (a) -- (b) -- (c) -- (d) -- (e) -- ++(0.5,0)
(i) -- (h) -- (g) -- (f) -- ++(-0.5,0);
\end{tikzpicture}}
\caption{Illustration of set $D(\mathcal S)$.}\label{fig:D(S)}
\end{figure}
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma:D(S)}
Let $G$ be a graph of girth at least~$5$ having a vdp-cover $\mathcal S$. Then $D(\mathcal S)$ is a locating-dominating set of $G$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
The proof follows from Lemma~\ref{lemma:girth5-LD}; indeed, each vertex $x$ of a path $P\in \mathcal S$ and $x\notin D(\mathcal S)$ that is not $2$-dominated has an image $f_{D(\mathcal S)}(x)\in P$ (and no other such vertex $y$ has $f_{D(\mathcal S)}(x)=f_{D(\mathcal S)}(y)$). It follows that the restriction of $f_{D(\mathcal S)}$ to the set $X$ of $1$-dominated vertices is injective.
\end{proof}
Now, using Theorem~\ref{thm:reed-vdp} and the above construction of the set $D(\mathcal S)$, we can give an improved bound for cubic graphs, based on the following general theorem:
\begin{theorem}\label{thm:vdp-ld-cubic}
Let $G$ be a graph of order~$n$, girth at least~$5$ and having a vdp-cover with $\alpha\cdot n$ paths. Then $\gamma^{\text{\tiny{LD}}}(G)\leq\frac{2+4\alpha}{5}n$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Let $\mathcal S$ be a vdp-cover of $G$ of size at most $\alpha\cdot n$. We consider the set $D(\mathcal S)$ defined in Definition~\ref{def:D(S)}. By Lemma~\ref{lemma:D(S)}, $D(\mathcal S)$ is a locating-dominating set of $G$. It remains to estimate the size of $D(\mathcal S)$.
For each path $P$ in $\mathcal S_i$ with $5k+i$ vertices ($k\geq 0$) blue, we have added $\frac{2k}{5}$ vertices of $P$ to $D(\mathcal S)$ in the first step of the construction. Then, in the second step, for each path in $\mathcal S_1\cup \mathcal S_2$ and $\mathcal S_3\cup \mathcal S_4$, we have added one and two additional vertices, respectively. So in total we get:
\begin{align*}
|D(\mathcal S)|&\leq\frac{2}{5}(n-|\mathcal S_1|-2|\mathcal S_2|-3|\mathcal S_3|-4|\mathcal S_4|)+|\mathcal S_1|+|\mathcal S_2|+2|\mathcal S_3|+2|\mathcal S_4|\\
&=\frac{2}{5}n+\frac{3}{5}|\mathcal S_1|+\frac{1}{5}|\mathcal S_2|+\frac{4}{5}|\mathcal S_3|+\frac{2}{5}|\mathcal S_4|\\
&\leq\frac{2}{5}n+\frac{4}{5}|\mathcal S|\\
&\leq\frac{2+4\alpha}{5}n.
\end{align*}
\end{proof}
We get the following corollary of Theorems~\ref{thm:reed-vdp} and~\ref{thm:vdp-ld-cubic}:
\begin{corollary}\label{cor:LD}
Let $G$ be a connected cubic graph of order~$n$ and girth at least~$5$. Then $\gamma^{\text{\tiny{LD}}}(G)\leq\frac{22}{45}n<0.489n$.
\end{corollary}
\subsection{Identifying codes}\label{sec:ID-upperbounds}
The methods used in this subsection are similar to the ones of Subsection~\ref{sec:LD-upperbounds}, but the proofs are more intricate.
\begin{theorem}\label{thm:vdp-ID-delta-2}
Let $G$ be an identifiable graph of order~$n$, girth at least~$5$ and minimum degree~$\delta\geq 2$. Then, $\gamma^{\text{\tiny{ID}}}(G)\leq\frac{5}{7}n<0.715n$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Given a vdp-cover $\mathcal S$ of $G$, let $\mathcal{T}_i$ be the set of paths of order exactly~$i$ of $\mathcal{S}$ (in this proof we do not consider the orders modulo~$5$). We choose $\mathcal{S}$ such that
\begin{equation}\label{eq:ID-min}
4 |\mathcal{T}_1 \cup \mathcal{T}_4| + 3 |\mathcal{T}_2 \cup \mathcal{T}_3| + 2 |\mathcal{T}_8 \cup \mathcal{T}_9|
\end{equation}
is minimized.
Let $P \in \mathcal{S}$ be an $r$-path with $r \ge 10$. Then we can replace $P$ by paths of orders $5$, $6$ and $7$ without affecting the minimality of \eqref{eq:ID-min}:
\begin{itemize}
\item If $r \equiv 0 \mod 5$, then we can replace $P$ by $5$-paths.
\item If $r \equiv 1 \mod 5$, then we can replace $P$ by one $6$-path and the remaining part by $5$-paths.
\item If $r \equiv 2 \mod 5$, then we can replace $P$ by one $7$-path and the remaining part by $5$-paths.
\item If $r \equiv 3 \mod 5$, then we can replace $P$ by one $6$-path, one $7$-path, and the remaining part by $5$-paths.
\item If $r \equiv 4 \mod 5$, then we can replace $P$ by two $7$-paths and the remaining part by $5$-paths.
\end{itemize}
Hence, without loss of generality, we can assume that there are no paths of length~$10$ or more in $\mathcal{S}$.
Now, we define a set $C$ in the following way. For each $r$-path $P = x_0-x_1-\ldots-x_{r-1}$ of $\mathcal{S}$, we add some vertices to $C$ and define a function $f$ according to the following distinction:
\begin{itemize}
\item If $r = 2$, then let $C$ contain $x_1$.
\item If $r = 3$, then let $C$ contain $x_1$ and $x_2$.
\item If $r = 4$, then let $C$ contain $x_0$ and $x_3$; let $f(x_1) = x_0$ and $f(x_2) = x_3$.
\item If $5 \le r \le 7$, then let $C$ contain $x_1, x_2, \ldots x_{r-2}$; let $f(x_0) = x_1$ and $f(x_{r-1}) = x_{r-2}$.
\item If $r = 8$, then let $C$ contain $x_1$, $x_2$, $x_3$, $x_6$ and $x_7$; let $f(x_4) = x_3$ and $f(x_5) = x_6$.
\item If $r = 9$, then let $C$ contain $x_1$, $x_2$, $x_3$, $x_4$, $x_7$ and $x_8$; let $f(x_5) = x_4$ and $f(x_6) = x_7$.
\end{itemize}
An illustration of set $C$ is given in Figure~\ref{fig:C}. We will show that $C$ is an identifying code of $G$.
\begin{figure}[!htpb]
\centering
\scalebox{0.9}{\begin{tikzpicture}[join=bevel,inner sep=0.5mm,scale=1.0,line width=0.5pt]
\path (0,8) node[draw,shape=circle] (a) {};
\draw (a)+(-1.5,0) node {$r = 1$:};
\path (0,7) node[draw,shape=circle] (a) {};
\draw (a)+(-1.5,0) node {$r = 2$:};
\draw (a) node[above=0.1cm] {$x_0$};
\path (1,7) node[draw,shape=circle,fill=black] (b) {};
\draw (b) node[above=0.1cm] {$x_1$};
\draw (a) -- (b);
\path (0,6) node[draw,shape=circle] (a) {};
\draw (a)+(-1.5,0) node {$r=3$:};
\draw (a) node[above=0.1cm] {$x_0$};
\path (1,6) node[draw,shape=circle,fill=black] (b) {};
\draw (b) node[above=0.1cm] {$x_1$};
\path (2,6) node[draw,shape=circle,fill=black] (c) {};
\draw (c) node[above=0.1cm] {$x_2$};
\draw (a) -- (b) -- (c);
\path (0,5) node[draw,shape=circle,fill=black] (a) {};
\draw (a)+(-1.5,0) node {$r=4$:};
\draw (a) node[above=0.1cm] {$x_0$};
\path (1,5) node[draw,shape=circle] (b) {};
\draw (b) node[above=0.1cm] {$x_1$};
\path (2,5) node[draw,shape=circle] (c) {};
\draw (c) node[above=0.1cm] {$x_2$};
\path (3,5) node[draw,shape=circle,fill=black] (d) {};
\draw (d) node[above=0.1cm] {$x_3$};
\draw (a) -- (b) -- (c) -- (d);
\path (0,4) node[draw,shape=circle] (a) {};
\draw (a)+(-1.5,0) node {$r=5$:};
\draw (a) node[above=0.1cm] {$x_0$};
\path (1,4) node[draw,shape=circle,fill=black] (b) {};
\draw (b) node[above=0.1cm] {$x_1$};
\path (2,4) node[draw,shape=circle,fill=black] (c) {};
\draw (c) node[above=0.1cm] {$x_2$};
\path (3,4) node[draw,shape=circle,fill=black] (d) {};
\draw (d) node[above=0.1cm] {$x_3$};
\path (4,4) node[draw,shape=circle] (e) {};
\draw (e) node[above=0.1cm] {$x_4$};
\draw (a) -- (b) -- (c) -- (d) -- (e);
\path (0,3) node[draw,shape=circle] (a) {};
\draw (a)+(-1.5,0) node {$r=6$:};
\draw (a) node[above=0.1cm] {$x_0$};
\path (1,3) node[draw,shape=circle,fill=black] (b) {};
\draw (b) node[above=0.1cm] {$x_1$};
\path (2,3) node[draw,shape=circle,fill=black] (c) {};
\draw (c) node[above=0.1cm] {$x_2$};
\path (3,3) node[draw,shape=circle,fill=black] (d) {};
\draw (d) node[above=0.1cm] {$x_3$};
\path (4,3) node[draw,shape=circle,fill=black] (e) {};
\draw (e) node[above=0.1cm] {$x_4$};
\path (5,3) node[draw,shape=circle] (f) {};
\draw (f) node[above=0.1cm] {$x_5$};
\draw (a) -- (b) -- (c) -- (d) -- (e) -- (f);
\path (0,2) node[draw,shape=circle] (a) {};
\draw (a)+(-1.5,0) node {$r=7$:};
\draw (a) node[above=0.1cm] {$x_0$};
\path (1,2) node[draw,shape=circle,fill=black] (b) {};
\draw (b) node[above=0.1cm] {$x_1$};
\path (2,2) node[draw,shape=circle,fill=black] (c) {};
\draw (c) node[above=0.1cm] {$x_2$};
\path (3,2) node[draw,shape=circle,fill=black] (d) {};
\draw (d) node[above=0.1cm] {$x_3$};
\path (4,2) node[draw,shape=circle,fill=black] (e) {};
\draw (e) node[above=0.1cm] {$x_4$};
\path (5,2) node[draw,shape=circle,fill=black] (f) {};
\draw (f) node[above=0.1cm] {$x_5$};
\path (6,2) node[draw,shape=circle] (g) {};
\draw (g) node[above=0.1cm] {$x_6$};
\draw (a) -- (b) -- (c) -- (d) -- (e) -- (f) -- (g);
\path (0,1) node[draw,shape=circle] (a) {};
\draw (a)+(-1.5,0) node {$r=8$:};
\draw (a) node[above=0.1cm] {$x_0$};
\path (1,1) node[draw,shape=circle,fill=black] (b) {};
\draw (b) node[above=0.1cm] {$x_1$};
\path (2,1) node[draw,shape=circle,fill=black] (c) {};
\draw (c) node[above=0.1cm] {$x_2$};
\path (3,1) node[draw,shape=circle,fill=black] (d) {};
\draw (d) node[above=0.1cm] {$x_3$};
\path (4,1) node[draw,shape=circle] (e) {};
\draw (e) node[above=0.1cm] {$x_4$};
\path (5,1) node[draw,shape=circle] (f) {};
\draw (f) node[above=0.1cm] {$x_5$};
\path (6,1) node[draw,shape=circle,fill=black] (g) {};
\draw (g) node[above=0.1cm] {$x_6$};
\path (7,1) node[draw,shape=circle,fill=black] (h) {};
\draw (h) node[above=0.1cm] {$x_7$};
\draw (a) -- (b) -- (c) -- (d) -- (e) -- (f) -- (g) -- (h);
\path (0,0) node[draw,shape=circle] (a) {};
\draw (a)+(-1.5,0) node {$r=9$:};
\draw (a) node[above=0.1cm] {$x_0$};
\path (1,0) node[draw,shape=circle,fill=black] (b) {};
\draw (b) node[above=0.1cm] {$x_1$};
\path (2,0) node[draw,shape=circle,fill=black] (c) {};
\draw (c) node[above=0.1cm] {$x_2$};
\path (3,0) node[draw,shape=circle,fill=black] (d) {};
\draw (d) node[above=0.1cm] {$x_3$};
\path (4,0) node[draw,shape=circle,fill=black] (e) {};
\draw (e) node[above=0.1cm] {$x_4$};
\path (5,0) node[draw,shape=circle] (f) {};
\draw (f) node[above=0.1cm] {$x_5$};
\path (6,0) node[draw,shape=circle] (g) {};
\draw (g) node[above=0.1cm] {$x_6$};
\path (7,0) node[draw,shape=circle,fill=black] (h) {};
\draw (h) node[above=0.1cm] {$x_7$};
\path (8,0) node[draw,shape=circle,fill=black] (i) {};
\draw (i) node[above=0.1cm] {$x_8$};
\draw (a) -- (b) -- (c) -- (d) -- (e) -- (f) -- (g) -- (h) -- (i);
\end{tikzpicture}}
\caption{Illustration of set $C$ in the proof of Theorem~\ref{thm:vdp-ID-delta-2}.}\label{fig:C}
\end{figure}
As in the proof of Theorem~\ref{thm:vdp-LD}, we say that a vertex $x$ is a $(p,q)$-vertex if it belongs to a path $P$ of order $p+q+1$ of $\mathcal S$ and the two paths obtained from $P$ by removing $x$ have orders $p$ and $q$. Observe that a $(p,q)$-vertex is the same as a $(q,p)$-vertex. Further, we say that, for fixed $p$ and $q$, the $(p,q)$-vertices are \emph{good} if they all belong to $C$, otherwise they are \emph{bad}. Taking into account that $p+q+1 \le 9$, we have the following set $B$ of pairs $(p,q)$ such that $(p,q)$-vertices are bad:
$$ B = \{ (0,0), (0,1), (0,2), (0,4), (0,5), (0,6), (0,7), (0,8), (1,2), (3,4), (2,5), (2,6), (3,5) \}.$$
Now we will prove the following claims.
\begin{claim}\label{claim:P_8&P_9}
For a path $P \in \mathcal{S}$ of order $r\in\{8,9\}$, we can assume that the end-vertex $x_{r-1}$, which belongs to $C$, has either a second neighbour in $P$ contained in $C$ (i.e. different from its predecessor $x_{r-2}$ in $P$) or it has a neighbour outside $P$.
\end{claim}
Let $r=8$ and $P = x_0-x_1-\ldots-x_7$ and, following the construction of $C$, we have $x_1,x_2,x_3,x_6, x_7 \in C$. By contradiction, suppose that $x_7$ is not adjacent to any of $x_1,x_2,x_3$. Suppose also that $x_7$ has no neighbour outside $P$. Since $G$ has girth at least~$5$, $x_7$ is neither adjacent to $x_4$ nor to $x_5$. Hence, as $\delta \ge 2$, $x_7$ has to be adjacent to $x_0$. Now, either $G = C_8$ or one of the vertices from $P$ has one neighbour outside $P$. In the first case, an independent set of size~$4$ is an identifying code of $G=C_8$ and satisfies the desired bound. Hence we may assume that $G \neq C_8$ and thus there is a vertex from $P$ having a neighbour outside $P$. In this case, we may reorder the vertices along the cycle such that $x_7$ has one neighbour outside $P$. Hence, Claim~\ref{claim:P_8&P_9} follows for $r=8$. The same argument can be used to prove the case $r=9$.
\begin{claim}\label{claim:r-paths}
Let $r \in \{1, 2, 3, 4, 8, 9\}$ and let $x$ be an end-vertex of an $r$-path $P \in \mathcal{S}$. Then all neighbours of $x$ outside $P$ are good vertices.
\end{claim}
Suppose that, for some $r \in \{1, 2, 3, 4, 8, 9\}$, there is an end-vertex of an $r$-path $P$ which is adjacent to a $(p,q)$-vertex in $P'\in \mathcal S$ with $P\neq P'$ and $(p,q)\in B$. Note that we can replace $P$ and $P'$ by either an $(r+p+1)$-path and a $q$-path or by a $p$-path and an $(r+q+1)$-path.\footnote{Whenever we consider a new $s$-path with $s\geq 10$, we implicitely assume that, as done in the beginning of the proof, it is cut into smaller paths.} We will see that, in each case, we obtain a vdp-cover which contradicts the minimality of~\eqref{eq:ID-min}. If $p = 0$, then we can join the $r$-path together with the $(q+1)$-path obtaining an $(r+q+1)$-path. This gives in all cases a lower value for the sum~\eqref{eq:ID-min}, which is a contradiction. Hence we can suppose that $(p, q) \in \{(1,2), (3,4), (2,5), (2,6), (3,5) \}$. When $r = 4$ and $(p,q)$ is arbitrary or when $r= 2$ and $(p,q) = (1,2)$, we can replace the $r$- and the $(p+q+1)$-path by an $(r+q+1)$- and a $p$-path and we obtain in all cases a lower value for~\eqref{eq:ID-min}. For $r \in \{1,3,8,9\}$ and $(p,q)$ is arbitrary or $r=2$ and $(p,q) \neq (1,2)$, we can replace the $r$- and the $(p+q+1)$-paths by an $(r+p+1)$- and a $q$-path and we obtain always a lower value for~\eqref{eq:ID-min}. Since we obtain in all cases a contradiction to the minimality of~\eqref{eq:ID-min}, it follows that, for $r =1, 2, 3, 4, 8, 9$, every end-vertex of an $r$-path is adjacent to a good vertex, proving Claim~\ref{claim:r-paths}.
\begin{claim}\label{claim:1-paths}
Every vertex from a $1$-path is adjacent to two vertices of $C$.
\end{claim}
As $\delta \ge 2$ and since by Claim~\ref{claim:r-paths}, the vertex of a $1$-path cannot be adjacent to a bad vertex, then it has to be adjacent to at least two good vertices, proving Claim~\ref{claim:1-paths}.
\begin{claim}\label{claim:components}
There are no components of $G[C]$ that have size at most~$2$.
\end{claim}
Since the girth of $G$ is at least~$5$ and $\delta \ge 2$, all end-vertices of a $2$-, $3$- or $4$-path $P$ have a neighbour outside $P$. By Claim~\ref{claim:r-paths}, these neighbours have to be good vertices. Hence, there are no $1$-components in $G[C]$. On the other side, if $P$ is an $8$- or a $9$-path, Claim~\ref{claim:P_8&P_9} implies that the end-vertices of $P$ have either a further neighbour in $P$ belonging to $C$ or they have a neighbour outside $P$, which, by Claim~\ref{claim:r-paths}, is a good vertex. Thus, the only possibilities to have $2$-components in $G[C]$ are given when two $2$-paths or one $2$-path and one $4$-path or two $4$-paths are connected through their good end-vertices. In these cases we could transform them into a $4$-path, a $6$-path or an $8$-path which would contribute less to the sum~\eqref{eq:ID-min} than the original paths, which is a contradiction, proving Claim~\ref{claim:components}.
Hence, by Claims~\ref{claim:P_8&P_9}, \ref{claim:r-paths}, \ref{claim:1-paths} and \ref{claim:components} and by the construction of the function $f$, $C$ fulfils the conditions of Lemma~\ref{lemma:girth5-ID}, which certifies that it is an identifying code. Since at most $\frac{5}{7}|P|$ vertices from every path $P \in \mathcal{S}$ belong to $C$, $C$ is an identifying code of $G$ of cardinality at most $\frac{5}{7}n$.
\end{proof}
Theorem~\ref{thm:vdp-ID-delta-2} is tight for the cycle $C_7$, which can easily be seen to have identifying code number~$5$ (see also~\cite{BCHL04}).
As for locating-dominating sets, given a vdp-cover $\mathcal S$ of a graph $G$ with girth~$5$, we define a set $C(\mathcal S)$ and a function $f_{C(\mathcal S)}$ as follows.
\begin{definition}\label{def:C(S)}
Let $G$ be a graph of girth at least~5 and $\mathcal S$ be a vdp-cover of $G$. Then, the set $C(\mathcal S)$ and the function $f=f_{C(\mathcal S)}$ are constructed as follows.
For each path $P=x_0-\ldots-x_{p-1}$ of $\mathcal S$, we do the following. Assume that $P\in \mathcal S_i$ ($0\leq i\leq 4$), that is, $p=5k+i$ for some $k\geq 0$. If $k\geq 1$, $C(\mathcal S)$ contains the set $\{x_j\in V(P), j=1,2,3\bmod 5, j< 5k\}$.
Now, for $k\geq 0$, if $P$ belongs to $\mathcal S\setminus \mathcal S_0$, we add some vertices to $C(\mathcal S)$ according to the following case distinction:
\begin{itemize}
\item If $P\in \mathcal S_1$ and $k\geq 1$, we let
$C(\mathcal S)$ contain $x_{p-2}$ and $f(x_{p-1})=x_{p-2}$. If $k=0$, $C(\mathcal S)$ contains $x_0$.
\item If $P\in \mathcal S_2$ and $k\geq 1$, $C(\mathcal S)$ also contains
$\{x_{p-3},x_{p-2}\}$ and $f(x_{p-1})=x_{p-2}$. If $k=0$, $C(\mathcal S)$ contains
$\{x_0,x_1\}$.
\item If $P\in \mathcal S_3$ and $k\geq 1$, $C(\mathcal S)$ also contains
$\{x_{p-3},x_{p-2},x_{p-1}\}$. If $k=0$, $C(\mathcal S)$ contains
$\{x_0,x_1,x_2\}$.
\item If $P\in \mathcal S_4$ and $k\geq 1$, $C(\mathcal S)$ also contains
$\{x_{p-4},x_{p-3},x_{p-2}\}$ and $f(x_{p-1})=x_{p-2}$. If $k=0$, $C(\mathcal S)$ contains
$\{x_0,x_1,x_2\}$ and $f(x_{3})=x_{2}$.
\end{itemize}
To finish the construction of the function $f$, for $j< 5k$, if $x_j\notin C(\mathcal S)$ and $j=0\bmod 5$, $f(x_j)=x_{j+1}$; if $j=4\bmod 5$, $f(x_j)=x_{j-1}$. Note that each vertex $x\in P$ of $V(G)\setminus C(\mathcal S)$ has an image $f(x)$ belonging to $P$.
\end{definition}
An illustration of Definition~\ref{def:C(S)} is given in Figure~\ref{fig:C(S)}.
\begin{figure}[!htpb]
\centering
\scalebox{0.9}{\begin{tikzpicture}[join=bevel,inner sep=0.5mm,scale=1.0,line width=0.5pt]
\path (0,4) node[draw,shape=circle] (a) {};
\draw (a)+(-1.5,0) node {$P\in\mathcal S_0$:};
\draw (a) node[above=0.1cm] {$x_0$};
\path (1,4) node[draw,shape=circle,fill=black] (b) {};
\draw (b) node[above=0.1cm] {$x_1$};
\path (2,4) node[draw,shape=circle,fill=black] (c) {};
\draw (c) node[above=0.1cm] {$x_2$};
\path (3,4) node[draw,shape=circle,fill=black] (d) {};
\draw (d) node[above=0.1cm] {$x_3$};
\path (4,4) node[draw,shape=circle] (e) {};
\draw (e) node[above=0.1cm] {$x_4$};
\draw (e)+(1,0) node {\ldots};
\path (6,4) node[draw,shape=circle] (a2) {};
\draw (a2) node[above=0.1cm] {$x_{p-5}$};
\path (7,4) node[draw,shape=circle,fill=black] (b2) {};
\draw (b2) node[above=0.1cm] {$x_{p-4}$};
\path (8,4) node[draw,shape=circle,fill=black] (c2) {};
\draw (c2) node[above=0.1cm] {$x_{p-3}$};
\path (9,4) node[draw,shape=circle,fill=black] (d2) {};
\draw (d2) node[above=0.1cm] {$x_{p-2}$};
\path (10,4) node[draw,shape=circle] (e2) {};
\draw (e2) node[above=0.1cm] {$x_{p-1}$};
\draw (a) -- (b) -- (c) -- (d) -- (e) -- ++(0.5,0)
(e2) -- (d2) -- (c2) -- (b2) -- (a2) -- ++(-0.5,0);
\path (0,3) node[draw,shape=circle] (a) {};
\draw (a)+(-1.5,0) node {$P\in\mathcal S_1$:};
\draw (a) node[above=0.1cm] {$x_0$};
\path (1,3) node[draw,shape=circle,fill=black] (b) {};
\draw (b) node[above=0.1cm] {$x_1$};
\path (2,3) node[draw,shape=circle,fill=black] (c) {};
\draw (c) node[above=0.1cm] {$x_2$};
\path (3,3) node[draw,shape=circle,fill=black] (d) {};
\draw (d) node[above=0.1cm] {$x_3$};
\path (4,3) node[draw,shape=circle] (e) {};
\draw (e) node[above=0.1cm] {$x_4$};
\draw (e)+(1,0) node {\ldots};
\path (6,3) node[draw,shape=circle] (a2) {};
\draw (a2) node[above=0.1cm] {$x_{p-6}$};
\path (7,3) node[draw,shape=circle,fill=black] (b2) {};
\draw (b2) node[above=0.1cm] {$x_{p-5}$};
\path (8,3) node[draw,shape=circle,fill=black] (c2) {};
\draw (c2) node[above=0.1cm] {$x_{p-4}$};
\path (9,3) node[draw,shape=circle,fill=black] (d2) {};
\draw (d2) node[above=0.1cm] {$x_{p-3}$};
\path (10,3) node[draw,shape=circle,fill=black] (e2) {};
\draw (e2) node[above=0.1cm] {$x_{p-2}$};
\path (11,3) node[draw,shape=circle] (f) {};
\draw (f) node[above=0.1cm] {$x_{p-1}$};
\draw (a) -- (b) -- (c) -- (d) -- (e) -- ++(0.5,0)
(f) -- (e2) -- (d2) -- (c2) -- (b2) -- (a2) -- ++(-0.5,0);
\path (0,2) node[draw,shape=circle] (a) {};
\draw (a)+(-1.5,0) node {$P\in\mathcal S_2$:};
\draw (a) node[above=0.1cm] {$x_0$};
\path (1,2) node[draw,shape=circle,fill=black] (b) {};
\draw (b) node[above=0.1cm] {$x_1$};
\path (2,2) node[draw,shape=circle,fill=black] (c) {};
\draw (c) node[above=0.1cm] {$x_2$};
\path (3,2) node[draw,shape=circle,fill=black] (d) {};
\draw (d) node[above=0.1cm] {$x_3$};
\path (4,2) node[draw,shape=circle] (e) {};
\draw (e) node[above=0.1cm] {$x_4$};
\draw (e)+(1,0) node {\ldots};
\path (6,2) node[draw,shape=circle] (a2) {};
\draw (a2) node[above=0.1cm] {$x_{p-7}$};
\path (7,2) node[draw,shape=circle,fill=black] (b2) {};
\draw (b2) node[above=0.1cm] {$x_{p-6}$};
\path (8,2) node[draw,shape=circle,fill=black] (c2) {};
\draw (c2) node[above=0.1cm] {$x_{p-5}$};
\path (9,2) node[draw,shape=circle,fill=black] (d2) {};
\draw (d2) node[above=0.1cm] {$x_{p-4}$};
\path (10,2) node[draw,shape=circle,fill=black] (e2) {};
\draw (e2) node[above=0.1cm] {$x_{p-3}$};
\path (11,2) node[draw,shape=circle,fill=black] (f) {};
\draw (f) node[above=0.1cm] {$x_{p-2}$};
\path (12,2) node[draw,shape=circle] (g) {};
\draw (g) node[above=0.1cm] {$x_{p-1}$};
\draw (a) -- (b) -- (c) -- (d) -- (e) -- ++(0.5,0)
(g) -- (f) -- (e2) -- (d2) -- (c2) -- (b2) -- (a2) -- ++(-0.5,0);
\path (0,1) node[draw,shape=circle] (a) {};
\draw (a)+(-1.5,0) node {$P\in\mathcal S_3$:};
\draw (a) node[above=0.1cm] {$x_0$};
\path (1,1) node[draw,shape=circle,fill=black] (b) {};
\draw (b) node[above=0.1cm] {$x_1$};
\path (2,1) node[draw,shape=circle,fill=black] (c) {};
\draw (c) node[above=0.1cm] {$x_2$};
\path (3,1) node[draw,shape=circle,fill=black] (d) {};
\draw (d) node[above=0.1cm] {$x_3$};
\path (4,1) node[draw,shape=circle] (e) {};
\draw (e) node[above=0.1cm] {$x_4$};
\draw (e)+(1,0) node {\ldots};
\path (6,1) node[draw,shape=circle] (a2) {};
\draw (a2) node[above=0.1cm] {$x_{p-8}$};
\path (7,1) node[draw,shape=circle,fill=black] (b2) {};
\draw (b2) node[above=0.1cm] {$x_{p-7}$};
\path (8,1) node[draw,shape=circle,fill=black] (c2) {};
\draw (c2) node[above=0.1cm] {$x_{p-6}$};
\path (9,1) node[draw,shape=circle,fill=black] (d2) {};
\draw (d2) node[above=0.1cm] {$x_{p-5}$};
\path (10,1) node[draw,shape=circle] (e2) {};
\draw (e2) node[above=0.1cm] {$x_{p-4}$};
\path (11,1) node[draw,shape=circle,fill=black] (f) {};
\draw (f) node[above=0.1cm] {$x_{p-3}$};
\path (12,1) node[draw,shape=circle,fill=black] (g) {};
\draw (g) node[above=0.1cm] {$x_{p-2}$};
\path (13,1) node[draw,shape=circle,fill=black] (h) {};
\draw (h) node[above=0.1cm] {$x_{p-1}$};
\draw (a) -- (b) -- (c) -- (d) -- (e) -- ++(0.5,0)
(h) -- (g) -- (f) -- (e2) -- (d2) -- (c2) -- (b2) -- (a2) -- ++(-0.5,0);
\path (0,0) node[draw,shape=circle] (a) {};
\draw (a)+(-1.5,0) node {$P\in\mathcal S_4$:};
\draw (a) node[above=0.1cm] {$x_0$};
\path (1,0) node[draw,shape=circle,fill=black] (b) {};
\draw (b) node[above=0.1cm] {$x_1$};
\path (2,0) node[draw,shape=circle,fill=black] (c) {};
\draw (c) node[above=0.1cm] {$x_2$};
\path (3,0) node[draw,shape=circle,fill=black] (d) {};
\draw (d) node[above=0.1cm] {$x_3$};
\path (4,0) node[draw,shape=circle] (e) {};
\draw (e) node[above=0.1cm] {$x_4$};
\draw (e)+(1,0) node {\ldots};
\path (6,0) node[draw,shape=circle] (a2) {};
\draw (a2) node[above=0.1cm] {$x_{p-9}$};
\path (7,0) node[draw,shape=circle,fill=black] (b2) {};
\draw (b2) node[above=0.1cm] {$x_{p-8}$};
\path (8,0) node[draw,shape=circle,fill=black] (c2) {};
\draw (c2) node[above=0.1cm] {$x_{p-7}$};
\path (9,0) node[draw,shape=circle,fill=black] (d2) {};
\draw (d2) node[above=0.1cm] {$x_{p-6}$};
\path (10,0) node[draw,shape=circle] (e2) {};
\draw (e2) node[above=0.1cm] {$x_{p-5}$};
\path (11,0) node[draw,shape=circle,fill=black] (f) {};
\draw (f) node[above=0.1cm] {$x_{p-4}$};
\path (12,0) node[draw,shape=circle,fill=black] (g) {};
\draw (g) node[above=0.1cm] {$x_{p-3}$};
\path (13,0) node[draw,shape=circle,fill=black] (h) {};
\draw (h) node[above=0.1cm] {$x_{p-2}$};
\path (14,0) node[draw,shape=circle] (i) {};
\draw (i) node[above=0.1cm] {$x_{p-1}$};
\draw (a) -- (b) -- (c) -- (d) -- (e) -- ++(0.5,0)
(i) -- (h) -- (g) -- (f) -- (e2) -- (d2) -- (c2) -- (b2) -- (a2) -- ++(-0.5,0);
\end{tikzpicture}}
\caption{Illustration of set $C(\mathcal S)$.}\label{fig:C(S)}
\end{figure}
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma:C(S)}
Let $G$ be an identifiable graph of girth at least~$5$ having a vdp-cover $\mathcal S$. Then $C(\mathcal S)$ is a dominating set, and all pairs of vertices are separated, except possibly pairs $x,y$ of vertices such that $x-y$ forms a path of $\mathcal S$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
The proof follows from Lemma~\ref{lemma:girth5-ID}; indeed, each vertex $x$ of $V(G)\setminus C(\mathcal S)$, with $x\in P$ and $P\in\mathcal S$, that is not $2$-dominated has an image $f_{C(\mathcal S)}(x)\in P$, the restriction of $f_{C(\mathcal S)}$ to the set of $1$-dominated vertices is injective, and the only potentially isolated vertices in $C(\mathcal S)$ are vertices $v$ belonging to a path of $\mathcal S$ of order~$1$ (hence by construction no vertex $x$ has $f_{C(\mathcal S)}(x)=v$).
\end{proof}
Similarly to Theorem~\ref{thm:vdp-ld-cubic} for locating-dominating sets, we have the following generic theorem:
\begin{theorem}\label{thm:vdp-id-cubic}
Let $G$ be an identifiable graph of order $n$, girth at least~$5$ and having a vdp-cover with $\alpha\cdot n$ paths. Then $\gamma^{\text{\tiny{ID}}}(G)\leq\frac{3+4\alpha}{5}n$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Let $\mathcal S$ be the vdp-cover of $G$. The idea is to construct a set $C$ and an injective function $f:X\rightarrow C$ (where $X$ is the set of $1$-dominated vertices of $V(G)\setminus C$) meeting the conditions of Lemma~\ref{lemma:girth5-ID}. We will build $C$ by taking roughly three vertices out of five in each path of $\mathcal S$, then adding a few vertices for each path whose length is nonzero modulo five, and finally performing a few local modifications.
\vspace{0.3cm}\noindent\textit{Step 1: Constructing an initial pseudo-code.} We construct $C=C(\mathcal S)$ and $f=f_{C(\mathcal S)}$ by the procedure described in Definition~\ref{def:C(S)}.
\vspace{0.3cm}
\noindent\textit{Step 2: Taking care of components of $G[C]$ of order 2.} By Lemma~\ref{lemma:C(S)}, all conditions of Lemma~\ref{lemma:girth5-ID} (where we consider the restriction of $f$ to the set $X$ of $1$-dominated vertices) are fulfilled, except for Property~(i): there might be some paths in $\mathcal S_2$ of order exactly~$2$ and forming a connected component of $G[C]$ (second item of our case distinction). Let $P$ be such a path, and $V(P)=\{x_0,x_1\}$. Then, since $G$ is identifiable, one of $x_0,x_1$ (say $x_1$) has a neighbour $y$, and since $P$ is a connected component in $G[C]$, $y\notin C$. By the construction of $C$, $y$ belongs to a path and is adjacent to vertex $f(y)$ in $C$. We perform the following modification: remove $x_0$ from $C$, put $y$ instead, and let $f(x_0)=x_1$. It is clear that repeating this for each such case, we get rid of all components of order~$2$ in $G[C]$.
Now, all conditions of Lemma~\ref{lemma:girth5-ID} are fulfilled, hence
$C$ is an identifying code of $G$.
\vspace{0.3cm}
\noindent\textit{Step 3: Saving one vertex for each path of $\mathcal S_3$.}
We consider all paths in $\mathcal S_3$ one by one, in an arbitrary order. For each such path $P$ with $V(P)=\{x_0,\ldots,x_{p-1}\}$ ($p=5k+3$ for some $k\geq 0$), we remove $x_{p-3},x_{p-2},x_{p-1}$ from $C$. We now distinguish some cases.
If $x_i\in\{x_{p-2},x_{p-1}\}$ has a neighbour in $C$, then, we add both $x_{p-2},x_{p-1}$ to $C$ and let $f(x_{p-3})=x_{p-2}$. Similarly, if $x_{p-3}$ has a neighbour in $C$, we add both $x_{p-3},x_{p-2}$ to $C$ and let $f(x_{p-1})=x_{p-2}$. Note that in both cases, the two new code-vertices are now part of a component of $G[C]$ of order at least~$3$, hence all conditions of Lemma~\ref{lemma:girth5-ID} are preserved.
If none of $x_{p-3},x_{p-2},x_{p-1}$ have a neighbour in $C$, we add $x_{p-3}$ and $x_{p-1}$ to $C$. Note that $x_{p-2}$ is now $2$-dominated, hence all conditions of Lemma~\ref{lemma:girth5-ID} are again preserved.
Repeating this at every step, $C$ is still an identifying code, and we have decreased the size of $C$ by $|\mathcal S_3|$.
\vspace{0.3cm}
\noindent\textit{Step 4: Estimating the size of the code.} It remains to compute the size of $C$.
For each path $P$ in $\mathcal S_i$ with $5k+i$ vertices, we have added $\frac{3k}{5}$ vertices of $P$ to $C$ in the first phase of the construction of $C(\mathcal S)$ (Definition~\ref{def:C(S)}). Then, in the second phase of the construction of Definition~\ref{def:C(S)}, for each path in $\mathcal S_1,\mathcal S_2,\mathcal S_3,\mathcal S_4$, we have added one, two, three and three additional vertices, respectively. In Steps~2 and~3, we did not change the size of $C$, but in Step~4, we were able to reduce the size of $C$ by one for each path in $\mathcal S_3$. So in total we have:
\begin{align*}
|C|&\leq\frac{3}{5}(n-|\mathcal S_1|-2|\mathcal S_2|-3|\mathcal S_3|-4|\mathcal S_4|)+|\mathcal S_1|+2|\mathcal S_2|+3|\mathcal S_3|+3|\mathcal S_4|-|\mathcal S_3|\\
&=\frac{3}{5}n+\frac{2}{5}|\mathcal S_1|+\frac{4}{5}|\mathcal S_2|+\frac{1}{5}|\mathcal S_3|+\frac{3}{5}|\mathcal S_4|\\
&\leq\frac{3}{5}n+\frac{4}{5}|\mathcal S|\\
&\leq\frac{3+4\alpha}{5}n.
\end{align*}
\end{proof}
We get the following improvement for cubic graphs, a corollary of Theorems~\ref{thm:reed-vdp} and~\ref{thm:vdp-id-cubic}:
\begin{corollary}\label{cor:ID}
Let $G$ be a connected cubic identifiable graph of order $n$ and girth at least~5. Then $\gamma^{\text{\tiny{ID}}}(G)\leq\frac{31}{45}n<0.689n$.
\end{corollary}
\section{Constructions}\label{sec:cons}
In this section, we provide constructions of connected graphs with girth at least~$5$ and large location-domination or identifying code number. First of all, the following result is a lower bound on parameters $\gamma^{\text{\tiny{LD}}}$ and $\gamma^{\text{\tiny{ID}}}$ depending on the maximum degree $\Delta$ of a graph. It will be useful since it also applies to $\Delta$-regular graphs.
\begin{theorem}[\cite{F,KCL98,S95}]\label{th:LB-Delta}
Let $G$ be a graph of order $n$ and maximum degree $\Delta$. Then $\gamma^{\text{\tiny{LD}}}(G)\geq\frac{2n}{\Delta+3}$. If $G$ is identifiable, then $\gamma^{\text{\tiny{ID}}}(G)\geq\frac{2n}{\Delta+2}$, and any identifying code of this size is an independent $2$-dominating set whose vertices all have degree
$\Delta$ in $G$.
\end{theorem}
We remark that the last part of the statement is not very difficult to obtain from the proof of the bound; a proof is available in the first author's PhD thesis~\cite[Section 4.1]{F}.
\subsection{Generic constructions}
We now define constructions based on the Petersen graph that will be used later on.
\begin{definition}\label{def:petersens} Denote by $P_{10}$ the Petersen graph with $V(P_{10})=\{0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9\}$, and $0-1-2-\ldots-9$ one of its Hamiltonian paths, such that vertices $1$ and $9$ are adjacent. Let $P_{11}$ be the graph obtained from $P_{10}$ by subdividing once the edge $\{0,1\}$, and calling the new vertex $x$.
\end{definition}
The graphs of Definition~\ref{def:petersens} are illustrated in Figure~\ref{fig:petersens}.
\begin{figure}[!ht]
\begin{center}
\subfigure[Graph $P_{10}$.]{\scalebox{0.9}{\begin{tikzpicture}[join=bevel,inner sep=0.5mm]
\node[graphnode](8) at (18:1) {};
\draw (8) node[below right=0.1cm] {$8$};
\node[graphnode](5) at (90:1) {};
\draw (5) node[right=0.15cm] {$5$};
\node[graphnode,fill](7) at (162:1) {};
\draw (7) node[below left=0.1cm] {$7$};
\node[graphnode,fill](9) at (234:1) {};
\draw (9) node[below right=0.08cm] {$9$};
\node[graphnode](6) at (306:1) {};
\draw (6) node[below left=0.08cm] {$6$};
\node[graphnode](3) at (18:2) {};
\draw (3) node[right=0.15cm] {$3$};
\node[graphnode,fill](4) at (90:2) {};
\draw (4) node[above=0.15cm] {$4$};
\node[graphnode](0) at (162:2) {};
\draw (0) node[left=0.15cm] {$0$};
\node[graphnode](1) at (234:2) {};
\draw (1) node[below left=0.1cm] {$1$};
\node[graphnode,fill](2) at (306:2) {};
\draw (2) node[below right=0.1cm] {$2$};
\node (-6,0) {};
\node (6,0) {};
\draw[-] (7)--(6)--(5)--(9)--(8)--(7);
\draw[-] (3)--(4)--(0)--(1)--(2)--(3);
\draw[-] (7)--(0);
\draw[-] (5)--(4);
\draw[-] (6)--(2);
\draw[-] (9)--(1);
\draw[-] (8)--(3);
\end{tikzpicture}}}\qquad
\subfigure[Graph $P_{11}$.]{\scalebox{0.9}{\begin{tikzpicture}[join=bevel,inner sep=0.5mm]
\node[graphnode](8) at (18:1) {};
\draw (8) node[below right=0.1cm] {$8$};
\node[graphnode](5) at (90:1) {};
\draw (5) node[right=0.15cm] {$5$};
\node[graphnode](7) at (162:1) {};
\draw (7) node[below left=0.1cm] {$7$};
\node[graphnode](9) at (234:1) {};
\draw (9) node[below right=0.08cm] {$9$};
\node[graphnode](6) at (306:1) {};
\draw (6) node[below left=0.08cm] {$6$};
\node[graphnode](3) at (18:2) {};
\draw (3) node[right=0.15cm] {$3$};
\node[graphnode](4) at (90:2) {};
\draw (4) node[above=0.15cm] {$4$};
\node[graphnode](0) at (162:2) {};
\draw (0) node[left=0.15cm] {$0$};
\node[graphnode](x) at (198:1.62) {};
\draw (x) node[above left=0.1cm] {$x$};
\node[graphnode](1) at (234:2) {};
\draw (1) node[below left=0.1cm] {$1$};
\node[graphnode](2) at (306:2) {};
\draw (2) node[below right=0.1cm] {$2$};
\draw[-] (7)--(6)--(5)--(9)--(8)--(7);
\draw[-] (3)--(4)--(0) -- (x) -- (1)--(2)--(3);
\draw[-] (7)--(0);
\draw[-] (5)--(4);
\draw[-] (6)--(2);
\draw[-] (9)--(1);
\draw[-] (8)--(3);
\draw[-] (x)+(-0.5,-0.2)--(x);
\end{tikzpicture}}}
\end{center}
\caption{\label{fig:petersens} The Petersen graph $P_{10}$ and its modification $P_{11}$. The black vertices form an optimal identifying code and locating-dominating set of $P_{10}$.}
\end{figure}
\begin{definition}\label{def:G_11^k}
For any $k\geq 2$, let $G_{11}^k$ be the graph formed by a vertex $y$
connected to $k$ copies of $P_{11}$ (each attached via vertex $x$).
\end{definition}
The graph $G_{11}^k$ is illustrated in Figure~\ref{fig:P11's}.
\begin{figure}[!ht]
\begin{center}
\subfigure[An optimal locating-dominating set of $G_{11}^k$.]{\label{fig:P11's-LD}\scalebox{0.8}{\begin{tikzpicture}[join=bevel,inner sep=0.5mm]
\node[graphnode](y) at (2.5,3) {};
\draw (y) node[above=0.15cm] {$y$};
\node[graphnode](8) at (18:1) {};
\path (8)+(5,0) node[graphnode,fill] (81) {};
\node[graphnode,fill](5) at (90:1) {};
\path (5)+(5,0) node[graphnode,fill] (51) {};
\node[graphnode,fill](7) at (162:1) {};
\path (7)+(5,0) node[graphnode] (71) {};
\node[graphnode](9) at (234:1) {};
\path (9)+(5,0) node[graphnode] (91) {};
\node[graphnode](6) at (306:1) {};
\path (6)+(5,0) node[graphnode] (61) {};
\node[graphnode](3) at (18:2) {};
\path (3)+(5,0) node[graphnode] (31) {};
\node[graphnode](4) at (90:2) {};
\path (4)+(5,0) node[graphnode] (41) {};
\node[graphnode](0) at (162:2) {};
\path (0)+(5,0) node[graphnode] (01) {};
\node[graphnode,fill](x) at (54:1.62) {};
\path (x)+(3.1,0) node[graphnode,fill] (x1) {};
\node[graphnode,fill](1) at (234:2) {};
\path (1)+(5,0) node[graphnode] (11) {};
\node[graphnode](2) at (306:2) {};
\path (2)+(5,0) node[graphnode,fill] (21) {};
\path (2.5,1.5) node {$\ldots$};
\draw[-] (7)--(6)--(5)--(9)--(8)--(7);
\draw[-] (3)--(x)--(4)--(0) -- (1)--(2)--(3);
\draw[-] (7)--(0);
\draw[-] (5)--(4);
\draw[-] (6)--(2);
\draw[-] (9)--(1);
\draw[-] (8)--(3);
\draw[-] (x)--(y)--(x1);
\draw[-] (71)--(61)--(51)--(91)--(81)--(71);
\draw[-] (31)--(41)--(x1)--(01) -- (11)--(21)--(31);
\draw[-] (71)--(01);
\draw[-] (51)--(41);
\draw[-] (61)--(21);
\draw[-] (91)--(11);
\draw[-] (81)--(31);;
\end{tikzpicture}}}\qquad
\subfigure[An optimal identifying code of $G_{11}^k$.]{\label{fig:P11's-ID}\scalebox{0.8}{\begin{tikzpicture}[join=bevel,inner sep=0.5mm]
\node[graphnode](y) at (2.5,3) {};
\draw (y) node[above=0.15cm] {$y$};
\node[graphnode,fill](8) at (18:1) {};
\path (8)+(5,0) node[graphnode] (81) {};
\node[graphnode,fill](5) at (90:1) {};
\path (5)+(5,0) node[graphnode,fill] (51) {};
\node[graphnode](7) at (162:1) {};
\path (7)+(5,0) node[graphnode,fill] (71) {};
\node[graphnode](9) at (234:1) {};
\path (9)+(5,0) node[graphnode] (91) {};
\node[graphnode](6) at (306:1) {};
\path (6)+(5,0) node[graphnode] (61) {};
\node[graphnode](3) at (18:2) {};
\path (3)+(5,0) node[graphnode,fill] (31) {};
\node[graphnode](4) at (90:2) {};
\path (4)+(5,0) node[graphnode] (41) {};
\node[graphnode,fill](0) at (162:2) {};
\path (0)+(5,0) node[graphnode] (01) {};
\node[graphnode,fill](x) at (54:1.62) {};
\path (x)+(3.1,0) node[graphnode,fill] (x1) {};
\node[graphnode](1) at (234:2) {};
\path (1)+(5,0) node[graphnode,fill] (11) {};
\node[graphnode,fill](2) at (306:2) {};
\path (2)+(5,0) node[graphnode] (21) {};
\path (2.5,1.5) node {$\ldots$};
\draw[-] (7)--(6)--(5)--(9)--(8)--(7);
\draw[-] (3)--(x)--(4)--(0) -- (1)--(2)--(3);
\draw[-] (7)--(0);
\draw[-] (5)--(4);
\draw[-] (6)--(2);
\draw[-] (9)--(1);
\draw[-] (8)--(3);
\draw[-] (x)--(y)--(x1);
\draw[-] (71)--(61)--(51)--(91)--(81)--(71);
\draw[-] (31)--(41)--(x1)--(01) -- (11)--(21)--(31);
\draw[-] (71)--(01);
\draw[-] (51)--(41);
\draw[-] (61)--(21);
\draw[-] (91)--(11);
\draw[-] (81)--(31);;
\end{tikzpicture}}}
\end{center}
\caption{\label{fig:P11's} The graph $G_{11}^k$.}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Locating-dominating sets}
We now give constructions with large location-domination number. The first construction is based on copies of the $6$-cycle $C_6$.
\begin{proposition}\label{prop:example-LD-n/2}
There are infinitely many connected graphs $G$ of order $n$, girth~$5$ and minimum degree~$2$ with $\gamma^{\text{\tiny{LD}}}(G)=\frac{n-1}{2}$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
Consider the graph $G$ obtained from one vertex $x$ and $k\geq 2$ disjoint copies of $C_6$, each joined to $x$ by exactly one edge. We have $n=6k+1$, and we claim that $\gamma^{\text{\tiny{LD}}}(G)=3k$. It is easy to check that a set consisting of three vertices in each copy of $C_6$ (see Figure~\ref{fig:C_6's}) is locating-dominating. For the lower bound, assume that $D$ is an optimal locating-dominating set, and that $x\notin D$. Then, each copy of $C_6$ contains at least $\gamma^{\text{\tiny{LD}}}(C_6)=3$ vertices of $D$, and we are done. Hence, assume that $x\in D$. Each copy of $C_6$ has at least two vertices from $D$ (otherwise $D$ is not dominating). Assume some copy contains exactly two ($y,z$): then the neighbour of $x$ in that copy must be only dominated by $x$. Indeed, if this is not the case (say he is dominated also by $y$), there would be two vertices in this copy of $C_6$ that are not in $D$ but only dominated by $z$, a contradiction. But now observe that in the whole graph, at most one vertex of $V(G)\setminus D$ can be dominated only by $x$, hence all other copies of $C_6$ contain three vertices of $D$, and we are done.
\end{proof}
\begin{figure}[!ht]
\begin{center}
\scalebox{0.9}{\begin{tikzpicture}[join=bevel,inner sep=0.5mm]
\node[graphnode](x) at (1.5,2) {};
\draw (x) node[above=0.15cm] {$x$};
\node[graphnode](8) at (0:1) {};
\path (8)+(3,0) node[graphnode] (3) {};
\node[graphnode,fill](5) at (60:1) {};
\path (5)+(3,0) node[graphnode] (4) {};
\node[graphnode](7) at (120:1) {};
\path (7)+(3,0) node[graphnode,fill] (0) {};
\node[graphnode,fill](9) at (180:1) {};
\path (9)+(3,0) node[graphnode] (1) {};
\node[graphnode,fill](6) at (240:1) {};
\path (6)+(3,0) node[graphnode,fill] (2) {};
\node[graphnode](a) at (300:1) {};
\path (a)+(3,0) node[graphnode,fill] (b) {};
\path (1.5,0.5) node {$\ldots$};
\draw[-] (8)--(5)--(7)--(9)--(6)--(a)--(8);
\draw[-] (3)--(4)--(0)--(1)--(2)--(b)--(3) (5)--(x)--(0);
\end{tikzpicture}}
\end{center}
\caption{\label{fig:C_6's} A family of connected graphs with location-domination number $\frac{n-1}{2}$.}
\end{figure}
We will use the following lemma about the graph $P_{11}$.
\begin{lemma}\label{lemm:P11-LD}
Let $G$ be a graph of girth~5 containing a copy $P$ of $P_{11}$ as an induced subgraph, such that in $P$, only vertex $x$ has neighbours out of $P$. Let $D$ be a locating-dominating set of $G$. Then, we have $|D\cap V(P)|\geq 4$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
By contradiction, we assume that $D_P=D\cap V(P)$ has size~$3$. If $x\notin D_P$, then $D_P$ must form a locating-dominating set of $P\setminus\{x\}$. By Theorem~\ref{th:LB-Delta}, $\gamma^{\text{\tiny{LD}}}(G)\geq\frac{20}{6}>3$, a contradiction. Hence, $x\in D_P$. But now it is not possible to even dominate the remaining vertices with just two vertices, a contradiction.
\end{proof}
\begin{proposition}\label{prop:example-LD-conn-4/11}
There are infinitely many connected graphs $G$ of order $n$, girth~$5$ and minimum degree~$3$ with $\gamma^{\text{\tiny{LD}}}(G)=\frac{4}{11}(n-1)>0.363n$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
Consider the graph $G_{11}^k$ ($k\geq 3$) from Definition~\ref{def:G_11^k}, which has $n=11k+1$ vertices. A locating-dominating set of size~$4k$ is given by selecting vertices $\{x,3,6,9\}$ of each copy of $P_{11}$ (see Figure~\ref{fig:P11's-LD}). By Lemma~\ref{lemm:P11-LD}, this is optimal.
\end{proof}
The Heawood graph $H_{14}$ is a well-known Hamiltonian cubic vertex-transitive graph on $14$~vertices and with girth~$6$. Given its vertex set $\{0,1, \ldots, 13\}$, its edges are given by a Hamiltonian cycle $0-1-2-\ldots-13$ and $\{0,5\}$, $\{1,10\}$, $\{2,7\}$, $\{3,12\}$, $\{4,9\}$, $\{6,11\}$ and $\{8,13\}$. See Figure~\ref{fig:heawood} for an illustration.
\begin{figure}[!ht]
\begin{center}
\scalebox{0.9}{\begin{tikzpicture}[join=bevel,inner sep=0.5mm]
\node[graphnode](0) at (26:2) {};
\draw (0) node[right=0.1cm] {$0$};
\node[graphnode,fill](1) at (52:2) {};
\draw (1) node[above right=0.1cm] {$1$};
\node[graphnode](2) at (78:2) {};
\draw (2) node[above=0.1cm] {$2$};
\node[graphnode](3) at (104:2) {};
\draw (3) node[above=0.1cm] {$3$};
\node[graphnode,fill](4) at (129:2) {};
\draw (4) node[above left=0.1cm] {$4$};
\node[graphnode](5) at (155:2) {};
\draw (5) node[left=0.1cm] {$5$};
\node[graphnode,fill](6) at (181:2) {};
\draw (6) node[left=0.1cm] {$6$};
\node[graphnode](7) at (206:2) {};
\draw (7) node[left=0.1cm] {$7$};
\node[graphnode,fill](8) at (232:2) {};
\draw (8) node[below left=0.1cm] {$8$};
\node[graphnode](9) at (258:2) {};
\draw (9) node[below=0.1cm] {$9$};
\node[graphnode,fill](10) at (283:2) {};
\draw (10) node[below=0.1cm] {$10$};
\node[graphnode](11) at (309:2) {};
\draw (11) node[below right=0.1cm] {$11$};
\node[graphnode](12) at (335:2) {};
\draw (12) node[below right=0.1cm] {$12$};
\node[graphnode,fill](13) at (361:2) {};
\draw (13) node[right=0.1cm] {$13$};
\draw[-] (0)--(1)--(2)--(3)--(4)--(5)--(6)--(7)--(8)--(9)--(10)--(11)--(12)--(13)--(0);
\draw[-] (0)--(5) (1)--(10) (2)--(7) (3)--(12) (4)--(9) (6)--(11) (8)--(13);
\end{tikzpicture}}
\end{center}
\caption{\label{fig:heawood} The Heawood graph with a minimum locating-dominating set (black vertices).}
\end{figure}
\begin{proposition}\label{prop:heawood-LD}
The Heawood graph $H_{14}$ has $\gamma^{\text{\tiny{LD}}}(H_{14})=6=\frac{3}{7}n>0.428n$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
A locating-dominating set of size~$6$ is for example $\{1,4,6,8,10,13\}$.
We now prove that no locating-dominating set of size~$5$ exists. Assume by contradiction that there is a locating-dominating set $D$ of $H_{14}$ of size~$5$. Let $m(D)$ and $m(D,S)$ count the number of edges between vertices of $D$ and the edges between $D$ and $S=V(H_{14})\setminus D$, respectively. Since at most $|D|$ vertices from $S$ can be dominated by a single vertex of $D$, we have $m(D,S)\geq |D|+2(|S|-|D|)=13$. On the other hand, since $H_{14}$ is cubic, $m(D,S)=15-2m(D)$. Hence, we have $m(D)\leq 1$.
Therefore, we have at least three vertices in $D$ that are adjacent only to vertices of $S$. Since $H_{14}$ is vertex-transitive, we assume without loss of generality that vertex $0$ is such a vertex. Among the neighbours of $0$ (vertices $1,5,13$), at most one is dominated only by $0$.
Assume that one of them is in that case. By the symmetries of the graph, there are automorphisms pairwise exchanging edges $\{0,1\},\{0,5\},\{0,13\}$. Hence, without loss of generality, we can assume that vertex $5$ is $1$-dominated, but vertices $1,13$ are $2$-dominated. Hence, vertices $4,6\notin D$ but at least one vertex among $2,10$ and $8,12$ belongs to $D$, respectively. Moreover, in order to dominate vertices $4$ and $6$, one of $3,9$ and $7,11$ belongs to $D$, respectively. Since these four sets are disjoint and $|D|=5$, $D$ contains \emph{exactly} one of each.
We first assume that $2\in D$: hence
$10\notin D$. If also $7\in D$ (and
$11\notin D$), both $9,12\in D$ in order to dominate
10 and 11, respectively. Then $D=\{0,2,7,9,12\}$ but $4,10$
are both dominated only by 9, a contradiction. Hence,
$7\notin D$ and $11\in D$. Then, $9\in D$
in order to separate $6,10$; then, $3\notin D$ and
$12\in D$, otherwise $6,12$ are not separated. Hence
$D=\{0,2,9,11,12\}$ but $4,8$ are both dominated only by 9,
a contradiction.
Hence, $2\notin D$ and $10\in D$. If $3\notin D$, then $9\in D$ and moreover $12\in D$ in order to dominate $3$ (hence $8\notin D$). Since $7$ is dominated, $7$ is the last vertex of $D$. But then $2,6$ are both dominated only by $7$, a contradiction. Hence, $3\in D$ and $9\notin D$. To separate $2,4$, $7\in D$ (hence $11\notin D$). Then $8$ is the last vertex of $D$, otherwise it would not be separated by $6$. But then $4,12$ are not separated, a contradiction.
Therefore, we can assume that all neighbours of $0$ are $2$-dominated. Hence, at least one vertex among $\{2,10\}$, $\{4,6\}$ and $\{8,12\}$, respectively, belongs to $D$. Assume first that $2\in D$. Then, in order for $10$ to be dominated, one of $9,10,11$ belongs to $D$. Then, exactly one of $8,12$ belongs to $D$. If $10\in D$, one of $8,12$ would not be dominated, a contradiction. If $9\in D$, then $12\in D$ (otherwise it is not dominated). But then, both $8,10$ are only dominated by $9$, a contradiction. A similar contradiction follows if $11\in D$.
Hence, $2\notin D$, and $10\in D$. Then, (exactly) one of $3,7$ belongs to $D$, otherwise $2$ is not dominated. If $3\in D$ and $7\notin D$, $8\in D$ (otherwise $8$ is not dominated). Since $6$ must be dominated, $6$ itself is the last vertex of $D$; but then, $4,12$ are both only dominated by $3$, a contradiction. Hence, If $7\in D$ and $3\notin D$. Then, $12\in D$ (otherwise it is not dominated). Hence, $8\notin D$. But now, both $2,8$ are only dominated by $7$, a contradiction.
Therefore, $D$ does not exist, which completes the proof.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Identifying codes}
We now give constructions with large identifying code number. We start with a construction based on the 5-cycle $C_5$, which has identifying code number~$3$~\cite{BCHL04}.
\begin{proposition}\label{prop:example-ID-3n/5}
There are infinitely many connected graphs $G$ of order $n$, girth~$5$ and minimum degree~$2$ with $\gamma^{\text{\tiny{ID}}}(G)=\frac{3}{5}(n-1)$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
Consider a vertex $x$ attached to $k\geq 2$ copies of $C_5$ via one of each copy's vertex (Figure~\ref{fig:C_5's}). The set formed by three consecutive vertices of each copy of $C_5$ (centered in the neighbour of $x$) is clearly an identifying code. For the lower bound, assume that some copy contains at most two vertices of an identifying code $C$. Then they must be non-adjacent (otherwise some vertex is not dominated). But then at least one of these two vertices is not separated from one of its neighbours, a contradiction. Hence each copy of $C_5$ contains at least three vertices of $C$, proving the bound.
\end{proof}
\begin{figure}[!ht]
\begin{center}
\scalebox{0.9}{\begin{tikzpicture}[join=bevel,inner sep=0.5mm]
\node[graphnode](x) at (1.5,2) {};
\draw (x) node[above=0.15cm] {$x$};
\node[graphnode,fill](8) at (18:1) {};
\path (8)+(3,0) node[graphnode,fill] (3) {};
\node[graphnode,fill](5) at (90:1) {};
\path (5)+(3,0) node[graphnode,fill] (4) {};
\node[graphnode,fill](7) at (162:1) {};
\path (7)+(3,0) node[graphnode,fill] (0) {};
\node[graphnode](9) at (234:1) {};
\path (9)+(3,0) node[graphnode] (1) {};
\node[graphnode](6) at (306:1) {};
\path (6)+(3,0) node[graphnode] (2) {};
\path (1.5,0.5) node {$\ldots$};
\draw[-] (8)--(5)--(7)--(9)--(6)--(8);
\draw[-] (3)--(4)--(0)--(1)--(2)--(3) (5)--(x)--(4);
\end{tikzpicture}}
\end{center}
\caption{\label{fig:C_5's} A family of connected graphs with identifying code number $\frac{3}{5}(n-1)$.}
\end{figure}
The following lemma is about the graph $P_{11}$.
\begin{lemma}\label{lemm:P11}
Let $G$ be an identifiable graph of girth~$5$ containing a copy $P$ of $P_{11}$ as an induced subgraph, such that in $P$, only vertex $x$ has neighbours out of $P$. Let $C$ be an identifying code of $G$ and $C\cap V(P)=C_P$. Then:\begin{itemize}
\item[(i)] $|C_P|\geq 4$;
\item[(ii)] if $|C_P|=4$, then $x$ is \emph{only} dominated by a vertex $y\notin V(P)$;
\end{itemize}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
(i) By contradiction, assume that $|C_P|=3$. If $C_P$ induces a connected graph, then one can check that there are some non-dominated vertices in $P$. Hence, by Lemma~\ref{lemma:girth5-ID}(i), either $C_P$ induces a $K_2$ containing $x$ and an isolated vertex, or three isolated vertices. In both cases some vertices of $P$ would not be separated, a contradiction.
(ii) Assume that $|C_P|=4$ and by contradiction, that $x$ is dominated by a vertex of $C_P$. If $x\notin C_P$, then $C_P$ must form an identifying code of $P\setminus\{x\}$. Then, the bound $\gamma^{\text{\tiny{ID}}}(G)\geq\frac{2n}{\Delta+2}$ of Theorem~\ref{th:LB-Delta} is tight, and by the same theorem, all vertices in $C_P$ have degree~$3$ in $P\setminus\{x\}$. Hence the neighbours of $x$ do not belong to $C_P$, a contradiction. Hence, $x\in C_P$.
Let $m(C_P)$ and $m(C_P,S)$ count the number of edges between vertices of $C_P$ and edges between vertices of $C_P$ and $S=V(P)\setminus C_P$, respectively. Let $i$ denote the number of vertices in $C_P$ that are not adjacent to any other vertex of $C_P$ (note that $0\leq i\leq 2$ since $x\in C_P$ and $x$ is dominated by a vertex of $C_P$). Then, we have $m(C_P)=4-i-1$ (indeed $C_P$ must induce a forest). We also have $m(C_P,S)=11-2m(C_P)$ (since $x\in C_P$ and has degree~$2$ in $P$). We get that $m(C_P,S)=5+2i$. On the other hand, at most $4-i$ vertices in $S$ can be $1$-dominated, and the other ones must be at least $2$-dominated. Since $|S|=7$, we get $m(C_P,S)\geq 4-i + 2(7-(4-i))=10+i$. Putting both inequalities together, we get that $i\geq 5$, a contradiction.
\end{proof}
\begin{proposition}\label{prop:example-ID-5n/11}
There are infinitely many connected graphs $G$ of order $n$, girth~$5$ and minimum degree~$3$ with $\gamma^{\text{\tiny{ID}}}(G)=\frac{5}{11}(n-1)>0.454n$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
Consider the graph $G_{11}^k$ from Definition~\ref{def:G_11^k}. An identifying code of size $5k$, formed by vertices $\{x,2,4,7,9\}$ of each copy of $P_{11}$, is illustrated in Figure~\ref{fig:P11's-ID}. Now, consider an identifying code $C$ of the graph. By Lemma~\ref{lemm:P11}(i), every copy of $P_{11}$ contains at least four vertices of $C$. By Lemma~\ref{lemm:P11}(ii), for each copy of $P_{11}$ containing \emph{exactly} four code-vertices, then $y\in C$ and vertex $x$ is dominated only by $y$. Hence there can be only one such copy, proving the lower bound.
\end{proof}
We now define a cubic graph on $12$~vertices with girth~$5$.
\begin{definition}
Let $G_{12}$ be the $12$-vertex graph with vertex set $\{0,1, \ldots, 11\}$ and edges given by a hamilitonian cycle $0-1-2-\ldots-11-0$ and $\{0,4\}$, $\{1,8\}$, $\{2,6\}$, $\{3,10\}$, $\{5,9\}$, and $\{7,11\}$.
\end{definition}
An illustration is given in Figure~\ref{fig:g12}. We remark that, alternatively, $G_{12}$ can be obtained from the Petersen graph by subdividing two edges that are at maximum distance (i.e. distance~$2$) from each other and joining the two new vertices by an edge. A third way is to take the Heawood graph, delete two adjacent vertices $x,y$ and adding an edge between the two neighbours of $x$ and an edge between the two neighbours of $y$.
\begin{figure}[!ht]
\begin{center}
\scalebox{0.9}{\begin{tikzpicture}[join=bevel,inner sep=0.5mm]
\node[graphnode,fill](2) at (0:2) {};
\draw (2) node[right=0.1cm] {$2$};
\node[graphnode](3) at (60:2) {};
\draw (3) node[above right=0.1cm] {$3$};
\node[graphnode,fill](10) at (120:2) {};
\draw (10) node[above=0.1cm] {$10$};
\node[graphnode](9) at (180:2) {};
\draw (9) node[left=0.1cm] {$9$};
\node[graphnode](8) at (240:2) {};
\draw (8) node[below=0.1cm] {$8$};
\node[graphnode](1) at (300:2) {};
\draw (1) node[below=0.1cm] {$1$};
\node[graphnode,fill](6) at (0:1) {};
\draw (6) node[above=0.1cm] {$6$};
\node[graphnode](4) at (60:1) {};
\draw (4) node[above left=0.1cm] {$4$};
\node[graphnode](11) at (120:1) {};
\draw (11) node[below left=0.1cm] {$11$};
\node[graphnode,fill](5) at (180:1) {};
\draw (5) node[below=0.1cm] {$5$};
\node[graphnode,fill](7) at (240:1) {};
\draw (7) node[below right=0.1cm] {$7$};
\node[graphnode,fill](0) at (300:1) {};
\draw (0) node[right=0.1cm] {$0$};
\draw[-] (8)--(1)--(2)--(3)--(10)--(9)--(8)
(6)--(5)--(4)--(0)--(11)--(7)--(6)
(2)--(6) (3)--(4) (10)--(11) (5)--(9) (7)--(8) (0)--(1);
\end{tikzpicture}}
\end{center}
\caption{\label{fig:g12} The graph $G_{12}$ with a minimum identifying code (black vertices).}
\end{figure}
\begin{proposition}\label{prop:G12-ID}
The graph $G_{12}$ has $\gamma^{\text{\tiny{ID}}}(G_{12}) = 6 = \frac{n}{2}$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
An identifying code of size $6$ is given for instance by the set $\{0,2,5,6,7,10\}$, implying that $\gamma^{\text{\tiny{ID}}}(G_{12}) \le 6$.
To prove our claim, it is sufficient to show that there is no identifying code on $5$ vertices. Assume for contradiction that there is an identifying code $C$ of $G_{12}$ of size $5$. Let $I$ be the set of isolated vertices in $C$, $S = V(G_{12})\setminus C$. Let $m(C)$ and $m(C,S)$ count the number of edges between vertices of $C$ and the edges between $C$ and $S$, respectively. By Lemma~\ref{lemma:girth5-ID}, at least $|S|-|C\setminus I|$ vertices from $S$ have to be $2$-dominated. Hence, there are at least $|C\setminus I|+2(|S|-|C\setminus I|)$ edges from $S$ to $C$. On the other hand, there are $3|C|-2m(C) = 15 - 2m(C)$ edges from $C$ to $S$. Hence,
\begin{align*}
15-2m(C) = m(C,S) &\ge |C\setminus I|+ 2(|S|-|C\setminus I|) \\
&= 2|S| - |C\setminus I|\\
&= 2(12-|C|)-|C|+|I| =9+|I|,
\end{align*}
which gives
\begin{align}
m(C) \le 3 - \frac{|I|}{2}.\label{eq:m(C)}
\end{align}
By Lemma~\ref{lemma:girth5-ID}(i), the subgraph induced by $C$ consists either of a single component of order~$5$, a component of order~$4$ and an isolated vertex, a component of order~$3$ and two isolated vertices, or $C$ is an independent set. We distinguish now between these cases.
\vspace{0.2cm}\noindent{\it Case a: $C$ consists of a single component of order $5$.} Then $m(C)\geq 4$ and thus, by Inequality~\eqref{eq:m(C)}, $4\leq 3$, which is a contradiction.
\vspace{0.2cm}\noindent{\it Case b: $C$ consists of a component of order $4$ and an isolated vertex.} Again, by Inequality~\eqref{eq:m(C)}, $3\leq m(C)\leq 2.5$, a contradiction.
\vspace{0.2cm}\noindent {\it Case c: $C$ consists of a component $C_c$ of order~$3$ and two isolated vertices $x$ and $y$.}
Then $C_c$ is a path of length~$2$, say $uvw$, and $m(C)=2=3-\frac{|I|}{2}$, giving equality in the above inequality chain. Hence, three vertices from $S$ have exactly one neighbour in $C$, while the other four have exactly two neighbours in $C$. With $S = \{s_1,s_2,s_3,s_4,s_5,s_6,s_7\}$, let us say that $s_1$, $s_2$, and $s_3$ are the vertices being dominated once and let $\{s_1,u\}$, $\{s_2,v\}$, $\{s_3,w\}$ be the edges hereby involved. Then the edges incident with $v$ have been all assigned, while $u$ and $w$ can still contribute dominating one more vertex from $S$. However, to $2$-dominate the vertices in $\{s_4,s_5,s_6,s_7\}$, necessarily two of them will be adjacent to both $x$ and $y$, building a cycle of length~$4$, which is not allowed. Thus, this case is not possible.
\vspace{0.2cm}\noindent{\it Case d: $C = I = \{x_1,x_2,x_3,x_4,x_5\}$.} By Lemma~\ref{lemma:girth5-ID}(ii), all vertices from $S$ have to be $2$-dominated by $I$, and hence $m(C,S)\geq 14$. But since $G_{12}$ is cubic, each vertex of $S$ is incident to at most one further edge. Since $|S|=7$, at most six vertices in $S$ can be paired, and $m(C,S)\geq 15$. On the other hand, each vertex of $C$ has three neighbours, hence $m(C,S)\leq 15$. This implies that while one vertex from $S$, say $s_7$, has exactly three neighbours in $I$, the other six vertices from $S$ have exactly two neighbours in $I$. Since $G_{12}$ is cubic, the vertices in $\{s_1,s_2,s_3,s_4,s_5,s_6\}$ are paired by a matching, say $\{s_1,s_2\}$, $\{s_3,s_4\}$, $\{s_5,s_6\}$. Consider the edge $\{s_1,s_2\}$ and its neighbours in $I$, say $\{x_1,x_2,x_3,x_4\}$. Going through all edges from the graph $G_{12}$ and considering their four independent neighbours, there are only two possibilities where the corresponding independent sets can be completed to an independent set of size~$5$. These are the edges $\{3,4\}$ and $\{7,8\}$ which give each two possible independent sets $\{0,2,5,7,10\}$, $\{0,2,5,8,10\}$ and $\{1,3,6,9,11\}$, $\{1,4,6,9,11\}$. Hence, $C=I$ has to be one of these sets. However, it is easy to check that none of them is an identifying code.
\vspace{0.2cm}
Hence, $G_{12}$ has no identifying code of size $5$ and $\gamma^{\text{\tiny{ID}}}(G_{12}) = 6$.
\end{proof}
\section{Conclusion}\label{sec:conclu}
We proved the two tight upper bounds $\gamma^{\text{\tiny{LD}}}(G)\leq\frac{n}{2}$ and $\gamma^{\text{\tiny{ID}}}(G) \leq \frac{5}{7}n$ for graphs $G$ of girth at least~$5$ and minimum degree at least~$2$, as well as improved bounds for cubic graphs. While the first bound is asymptotically tight for large values of $n$, we do not know whether this holds for the latter one.
For minimum degree at least~$3$, either our bounds are not tight, or we have not found the graphs with highest value of parameters $\gamma^{\text{\tiny{LD}}}$ and $\gamma^{\text{\tiny{ID}}}$. In particular, the question whether for every graph $G$ of girth at least~$5$ and minimum degree at least~$3$, we have $\gamma^{\text{\tiny{ID}}}(G)\leq\frac{n}{2}$ seems intriguing. By Proposition~\ref{prop:G12-ID} this would be tight for the graph $G_{12}$. Though we have tried to get better bounds when $\delta\geq 3$, it seems that our technique is not powerful enough for such an improvement (at least without any new idea).
To conclude, we remark that another interesting question would be to conduct a similar study for the \emph{open location-domination number} and the \emph{locating-total domination number}, related concepts introduced in~\cite{SS10} and~\cite{hhh06}, respectively.
\vspace{0.2cm}
\noindent\textbf{Acknowledgements.} We thank the anonymous referee for carefully reading the paper, therefore helping to improve its presentation.
|
\section{Introduction}
The Quark-Gluon String Model (QGSM)~\cite{KTM,K20}, based on the Dual
Topological Unitarization (DTU), Regge phenomenology, and nonperturbative
notions of QCD, has been foe already more than thirty years
to to succesfully predict and describe many features of the hadronic processes
in a wide energy range. In particular, the QGSM allows one to make
quantitative predictions on the inclusive densities of different secondaries both in
the central and beam fragmentation regions.
In the QGSM frame, high energy
hadron-nucleon collisions are considered as taking place via the exchange
of one or several Pomerons. Each Pomeron is considered in DTU as a cylindrical
diagram (Fig.~1a). The cut~\cite{AGK} between Pomerons in a multipomeron
diagram results in elastic or diffraction dissociation processes, while the cut
through one (Fig.~1b) or several (Fig.~1c) Pomerons corresponds to inelastic
processes with multiple production of secondaries, the cut of every Pomeron
leading to the production of two showers of secondaries.
\vskip 2.cm
\begin{figure}[htb]
\label{cil}
\centering
\vskip -8.cm
\includegraphics[width=.7\hsize]{19eps.pdf}
\vskip -2.5cm
\caption{\footnotesize
(a) Cylindrical diagram representing a Pomeron exchange within the DTU
classification (quarks are shown by solid lines); (b) A cut of the
cylindrical diagram corresponding to the single-Pomeron exchange contribution
to inelastic $pp$ scattering; (c) The cuts of the diagrams for the inelastic
interaction of the incident proton with a target nucleon in a $pp$ collision.}
\end{figure}
This model has been successfully used for the description of
multiparticle production processes in hadron-hadron
collisions. The QGSM description of the production of secondaries (pseudoscalar mesons $\pi$
and $K$), and of nucleons $p$, $\overline{p}$, which give the main contribution to
mean multiplicity at different energies was obtained many years ago in~\cite{KaPi,Sh} (see
also~\cite{AMPS,MPS}). Vector meson production was
considered in~\cite{aryer,yer,APSh}. The yields of hyperons, including the
multistrange ones, has been described in~\cite{ACKS,Sigma}.
In the present paper, we apply first time the QGSM formalism to the description of the spectra
of vector $\varphi$-mesons production in $\pi p$ and $pp$ collisioms, and of the ratios
of yields $\varphi$/$\pi^-$ and $\varphi$/$K^-$ in $pp$-collisions for a large scope of the
initial energy going up to the RHIC and LHC ranges. The $\varphi$-meson is a system,
of $s\overline{s}$ quarks with non-zero masses, that is rarely produced, and that it can be
thus sensitive to the production mechanism.
\section{Meson production in the QGSM}
In the QGSM the inclusive spectrum of a secondary hadron $h$ is
determined~\cite{KTM,K20} by the convolution of the diquark, valence quark, and sea
quark distributions, $u(x,n)$, in the incident particles, with the
fragmentation functions, $G^h(z)$, of quarks and diquarks into the secondary hadron $h$.
Both the distribution and the fragmentation functions are constructed using the Reggeon counting
rules~\cite{Kai}.
For a nucleon target, the inclusive rapidity, $y$, or Feynman-$x$, $x_F$,
spectrum of a secondary hadron $h$ has the form~\cite{KTM}:
\begin{equation}
\frac{dn}{dy}\ = \
\frac{x_E}{\sigma_{inel}}\cdot \frac{d\sigma}{dx_F}\ =
\sum_{n=1}^\infty w_n\cdot\phi_n^h (x) + w_D \cdot\phi_D^h (x) \ ,
\end{equation}
where the functions $\phi_{n}^{h}(x)$ determine the contribution of diagrams
with $n$ cut Pomerons, $w_n$ is the relative weight of this diagram, that
it depends on the beam particle,
and the term $w_D \cdot\phi_D^h (x)$ accounts for the contribution of
diffraction dissociation processes.
In the case of $pp$ collisions:
\begin{eqnarray}
\phi_n^{h}(x) &=& f_{qq}^{h}(x_{+},n) \cdot f_{q}^{h}(x_{-},n) +
f_{q}^{h}(x_{+},n) \cdot f_{qq}^{h}(x_{-},n)\\
&+& 2(n-1)\cdot f_{s}^{h}(x_{+},n) \cdot f_{s}^{h}(x_{-},n)\ \ , \nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
\begin{eqnarray}
x_{\pm} &=& \frac{1}{2}[\sqrt{4m_{T}^{2}/s+x^{2}}\pm{x}]\ \ ,
\end{eqnarray}
where $f_{qq}$, $f_{q}$, and $f_{s}$ correspond to the contributions
of diquarks, valence quarks, and sea quarks, respectively.
In the case of meson-nucleon collisions, the diquark contribution
$f_{qq}^{h}(x_{+},n)$ in Eq.~(2) should be replaced by the valence antiquark
contributions $f_{\bar{q}}^{h}(x_{+},n)$. Thus, in the case of meson-nucleon
collisions, the quark and antiquark contributions
would be determined, respectively, by the convolution of the quark and
antiquark distributions with the corresponding fragmentation functions, e.g.
\begin{equation}
f_{q}^{h}(x_{+},n) = \int_{x_{+}}^{1}
u_{q}(x_{1},n)\cdot G_{q}^{h}(x_{+}/x_{1}) dx_{1}\ \ .
\end{equation}
The details of the model are presented in~\cite{KTM,K20,KaPi,Sh,ACKS}, and we
use in this paper the Pomeron parameters in ref.~\cite{Sh}.
The averaged number of exchanged Pomerons in $pp$ collisions
$\langle n \rangle_{pp}$ slowly increases with the energy.
In particular, in the case of $n > 1$, i.e. in the
case of multipomeron exchange, the distributions of valence quarks and
diquarks are softened due to the appearance of a sea quark contribution
\cite{KTMS}.
The production of $\pi$ and $K$ mesons in $pp$ collisions, starting from
comparatively low energies, was analyzed in~\cite{KaPi,Sh}.
For the $\varphi$-meson production we use the following quark fragmentation
functions~\cite{aryer}:
\begin{eqnarray}
G_{u}^{\varphi} &=& G_{d}^{\varphi} =
a_{\varphi}\cdot(1-z)^{\lambda - \alpha_R - 2 \alpha_{\varphi}+2}, \;\; \\
G_{s}^{\varphi} &=& a_{\varphi}\cdot(1-z)^{\lambda - \alpha_{\varphi}}.
\end{eqnarray}
On the other hand, the diquark fragmentation functions into $\varphi$-mesons have the form:
\begin{equation}
G_{uu}^{\varphi} = G_{ud}^{\varphi} =
a_{\varphi}\cdot(1-z)^{\lambda+\alpha_R -2(\alpha_R +\alpha_{\varphi})} \ \ ,
\end{equation}
where the parameter $\lambda$ takes the value $\lambda$=0.5~\cite{KTM,KaPi,Sh}, and the
parameters $\alpha_R$=0.5 and $\alpha_{\varphi}$=0. are the intercepts of the $\rho$
and $\varphi$ Regge trajectories, respectively.
The value of the parameter $a_{\varphi}$ is determined by comparison to experimental
data on $\phi$ production from different hadron beams. In our calcualtions we
use the value $a_{\varphi}=0.11$.
\section{Numerical results}
In this section we compare the QGSM calculations to the experimental data on
$\varphi$ inclusive cross sections in $\pi p$~\cite{apsimon,agbenpi,daum}
and $pp$~\cite{daum,NA49,dijkstra,agben,brenner} collisions at different energies,
and to the experimental data on ratios of $\varphi/\pi$ and
$\varphi/K$~\cite{starphi,alvec,alfik} for energies up to the LHC range.
In Fig.~2 we compare two sets of experimental data for $x_F$-spectra of $\varphi$-mesons
produced in $\pi^{\pm} p$ collisions for two different initial momenta of $\pi$-mesons,
93$-$140 GeV/c (upper panel) and 175$-$360 GeV/c (lower panel), measured by different
collaborations \cite{apsimon,agbenpi,daum,dijkstra}, to the corresponding QGSM calculations.
The full curve on the upper panel was calculated at 140 GeV/c, while the full curve on the
lower panel corresponds to momenta 200 GeV/c and the dashed curve to momenta 360 GeV/c.
As we can see on Fig.2, for $\pi p$-collision there is a remarkable disagreement between
experimental data \cite{apsimon,daum} and \cite{dijkstra}, these being significantly higher.
The data \cite{apsimon,agbenpi,daum} were measured on proton target, while data \cite{dijkstra}
were measured on Be target, and the absolute cross section per nucleon have been obtained using
linear A-dependence. As it was mentioned in \cite{dijkstra}, the origin of the
difference in the normalization has not been found.
The theoretical QGSM curves for $\pi^+$ and $\pi^-$ beams practically coincide.
The QGSM description of the experimental data on the $x_F$ dependence of $d\sigma/dx_F$-spectra
of $\varphi$-mesons at $pp$-collision measured at different energies \cite{agbenpi,daum,NA49,dijkstra}
is presented in Fig.~3, where one can see that the difference between the normalisation of different
experiments in pp collisions is not so large as for $\pi p$ collisions.
The full curve in Fig.~3 corresponds to the QGSM calculations at 158 GeV/c.
Here, the agreement of the QGSM calculation with
the experimental data~\cite{NA49} is remarkably good. For the determination
of the normalisation parameter $a_{\varphi}$ experimental results by \cite{apsimon,agbenpi,NA49}
have been used.
In Fig.~4, we compare the QGSM calculations to the experimental data on the inclusive spectra
$x_F\cdot d\sigma /dx_F$ of $\varphi$-mesons in $pp$-collisions at 400 Gev/c~\cite{agben}.
In Fig.~5, the $y$- spectra $dn/dy$ of $\varphi$-mesons production in
$pp$-collisions at 400 Gev/c~\cite{agben} are compared to the QGSM calculations at the same energy.
The theoretical predictions for the same spectra at LHC energies 7 (dashed curve)
and 14 Tev (dashed-dotted curve) are also presented.
As it is shown in Figs.~2 to 5, the QGSM description of the experimental data at
intermediate energies is consistently satisfactory.
\begin{figure}[htb]
\label{pi140}
\centering
\vskip -8.cm
\includegraphics[width=.8\hsize]{lpiphi100-140.pdf}
\vskip -8.cm
\includegraphics[width=.8\hsize]{piphi200-360.pdf}
\vskip -.7cm
\caption{\footnotesize
Two sets of experimental data on the $x_F$-spectra of $\varphi$-mesons produced
in $\pi^{\pm} p$ collisions for two different initial momenta of $\pi$-mesons 93$-$140 GeV/c
(upper panel) and 175$-$360 GeV/c (lower panel), measured by different collaborations
\cite{apsimon,agbenpi,daum,dijkstra}, and the corresponding theoretical curves (see the main text).}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[htb]
\label{phi158}
\centering
\vskip -7.cm
\includegraphics[width=.85\hsize]{pphiallxlog.pdf}
\vskip -.7cm
\caption{\footnotesize
The experimental data on the $x_F$-spectra of $\varphi$-mesons produced in $pp$
collisions at different energies \cite{NA49,dijkstra,daum}, compared to the corresponding
QGSM calculation at 158 GeV/c (full curve).}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[htb]
\label{phi400}
\centering
\vskip -12.5cm
\includegraphics[width=.85\hsize]{pphi400.pdf}
\vskip -0.25cm
\caption{\footnotesize
The experimental data on the $x_F$-spectra $x_F d\sigma/dx_F$
of $\varphi$-mesons produced in $pp$ collisions
at 400 GeV/c~\cite{agben}, compared to the corresponding
QGSM calculation.}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[htb]
\label{phi158y}
\centering
\vskip -8.cm
\includegraphics[width=.9\hsize]{pphidndylog.pdf}
\vskip -.8cm
\caption{\footnotesize
The experimental data~\cite{agben} on the $y$-spectra $dn/dy$ of $\varphi$-mesons
produced in $pp$ collisions at 158 GeV/c, and the corresponding QGSM result (full line).
The QGSM predictions for LHC energies 7 (dashed line) and 14 TeV( dashed-dotted line)
are also presented.}
\end{figure}
To calculate the $\varphi/\pi$ and $\varphi/K$ cross section ratios
one needs the calculated values of both $\varphi$ and pseudoscalar $\pi$ and $K$-mesons
cross sections. For $\pi$ mesons the QGSM predictions are rather reliable~\cite{KaPi,Sh,MPS}
up to the LHC energies, taking into account in Eq.~(3) the growth of the $<p_T>$
of produced $\pi,K$ and $\varphi$- mesons with energy.
\newpage
In Fig.~6 we present the QGSM description of the experimental data on
the inclusive spectra of $K^+$ (upper panel) and $K^-$ (lower panel) mesons
in $pp$-collisions on a wide energy range, going from 100 GeV/c up to
$\sqrt{s}$=200 GeV~\cite{NA49,brenner}.
The integrated over $p_T$ RHIC data at $\sqrt{s}$=200 GeV have been taken fron~\cite{NA49}.
This data were obtained by the NA49 Collaboration in ref.~\cite{NA49} by
interpolating the RHIC data at different $p_T$.
In Fig.~6 one can appreciate that at low energies the normalization of
the experimental data at 100 and 175 GeV/c in ref.~\cite{brenner} differs from
that of the experimental data in ref.~\cite{NA49} at 158 GeV/c.
We present the results of the QGSM calculations at two different energies:
158 GeV/c ($\sqrt{s}$=17.3 GeV), by solid curves, and RHIC energy
($\sqrt{s}$=200 Gev), by dashed curves.
One can see that the theoretical calculations at $\sqrt{s}$=200 Gev
decrease alightly more rapidly than those at $\sqrt{s}$=17.3GeV.
The energy dependence of the production cross section ratios of
$\varphi/\pi^-$ (upper panel)~\cite{starphi,alvec} and $\phi/K^-$
(lower panel)~\cite{starphi,alfik} in pp collisions are
presented in Fig.~7, where the QGSM description is shown by solid
curves. The shapes of the two theoretical curves are similar because
the ratio of $K/\pi$ production depends rather weakly on the initial energy.
The discrepancies of the theoretical curves with the experimental points at
high energies in Fig.~7 can be connected to the
differences in the kinematical windows for $\varphi$, $K$, and $\pi$ experimental
measurements at LHC energies.
\section{Conclusion}
The QGSM provides a reasonable description of Feynman $x_F$ and rapidity $y$ spectra of
$\varphi$-meson production for the interaction of different hadron beams with a nucleon target in
a wide energy region, by only using one new normalization parameter, $a_{\varphi}$=0.11.
We show the QGSM prediction for $dn/dy$ cross sections for LHC energies.
We have also obtained a reasonable agreement for the $\varphi/\pi$ and $\varphi/K$ cross
section ratios in a wide interval of the beam energy, going up to the LHC range.
\begin{figure}[htb]
\centering
\vskip -6.cm
\includegraphics[width=.7\hsize]{ppkplallsin.pdf}
\vskip -6.cm
\includegraphics[width=.7\hsize]{ppkminallsin.pdf}
\vskip -.75cm
\caption{\footnotesize
The QGSM description of the invariant cross section of $K^+$ (upper panel) and $K^-$ (lower panel)
mesons produced in $pp$ collisions compared to the experimental data
at different energies~\cite{NA49,brenner}. Solid lines correspond to the QGSM result
at 158 GeV/c ($\sqrt{s}$=17.3 GeV), while dashed lines correspond to the QGSM calculation at RHIC energy
($\sqrt{s}$=200 Gev).}
\end{figure}
\newpage
\begin{figure}[htb]
\centering
\label{ratios}
\vskip -6.5cm
\includegraphics[width=.7\hsize]{rphipin.pdf}
\vskip -5.cm
\includegraphics[width=.7\hsize]{rphkmin2.pdf}
\vskip -.5cm
\caption{\footnotesize
The QGSM description of the $\sqrt{s}$ dependence of $\varphi/\pi^-$ (upper panel)
and $\varphi/K^-$ (lower panel) cross section ratios produced in pp collisions,
compared to the corresponding experimental data in refs.~\cite{starphi,alvec,alfik}.}
\end{figure}
{\bf Acknowledgements}
We thank C. Pajares for useful discussions.
We are also grateful to N.I. Novikova for technical help.
This paper was supported by Ministerio de Econom\'i a y
Competitividad of Spain (FPA2011$-$22776), the Spanish
Consolider-Ingenio 2010 Programme CPAN (CSD2007-00042),
by Xunta de Galicia, Spain (2011/PC043), by the State
Committee of Science of the Republic of Armenia
(Grant-13-1C023), and, partially, by grant RSGSS-3628.2008.2.
|
\section{\MakeUppercase{Introduction}}\label{sec.introduction}
Point processes are effectively used to model a variety of event data, and have also shown a recent popularity within the Machine Learning community as priors over sets. The most fundamental example of such a stochastic model for random sets is the homogenous Poisson process. This is defined via an intensity which describes the expected number of points found in any bounded region of some arbitrary domain. An inhomogenous Poisson process allows the intensity to vary throughout the domain over which the process is defined. As we do not know the functional form of this intensity given only event data, another stochastic process is typically used to model it nonparametrically. This is then termed a doubly-stochastic Poisson process, a type of renewal process also known as a Cox process. In our particular construction, we use transformed Gaussian processes to model the intensity functions of the individual dependent point processes, in such a manner as to enable fully nonparametric Bayesian inference \citep{Adams_09_a,Murray_10_a}. While we only explicitly consider the doubly stochastic Poisson process, any general renewal process \citep{Rao_11_a} could be incorporated into the framework we define.
There are many occasions when we have multiple point processes which we expect to be dependent: If the domain is temporal, then an example would be individual clients making trades with a specific financial services provider, or individual customers purchasing items from a specific vendor. If the domain is spatial, we might consider different categories of crime defined over some geographic region. Defining a flexible model for inter-process dependency structure, alongside an efficient inference scheme allows us to learn the underlying intensity functions which drive the typical behaviour. These can then be used to make more accurate predictions, especially during periods of unobservability for an individual process.
In order to maximise the flexibility of our approach, we specifically assume that the individual intensity functions arise via a weighted summation of convolutions of latent functions with a kernel. Intuitively this means that we take a small number of latent functions, individually smooth and scale them, and then add them together to yield an intensity function. This approach allows a wide range of intensities to arise from only a few latent functions.
We will present and validate the following novel contributions:
\begin{itemize}
\setlength{\itemsep}{0pt}
\item The first generative model for dependent Cox process data (Section \ref{sec.model}).
\item An efficient, parallelised inference scheme, which scales benignly with the number of observed point processes (Section \ref{sec.inference}).
\item A new adaptation of thinning \citep{Lewis_79_a}, which we term `adaptive thinning'. This introduces multiple uniformisation levels over the space, making the model viable for higher dimensional spaces and larger datasets (Section \ref{sec.adaptive}).
\end{itemize}
\section{\MakeUppercase{The Model}}\label{sec.model}
We first formally review the Cox process, before describing the innovative nonparametric Bayesian model outlined in \cite{Adams_09_a} as the Sigmoidal Gaussian Cox Process (SGCP), which allows a full Gaussian process to be used as a prior over an individual intensity function. We then move on to review the convolution process \citep{Alvarez_11_a}, a method of modelling dependent functions and the underlying latent processes which govern them. Our novel combination of these constituent elements represents the first model for dependent Cox point processes.
\subsection{\MakeUppercase{The Inhomogenous Poisson Process}}
For a domain $\mathcal{X} = \mathbb{R}^D$ of arbitrary dimension $D$, we may define an inhomogenous Poisson process via an intensity function $\lambda(x) : \mathcal{X} \rightarrow \mathbb{R}^+$, and a Lebesgue measure over the domain, $\mathrm{d} x$. The number of events $N(\mathcal{T})$ found over a subregion $\mathcal{T} \subset \mathcal{X}$ will be Poisson distributed with parameter $\lambda_{\mathcal{T}} = \int_{\mathcal{T}} \lambda(x) \, \mathrm{d} x$. Furthermore, we define $N(\mathcal{T}_i)$ to be independent random variables, where $\mathcal{T}_i$ are disjoint subsets of $\mathcal{X}$ \citep{Kingman_93_a}.
If we bound the region to be considered, and assume there are $K$ observed events, labelled as $\{x_k\}_{k=1}^K$, then the inhomogenous Poisson process likelihood function may be written as
\begin{equation}
p(\{x_k\}_{k=1}^K \mid \lambda(x) ) = \exp \left\{- \int_{\mathcal{T}} \, \mathrm{d} x \, \lambda(x) \right\} \prod\limits_{k=1}^K \lambda(x_k) \mathrm{.}
\label{eqn:intracint}
\end{equation}
\subsection{\MakeUppercase{The Sigmoidal Gaussian Cox Process}}
In order to model the intensity nonparametrically, we place a Gaussian Process \citep{Rasmussen_06_a} prior over a random scalar function $g(x) : \mathcal{X} \rightarrow \mathbb{R}$. This means that the prior over any finite set of function values $\{g(x_n)\}_{n=1}^N$ is a multivariate Gaussian distribution, defined by a positive definite covariance function $C(.,.) : \mathcal{X} \times \mathcal{X} \rightarrow \mathbb{R}$ and a mean function $m(.) : \mathcal{X} \rightarrow \mathbb{R}$. The mean and covariance function are parameterised by a set of hyperparameters, which we denote $\gamma$.
In the SGCP, a Gaussian Process is transformed into a prior over the intensity function by passing it through a sigmoid function and scaling it against a maximum intensity $\lambda^*$: $\lambda(x) = \lambda^* \sigma(g(x))$, where $\sigma(.)$ is the logistic function. This forms the basis of a generative prior, whereby exact Poisson data can be generated from $\lambda(x)$ via thinning \citep{Lewis_79_a}, which involves adding $M$ events, such that the joint point process over the $M + K$ events is homogenous with fixed rate $\lambda^*$.
As we are using an infinite dimensional proxy for $\lambda(x)$, the integral in Equation \ref{eqn:intracint} is intractable. Furthermore, using Bayes' theorem with this likelihood yields a posterior with intractable integrals in both the numerator and denominator. These challenges are overcome by making use of the generative prior, and augmenting the variable set to include the number of thinned points, $M$, and their locations, $\{\tilde{x}_m\}_{m=1}^M$. This then means that the value of the intensity function need only be inferred at the $M+K$ point locations, $\mathbf{g_{M+K}} = \{g(x_k)\}_{k=1}^K \cup \{g(\tilde{x}_m)\}_{m=1}^M$. Noting that $\sigma(-z)=1- \sigma(z)$, the joint likelihood over the data, function values and latent variables is
\begin{align}
p(\{x_k&\}_{k=1}^K, M, \{\tilde{x}_m\}_{m=1}^M, \mathbf{g_{M+K}} \mid \lambda^*, \mathcal{T}, \theta ) = \notag \\
&(\lambda^*)^{M+K} \exp \left\{ -\lambda^* \mu(\mathcal{T}) \right\} \notag \\
&\times \prod\limits_{k=1}^K \sigma(g(x_k)) \prod\limits_{m=1}^M \sigma(-g(\tilde{x}_m)) \notag \\
&\times \, \mathcal{GP}(\mathbf{g_{M+K}} \mid \{x_k\}_{k=1}^K, \{\tilde{x}_m\}_{m=1}^M, \gamma) \mathrm{,}\label{eqn:doableint}
\end{align}
where we have defined $\mu(\mathcal{T}) = \int\limits_\mathcal{T} \, \mathrm{d} x$.
Notably, this likelihood equation does not involve any intractable integrals. This means that inference is now possible in this model, albeit subject to the cost of an augmented variable set.
\subsection{\MakeUppercase{The Convolution Process}}
The convolution process framework is an elegant way of constructing dependent output processes. Instead of assuming the typical instantaneous \citep{Teh_05_a} mixing of a set of independent processes to construct correlated output processes, we generalise to allow a blurring of the latent functions achieved via convolution with a kernel, $G(x,z)$, prior to mixing. $z$ is typically defined on the same domain as $x$. If we place a Gaussian process prior over the latent function, the output function turns out to also be a Gaussian process \citep{Alvarez_11_a}. Specifically, given $D$ dependant intensity functions $g_d(x)$ and $Q$ latent processes $u_q(x)$, (where typically $Q < D$), the stochastic component of the $d${th} intensity
is
\begin{equation}
g_d(x) = \sum \limits_{q=1}^Q \int \limits_{\mathcal{T}} G_d(x,z) u_q(z) \, \mathrm{d} z \mathrm{.}
\label{eqn:convint}
\end{equation}
Given full knowledge of the latent functions, the $g_d(x)$ are independent and deterministic. The $G_d(x,z)$ encode the observed process specific characteristics, and the $u_q(z)$ can be thought of as encoding the latent driving forces.
The convolution process has strong links with the Bayesian kernel method, as described in \citep{Pillai_07_a}. This allows a function $f(x)$ on $\mathcal{X}$ to arise as
\begin{equation}
f(x) = \int_{\mathcal{X}} K(x,z) U(\mathrm{d} z) \mathrm{,}
\end{equation}
where $U(\mathrm{d} z) \in \mathcal{M}(\mathcal{X})$ is a signed measure on $\mathcal{X}$. The integral operator $\mathcal{L}_K : U(\mathrm{d} z) \rightarrow f(x)$ maps the space of signed measures $\mathcal{M}(\mathcal{X})$ into $\mathcal{H}_K$, a reproducing kernel Hilbert space (RKHS) defined by the kernel, $K(x,z)$. This mapping is dense in $\mathcal{H}_K$. If we place a Gaussian process prior on the random signed measure $U(\mathrm{d} z)$, rather than directly over $f(x)$, then any draw of $f(x)$ will provably lie in $\mathcal{H}_K$. As $\mathcal{H}_K$ is equivalent to the span of functions expressible as kernel integrals, this approach allows us to properly construct distributions over specific parts of function space. Using prior domain knowledge to restrict inference to plausible areas of function space is valuable, particularly for point process intensities where the likelihood linking function to data is weak and non-trivial, and we wish to only consider smooth intensities while using a sampling based inference scheme.
The convolution process is also known as a latent force model \citep{Alvarez_09_a}. In this guise, it is used to infer the solution of a differential equation when there is uncertainty in the forcing function. The convolution kernel is the Green's function of a particular differential equation, and the Gaussian process prior is placed on the driving function. This representation lets us consider the latent functions as driving forces, which are viewed through the intensity function specific convolution kernel. The convolution kernel can, for example, be used to model differing speeds of information propagation from the latent factors to each of the observed processes.
It is worth noting that any general L\'evy process prior can be used over the latent functions, however in this particular case we use a pure Gaussian process primarily for reasons of tractability.
\subsection{\MakeUppercase{Sparse Latent Functions}}
To make the model tractable, we make use of the property that the intensities are independent conditioned on the latent functions. This is made clear from the perspective of a generative model with only one latent function: we first draw a sample of the object $u(z)$, before solving the integral in equation \ref{eqn:convint}, where uncertainty about $u(z)$ is propagated through the convolution. Now instead of maintaining the full, infinite dimensional object $u(z)$, let us condition on a finite dimensional draw of $u(z)$, $u(Z) = [u(z_1),\ldots ,u(z_J)]^T$ where $Z = \{z_j\}_{j=1}^{J}$. We can then sample from $p(u(z)\mid u(Z))$, as this is a conditional Gaussian distribution, and use this function to solve the convolution integral. With multiple latent functions we can approximate each $u_q(z)$ by $\mathbb{E}[u_q(z)\mid u_q(Z)]$, replacing Equation \ref{eqn:convint} with
\begin{equation}
g_d(x) \approx \sum \limits_{q=1}^Q \int \limits_{\mathcal{T}} G_d(x,z) \mathbb{E}[u_q(z)\mid u_q(Z)] \, \mathrm{d} z \mathrm{.}
\label{eqn:approxint}
\end{equation}
This is reasonable as long as each $u_q(z)$ is smooth, in the sense that it is well approximated given the covariance function and the finite dimensional sample $u_q(Z)$. In Section \ref{sec:inf}, we use the approximation in Equation \ref{eqn:approxint} along with the conditional independence assumption to build a tractable inference scheme.
\subsection{\MakeUppercase{Constructing the Model}}
Let the $Q$ latent functions $u_q(z)$ be modelled as Gaussian processes with Gaussian covariance functions such that
\begin{equation}
u_q \mid \phi_q \sim \mathcal{GP}(0,K_q(z,z')) \mathrm{,}
\end{equation}
where $K_q(z,z')$ is simply the Gaussian kernel
\begin{equation}
K_q(z,z') = \mathcal{N}(z;z',\phi_q) \mathrm{.}
\end{equation}
We use a scaled Gaussian convolution kernel
\begin{equation}
G_{d}(x,z) = \kappa_d \dotfill \, \mathcal{N}(x;z,\theta_d) \mathrm{.}
\end{equation}
This restricts $g_d(x)$ to be at least as smooth as the random draws from $u_q(z)$. The covariance linking $u_q(z)$ to $g_d(x)$ is
\begin{align}
K_{g_d,u_q}(x,z) &= \int \limits_{\mathcal{X}} G_{d}(x,z) K_q(z,z') \mathrm{d} z \notag \\
&= \kappa_d \, \mathcal{N}(x;z,\theta_d + \phi_q) \mathrm{,}
\end{align}
and the overall covariance between output functions is
\begin{align}
K_{g_d,g_{d'}}(x,x') &= \sum \limits_{q = 1}^{Q} \int \limits_{\mathcal{X}} G_{d}(x,z) \notag \\&\int \limits_{\mathcal{X}} G_{d'}(x',z') K_q(z,z') \, \mathrm{d} z' \, \mathrm{d} z \notag \\
K_{g_d,g_{d'}}(x,x') &= \sum \limits_{q = 1}^{Q} \kappa_d \, \kappa_{d'} \, \mathcal{N}(x;z,\theta_d + \theta_d' + \phi_q) \mathrm{.}
\end{align}
We could use this joint covariance function to construct one large joint Gaussian process over all the intensity functions. In doing this, however, the $u_q(z)$ have been implicitly integrated out, and the resulting inference problem will scale computationally as $\mathcal{O}(D^3N^3)$ with storage requirements of $\mathcal{O}(D^2N^2)$, where $N = M+K$ is the joint number of events. This is intractable for any real problem, where we would hope to leverage many dependent point processes to learn a few latent factors with minimal uncertainty.
Let us now define some additional notation: $\mathbf{K}$ denotes a covariance matrix obtained by evaluating the appropriate covariance function at all eligible pairs of data points. Subscripts determine which covariance is used and hence which inputs are valid, e.g. $\mathbf{K}_{g_d,u_q}$ denotes the cross covariance between the $d${th} output and $q${th} input function. $\mathbf{K}_{g_d,u}$ means stack the $Q$ $\mathbf{K}_{g_d,d_q}$ matrices vertically, $\mathbf{K}_{u,u}$ is a block diagonal matrix where each block corresponds to $\mathbf{K}_{u_q,u_q}$, and $\mathbf{u}$ is the result of stacking the draws from the finite dimensional Gaussians $p(u_q(Z))$ vertically.
We also define: $\phi = \{\phi_q\}_{q=1}^Q$, $\kappa = \{\kappa_d\}_{d=1}^D$, $\theta = \{\theta_d\}_{d=1}^D$, $X_d = \{x_{d,k}\}_{k=1}^{K_d} \cup \{\tilde{x}_{d,m}\}_{m=1}^{M_d}$. If we wish to allow the latent functions to be sampled at different points, then we define a separate $Z_q$ for each $u_q(z)$: $Z_q = \{z_{q,j}\}_{j=1}^{J}$. The set of inputs over all latent functions is then $Z = \{Z_q\}_{q=1}^Q$, and similarly for the intensities: $X = \{X_d\}_{d=1}^D$.
Notation in place, we determine that given the approximation in Equation \ref{eqn:approxint}, the conditional likelihood for $g_d(x)$ is
\begin{align}
p(&g_d \mid u, Z, X_d, \kappa_d, \theta_d, \phi) = \nonumber \\
&\mathcal{N}(\mathbf{K}_{g_d,u} \mathbf{K}^{-1}_{u,u} \mathbf{u}, \, \mathbf{K}_{g_d,g_d} - \mathbf{K}_{g_d,u}\mathbf{K}^{-1}_{u,u}\mathbf{K}^T_{g_d,u}) \mathrm{.}
\label{eqn:funccov}
\end{align}
Still conditioning on the latent functions, the joint likelihood over all $D$ intensity functions is then simply
\begin{align}
p(&g_1,\ldots ,g_D \mid u, Z, X, \kappa, \theta, \phi) = \notag \\
&\prod \limits_{d=1}^D p(g_d \mid u, Z, X_d, \kappa_d, \theta_d, \phi) \mathrm{.}
\end{align}
Bayes' rule for Gaussians gives us the posterior over the $u_q(Z)$ as
\begin{multline}
p(u_1,\ldots ,u_Q \mid g_1,\ldots ,g_D, Z, X, \kappa, \phi, \theta ) \\
= \mathcal{N}(u_1,\ldots ,u_Q; \mathbf{\mu}_p,\, \mathbf{\Sigma}_p) \mathrm{.}
\label{eqn:latentfunclik}
\end{multline}
Where the mean and covariance are
\begin{align}
\mathbf{\Sigma}_p &= \left[ \mathbf{K}^{-1}_{u,u} + (\mathbf{K}_{g,u}\mathbf{K}^{-1}_{u,u})^T\mathbf{D}^{-1}(\mathbf{K}_{g,u}\mathbf{K}^{-1}_{u,u}) \right]^{-1} \nonumber \\
\mathbf{\mu}_p &= \mathbf{\Sigma}_p (\mathbf{K}_{g,u}\mathbf{K}^{-1}_{u,u})^T \mathbf{D}^{-1} \mathbf{g}
\end{align}
and where $\mathbf{D} = \mathbf{K}_{g,g} - \mathbf{K}_{g,u}\mathbf{K}^{-1}_{u,u}\mathbf{K}^T_{g,u}$.
The exact form of $\mathbf{D}$ depends on the degree to which we are willing make independence assumptions in order to approximate the Gaussian processes used to model the functions. Naturally the higher the degree of approximation, the more scalable the resulting inference scheme.
Under full dependence, a single event is linked to both inter and intra-process data. We will be assuming that the dependency structure across the $g_d(x)$ is entirely contained by the latent processes, $u_q(z)$. Intuitively, this means that we maintain the full Gaussian process structure for each individual intensity function, while summarising the latent functions via a set of inducing inputs $Z = \{z_j\}_{j=1}^J$. This approximation scheme results in a functional form which is similar to what \citet{Quinonero_05_a} call the Partial Independence (PITC) scheme. Importantly it allows inference to scale computationally as $\mathcal{O}(DN^3)$, with storage requirements of $\mathcal{O}(DN^2)$ even in the worst case scenario of $J = N$. Further approximations may be made, and these are especially useful if the number of events per process is large, however for our purposes they are not necessary. For more information on approximation methods for Gaussian processes see \cite{Quinonero_05_a} and \cite{Snelson_05_a}.
Under the PITC low rank covariance, the resulting form for $\mathbf{D}$ is: $[ \mathbf{K}_{g,g} - \mathbf{K}_{g,u}\mathbf{K}^{-1}_{u,u}\mathbf{K}^T_{g,u} ] \circ \mathbf{M}$, where $\mathbf{M} = \mathbf{I}_N \otimes \mathbf{1}_N$ and $\mathbf{1}_N$ is a $N \times N$ matrix of ones. This may be more familiar as \texttt{blkdiag}$[\mathbf{D}]$.
\section{\MakeUppercase{Inference}}\label{sec.inference}
\label{sec:inf}
For each of the $D$ point processes we need to learn $|X_d| $, $X_d$, $\kappa_d$, $\theta_d$, $\lambda^*_d$ and $g_d(x)$. For each of the $Q$ latent functions $u_q(Z)$ and $\phi_q$ must be inferred. $Z_q$ are fixed to an evenly spaced grid which is identical across the latent processes. To find posteriors over all these variables, we choose a Markov Chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) algorithm, as detailed below.
Using the PITC approximation scheme, the likelihood over the point processes factorises conditioned on the latent functions. This means that given $D$ compute units the updates associated with each point process may be made in parallel. This is important as the inference algorithm is computationally bottlenecked by operations associated with learning the locations of the thinning points, $X$.
We now give a recap of the inference scheme from the SGCP for a single point process, while listing our minor modifications. Updates for the latent functions are then given, conditioning on the $D$ intensity functions.
\subsection{\MakeUppercase{Learning the Intensity Function}}
Recalling Equation \ref{eqn:doableint}, three kinds of Markov transitions are used to draw from this joint distribution: 1) Sampling the number of thinned points, $M$. 2) Sampling the locations of the thinned events, $\{\tilde{x}_m\}_{m=1}^M$. 3) Resampling the intensity function, $\mathbf{g_{M+K}}$.
Metropolis-Hastings is used to sample $M$. The probability of insertion/deletion is parameterised by a Bernoulli proposal function: $b(K,M) : \mathbb{N} \times \mathbb{N}\rightarrow (0,1)$, where the parameter has been arbitrarily set to $\frac{1}{2}$. If an insertion is required, a new $x_{M+1}$ is drawn uniformly and at random from $\mu(\mathcal{T})$, and $g(x_{M+1})$ is drawn from the Gaussian process conditioned on the current state. A deletion results in a thinned event $\tilde{x}_m$ being removed at random from $\{\tilde{x}_m\}_{m=1}^M$. The overall transition kernels $q$, and Metropolis-Hastings acceptance ratios, $a$, are:
\begin{eqnarray}
&q_{ins}(M+1 \leftarrow M) = \label{eqn:samplethinbeg} \\
&\frac{b(K,M)}{\mu(\mathcal{T})} \mathcal{GP}(g(\tilde{x}_{M+1}) \mid \{\tilde{x}_m\}_{m=1}^M, \mathbf{g_{M+K}}) \mathrm{,} \nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
\begin{equation}
a_{ins} = \frac{(1 - b(K,M+1))\mu(\mathcal{T})\lambda^*}{(M+1)b(K,M)(1 + \exp(g(\tilde{x}_{M+1})))} \mathrm{,}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
q_{del}(M-1 \leftarrow M) = \frac{1 - b(K,M)}{M}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
a_{del} = \frac{M b(K,M-1)(1+\exp(g(\tilde{x}_m)))}{(1-b(K,M))\mu(\mathcal{T}) \lambda^*} \mathrm{.}
\label{eqn:samplethinend}
\end{equation}
Sampling the locations of the thinned events also makes use of the Metropolis criterion. For each event $\tilde{x}_m$ a move to $\hat{x}_m$ is proposed via a Gaussian proposal density. A function value $g(\hat{x}_m)$ is then drawn conditioned on the state with $g(\tilde{x}_m)$ removed, denoted $\mathbf{g_{M_-+K}}$. This gives the move acceptance ratio
\begin{equation}
a_{move} = \frac{q_{move}(\tilde{x}_m \leftarrow \hat{x}_m)(1 + \exp(g(\tilde{x}_m)))}{q_{move}(\hat{x}_m \leftarrow \tilde{x}_m)(1 + \exp(g(\hat{x}_m)))} \mathrm{.}
\label{eqn:samplejitterbeg}
\end{equation}
where $q_{move}$ is the proposal distribution. We use a symmetric Gaussian proposal
\begin{equation}
q_{move}(\hat{x}_m \leftarrow \tilde{x}_m) = \mathcal{N}\left(0,\frac{\mu(\mathcal{T})}{100}\right) \mathrm{.}
\label{eqn:samplejitterend}
\end{equation}
To sample the function we opt to use Elliptical Slice Sampling \citep{Murray_10_a}. This is an algorithm specifically designed for sampling from high dimensional, highly correlated, Gaussian process posteriors. The log conditional posterior over function values is
\begin{eqnarray}
&\ln \, p(\mathbf{g_{M+K}} \mid M, \{x_k\}_{k=1}^K, \{\tilde{x}_m\}_{m=1}^M, \gamma ) = \nonumber \\
&-\frac{1}{2} \mathbf{g_{M+K}} \mathbf{\Sigma^{-1}} \mathbf{g_{M+K}} - \sum \limits_{k=1}^K \ln(1 + \exp(-g(x_k))) \nonumber \\
&-\sum\limits_{m=1}^{M} \ln(1 + \exp(g(\tilde{x}_m))) + const.
\label{eqn:samplefunc}
\end{eqnarray}
In our case, $\mathbf{\Sigma}$ is equal to the covariance in Equation \ref{eqn:funccov}, and naturally for each iteration we perform all the above updates in parallel for each observed point process, conditioned on the latent functions.
To infer the posteriors over the Gaussian process hyperparameters, we use Hamiltonian Monte Carlo (HMC) \citep{Duane_87_a,Neal_10_a}, with log-normal priors over each hyperparameter. By placing a Gamma prior with shape $\alpha$ and inverse scale $\beta$ over $\lambda^*$, we infer the posterior conditioned on the thinned and true points using a Gibbs update as follows:
\begin{eqnarray}
\alpha_{post} = \alpha + K + M, & \beta_{post} = \beta + \mu{\mathcal{T}} .
\label{eqn:samplelambda}
\end{eqnarray}
\subsection{\MakeUppercase{Learning the Latent Functions}}
Conditioning on the point process intensity functions, $g_d(x)$, the latent functions are dependent, with conditional posterior distribution given by Equation \ref{eqn:latentfunclik}.
Having drawn new values for each of the $u_q(Z_q)$, we can update the $\phi_q$ using a metropolis-hastings step under the following log conditional posterior which is
\begin{eqnarray}
&\ln p(\phi_q \mid u_q(Z_q), Z_q) = -\frac{1}{2}u_q(Z_q)\mathbf{K}^{-1}_{u_q,u_q}\frac{1}{2}u_q(Z_q) \nonumber \\
& - \frac{1}{2}\log\det(\mathbf{K}_{u_q,u_q}) + \text{const.}
\label{eqn:latenthyp}
\end{eqnarray}
The overall procedure is summarised in algorithm \ref{alg:inference}.
\algblock{ParFor}{EndParFor}
\begin{algorithm}[tb]
\caption{MCMC Scheme}
\label{alg:inference}
\begin{algorithmic}
\State {\bfseries Input:} $\{X_k\}_{k=1}^K$, priors.
\Repeat
\ParFor{ $d=1$ {\bfseries to} $D$}
\State Sample thinned events: Equations \ref{eqn:samplethinbeg} $\rightarrow$ \ref{eqn:samplethinend}
\State Sample locations: Equations \ref{eqn:samplejitterbeg} $\rightarrow$ \ref{eqn:samplejitterend}
\State Sample function: Equation \ref{eqn:samplefunc}
\State Sample hyperparameters: Equation \ref{eqn:samplefunc}
\State Sample $\lambda^*$: Equation \ref{eqn:samplelambda}
\EndParFor
\State Sample latent functions: Equation \ref{eqn:latentfunclik}
\State Sample latent hyperparameter: Equation \ref{eqn:latenthyp}
\Until{\emph{convergence} is \emph{true}}
\end{algorithmic}
\end{algorithm}
\section{\MakeUppercase{Adaptive Thinning}}\label{sec.adaptive}
In higher dimensional spaces, data is typically concentrated into small, high density sub-domains. Under the current methodology, we must thin the entire empty space to a uniform concentration which matches that of the most dense subregion. If we wish to use Gaussian Process intensities this rapidly becomes infeasible, even under the most radical of sparse approximations \citep{Snelson_05_a}.
Our novel solution to this problem is to model the upper bounded intensity over the space using a piece-wise constant function, where each section takes a fractional proportion of the global upper bound, $\lambda^*$. This preserves the tractability of the integrals in the likelihood and posterior, and does not violate any of the properties of the point process, while simultaneously allowing empty regions to be thinned to a far lower average density.
Consider Figure \ref{fig:athin}: this shows both the data and the thinned points, where for the left three quarters of the plot the maximum rate does not exceed 50\% of $\lambda^*$. Let us assume we allow the maximum rate to take one of two values for each datapoint: $\frac{1}{2} \lambda^*$ and $\lambda^*$. For each new thinned point we sample an intensity function value, before also sampling an upper bound for the rate from the available levels. This upper bound is at least as great as the current function evaluation at that point.
In this manner we hope to infer that for the majority of Figure \ref{fig:athin}, the rate may be happily upper-bounded by half the global maximum rate, $\lambda^*$, and hence the bulk of the space may be thinned to a significantly lower density. As a result, the computational burden incurred will be significantly reduced, as far fewer expensive points need be incorporated into our GP.
In our particular implementation, we fix \emph{a-priori} a set of $B$ possible maximum rate `levels':
\begin{equation}
L = \{l_i \in (0, 1] | l_i < l_{i+1},l_{B} = 1\}_{i=1}^B.
\end{equation}
We then augment the variable set to include for each thinned point $\tilde{x}_m$ which rate level $r_m \in \{1\hdots B\}$ it is currently assigned, where we set $r_m$ such that $\sigma(g(\tilde{x}_m)) \leq l_{r_m}$. This causes the probability of seeing a thinned point $\tilde{x}_m$ under the sigmoid GP to become
\begin{equation}
p( \tilde{x}_m | r_m ) = \frac{l_{r_m} - \sigma(g(\tilde{x}_m))}{l_{r_m}} \; \mathrm{,}
\end{equation}
while the probability of a non-thinned point remains unchanged. Using this relationship we modify the Metropolis acceptance criteria which now become
\begin{equation}
a_{ins} = \frac{(1 - b(K,M+1))\mu(\mathcal{T})\lambda^*l_{r_{M+1}}p(\tilde{x}_{M+1}|r_{M+1})}{(M+1)b(K,M)} \mathrm{,}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
a_{del} = \frac{M b(K,M-1))}{(1-b(K,M))\mu(\mathcal{T}) \lambda^*l_{r_m}p(\tilde{x}_m|r_{m})} \mathrm{,}
\end{equation}
as well as the likelihood function for $p(g(\mathbf{X_{M+K}}))$, Equation \ref{eqn:samplefunc}.
In principle this scheme could slow mixing, since the function is constrained to lie below the maximum level at each point. By ensuring that there is always some slack, $s$, between the function and the rate level assigned we find that mixing is hardly affected. The slack is incorporated by assigning the rate as follows:
\begin{equation}
r_m \leftarrow \left\{ \begin{array}{ll}
\underset{r} {\mathrm{argmax}}\left\{ \sigma(g(\tilde{x}_m)) \leq l_r \times s \right\}, & \sigma(g(\tilde{x}_m)) \leq s \\
1, & \mathrm{otherwise.}
\end{array} \right. \\
\end{equation}
We used $s$ = 0.9. The rate levels can also change at each iteration during the `move' step when we compute the new rate level for jittered points and we compose the acceptance criteria as the product of the insertion and deletion criteria $a_{move} = a_{ins} \times a_{del}$.
Finally, when re-sampling $\lambda^*$ we must compute an estimate of the total number of points under a single rate uniformisation of the space. This estimate is readily available because the number of points (including observed data points) with rate $r$ is a Monte-Carlo integral of the proportion of space thinned to rate level $l_r$. Since the number of points in each region is scaled by $l_r$, the estimated total is
\begin{equation}
\hat{N}_{tot} = \sum_{k=1}^K \frac{1}{l_{\bar{r}_k}} + \sum_{m=1}^M \frac{1}{l_{r_m}} \mathrm{,}
\end{equation}
where $\bar{r}_k$ is the notional rate of observed data computed exactly as for the thinned points. The posterior value $\alpha_{post}$ is therefore $\alpha + \hat{N}_{tot}$.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth, trim = 18mm 15mm 10mm 5mm, clip]{multirate.png}
\caption{Graphical representation of adaptive thinning: Blue crosses indicate thinned points, red crosses represent data. The black line shows the intensity function. Each point is accepted as data with probability given by $\sigma(g(x_n))$. Fewer thinned points are required in areas of half maximum bound.}
\label{fig:athin}
\end{figure}
To validate adaptive thinning, we return to the original SGCP and modify it in the manner described above. We perform two experiments: The first in 1D and the second in 2D. In both cases we use 10 known random intensity functions to generate event data: In the 1D case we sample 15 random datasets per function, while in the 2D case we generate 10. One dataset is used to learn the model, the rest are held out for testing purposes. Two metrics of performance are used: L2-norm error as measured against the true intensity function, and average predictive log-likelihood across all held out test datasets.
In 1D, we run each model for 6 minutes total compute time, in 2D we allow 20 minutes total. In both cases half the time is allocated to burn-in. In 1D the single rate method achieved roughly one sample per second, with the two rate case yielding just under four samples per second, and the four rate approach giving just under 8 samples per second. In 2D the number of points required was larger in all cases, with the multi-rate approach buying a factor of two speedup.
The results, (given in Tables \ref{tab:1drms} through \ref{tab:2dll}), show that in almost all cases the multi-level approach performs best across both metrics. It is observed that typically the original, homogenous rate approach performs worst of all.
\begin{table*}[htp]
\begin{minipage}{0.45\textwidth}
\caption{\centering{One dimensional adaptive thinning L2-norm function error. Bold is best.}}
\label{tab:1drms}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{llll}
\toprule
Function & \multicolumn{3}{c}{L2 Norm Error} \\
(1D) & Original & 2 Rates & 4 Rates \\
\midrule
1 & 11.6 & 13.0 & \bf{7.1} \\
2 & 14.6 & 10.5 & \bf{7.2} \\
3 & 10.6 & 5.0 & \bf{4.9} \\
4 & 10.5 & \bf{4.7} & 5.1 \\
5 & 12.4 & \bf{10.1} & 10.4 \\
6 & 11.1 & 8.2 & \bf{7.6} \\
7 & \bf{12.0} & 13.7 & 12.5 \\
8 & 13.0 & \bf{12.0} & 12.8 \\
9 & 19.6 & \bf{16.4} & 28.8 \\
10 & 31.4 & \bf{27.2} & 32.6 \\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\end{minipage}
\hspace{1cm}
\begin{minipage}{0.45\textwidth}
\caption{\centering{One dimensional adaptive thinning average predictive log-likelihood on 14 held out datasets. Bold is best.} }
\label{tab:1dll}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{llll}
\toprule
Function & \multicolumn{3}{c}{Predictive Log-Likelihood} \\
(1D) & Original & 2 Rates & 4 Rates \\
\midrule
1 & 373.8 & 381.8 & \bf{388.2} \\
2 & 626.1 & 644.2 & \bf{650.7} \\
3 & 274.2 & 285.1 & \bf{288.0} \\
4 & 435.5 & \bf{457.7} & 456.0 \\
5 & 877.0 & 885.8 & \bf{889.5} \\
6 & 995.4 & 1006.6 & \bf{1013.4} \\
7 & 753.0 & \bf{763.3} & 760.6 \\
8 & 522.3 & \bf{531.2} & 528.3 \\
9 & 1840.6 & \bf{1852.9} & 1826.0 \\
10 & 2328.1 & \bf{2365.8} & 2349.8 \\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\end{minipage}
\end{table*}
\begin{table*}[htp]
\begin{minipage}{0.45\textwidth}
\caption{\centering{Two dimensional adaptive thinning L2-norm function error. Bold is best.}}
\label{tab:2drms}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{llll}
\toprule
Function & \multicolumn{3}{c}{L2 Norm Error} \\
(2D) & Original & 2 Rates & 4 Rates \\
\midrule
1 & 13.3 & 13.4 & \bf{11.3} \\
2 & 14.3 & \bf{14.3} & 14.7 \\
3 & 13.5 & 14.7 & \bf{13.5} \\
4 & 12.5 & 12.9 & \bf{12.0} \\
5 & 17.9 & \bf{16.6} & 17.8 \\
6 & \bf{14.4} & 16.2 & 15.3 \\
7 & 15.1 & \bf{13.7} & 17.5 \\
8 & 14.6 & \bf{14.4} & 14.8 \\
9 & 18.3 & 17.1 & \bf{15.6} \\
10 & 15.4 & \bf{12.9} & 13.6 \\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\end{minipage}
\hspace{1cm}
\begin{minipage}{0.45\textwidth}
\caption{\centering{Two dimensional adaptive thinning average predictive log-likelihood on 9 held out datasets. Bold is best.}}
\label{tab:2dll}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{llll}
\toprule
Function & \multicolumn{3}{c}{Predictive Log-Likelihood} \\
(2D) & Original & 2 Rates & 4 Rates \\
\midrule
1 & 2039.6 & 2080.6 & \bf{2203.0} \\
2 & 2757.9 & 2758.1 & \bf{2829.3} \\
3 & 2753.2 & 2689.5 & \bf{2827.2} \\
4 & 2803.2 & 2784.0 & \bf{2933.6} \\
5 & 2532.4 & \bf{2663.0} & 2572.1 \\
6 & \bf{3098.2} & 3040.5 & 3054.4 \\
7 & 3157.5 & \bf{3259.8} & 3075.2 \\
8 & 2086.9 & \bf{2101.0} & 2087.4 \\
9 & 5018.1 & 5146.6 & \bf{5185.3} \\
10 & 2008.1 & \bf{2205.0} & 2174.0 \\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\end{minipage}
\end{table*}
\section{\MakeUppercase{Empirical Results}}
As this is the first model for structured point process data, the approach is initially validated on a synthetic dataset. It is then compared to both the independent SGCP, as well as a state of the art Kernel Density Estimator \citep{Botev_10_a} on two real datasets.
\subsection{\MakeUppercase{Synthetic Data}}
Using the convolution process, we sample four intensity functions, using those to sample event data. The variety of intensities which may be observed given a single latent function is notable in Figure \ref{fig:gendata}.
\begin{figure*}[htp]
\centering
\begin{minipage}{0.48\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth, trim = 44mm 26mm 31mm 17mm, clip]{gendata-eps-converted-to}
\caption{\centering{Synthetic functions (not showing the sampled events).}}\label{fig:gendata}
\end{minipage}
\hfill
\begin{minipage}{0.48\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth, trim = 38mm 22mm 26mm 15mm, clip]{gendataresults-eps-converted-to}
\caption{\centering{Learned functions using 3 rate levels: $\frac{1}{4}\lambda^*$, $\frac{1}{2}\lambda^*$, $\lambda^*$.}}\label{fig:genresults}
\end{minipage}
\end{figure*}
We then average over 2000 iterations after it was determined convergence had been achieved. The resulting learned intensity functions are shown in Figure \ref{fig:genresults}.
It is reassuring that the original latent function is well recovered given only four observed event processes.
\subsection{\MakeUppercase{Real Data}}\label{sec.realdata}
Two datasets were selected to test the model, both of which we considered were likely to exhibit a dependency structure which could be well captured by the convolution
process.
\begin{itemize}
\item British politicians (MPs) tweet times during the week of Nelson Mandela's death (02/12/13-08/12/13). These were obtained using the Twitter API. Here we considered that there would naturally be a daily periodicity, however, it is not unreasonable to further postulate that some MPs may concentrate their twitter activity into a smaller segment of the day. This behaviour should be well captured by the convolution process.
\item NBA player shot profiles for the 2013-2014 season, scraped from the NBA website. Here we select a diverse subset of four players: Blake Griffin, Damien Lillard, DeMar DeRozen, and Arron Affalo. It was supposed that it might be possible for a single latent function to be blurred to represent a variety of player positions and styles.
\end{itemize}
\subsubsection{Twitter Data Results}
Four MPs active on twitter were selected at random. Here on we call them MPs A, B, C, and D. We select data from the period covering 02/12/13 through 13/12/13, and randomly partition each dataset into 75\% training data, with the remainder being used to evaluate predictive test log-likelihood.
Figure \ref{fig:tweetdata} depicts the average learned intensity functions for each MP (red line), along with the one standard deviation bars (grey shading) derived from the function samples. The bottom plot depicts the learned latent driving function in the same manner.
The latent function clearly shows a strong daily period, particularly evident during the working week (02/12/13 was a Monday---corresponding to `1' in Figure \ref{fig:tweetdata}). Furthermore, the largest two peaks in activity occur on the 3rd and the 5th of December. Potential contributing factors to these two spikes include a public sector strike, and the death of Nelson Mandela respectively.
\begin{figure}[htp]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth, trim = 20mm 0mm 10mm 0mm, clip]{resultstwitter-edited}
\caption{Learned intensities over four MP's tweet data (A, B, C, D); learned latent function at bottom. Actual data shown in blue.}
\label{fig:tweetdata}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure*}[htp]
\begin{minipage}{0.45\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth, trim = 23mm 18mm 20mm 5mm, clip]{basketball-eps-converted-to}
\caption{Learned basketball intensity functions using 3 rate levels: $\frac{1}{4}\lambda^*$, $\frac{1}{2}\lambda^*$, and $\lambda^*$. }
\label{fig:bbresults}
\end{minipage}
\hspace{1cm}
\begin{minipage}{0.45\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth, trim = 30mm 5mm 25mm -12mm, clip]{bbdata-edited}
\label{fig:bbdata}
\label{tab:bbll}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{llll}
\toprule
Player & \multicolumn{3}{c}{Predictive Log-Likelihood} \\
& KDE & SGCP & Ours \\
\midrule
Blake Griffin & -121.8 & 335.6 & \bf{374.7} \\
Damien Lillard & -22.6 & 231.2 & \bf{395.3} \\
DeMer DeRozen & -2.9 & 253.1 & \bf{410.7} \\
Arron Affalo & -260.7 & -76.7 & \bf{84.2} \\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\caption{Basketball ball shot data (top) and predictive log-likelihood for held out basketball data across models (bottom).}\label{fig.bbresults}
\end{center}
\end{minipage}
\end{figure*}
Table \ref{tab:twll} gives predictive log-likelihood for the held out data, again evaluated across three approaches: An intensity function learned via Kernel Density Estimation (KDE) \citep{Botev_10_a}, the SGCP \citep{Adams_09_a}, and our own structured approach. Both the SGCP and our own approach use two maximum rate levels for adaptive thinning. Each intensity function is modelled using an independent SGCP/KDE. The structured approach performs vastly better, suggesting that it is highly appropriate for this type of data.
\begin{table}[h]
\caption{Predictive log-likelihood for held out twitter data across models.}
\label{tab:twll}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{llll}
\toprule
MP & \multicolumn{3}{c}{Predictive Log-Likelihood} \\
& KDE & SGCP & Ours \\
\midrule
A & 177.1 & 176.6 & \bf{469.5} \\
B & -1.3 & 89.6 & \bf{412.9} \\
C & -5.4 & 49.6 & \bf{283.4} \\
D & -67.7 & 38.7 & \bf{293.7} \\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\end{table}
\subsubsection{Basketball Data}
For the basketball point shot data, the approach performed particularly well. Each player had around 600 attempted shots, of which we used 400, holding out the rest as test data. We used 3 rate boundaries: $\frac{1}{4}\lambda^*$, $\frac{1}{2}\lambda^*$, $\lambda^*$, and once again averaged over 2000 samples after convergence. We compare predictive log-likelihood to both the SGCP model (using the same set of rate boundaries) and using a rate function estimated via a state of the art KDE by \cite{Botev_10_a}.
Figure \ref{fig:bbresults} depicts the resulting intensity functions. It is clear that the latent function represents a general view of the court hotspots, the hoop and three pointer line are clearly demarcated. Furthermore the intensity functions for each player strongly match what would be expected given their playing style---e.g. Arron Affalo is a `shooting guard' who is expected to spend the majority of his time inside the three pointer line, but has a propensity to shoot from the bottom left of the court. These effects are clearly visible on the heat map, less so on the data (see Figure \ref{fig:bbdata}).
As is clearly demonstrated in Table \ref{fig.bbresults}, our structured approach to modelling the basketball point data in a fully Bayesian fashion yields a huge improvement over both the independent SGCP as well as a modern kernel density estimator. Another point worth making is that due to the high data density around the hoop for each player, the traditional approach of thinning (used here as well as in the SGCP) would be prohibitively computationally expensive. We are only able to test on this data due to the method of adaptive thinning introduced in this paper.
\section{\MakeUppercase{Conclusion}}
We have introduced a fully generative model for dependent point processes, alongside an efficient, parallelised inference scheme. We have shown the appropriateness of this model on two real datasets, and introduced a new adaptation of thinning which allows the model to scale to larger datasets and in particular higher dimensional spaces. Future work entails investigating the appropriateness of manually introducing known latent drivers, exploring multiple latent functions, and replacing the MCMC inference scheme with one based on stochastic variational inference \citep{Hensman_13_a}.
\subsubsection*{Acknowledgements}
Tom Gunter is supported by UK Research Councils. Chris Lloyd is funded by a DSTL PhD Studentship.
\pagebreak
\subsubsection*{References}
\begingroup
\renewcommand{\section}[2]{}%
\bibliographystyle{plainnat}
|
\section{Introduction
A typical model of classical spacetime is a Lorentzian manifold $(M,g_{ab},\psi)$, containing a matter or gauge field(s) $\psi$, which allows at least one Killing vector field $\xi^a$, such that $\pounds_\xi g_{ab} = 0$. There are two natural questions about the symmetries of the fields one might ask in such a context. The first one is whether the field $\psi$ has to share the same symmetries as the metric of the spacetime. When such a concurrence exists, or more concretely, if $\pounds_\xi \psi = 0$ necessarily holds, then we say that the field $\psi$ \emph{inherits} the symmetry. Another question is whether the presence of some particular isometry group $G_n$ implies via field equations the necessity of strictly larger isometry group. This can be answered by a number of results which are usually collected under the umbrella term Birkhoff's theorem \cite{Birk} or, historically more correctly, Jebsen-Birkhoff theorem (JBT) \cite{Jeb,Deser05,JR06}. There are several versions of the precise statement of JBT \cite{Schmidt12}, among which we focus on the one where the spherically symmetric spacetime necessarily allows at least one additional Killing vector field.
\bigskip
The aim of this paper is twofold: a) to revise the symmetry inheritance of some typical fields and, using these results, b) to find what properties fields have to satisfy in order to allow non-vacuum JBT.
\bigskip
We shall consider general form of the gravitational field equation,
\begin{equation}\label{eq:ET}
E_{ab} = \kappa T_{ab}[\psi]
\end{equation}
where $T_{ab}$ is the energy-momentum tensor and $\kappa$ is some physical constant. The specific form of the tensor $E_{ab}$ will be specified later in the paper. For example, Einstein's equation with cosmological constant $\Lambda$ is the case with $E_{ab} = G_{ab} + \Lambda g_{ab}$, where $G_{ab}$ is the Einstein's tensor. Throughout the text we shall often use the abbreviation $T \equiv g_{ab} T^{ab}$. All the results will be illustrated with three important examples: the ideal fluid,
\begin{equation}\label{eq:Tidflu}
T_{ab} = (\rho + p) u_a u_b + p g_{ab} \ ,
\end{equation}
the real scalar field $\phi$ with potential $V$ (e.g.~mass term is given by $V_{\mathrm{mass}} = m^2\phi^2/2$),
\begin{equation}\label{eq:Tscalar}
T_{ab} = \nab{a}\phi \nab{b}\phi - g_{ab} \left( \frac{1}{2}\,g^{cd}\,\nab{c}\phi \nab{d}\phi + V(\phi) \right) \ ,
\end{equation}
and the electromagnetic field $F_{ab}$,
\begin{equation}\label{eq:Tem}
T_{ab} = \frac{1}{4\pi} \left( F_{ac} \tensor{F}{_b^c} - \frac{1}{4}\,g_{ab}\,F_{cd}F^{cd} \right) \ .
\end{equation}
We assume that the dimension of the spacetime is general $D > 1$, except in the case of electromagnetic field, where $D = 4$.
\bigskip
\section{Symmetry inheritance
Due to the fact that for every Killing vector field $\xi^a$ we have $\pounds_\xi R_{abcd} = 0$ and that the Lie derivative with respect to a Killing vector field and the covariant derivative commute, the following result follows immediately.
\bigskip
\begin{lm}
Let $\xi^a$ be a Killing vector field and
$$E_{ab} = E_{ab}(g_{cd},R_{cdef},\nab{c}R_{defg},\nab{c}\nab{d}R_{efgh},\dots)$$
a polynomial function. Then $\pounds_\xi E_{ab} = 0$.
\end{lm}
\bigskip
So, in every theory with the gravitational field equation (\ref{eq:ET}) and the tensor $E_{ab}$ specified as in the previous lemma, the energy-momentum tensor shares the symmetries of the spacetime, i.e.~$\pounds_\xi T_{ab} = 0$ is valid for each Killing vector field $\xi^a$. One can now use this piece of information to deduce something about the symmetries of the fields.
\bigskip
In an early analysis by Hoenselaers \cite{Hoen78} it has been proven that the symmetry is inherited by the ideal fluid,
\begin{equation}
\pounds_\xi \rho = \pounds_\xi p = 0 \quad \textrm{and} \quad \pounds_\xi u^a = 0 \ ,
\end{equation}
as well by the real scalar field with the simplest potential $V_{\mathrm{mass}}$. The letter result can be easily generalized using several tricks. Since the general potential $V$ can be expressed as
\begin{equation}
V(\phi) = -\frac{T}{D} \pm \frac{D-2}{2D} \sqrt{ \frac{D T_{ab}T^{ab} - T^2}{D-1} } \ ,
\end{equation}
and by assumption $\pounds_\xi T_{ab} = 0$, it follows that
\begin{equation}
0 = \pounds_\xi V(\phi) = \frac{dV(\phi)}{d\phi}\,\pounds_\xi \phi \ .
\end{equation}
Therefore, at every point where $V'(\phi) \ne 0$ we have $\pounds_\xi \phi = 0$. The case of the massless real scalar field, such that $V(\phi) = 0$, demands a different approach. Here we have
\begin{equation}
T_{ab} = \nab{a}\phi \nab{b}\phi + \frac{T}{D-2}\,g_{ab} \ ,
\end{equation}
so that
\begin{equation}
0 = \xi^a \xi^b \pounds_\xi T_{ab} = \pounds_\xi \left( (\pounds_\xi \phi)^2 \right) \ .
\end{equation}
The last equation implies that $\pounds_\xi \phi$ is constant along the orbits (integral curves) of $\xi^a$. In other words, field $\phi$ is a linear function of a parameter along these curves. Hence, assuming that the orbits don't run into a singularity, the exact symmetry inheritance, $\pounds_\xi \phi = 0$, will occur if these curves are compact (topological circles) or if $\phi$ is bounded. An example of unbounded scalar field, a linear function of time in a stationary spacetime, appears in the Case II of Wyman's solution \cite{Wyman81}. We note in passing that a symmetry is not necessarily inherited by the complex scalar field, as was shown by the recent discovery of the scalar hair on Kerr black hole \cite{HR14}. In fact, this ``noninheritance'' lies at the very heart of the circumvention of the Bekenstein's no-hair theorems \cite{Beken72}, which always assume the symmetry inheritance of the fields in the proofs.
\bigskip
Detailed analysis of the symmetry inheritance for the electromagnetic fields in general relativity has been done by Michalski and Wainwright \cite{MW75}, proving that generally $\pounds_\xi F_{bc} = -a\,{*F}_{bc}$, where for non-null electromagnetic fields $a$ is a constant. Another, more elegant, spinorial proof, independent of particular gravitational field equation, was given more recently by Tod \cite{Tod06}. In the case of $SO(3)$ isometry group, each constant $a_i$, corresponding to Killing vector fields generating this group, is necessarily zero \cite{MW75,Hoen78}. Although there are various conditions which imply inheritance of the stationarity by the electromagnetic field \cite{MW75,Tod06}, in order to avoid any unnecessary additional assumptions, as well as to obtain other information about the nonvanishing components of the field, we show in the Appendix A that all this can be alternatively established by utilizing the spherical symmetry.
\bigskip
\section{Which fields admit Jebsen-Birkhoff theorem?
Using standard coordinates for a general spherically symmetric $D$-dimensional space\-time,
\begin{equation}
x^0 = t \ , \quad x^1 = r \ , \quad x^i = \theta^i \quad (i=2,3,\dots,D-1)
\end{equation}
where
$$0 \le \theta^i < \pi \quad \textrm{for} \quad i = 2,\dots,D-2 \quad \textrm{and} \quad 0 \le \theta^{D-1} < 2\pi \ ,$$
its metric can be written in the following form (see \cite{HE}, Appendix B)
\begin{equation}\label{eq:metric}
ds^2 = -e^{2\alpha(t,r)} dt^2 + e^{2\beta(t,r)} dr^2 + \gamma^2(t,r) \, d\Omega_{D-2}^2
\end{equation}
The components of the metric of the spherically symmetric subspace are given by $g_{ii} = \gamma^2\Pi(i)$, where $\Pi(i)$ is the auxiliary function
\begin{equation}
\Pi(i) \equiv \left\{ \begin{array}{ll} 1 \, , & i = 2 \\ \prod_{k=2}^i \sin^2\theta^k \, , & i \ge 3 \end{array} \right.
\end{equation}
In order to distinguish between different subsets of the general indices $\{\mu,\nu,\dots\}$, we use upper case letters from the beginning of the Latin alphabet $\{A,B,\dots\}$ to denote coordinates from the $t$--$r$ subspace, and lower case letters from the middle of the Latin alphabet $\{i,j,\dots\}$ to denote coordinates from the spherically symmetric subspace. When we speak of a ``diagonal tensor'' $Z_{ab}$ in this particular coordinate system, the phrase can be easily put in a covariant form as $Z_{ab} e^b_{(\mu)} e^c_{(\nu)} = 0$ for each $\mu \ne \nu$, where $\{e^a_{(\mu)}\}$ are the corresponding vielbeins. Finally, we use dot $\,\dot{}\,$ and prime $\,'\,$ to denote derivatives with respect to, respectively, $t$ and $r$ coordinates. It is straightforward to check that the only nonvanishing components of the Riemann tensor for the metric (\ref{eq:metric}) are
\begin{equation}\label{eq:Riem1}
R_{0101} = \left( \alpha'' + \alpha'^2 - \alpha'\beta' \right) e^{2\alpha} - \left( \ddot{\beta} + \dot{\beta}^2 - \dot{\alpha}\dot{\beta} \right) e^{2\beta}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}\label{eq:Riem2}
R_{0i0i} = \left( \alpha'\gamma' e^{2(\alpha-\beta)} + \dot{\alpha}\dot{\gamma} - \ddot{\gamma} \right) \gamma\,\Pi(i)
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}\label{eq:Riem3}
R_{0i1i} = \left( \alpha'\dot{\gamma} + \dot{\beta}\gamma' - \dot{\gamma}' \right) \gamma\,\Pi(i)
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}\label{eq:Riem4}
R_{1i1i} = \left( \beta'\gamma' - \gamma'' + \dot{\beta}\dot{\gamma} e^{2(\beta-\alpha)} \right) \gamma\,\Pi(i)
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}\label{eq:Riem5}
R_{ijij} = \left( 1 - \gamma'^2 e^{-2\beta} + \dot{\gamma}^2 e^{-2\alpha} \right) \gamma^2 \Pi(i) \Pi(j)
\end{equation}
\bigskip
Careful analysis of JBT has to take care about the type of the vector $\nabla^a\gamma$. However, since the different possible cases are in principle analogous \cite{HE}, we restrict our discussion on the case when $\nabla^a\gamma$ is a spacelike vector. This implies that the coordinates can be redefined so that $\gamma = r$. There have been various earlier attempts to characterize energy-momentum tensor which implies JBT \cite{BM95,Faraoni10,FN}. For example, Frolov and Novikov present an elegant sufficient condition.
\bigskip
\begin{tm}
JBT for a solution to Einstein's equation is valid if $T_{AB} = f g_{AB}$ for some function $f$.
\end{tm}
\bigskip
It is interesting to note that this condition is identical to the one which in general relativity implies $g_{00} g_{11} = -1$, as noted by Jacobson \cite{Jacobson07}. More generally, it can be also seen as an ``partial'' equation of state, $T_{00} = -e^{2(\alpha-\beta)} T_{11}$ with vanishing radial momentum density $T_{01} = 0$.
\bigskip
What are the implications of the condition from the Theorem 2 on the fields? For the ideal fluid, the ``$01$'' component implies that $\rho + p = 0$ or $u_0 = 0$ or $u_1 = 0$. If $\rho + p \ne 0$ then the remaining, $tt$ and $rr$ equations imply that $u_0 = u_1 = 0$, which is in a contradiction with the normalization $u^a u_a = -1$. In conclusion, we necessarily have $\rho + p = 0$ (the cosmological constant case). Symmetry inheritance of the real scalar field allows us to conclude that $\phi = \phi(t,r)$, while the condition from the Theorem 2 puts even stronger further constraint, namely $\phi$ has to be a constant. In the case of electromagnetic field we have the vanishing of the radial component of the Poynting vector (\emph{a posteriori}, JBT and symmetry inheritance imply that the electric and the magnetic fields are spherically symmetric and static).
\bigskip
In order to investigate whether these constraints are too stringent, it is important to find \emph{necessary and sufficient} conditions for the validity of JBT. Pavelle \cite{Pavelle78} has provided an answer for general relativity in a form of the following theorem.
\bigskip
\begin{tm}
JBT for a spherically symmetric solution to Einstein's equation is valid if and only if the energy-momentum tensor is stationary ($t$-independent) and diagonal.
\end{tm}
\bigskip
We shall argue that Pavelle's theorem can be generalized to a much wider class of theories. From now on, we assume that $E_{ab}$ is a polynomial function formed by the contractions of the Riemann tensors (without covariant derivatives),
\begin{equation}\label{eq:EpolyR}
E_{ab} = \sum_k E_{ab}^{(k)}(g_{cd}, R_{cdef})
\end{equation}
where $E_{ab}^{(k)}$ denotes a ``monomial'' term. For example, Lovelock has proved \cite{Love71,Love72} that the most general symmetric, divergence free tensor $E_{ab}$, function of metric and its first two derivatives, is exactly of this form.
\bigskip
\begin{lm}\label{lm:Ediag}
If $g_{ab}$ is a spherically symmetric static metric and $E_{ab}$ of the form (\ref{eq:EpolyR}), then $E_{\mu\nu}$ is diagonal.
\end{lm}
\medskip
\prf{
One can easily check from the equations (\ref{eq:Riem1}--\ref{eq:Riem5}) that in the stationary case the only nonvanishing components of the Riemann tensor are of the form $R_{\mu\nu\mu\nu}$, up to symmetries. Let us examine an off-diagonal component of the monomial term, $E_{\rho\sigma}^{(k)}$ for $\rho \ne \sigma$. Due to the structure of the components of the Riemann tensor, we know that there would have to be odd number of $\rho$'s among the contracted indices. On the other hand, contracted indices come in pairs, which means that there has to be even number of $\rho$'s. So, the off-diagonal components of the $E_{\mu\nu}$ tensor vanish.
}
\bigskip
It is important to note that this wouldn't be necessarily true in the presence of covariant derivatives of the Riemann tensors. The notable exceptions are the gravitational Chern-Simons terms, which identically vanish for spherically symmetric metrics \cite{BCPDPS11,BCPDPS13}.
\bigskip
\begin{lm}\label{lm:dotbeta}
Let $g_{ab}$ be a spherically symmetric metric. Then $E_{01} \sim \dot{\beta}$.
\end{lm}
\medskip
\prf{
Let assume that a monomial term $E_{01}^{(k)}$ doesn't contain the $R_{0i1i}$ component. Then, due to the structure of the components of the Riemann tensor, we know that there would have to be odd number of ``$0$'' indices among the contracted ones. However, contracted indices come in pairs and hence every monomial term has to contain the $R_{0i1i}$ component. In the $\gamma = r$ case we have $R_{0i1i} \sim \dot{\beta}$.
}
\bigskip
Using these two lemmas, we shall present the scheme by which it is possible to generalize Pavelle's theorem in the following form,
\begin{quote}
\textbf{Proposition.} Suppose that JBT is valid in the vacuum case of (\ref{eq:ET}). Then JBT in the presence of fields is valid if and only if the energy-momentum tensor is stationary and diagonal.
\end{quote}
\noindent
The reason why this statement is not present as an rigorous theorem is related to the generality of the claim and will be commented at the end of the discussion that follows.
\bigskip
Suppose that JBT is valid for (\ref{eq:ET}). Then the metric $g_{ab}$ is stationary, which implies that $E_{ab}$ is stationary and hence the energy-momentum tensor is stationary too. Also, from the Lemma \ref{lm:Ediag} we know that $E_{\mu\nu}$ is diagonal, so is $T_{\mu\nu}$. Conversely, let us suppose that the energy-momentum tensor is stationary and diagonal. From the Lemma \ref{lm:dotbeta} we know that $E_{01} \sim \dot{\beta}$. In the vacuum case this component of the field equation is used to conclude that $\dot{\beta} = 0$ and hence $g_{11,0} = 0$. Since the energy-momentum tensor is diagonal, the off-diagonal components of the field equations remain unchanged in the non-vacuum case, so that this conclusion remains unaltered. Furthermore, using $\beta = \beta(r)$ and $\gamma = \gamma(r)$ we see that in the components of the Riemann tensor remain only derivations with respect to the $r$ coordinate. Since the components of the energy-momentum tensor are $t$-independent, the diagonal components of the field equations allow solution for the $g_{00}$ component of the form $g_{00} = p(t)q(r)$. Then the $p$ function can be used to redefine coordinate $t$ and hence $g_{00,0} = 0$. In conclusion JBT remains valid in the non-vacuum case under given assumptions.
\bigskip
One could possibly contrive an example of gravitation field equation where the nonvacuum JBT doesn't hold because the conclusion $\dot{\beta} = 0$ depends on ``diagonal equations'' in such a way that the presence of $r$-dependent terms $T_{\mu\mu}$ ruins its validity. This, however, doesn't happen in various important extensions of general relativity where JBT is known to be valid in the vacuum case, such as the Lovelock's gravity \cite{Whitt88,Zegers05} and Palatini $f(R)$ theory \cite{Faraoni10}. Thus, a possible ``pathological'' case of tensor (\ref{eq:EpolyR}) will violate usual fundamental physical prerequisites (assumptions from the Lovelock's theorem) for the gravitational field equation. It remains to be seen to what extent this proposition can be extended if the covariant derivatives of Riemann tensors are present in the tensor $E_{ab}$.
\bigskip
Finally, let us investigate consequences of the conditions from generalized Pavelle's theorem and symmetry inheritance properties. For the ideal fluid we get $\rho = \rho(r)$, $p = p(r)$ and either $\rho + p = 0$ or $u^0 = u^0(r)$ as the only nonvanishing component of $u^a$. Similarly, for the real scalar field we get either $\phi = \phi(t)$ or $\phi = \phi(r)$ (\emph{a posteriori}, the former option is incompatible with JBT and symmetry inheritance). In the presence of the black hole horizon, due to Bekenstein's no-hair result \cite{Beken72}, the field $\phi$ must be constant. Diagonal electromagnetic energy-momentum tensor implies the vanishing of the Poynting vector (see e.g.~\cite{Heusler}, section 5.1), so that $E^a$ and $B^a$ are parallel, which is consistent with the conclusions from the symmetry inheritance.
\bigskip
\ac
This work was partially supported by the Croatian Ministry of Science, Education and Sport under the contract No.~119-0982930-1016.
\bigskip
\appendi
\section{Stationarity inheritance of the electromagnetic field
Suppose that the spacetime is spherically symmetric and that due to JBT it is stationary too, with corresponding Killing vector field $k^a = (\partial/\partial t)^a$. Then one can introduce \cite{Heusler,Smolic14} electric and magnetic 1-forms, $E = -i_k F$ and $B = i_k {*F}$. Let $\xi^a$ be a Killing vector field such that $\pounds_\xi F_{ab} = 0$ and $\pounds_k \xi^a = 0$. Then, using the identity
\begin{equation}
\pounds_X i_Y - i_Y \pounds_X = i_{[X,Y]}
\end{equation}
and the fact that the Lie derivative commutes with Hodge operator, we have
\begin{equation}
\pounds_\xi E = -\pounds_\xi i_k F = -i_k \pounds_\xi F = 0
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\pounds_\xi B = \pounds_\xi i_k {*F} = i_k \pounds_\xi {*F} = 0
\end{equation}
Since $\xi^a$ is a Killing vector field, the same is true for dual vector fields $E^a$ and $B^a$, $\pounds_\xi E^a = \pounds_\xi B^a = 0$. More concretely, using the fact that the non-null electromagnetic field inherits the spherical symmetry and that well known generators of the $SO(3)$ isometry (see e.g.~\cite{Carroll}, equation (5.25)) commute with $k^a$, these equations imply that the only nonvanishing components of the electric and magnetic fields are $E^1 = E^1(t,r)$ and $B^1 = B^1(t,r)$. Correspondingly, the only nonvanishing components of $F_{ab}$ are thus $F_{01} = F_{01}(t,r)$ and $F_{23} = f(t,r)\sin\theta$ for some function $f$. Covariant form of the vacuum Maxwell's equations can be written as
\begin{equation}
\nabla^\mu F_{\mu\nu} = \frac{1}{\sqrt{-g}}\,g^{\mu\rho} \partial_\rho \left( \sqrt{-g} \, F_{\mu\nu} \right) = 0
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\nabla^\mu\,{*F}_{\mu\nu} = \frac{1}{\sqrt{-g}}\,g^{\mu\rho} \partial_\rho \left( \sqrt{-g} \, {*F}_{\mu\nu} \right) = 0
\end{equation}
where $g$ is the determinant of the metric. Using the information we have obtained about the components of $F_{ab}$, $\nu = 1$ components of the Maxwell's equations allow us to finally deduce that $F_{01}$ and $F_{23}$ are in fact $t$-independent in a spherically symmetric static spacetime. In conclusion, under given assumptions, the electromagnetic field inherits the stationarity, $\pounds_k F_{ab} = 0$.
\bigskip
In such a context, one can also introduce \cite{Heusler,Smolic14} locally defined electric scalar potential $\Phi$ and the magnetic scalar potential $\Psi$, defined via $E = d\Phi$ and $B = d\Psi$. Since the Lie derivative and the exterior derivative commute, it follows that $\pounds_\xi \Phi$ and $\pounds_\xi \Psi$ are both constant. Furthermore, in the presence of Dirichlet boundary conditions on the hypersurfaces invariant under the action of a Killing vector field $\xi^a$ (e.g.~the electromagnetic potentials are constant on Killing horizons \cite{Smolic12,Smolic14}) one can deduce that both $\pounds_\xi \Phi$ and $\pounds_\xi \Psi$ are in fact zero. In the case of spherically symmetric static spacetime this implies that $\Phi = \Phi(r)$, $\Psi = \Psi(r)$, and thus the electric and magnetic fields are spherically symmetric, static and radial, $E = E(r)\,dr$ and $B = B(r)\,dr$, in agreement with the conclusions from above.
\section*{References
\bibliographystyle{unsrt}
|
\section{Introduction}
An $n$-by-$n$ real symmetric matrix is called \emph{doubly nonnegative} (DN) if it is both positive semidefinite and entrywise nonnegative.
Given a doubly nonnegative matrix $A$, the continuous conventional powers of $A$ are defined using the spectral decomposition:
if $\alpha>0$, $A = UDU^{T}$, and $D = \text{diag}(d_{11}, . . . , d_{nn})$, then $A^\alpha := UD^\alpha U^T$,
with $D^\alpha := \text{diag}(d_{11}^\alpha, . . . , d_{nn}^\alpha)$.
The conventional \emph{critical exponent} (CE) for DN matrices is the least real number $m$ such that for any DN matrix $A$, $A^\alpha$ is also DN for all $\alpha > m$. It was shown in \cite{Johnson} that the critical exponent for DN matrices exists and is no smaller than $n-2$, and is $n-2$ for $n<6$. A low coefficient quadratic upper bound was also given in \cite{Johnson}. The authors conjectured that the critical exponent is $n-2$, and this conjecture was proven in \cite{Stanford} by applying a result from \cite{M}. There is also the concept of critical exponents of DN matrices under Hadamard powering, and interestingly enough, the critical exponent is also shown to be $n-2$ in \cite{Hadamard}.
Here we relax the assumption that the matrix be symmetric while still insisting that the matrix is entrywise nonnegative, diagonalizable, and has nonnegative eigenvalues. We call such matrices \emph{generalized doubly nonnegative} (GDN). Because GDN matrices are diagonalizable, we have
$A = SDS^{-1}$, where $D$ is a diagonal matrix, and we can define continuous powers similarly via $A^\alpha := SD^\alpha S^{-1}$.
We show here the critical exponent for GDN matrices also exists, and we give low-coefficient quadratic upper bounds for it. We show that the critical exponent is strictly larger than $n-2$ if $n$ is an odd integer greater than 2. We make observations about the relation between the index of primitivity of a primitive matrix and the critical exponent for GDN matrices of that size. In addition, we make the observation that the GDN critical exponent under Hadamard powering does not exist.
\section{Background}
Any diagonalizable matrix $A \in M_n(\R)$ can be decomposed as
\[ A = SDS^{-1}\]
in which $D$ is a diagonal matrix consisting of the eigenvalues of $A$.
If $x_i$ denotes the $i\textsuperscript{th}$-column of $S$ and $y_i$ denotes the $i\textsuperscript{th}$-row of $S^{-1}$, then $A$ can be written as
\[ A = \lambda_1x_1y_1 + ... + \lambda_nx_ny_n. \]
If all eigenvalues of $A$ are nonnegative, then for $\alpha>0 $, $A^\alpha$ is defined by
\[ A^\alpha = \lambda_1^\alpha x_1y_1+ ... + \lambda_n^\alpha x_ny_n. \]
Each entry of $A^\alpha$ has the form
\[ (A^\alpha)_{ij} = \lambda_1^\alpha (x_1y_1)_{ij}+...+ \lambda_n^\alpha (x_ny_n)_{ij}. \]
Any function of the form
\[ \phi(t) = a_1 e^{b_1 t} + ... +a_n e^{b_n t} \]
where $a_i, b_i \in \R$, is called an \emph{exponential polynomial}. In particular, if all eigenvalues of $A$ are nonnegative, then each entry of $A^\alpha$ is an
exponential polynomial in $\alpha$. The eigenvalues of the $A^\alpha$ are obvious but the non-negativity of the entries is not obvious. The following version of Descartes' rule for exponential polynomials is
well known and appears as an exercise in \cite{DR}.
\begin{lemma}\label{DR}
Let $ \phi(t) = \sum_{i=1}^{n} a_i e^{b_i t}$ be a real exponential polynomial such that each $a_i \not = 0$ and
$b_1 > b_2 > . . . > b_n$. The number of real roots of $\phi(t)$, counting multiplicity, cannot exceed the number
of sign changes in the sequence of coefficients $(a_1, a_2, . . . , a_n)$.
\end{lemma}
\section{The existence and an upper bound for the GDN critical exponent}
We follow the strategy of \cite{Johnson} to show the existence and an upper bound for CE.
Lemma \ref{DR} leads immediately to the the existence of a GDN CE.
\begin{theorem}\label{existence}
There is a function $m(n)$ such that for any $n$-by-$n$ GDN matrix $A$, $A^\alpha$ is generalized doubly
nonnegative for $\alpha \ge m(n)$.
\end{theorem}
The proof of Theorem 2.1 in \cite{Johnson} does not rely on the symmetry assumption so that essentially the same proof establishes Theorem \ref{existence}.
\begin{proof}
Let $A$ be an $n$-by-$n$ GDN matrix. Since $A$ is entrywise nonnegative, so is $A^k$ for all positive
integers $k$. If $A^\alpha$ is entrywise nonnegative for all $\alpha \in [m,m + 1]$, where $m \in \Z$, then it follows from repeated
multiplication by $A$ that $A^\alpha$ is also entrywise nonnegative for all $\alpha \ge m$. Suppose that $A^\alpha$ has a negative entry for some
$\alpha \in [m,m + 1]$, then the exponential polynomial corresponding to that entry must have at least two
roots in the interval $[m,m+1]$ by continuity and the fact that $A^m$ and $A^{m+1}$ are both entrywise nonnegative. By Lemma \ref{DR}, the maximum number of roots each entry may possess
depends on $n$. It follows that there is a constant $m(n)$ such that $A^\alpha $ is entrywise nonnegative, and thus GDN, for all $\alpha > m(n)$.
\end{proof}
Moreover, we may strengthen the argument in the proof of Theorem \ref{existence} to give an upper bound for the CE after developing some tools.
Let $A$ be any $n$-by-$n$ GDN matrix. Following \cite{Johnson}, corresponding to the matrix $A$, we define a matrix
$W = [w_{ij}]$ where $w_{ij}$ equals the number of sign changes in the sequence of coefficients of the exponential polynomial $(A^\alpha)_{ij}$ arranged in decreasing order of the corresponding eigenvalues. We refer
to $W$ as the \emph{sign change matrix} for $A$. By Lemma \ref{DR}, each entry $w_{ij}$ of a
sign change matrix gives an upper bound on the number of real zeros of the corresponding exponential
polynomial $(A^\alpha)_{ij}$, counting multiplicity. Note that $w_{ij} \le n-1$ because there are at most $n$ terms in the exponential polynomial $(A^\alpha)_{ij}$.
\begin{lemma}\label{2.3}
Let $A$ be an invertible GDN matrix with sign change matrix $W = [w_{ij}]$. Let $\bar{T}_{ij}= \{ \alpha > 1 : A^\alpha_{ij} < 0 \}$. Then the maximum number of connected components of $\bar{T}_{ij}$ is
\[\begin{cases}
\left \lfloor{\frac{w_{ij}-1}{2}}\right \rfloor &\text{ if $w_{ij} > 0$ and $i \not = j$} \\
\left \lfloor{\frac{w_{ij}}{2}}\right \rfloor & \text{ if $w_{ij} > 0$ and $i = j$} \\
0 & \text{ if $w_{ij} = 0$}
\end{cases}.\]
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
By Lemma \ref{DR} the maximum number of real roots of the exponential polynomial $A^\alpha_{ij}$ is given
by $w_{ij}$. Since $A$ is invertible, the exponential polynomials defining the entries of $A^\alpha$ when $\alpha > 0$ still
agree with $A^\alpha$ at $\alpha = 0$. Since $A^0$ is the identity matrix, the exponential polynomial $(A^\alpha)_{ij}$ has at most
$w_{ij} - 1$ roots in the interval $[1,\infty)$ when $i \not = j$.
Each of the connected components of $\bar{T}_{ij}$ is bounded because $A^k$ is nonnegative for all positive
integers $k$. The endpoints of these components are roots of the exponential polynomial $(A^\alpha)_{ij}$. If two
adjacent connected components of $\bar{T}_{ij}$ share an endpoint, that endpoint must be a root of degree at
least two. Counting multiplicity, the number of real roots of $(A^\alpha)_{ij}$ with $\alpha \ge 1$ must therefore be at
least double the number of connected components of $\bar{T}_{ij}$.
If $w_{ij}$ is zero, then the exponential polynomial $(A^\alpha)_{ij}$ has all positive coefficients, so $\bar{T}_{ij}$ is empty.
And if $w_{ii}$ is not zero, the corresponding exponential polynomial has at most $w_{ij}$ roots counting multiplicity and $0$ is not one of them. So there are at most $\left \lfloor{\frac{w_{ij}}{2}}\right \rfloor$ number of connected components.
\end{proof}
From now on, we will denote the GDN critical exponent of $n$-by-$n$ matrices by $CE_n$. We now provide an upper bound for $CE_n$.
\begin{theorem}\label{upper}
We have
\[ CE_n \le \begin{cases}
\frac{n^2 -3n+4}{2} & \text{n is odd} \\
\frac{n^2 - 2n}{2} & \text{n is even} \\
\end{cases}.
\]
\end{theorem}
\begin{observation}\label{ob}
For $j\in \{1,...,n\}$, let $\bar{T}_{j} = \{ \alpha > 1 : {A^\alpha}_{ij} < 0, i = 1, ..., n \}$.
Note that if $\bar{T}_{j} \cap (m,m + 1) = \emptyset$, for some integer $m$, then every entry in
column $j$ of $A^\alpha$ is nonnegative for all powers $\alpha \in [m,m + 1]$. Using repeated left multiplication by $A$,
we see that column $j$ of $A^\alpha$ must be nonnegative for all $\alpha \ge m$.
\end{observation}
\begin{proof}
Let $k(n)$ be the proposed upper bound. Assume $A$ is an invertible GDN matrix.
If $n$ is odd, then $\bar{T}_{j}$ can have at most
\begin{align*}
(n-1)\left \lfloor{\frac{n-2}{2}}\right \rfloor + \left \lfloor{\frac{n-1}{2}}\right \rfloor = \frac{n^2 -3n+2}{2}
\end{align*}
connected components in $[1, \infty)$. By Observation \ref{ob}, there has to be a connected component in $(0,1)$ as well. But this can be achieved by letting the exponential polynomial for one of the off-diagonal entries to have exactly one simple root in $(0,1)$.
If $n$ is even, then $\bar{T}_{j}$ can have at most
\begin{align*}
(n-1)\left \lfloor{\frac{n-2}{2}}\right \rfloor + \left \lfloor{\frac{n-1}{2}}\right \rfloor = \frac{n^2 -2n}{2}
\end{align*}
connected components in $[1, \infty)$. Again by Observation \ref{ob}, there has to be a connected component in $(0,1)$ as well. But in this case, the number of connected components in $[1, \infty)$ has to decrease by at least 1 if we insist that there is a connected component in $(0,1)$. Therefore, there are at most $\frac{n^2 -2n-2}{2}$ connected components in $[1, \infty)$.
Finally, by Observation \ref{ob}, the connected components in $[1, \infty)$ have to lie in intervals with consecutive integers as end points, starting from $[1,2]$. Therefore, there are no such connected components in $(k(n), \infty)$
Now suppose that $A$ is singular. By continuity, $A^\alpha$ cannot have a negative entry for any $\alpha > k(n)$.
Therefore the critical exponent $CE_n \le k(n)$.
\end{proof}
\section{The GDN critical exponent and the index of primitivity}
We first note that since a DN matrix is also GDN, the critical exponent for GDN matrices is no smaller than the critical exponent for DN matrices.
We now focus on irreducible matrices and explore the relation between the GDN critical exponent and the index of primitivity. We will address reducible GDN matrices in the next section.
If an $n$-by-$n$ GDN matrix is irreducible, then it is primitive by the Perron-Frobenius theorem. The \emph{index of primitivity} of a primitive matrix $A$ is the least positive integer $k$ such that $A^k$ is entrywise positive. It is known that the index of primitivity of a $n$-by-$n$ matrix is at most $(n-1)n^n$ (NOTE:CITE HORN,JOHNSON MATRIX ANALYSIS HERE). We denote the maximum index of primitivity for primitive $n$-by-$n$ GDN matrices by $MIP_n$.
By the definition of index of primitivity, there exists a GDN matrix that has at least one zero entry, say the $(i,j)$-entry, when raised to the power $MIP_n - 1$. If the exponential polynomial
\[ p(t) = a_1 \lambda_1^t + ... + a_n \lambda_n^t \]
corresponding to the $ij$-th entry has non-vanishing derivative at $t = MIP_n - 1$, that is,
$p'(MIP_n - 1) \not = 0$
then, either
$p(k)< 0$ for some $k>MIP_n - 1$, or
$p(k)<0$ for all $ k \in (MIP_n - 1 -\epsilon, MIP_n - 1)$ with some $\epsilon$ small enough. In either case, the GDN critical exponent is at least $MIP_n-1$.
The only case in which the GDN critical exponent is less than $MIP_n-1$ is when the exponential polynomial corresponding to a certain entry has a multiple root at an integer larger than the critical exponent. Since the index of primitivity depends only on the number and positions of zeros in the matrix but not on the numerical values of nonzero entries, if it so happens that $MIP_n-1 < CE_n$ with a certain matrix $A$, then the exponential polynomial corresponding to the entry where $A^{MIP_n-1}$ is zero for all GDN matrices with the same zero-nonzero pattern as $A$ has a multiple root at $MIP_n - 1$, which appears highly unlikely. Therefore, we make the following conjecture.
\begin{conj}\label{MIP<CE}
$MIP_n - 1 < CE_n$.
\end{conj}
If Conjecture \ref{MIP<CE} is true, then $MIP_n - 1$ gives a lower bound for the critical exponent, and the following question arises naturally.
\begin{question}\label{MIP_pattern}
What is $MIP_n$ and what are the zero-nonzero patterns that attain $MIP_n$?
\end{question}
Question \ref{MIP_pattern} not only may help improve the lower bound for GDN critical exponent but is also interesting in its own right. Note that as shown in Theorem 3.2 of \cite{Johnson}, the $MIP_n \ge n -1$ because of the tridiagonal DN matrices. By Lemma 2.4 in \cite{Johnson}, the maximum index of primitivity for DN matrices is precisely $n-1$. The next two lemmas gives an upper bound for $MIP_n$ and shows that $MIP_n > n-1$ if $n$ is odd.
\begin{lemma}\label{2n-d-1}
$MIP_n \le 2n - 3$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let $A$ be an $n$-by-$n$ matrix and first assume it has strict positive eigenvalues. Let $t_k = \text{Tr}(A^k)$. Then the characteristic polynomial of $A$ is given by:
\[ p(\lambda) = (-1)^n\big(\lambda^n + c_1\lambda^{n-1}+c_2\lambda^{n-2}+...+c_{n-1}\lambda + c_n\big)\]
where $c_1 = -t_1$ and $c_2 = \frac{1}{2}(t_1^2- t_2)$.
By Descartes' rule of signs, the number of positive roots of $p(\lambda)$ is at most the number of the sign changes in the sequence $(1, c_1, ..., c_n)$. Hence, if $A$ is GDN, then $c_1<0$ and $c_2 > 0$. Therefore, $A$ has at least two positive diagonal entries. If $A$ has only one positive diagonal entry, then
\[2c_2 = \Big (\sum_{i=1}^n a_{ii} \Big ) - \sum_{i,j=1}^n a_{ij}a_{ji} = - \sum_{i\not = j}^n a_{ij}a_{ji} \le 0\]
which is impossble as $c_2>0$. For an irreducible matrix $A$ with at least one positive diagonal entry, it is a routine exercise to verify that the index of primitivity of $A$ is at most $2n - d - 1$, where $d$ is the number of positive diagonal entries (see e.g., Theorem 8.5.9 in \cite{MA}). Therefore, $MIP_n \le 2n - 3$. Finally, we relax the assumption that $A$ has positive eigenvalues as the general case follows from continuity.
\end{proof}
\begin{proposition}\label{n-1}
If $n$ is odd, then $MIP_n > n-1$ and $CE_n \ge n-1$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
Consider the matrix
\begin{equation}
A = \begin{bmatrix}
d_1 & \epsilon & 0 & \cdots & \cdots & \cdots & \cdots & 0 \\
0 & d_2 & \epsilon & \ddots & && & \vdots \\
0 & 0 & d_3 & \ddots & \ddots & & & \vdots \\
\vdots & \ddots & \ddots & \ddots & \ddots & \ddots & & \vdots \\
\vdots & & \ddots & \ddots & \ddots & \ddots & \ddots& \vdots\\
\vdots & & & \ddots & \ddots & d_{n-2} & \epsilon& 0\\
0 & & & & \ddots & 0 & d_{n-1} & \epsilon\\
\epsilon & 0 & \cdots & \cdots & \cdots & 0 & 0& d_n \\
\end{bmatrix}
\end{equation}
where $d_1> d_2 > ... > d_{n-1} > d_n = 0$ and $0< \epsilon< \max\{\frac{d_i - d_{i+1}}{2}\}$. By the Gershgorin circle theorem, all eigenvalues are real and the first $n-1$ eigenvalues are positive.
Moreover, since
\[ \det(A) = \epsilon^n > 0 \]
all eigenvalues are positive.
Therefore, $A$ is GDN.
Note that $A^k_{nn} = 0$ for $ k = 1,2, ..., n-1$. Hence the index of primitivity of $A$ is at least $n$. Since there are at most $n-1$ roots for the exponential polynomial $p(\alpha) = A^\alpha_{nn}$ and $A^{n}_{nn}>0$, if follows that $A^\alpha_{nn}<0$ if $\alpha \in(n-2,n-1)$. Therefore, the critical exponent is at least $n-1$.
\end{proof}
\begin{corollary}
$CE_3 = 2$.
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}
The upper bound for the critical exponent is 2 by Theorem \ref{upper}, and the lower bound is also 2 by Proposition \ref{n-1}.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}
In Lemma 2.2 of \cite{Johnson}, it was shown that the diagonal entries of DN matrices remain positive under continuous powering, while in the proof of Proposition \ref{n-1}, a negative entry appears on the diagonal under continuous powering.
\end{remark}
It should be noted that when $n>3$, better lower bounds for $CE_n$ than $n-1$ exist, as demonstrated in the following examples. Examples of GDN matrices with highest index of primitivity discovered are displayed at the end of the section.
\begin{example}
\begin{equation*}
A_4 = \begin{bmatrix}
1 & 7 & 0 & 0\\
0 & 17000 & 8500 & 0\\
0 & 0 & 24000 & 1600\\
20 & 0 & 0 & 5\\
\end{bmatrix}
\end{equation*}
The critical exponent for $A_4$ is between 3.99 and 4.
\begin{equation*}
A_5 = \begin{bmatrix}
10 & 70 & 0 & 0 & 0 \\
0 & 5 & 90 & 0 & 0\\
0 & 0 & 80000 & 15000 & 0\\
0 & 0 & 0 & 120000 & 30\\
150 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0\\
\end{bmatrix}
\end{equation*}
The critical exponent for $A_5$ is between 5.99 and 6.
\begin{equation*}
A_6 = \begin{bmatrix}
156 & 1605 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0\\
0 & 375 & 7932 & 0 & 0 & 0\\
0 & 0 & 805 & 7840 & 0 & 0\\
0 & 0 & 0 & 13803330 & 224210 & 0\\
0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 9373900 & 18590\\
105720 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 25200\\
\end{bmatrix}
\end{equation*}
The critical exponent for $A_6$ is between 6.99 and 7.
\end{example}
\begin{remark}
Note that in the 4-by-4 case, the upper bound for critical exponent is 4 by Theorem \ref{upper} and the matrix $A_4$ in the previous example has critical exponent greater than 3.99. We notice that as row 1 and 4 of $A_4$ decrease in proportion (or equivalently as row 2 and 3 increase in proportion), the critical exponent increases. Therefore, we make the following conjecture.
\end{remark}
\begin{conj}\label{4}
$CE_4 = 4$.
\end{conj}
In Lemma \ref{2n-d-1}, we have shown that there have to be at least 2 positive entries on the diagonal. If there are exactly 2 positive entries on the diagonal, then the maximum index of primitivity is $2n-3$, giving $CE_n \ge 2n-4$ if Conjecture \ref{MIP<CE} holds. However, generally the zero-nonzero pattern with exactly two positive diagonal entries do not permit GDN matrices. Hence we perturb the diagonal zero entries and aim to the achieve lower bounds for $CE_n$ that are close to $2n-4$. And we observe that when $n=4$ and $n=5$, we can perform such perturbation and produce CE greater than 3.99 and 5.99 respectively. Therefore, we ask the following question:
\begin{question}
Is $CE_n$ = $2(n-2)$?
\end{question}
\begin{table}\label{t}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{ l | c | r|c }
\hline
n & $MIP_n$ & $CE_n$ & Upper bound for $CE_n$ (by Theorem 3.3)\\ \hline \hline
2 & 1 & 0 & 0\\ \hline
3 & 3 & 2 & 2\\ \hline
4 & 4 & $>$3.99 &4 \\ \hline
5 & 6 & $>$5.99 &7\\ \hline
6 & 6 & $>$6.99 &12\\ \hline
7 & 7 & $>$8.99 &16\\ \hline
\hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{Largest $CE_n$ and $MIP_n$ discovered in numerical experiments for small $n$'s}\label{table:t}
\end{center}
\end{table}
Table \ref{table:t}
shows the highest $MIP_n$ and GDN CE discovered in numerical experiments.
Notice that for all these low dimension cases with $n>2$, the lower bounds for the critical exponent are strictly larger than $n-2$, the critical exponent for DN matrices.
Now we give examples of 4-by-4 GDN matrices with index of primitivity 4, 5-by-5 GDN matrices with index of primitivity 6, and 6-by-6 GDN matrices with index of primitivity 6.
\begin{example}
\begin{equation*}
A_4 = \begin{bmatrix}
0 & 0 & 2 & 0\\
0 & 68 & 56 & 21\\
0 & 0 & 0 & 16\\
14 & 72 & 0 & 168\\
\end{bmatrix}
\end{equation*}
The index of primitivity of $A_4$ is 4 and the GDN CE of $A_4$ at least 2.99.
\begin{equation*}
A_5 = \begin{bmatrix}
1800 & 405 & 0 & 0 & 0 \\
0 & 916 & 794 & 0 & 0\\
447 & 0 & 0 & 7 & 0\\
0 & 300 & 0 & 0 & 15\\
0 & 0 & 72 & 0 & 0\\
\end{bmatrix}
\end{equation*}
The index of primitivity of $A_5$ is 6 and the GDN CE of $A_5$ is at least 4.99.
\begin{equation*}
A_6 = \begin{bmatrix}
2439 & 1020 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0\\
0 & 1917 & 668 & 0 & 0 & 0\\
509 & 0 & 890 & 213 & 0 & 0\\
0 & 2746 & 0 & 0 & 158 & 0\\
0 & 0 & 270 & 0 & 0 & 2\\
0 & 0 & 0 & 206 & 0 & 0\\
\end{bmatrix}
\end{equation*}
The index of primitivity of $A_6$ is 6 and the GDN CE of $A_6$ is at least 4.99.
\end{example}
\section{Additional observations}
We make a few observations about the reducible GDN matrices and about the Hadamard powering critical exponent of GDN matrices in this section.
\begin{proposition}
Let $A$ be a reducible $n$-by-$n$ GDN matrix. If
\[ P^TAP = \begin{bmatrix}
B & C\\
0 & D \\
\end{bmatrix}
\] for some permutation matrix $P$, then
\[P^TA^\alpha P = \begin{bmatrix}
B' & C'\\
0 & D' \\
\end{bmatrix}
\]
for all $\alpha > 0$. The matrix $B$ is $k$-by-$k$, $C$ is $k$-by-$n-k$, $0$ is $n-k$-by-$k$, and $D$ is $n-k$-by-$n-k$ for some integer $1<k<n$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
Let $p(\alpha)$ be the exponential polynomial corresponding to the $ij$-th entry, where $k+1 \le i \le n$ and $1 \le j \le k$, then $p(\alpha)$ has a root at every positive integer because the $ij$-th entry is zero for all integer powers of $A$. But $p(\alpha)$ has at most $n-1$ roots counting multiplicity if it is not identically zero, so
$ p(\alpha) \equiv 0$
Therefore, the $ij$-th entry stays zero under all continuous powers of $A$ and
\[P^TA^\alpha P = \begin{bmatrix}
B' & C'\\
0 & D' \\
\end{bmatrix}
\]
where $B'$ is $k$-by-$k$, $C'$ is $k$-by-$n-k$, $0$ is $n-k$-by-$k$, and $D'$ is $n-k$-by-$n-k$, for all $t > 0$.
\end{proof}
Continuous powers of a GDN matrix
$A = (a_{ij})$ are also well defined under Hadamard multiplication. Namely, for $\alpha>0$
\[ A^{(\alpha)} = (a_{ij}^\alpha). \]
Contrary to the conventional multiplication, in the Hadamard case, entrywise nonnegativity is clear, but the nonnegativity of the eigenvalues is in question. It was shown in \cite{Hadamard} that the critical exponent for continuous Hadamard powering of doubly nonnegative matrices is also $n-2$. So it is natural to ask whether there exists a critical exponent without the symmetry condition and consider generalized doubly nonnegative matrices; however, the $n-2$ critical exponent does not generalize. In fact the critical exponent does not exist as demonstrated in the case below:
\begin{example}
If
\[A =
\begin{bmatrix}
2 & 1 & 1 \\
1 & 1 & 1 \\
1 & 5 & 2 \\
\end{bmatrix},
\]
then the eigenvalues of $A^{(\alpha)}$ are $\lambda_1(\alpha) = 2^\alpha - 1$, $\lambda_2(\alpha) = 2^\alpha + \frac{1}{2} + \sqrt{5^\alpha + \frac{5}{4}}$ and $\lambda_3(\alpha) = 2^\alpha + \frac{1}{2} - \sqrt{5^\alpha + \frac{5}{4}}$.
Because $\lambda_3(\alpha) < 0$ for all $\alpha > 1$, the critical exponent does not exist.
\end{example}
\section{Questions}
In this section, we collect some questions that naturally arise when studying the GDN critical exponent. They are not only important and helpful in finding the GDN critical exponent, but are also interesting in their own right.
\begin{question}
Are GDN critical exponents for all $n$-by-$n$ matrices integers?
\end{question}
The critical exponent for both conventional and Hadamard powering of DN matrices turn out to be the integer $n-2$. It is natural to ask whether the same holds true in the conventional powering of GDN matrices. If that is indeed the case, then we can conclude $CE_4 = 4$ by the argument from section 4.
Moreover, in the case of conventional powering of DN, the maximum critical exponent is achieved by tridiagonal matrices. If $CE_n$ is also an integer and is achieved by a certain class of matrices, then we would have $2n-4$ as an upper bound for the critical exponent. To see that, suppose $A$ is a GDN matrix with the integer critical exponent $CE_n$. Then $A^{CE_n}$ has a zero entry. Because the index of primitivity of GDN matrices is at most $2n-3$ as shown in Lemma \ref{2n-d-1}, $CE_n \le 2n-4$.
\begin{question}
For which zero-nonzero patterns of primitive matrices do there exist GDN matrices?
\end{question}
\begin{question}
What is the relation between $MIP_n$ and $CE_n$?
\end{question}
We have seen in section 4 that $MIP_n$ is closely related to $CE_n$, and the knowledge of the relation between $MIP_n$ and $CE_n$ would help us gain information on one given knowledge about the other.
\bibliographystyle{gLMA}
|
\section{Introduction}
Models of network structure play several important roles in contemporary science. Parametric statistical models of network structure and dynamics allow inferences to be made about dependencies among network ties, network position, and nodal and dyadic covariates \citep{frank1986markov,anderson1992building, snijders2001statistical, schweinberger2003settings,handcock2003assessing,doreian2005generalized, hunter2006inference,steglich2010dynamic}. Algorithmic generative models illustrate how complex macroscopic structure can arise from simple and often local rules \citep{watts1998collective,vazquez2003growing,saramaki2004scale}. Despite the importance and diversity of research within both the model based inference and generative algorithms categories, one aspect of network model-based research that has been relatively slow to develop is that of assessing goodness of fit, or how well a given model describes the empirical data being modeled. Moreover, the methods that are commonly used to assess fit within one type of model may be uncommon or unavailable in another, making it difficult to integrate research techniques and results across scholarly communities.
The purpose of this paper is therefore to define a new measure of goodness of fit that substantially fills the gaps left by current methods. In particular, leveraging the features of the spectrum of the graph Laplacian, we define a new goodness of fit statistic that measures the percent improvement a network model makes over a null model in explaining the structure in the observed data. As such, we provide a goodness of fit measure that can be applied across modeling techniques and which provides an absolute measure of goodness of fit for the model to the observed network data.
\subsection{Existing methods}
Commonly used existing methods for assessing goodness of fit can be roughly classified into two groups: one based on comparing structural statistics from networks simulated from a fitted model to structural statistics from the observed network \citep{hunter2008goodness,schweinberger2012statistical}, and the other based on a model's likelihood function, exemplified by the Akaike Information Criterion \citep{hunter2008goodness}.
\subsubsection{Structural-statistics comparisons}
The most commonly used method of assessing goodness of fit (GOF) is the structural statistics approach, which is implemented in software for estimating Exponential Random Graph Models (ERGMs) as well as dynamic actor-oriented models (also known as 'Siena' models). Although not done in a hypothesis testing framework, important algorithmic models \citep[e.g.][]{watts1998collective} have also been described in terms of how well the algorithm reproduces the subgraph statistics in observed networks.
In this approach, after fitting a model, it is necessary to generate a large number of simulated networks based on that model. At that point comparisons can be made between the observed and the simulated networks. The modeler might ask if the observed number of closed triads (or distribution of closed triads over the nodes) could have been drawn from the distribution defined by the simulated networks, or if the observed degree distribution could have been drawn from the distribution of degree distributions in the simulated networks, or any number of other questions of fit between statistics describing the observed and simulated networks. If the structures in the observed network are very unlikely to have been generated by the fitted model, the modeler can reject the hypothesis that the model fits well.
The subgraph-statistical approach has many advantages. By specifying different structural statistics to compare, the approach can be readily adapted to different specific questions of model fit. For example, one researcher may have a theoretical reason to emphasize the length of geodesics, while another may focus on triadic closure. The results of such an analysis are also easy to interpret and lend themselves to graphical representation and inspection (as in \cite{hunter2008goodness}).
On the other hand, this method also has limitations. Even if the theoretical focus of a given researcher is on a single structural issue, say, modeling geodesics, the \textit{overall} fit of the model to the whole network is still important. A model that accurately reproduces the distribution of geodesics but does not reproduce the overall structure of the network is probably inferior to one that captures the geodesic distribution and the overall structure simultaneously.
The difficulty in the subgraph-statistical approach is that it is not clear how to measure the overall structure of the network, except in terms of a list of its statistics. This approach necessarily decomposes the goodness of fit of a whole model into multiple goodness of fit tests on specific features of the model. Theoretically, this is problematic; practically, the validity of the goodness of fit assessment depends heavily on which statistics are specified by the researcher for examination. In a sense, in order to construct a valid goodness of fit test, the researcher is required to know a priori what the important statistics are for a given observed network; this is sometimes a nonsensical requirement, as goodness of fit tests are often undertaken exactly because the research does \textit{not} know whether a given set of statistics (those described by the model parameters) are a good descritption of a network. The pragmatic solution is to use a commonly accepted set of statistics (\cite{hunter2008goodness} provides a good argument for one such set), but the possibility remains that important aspects of structure are not considered in such a goodness of fit test.
Additionally, assessing model fit in terms of subgraph statistics does not provide a means of selecting between two models that are both rejected or both not rejected: it provides neither a relative nor an absolute measure of fit by which such a comparison could be made. Finally, it is difficult to compare published results from different studies when they do not report the same subgraph statistical tests or analysis.
\subsubsection{Akaike Information Criterion}
Likelihood-based approaches, exemplified by the Akaike Information Criterion (AIC) (available for example, to users of the \texttt{ergm} package in \texttt{R} \citep{ergmMan, ergmArt}), fills some of the gaps left by hypothesis tests on structural statistics. The AIC is a well-known tool for model choice based that provides a relative measure of goodness of fit.
There are several limitations of the AIC as well. First, many models do not have a well-defined AIC, including ERGMs that are conditioned on having the exact number of edges present in the observed network, as well as models of networks that were not estimated from a statistical model at all (cases that we consider in more detail below).
Second, the AIC measures goodness of fit of all model parameters to all data, which may not always be what is desired. There are sometimes cases when a researcher wants to know if some model could have generated the observed pattern of ties alone, rather than whether the model could have jointly generated the ties and nodal and dyadic covariates. To briefly cite an example we discuss below, in specifying a model with a homophily parameter, the researcher may want to know how well the model explains the pattern of ties, rather than how well the model describes the homophily. AIC provides information on the latter, but not the former.
Third, like the structural-statistics approach to which it is related, one cannot know if there are omitted variables that would have improved the fit of the model. While the AIC can compare the relative quality of two models in certain senses, it cannot say whether either model is any good in in an absolute sense.
\subsection{Spectral Goodness of Fit}
Given the tools already available to network modelers, a desirable measure of goodness of fit would have the following properties:
\begin{itemize}
\item it would provide an absolute (not relative) measure of goodness of fit
\item it would not require the modeler to know the true model or which structural statistics are important in the observed network
\item It would allow comparison of a wide range of models, including those without likelihood functions or even without statistical parameterizations
\end{itemize}
In other words, it would have properties analogous to the $R^2$ used in standard linear regression. Here, we propose such a statistic: spectral goodness of fit (SGOF).
Throughout the rest of this article we make several assumptions. We consider only undirected networks explicitly, although we discuss extensions to directed networks in the final section, below. Additionally, in proposing to assess goodness of fit, we assume that a researcher has data on an observed network and has fit (or otherwise chosen) a model of network structure to that data. We do not make any assumptions about the functional form of that model or even whether the model is parametric at all, but we do assume that the researcher can generate simulated networks based on the fitted model.
\subsection{Computer Code}
We have made computer code for calculating SGOF and visualizing the results of the analysis available as an R package, \texttt{spectralGOF}\footnote{Available at http://people.bu.edu/jccs}
\section{The spectrum of the graph Laplacian}
\subsection{Definitions and notation}
Networks are frequently represented as square adjacency matrices (which we will denote by $A$), such that if there is a link from node $u$ to node $v$, then $A_{uv}>0$. For the purposes of this article, we are considering only undirected networks, so $A_{uv}=A_{vu}, \forall u \forall v$.
The Laplacian matrix is a transformation of the adjacency matrix given by $L = D - A$, where $D$ is the 'degree matrix,' containing the row sums of $A$ on its diagonal and zeros elsewhere. The spectrum of $L$ is the ordered multiset of eigenvalues, $\boldsymbol{\lambda}$, such that $0=\lambda_1 \leq \lambda_2 \dots \leq \lambda_n $. There is one Laplacian eigenvalue (hereafter, for brevity, 'eigenvalues' and 'spectrum' always refer to the eigenvalues of the Laplacian) equal to zero for every connected component in the network \citep{brouwer2011spectra}. Therefore, $\lambda_1$ is always $0$.
The sum of all eigenvalues is equal to the total weight of all edges in the network:
\begin{equation}\label{sumOfEvs}\sum_{i=1}^n \lambda_i = \sum_{u=1, v=1}^n{A_{uv}}\end{equation}
\subsection{The spectrum of the Lapacian as a representation of network structure}
The spectrum is a ``graph invariant,'' meaning that if two networks are isomorphic\footnote{Isomorphic networks have the same structure. They could be represented by the same adjacency matrix after permuting the rows and columns and disregarding any ``labels'' or names of the nodes.}, then they have the same spectrum.
The spectrum is also a compact representation of a great deal of structural information, and spectral techniques (sometimes including analysis of both the spectrum and its associated eigenvectors) have thus been used extensively to characterize the structure of complex networks \citep{pothen1990partitioning,newman2006modularity} and to compare and recognize complex objects in other applications such as facial recognition in computer vision \citep{turk1991eigenfaces,belkin2003Laplacian}. The properties of the Laplacian spectrum have been studied extensively \citep[see][for relatively accessible mathematical overviews]{mohar1991Laplacian,brouwer2011spectra, chung1997spectral} and a full treatment is well beyond the scope of this article. However, to provide context for our definition of the spectral goodness of fit statistic, we do provide some basic intuition for the connection beween the spectrum and network structure in the following paragraphs.
As we have already noted, the number of components is reflected in the spectrum by the number of zeros. The magnitude of the smallest non-zero eigenvalue is related to the minimum number of ties (how much total weight) that would have to be cut (that is, removed from the network) to divide the network into two disconnected components and is known as the ``algebraic connectivity'' of a network \citep{fiedler1973algebraic}. The magnitudes of the next smallest eigenvalues represent the relative modularity of the next-most macroscopic community structure of a network. \cite{donetti2006optimal} illustrate this logic as follows. Imagine a network comprising four totally disconnected components. Its spectrum would contain four eigenvalues equal to zero. If we perturb this network by connecting the components with a small number of ties \citep{cvetkovic1997eigenspaces}, such that they are no longer disconnected, then rather than having one eigenvalue equal to zero for each component, we would have one \textit{small} eigenvalue for each modular cluster \citep{donetti2006optimal}, one of which would be zero (as there would be one component, and thus one eigenvalue equal to zero). The more weight that was added between the components, the larger the eigenvalues would become.
The sizes of successively larger eigenvalues provide information on successively finer divisions of the network into smaller sub-communities. In general, a common interpretation of the magnitudes of eigenvalues of the Laplacian is one of correspondence to the relative weight removed by a series of minimum cuts of the network \citep[for a more detail, see, e.g.][]{bollobas2004graphs}. The largest eigenvalue therefore contains information about the number of ties incident to the single most highly connected node \citep{schur1923uber,brouwer2011spectra}.
\subsection{Normalizing the spectrum}
The shape of the spectrum describes how the total tie strength in a given network is structured relative to other networks with the same total amount of tie strength (density). Given this, in the definition of the spectral goodness of fit (SGOF) statistic below, we normalize all spectra to sum to unity.
As equation \ref{sumOfEvs} indicates, the sizes of the eigenvalues are sensitive to the density of the network. More specifically, given an adjacency matrix, $A$, let us denote by $\hat{A}$ a normalized version of $A$.
\begin{equation}
\hat{A}= \frac{A}{\sum{A}}
\end{equation}
Likewise, as $\boldsymbol\lambda$ is the vector of eigenvalues of $A$, let $\hat{\boldsymbol\lambda}$ denote the vector of eigenvalues of $\hat{A}$, which can also be calculated by normalizing $\boldsymbol\lambda$.
\begin{equation}
\hat{\boldsymbol\lambda}= \frac{\boldsymbol\lambda}{\sum{\boldsymbol\lambda}}
\end{equation}
An increase in the density of $A$ that does not result in changes to $\hat{A}$ (i.e., multiplying all entries in $A$ by a non-zero scalar constant) also does not change $\hat{\boldsymbol\lambda}$. In other words, such a change only alters the size and not the shape of the spectrum. On the other hand, an increase in the density of $A$ that does result in changes to $\hat{A}$ (i.e., adding new ties or increasing the strength of certain ties and not others) both increases the sizes of $\boldsymbol\lambda$ and changes its shape: it results in a changed $\hat{\boldsymbol\lambda}$ as well.
\section{Spectral Goodness of Fit}
\subsection{Spectral distance}
Given the structural information contained in the spectrum, the Euclidean distance between two spectra is frequently used as a measure of the structural similarity of two matrices \citep{cvetkovic2012spectral}. The Euclidean spectral distance ($ESD$) can be written as
$||\hat{\boldsymbol\lambda}^{A}-\hat{\boldsymbol\lambda}^{B}||$, where the normalized full spectra of graphs $A$ and $B$ are given by $\hat{\boldsymbol\lambda}^{A}$ and $\hat{\boldsymbol\lambda}^{B}$, and the double bars denote the the vector norm.
\newcommand{\nsim}{\ensuremath{N_{sim}}}
We wish to apply this notion of distance to our network models, but such models do not themselves have spectra. However, if networks can be simulated from or otherwise generated by the model, spectra for these networks can be calculated. It is the distance between these spectra and the observed spectrum that we will consider. If we have, say, $\nsim=1000$ simulated networks, we can calculate the mean spectral distance between the simulated networks and the observed network, as well as other distributional statistics, such as the $5^{th}$ and $95^{th}$ percentiles of the spectral distance between simulations and the observed network.
Formally, after normalizing the spectra as above, let us call the absolute value of the difference between the $i^{th}$ observed eigenvalue and the $i^{th}$ eigenvalue from the $k^{th}$ simulated network an 'error.'
\begin{equation}
\epsilon_i = \left|\hat{\lambda}_i^{obs}-\hat{\lambda}_i^{sim_k}\right|
\end{equation}
In this context then, $ESD$ is the square root of the sum of squared errors.
\begin{equation}
\label{singleError}
ESD_{obs,sim_k}=\left|\left|\hat{\boldsymbol\lambda}^{obs}-\hat{\boldsymbol\lambda}^{sim_k}\right|\right|=\sqrt{\sum_i{(\epsilon_i)^2}}
\end{equation}
The mean Euclidean spectral distance, $\overline{ESD}$, is then defined as arithmetic mean of the ESDs from each of the individual simulated networks.
\begin{equation} \overline{ESD}_{obs,sim}=\frac{1}{\nsim} \sum_{k=1}^{\nsim}ESD_{obs,sim_k}\end{equation}
\subsection{Definition of null model}
For network models we propose that goodness of fit be measured as an improvement in fit relative to a naive null model. It is therefore necessary to calculate the errors under the naive model and the fitted model for some number of simulated networks.
The natural null model for dichotomous networks is the density-only model, also known as the Bernoulli model or Erd\H{o}s-R\'enyi model, simulatations from which are random networks with the same expected density as the observed network. For the remainder of this article, we adopt the density-only model as a null model, but we note that any other model could be substituted in its place.
One situation where the Erd\H{o}s-R\'enyi model would not be appropriate as a null model is the case where the measurement of the observed network was by means of a survey instrument that specified the number of alters each respondant was to nominate ('name five people you discuss important matters with'). In this case a degree-regular random graph (one in which each node has the same degree) would be the appropriate null model. Likewise, if the observed data is weighted, the null model should also be weighted. In general, the null model should be the maximum entropy model generating networks in the same class as the observed data.
\subsection{Definition of SGOF}
To calculate the Spectral Goodness of Fit ($SGOF$), we simply divide the mean Euclidean spectral distance under the fitted model by the mean Euclidean spectral distance under the null model, and subtract the result from one.
\begin{equation}
\label{sgofdef}
SGOF=1- \frac{ \overline{ESD}_{obs,fitted}}{\overline{ESD}_{obs,null}}
\end{equation}
Additionally, given that models of networks imply a probability distribution of networks generated from the model, it is advisable to report SGOF calculated using the $5^{th}$ and $95^{th}$ percentile results for $ESD$ under the fitted model. Below, we report these in parentheses after the SGOF calculated using the mean as in equation \ref{sgofdef}. This confidence interval provides an indication of the dispersion of goodness of fit inherent in a fitted model.
Although the mean SGOF of the null model is defined to be zero, it is advisable to report the $5^{th}$ and $95^{th}$ percentile results for the null model as well. The reason for this is that the width of this 90\% confidence interval provides useful information for interpreting the SGOF of fitted models. If an observed network is not highly structured, the 90\% confidence interval for the null model's SGOF will be very wide, extending, say, from $-0.5$ to $0.5$, reflecting the fact that the observed network is not far from random. For observed networks with a great deal of structure, the 90\% confidence interval for the null model's SGOF will be narrow, extending for example only from $-0.001$ to $0.001$.
\subsection{Interpretion of SGOF}
The SGOF measures the amount of observed structure explained by a fitted model, expressed as a percent improvement over a null model, where structure means deviation from randomness. The observed spectrum will be distant from the spectrum of the null model in as much as the observed network has structure that is non-random. The SGOF is thus a summary measure of the percent of the observed structure that is explained by the fitted model.
\subsubsection{Bounds for SGOF}
Like $R^2$, SGOF is bounded above by one, when the fitted model exactly describes the structural data. Likewise, an SGOF of zero means no improvement over the null model. Finally, as with $R^2$, SGOF can be unboundedly negative\footnote{In normal practice, however, the fitted model for $R^2$ is an ordinary least squares linear regression with a free intercept parameter; in this typical case, $R^2$ is bounded below by zero.} if the spectrum of the fitted model is more distant from the observed spectrum than is the spectrum of the null model. If the SGOF is negative, it is therefore evidence that the null model (an Erd\H{o}s-R\'enyi random graph) is a better approximation of the observed network than the fitted model under consideration.
This is likely to occur in cases where the observed network is not highly structured (and thus very similar to the null model), and the fitted model is (incorrectly) highly structured. If the observed network is not structured, then while $\overline{ESD}_{obs, fitted} > 0$, $\overline{ESD}_{null} \rightarrow 0$ and by equation \ref{sgofdef}, $SGOF \rightarrow -\infty$. For ordinary cases involving an observed network that contains structure to be explained and sensible model specifications, however, SGOF will fall between zero and one.
\section{Applications and comparisons to existing methods}
In this section, we illustrate the spectral goodness of fit method with several examples chosen to highlight its strengths and weaknesses with respect to existing methods.
\subsection{Comparison with structural statistics: e.coli}
It is frequently the case that a researcher does not ever discover the 'true' model underlying the formation of an observed network, but rather is only able to approximate the truth with several theoretically plausible candidate models. In such cases it is useful to have quantitative evidence about model goodness of fit to help adjudicate the decision. Structural statistical tests can sometimes play this role, but as mentioned above, it may also be the case that all models under consideration are rejected (or supported) by the test, and more information is therefore needed.
This example considers such a situation by comparing two specifications of a model of the degree distribution of the \textit{e. coli} genetic regulatory network \citep{shen2002network}, both in the ERGM framework.
\begin{table*}[htbp]
\caption{Comparison of Spectral Goodness of Fit to structural hypothesis testing for the \textit{e. coli} genetic regulatory network}
\label{ECtab}
\begin{tabular}{m{1.5in} r m{.4in} m{1.2in}}
\hline\hline
Observed Network& & &
\includegraphics[width=1.1in,height=1.1in]{ECtablecells1}
\\\hline\\ & SGOF & Struc. h-test & Simulated Network\\\cline{2-4}Null model& 0 (-0.02, 0.025) & reject &
\includegraphics[width=1.1in,height=1.1in]{ECtablecells2}
\\Geom. weighted degree (curved exponential family) & 0.242 (0.167, 0.33) & reject &
\includegraphics[width=1.1in,height=1.1in]{ECtablecells3}
\\Geom. weighted degree & -0.014 (-0.033, 0.007) & reject &
\includegraphics[width=1.1in,height=1.1in]{ECtablecells4}
\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table*}
Using the \texttt{ergm} package in R, after fitting the models, we assessed their goodness of fit in the manner described by \cite{hunter2008goodness}, using the \texttt{gof} function with its default settings. This goodness of fit routine assesses the probability that the distributions of degree, transitive closure and mean geodesic lengths over the nodes in the observed network could have been generated by the fitted model. Results from the \texttt{gof} analysis show that both of the proposed model specifications produce distributions of structural statistics that diverge from the observed values. Accordingly, the $p-$values for the goodness of fit diagnostics (not shown) indicate rejection of the models.
Table \ref{ECtab} indicates this and gives values for the SGOF for these models, along with small network visualizations for reference. Although all the models are rejected by structural hypothesis tests, there are marked differences in how well these models fit. Specifically, the "curved exponential family" version of the model \citep[for more detail, see][]{hunter2006inference} provides a much better fit to the data than the other model without the curved exponential family specification. In fact, at -0.014, the SGOF of this model indicates that it is no better than the null model as an overall description of the structure of the observed data.
The simple lesson here is that goodness of fit based on structural statistics cannot quantitatively distinguish between similar models when all of the models are either accepted or rejected. Visual inspection of the graphical output can often help in this regard, but is not hard to come up with examples where it cannot. In these cases it would be good to have an absolute or relative measure of fit to provide a means of model choice. The AIC is thus a more comparable measure of goodness of fit to the SGOF we propose here, and the following examples make the comparison explicit.
\subsection{Comparison with AIC: Star graph}
The next example considers a 100-node star graph constructed by hand to serve as an imaginary observed network. In addition to the network ties, there is an observed attribute, indicated by the color of the nodes in the visualization. The attribute values have been measured by our imaginary researcher, but they were not part of the process that generated the network ties. For this example, we compare the SGOF to AIC from fitted models in the \texttt{ergm} package (Table \ref{startab}).
\begin{table*}[htbp]
\caption{Comparison of Spectral Goodness of Fit to AIC for a star graph}
\label{startab}
\begin{tabular}{m{1.5in} r r m{1.2in}}
\hline\hline
Observed Network& & &
\includegraphics[width=1.1in,height=1.1in]{stargraphmodel1}
\\\hline\\ & SGOF & Struc. h-test & Simulated Network\\\cline{2-4}Null model& 0 (-0.01, 0.014) & 972.59 &
\includegraphics[width=1.1in,height=1.1in]{stargraphmodel2}
\\Red node Homophily& 0.007 (-0.005, 0.025) & 939.83 &
\includegraphics[width=1.1in,height=1.1in]{stargraphmodel3}
\\99-star tendency & 1 (1, 1) & 2322.63 &
\includegraphics[width=1.1in,height=1.1in]{stargraphmodel4}
\\2-star tendency & 1 (1, 1) & 708.97 &
\includegraphics[width=1.1in,height=1.1in]{stargraphmodel5}
\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table*}
After the null model, the next model is one fitted with a term for homophily among red nodes in addition to the density term. The visualization shows that such a model produces a pattern of ties that is very similar to the null model, but a greater proportion of ties among red nodes, similar to the observed network. It is here that one major difference between SGOF and AIC can be seen. The SGOF indicates negligible improvement over the null model because the pattern of ties is only a negligible improvement over the null model. Meanwhile the AIC shows a substantial improvement, from 972.59 to 939.83, because the parameters of the fitted model, including a (spurious by construction) homophily effect, have a higher likelihood than the parameters of the null model, even after accounting for the number of parameters with Akaike's formula. The AIC is senstive to how well the model's parameters fit the data as a whole, including non-structural data.
The third and fourth models are both ERGMs fit to the data with a $k$-star parameter (tendency toward nodes with degree $k$) in addition to the density parameter, but they differ in how the $k$-star parameter is specified. The first of the two parameterizes the network with a tendency toward 99-stars, while the second of the two parameterizes the network with a tendency toward two-stars. Note that the $k$-stars are induced subgraphs, so although there are no nodes with degree two, there are ${99 \choose 2}= 4851$ two-stars, each centered on the same node, while there is only one 99-star in the observed network. Both of these models produce simulated networks that are star graphs just like the observed network. Accordingly, the SGOF for both of these models is 1: a perfect fit. According to the AIC, however, the two models are dramatically different: the 99-star model is much worse than the null model, with an AIC of 2322.63, while the 2-star model is clearly the best fit of all, with an AIC of 708.97. Unlike the SGOF, the AIC cannot indicate whether any given fit is good in an absolute sense.
In practice the AIC and the SGOF are complementary in that they provide answers to different modeling questions. A researcher may wish to know how well a model fits in terms of both structural effects and nodal or dyadic covariates, or on the other hand, assess the parsimony of the model. In these cases, the AIC is required. On the other hand, the researcher may wish to know how well a model that includes both structural effects and nodal and dyadic covariates explains the observed structure, or assess the absolute goodness of fit of a model of structure. In these cases the SGOF is required.
\subsection{Second comparison to AIC: Faux Mesa High}
The previous example of a star graph was artificially constructed to illustrate the differences between AIC and SGOF. In this subsection, we give an example of a more typical social network using the "Faux Mesa High" data set of \cite{hunter2008goodness}, adapted from the Add Health surveys \citep{harris2008national}. Similar to the star-graph example, above, after the null model we fit an ERGM model using only homophily effects on the observed covariates, which describe Race, Sex and Grade of the respondents. We go on to fit a model using only the "Geometrically Weighted Degree" (GWD) of \cite{hunter2006inference} (which is a flexible approach to modeling degree distributions), followed by a model with both the GWD and homophily effects. The final model differs in type: we consider the preferential attachment model of \cite{barabasi1999emergence}. Visualizations of the networks created by these models, as well as their AIC and SGOF statistics are shown in Table~\ref{FMHtab}.
\begin{table*}[htbp]
\caption{Comparison of Spectral Goodness of Fit to AIC for Faux Mesa High}
\label{FMHtab}
\begin{tabular}{m{1.5in} r r m{1.2in}}
\hline\hline
Observed Network& & &
\includegraphics[width=1.1in,height=1.1in]{tablecellsFMH1}
\\\hline\\ & SGOF & Struc. h-test & Simulated Network\\\cline{2-4}Null Model & 0 (-0.196, 0.21) & 2287.742 &
\includegraphics[width=1.1in,height=1.1in]{tablecellsFMH2}
\\Homophily on Race, Sex, Grade Only & 0.221 (-0.002, 0.474) & 1890.922 &
\includegraphics[width=1.1in,height=1.1in]{tablecellsFMH3}
\\GWD Only & 0.268 (-0.045, 0.545) & 2245.181 &
\includegraphics[width=1.1in,height=1.1in]{tablecellsFMH4}
\\GWD and homophily & 0.501 (0.259, 0.682) & 1853.656 &
\includegraphics[width=1.1in,height=1.1in]{tablecellsFMH5}
\\Preferential attachment& 0.467 (0.16, 0.666) & undefined &
\includegraphics[width=1.1in,height=1.1in]{tablecellsFMH6}
\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table*}
In this example, the homophily on the three covariates makes significant improvements in both SGOF and AIC, because unlike the star graph, there is almost certainly a real homophily effect in the original data. Likewise, both SGOF and AIC indicate that the model with both GWD and homophily is superior to the models with just one of those two types of effects. The lessons from Faux Mesa High are, however, otherwise consistent with those from the star graph. AIC indicates that the homophily-only model is superior to the GWD-only model. However, from the point of view of generating a pattern of ties alone, the SGOF indicates that the GWD-only model is superior to the homophily-only model. Again, the AIC measures the relative quality of fit of the model as a whole to the data as a whole, while the SGOF measures the absolute quality of the fit of the model to the structure manifest in the observed network ties.
Finally, we consider a model outside of not only the exponential random graph family, but indeed a model that is algorithmic in nature rather than statistical: the Barab{\'a}si-Albert preferential attachment model \citep{barabasi1999emergence}, as implemented in the \texttt{igraph} package \citep{igraph}. As we use it here, there is no likelihood function and thus no AIC associated with this last model. The preferential attachment model is based on a generative algorithm with fixed parameters and does not have a likelihood function that could be meaningfully compared to those from fitted ERGMs.
The SGOF is defined, however, as it is for \emph{any model} that generates networks with the same number of nodes as the observed network, regardless of conditions put on the sample space or how (or whether) the model was estimated. As such, the SGOF makes it possible to compare models that cannot be compared on the basis of the AIC or other likelihood-based methods.
\subsubsection{Visualization of SGOF}
As with other statistical methods, a fuller qualitative understanding of the SGOF can be gained through visualization. Figure \ref{errorfig} plots spectral fits for the ``GWD and Homophily'' and the ``Preferential attachment'' models from Table \ref{FMHtab}, using the \texttt{plotSGOFerrors} function in the \texttt{spectralGOF} package.
Each panel of the figure is a visualization of spectral error based on three spectra: the observed spectrum, the null model spectrum that is closest to the mean Euclidean distance from the observed spectrum, and the fitted model spectrum that is closest to the mean Euclidean distance from the observed spectrum. The first and the second are the same in both panels and are plotted as points.
The fitted model spectrum is not plotted in points, but rather indicated by colored bars as follows. When the fitted model's spectrum lies between the null and the observed spectra, the fitted model has improved the fit. The distance between the null and the fitted spectrum is error that has been "explained" and is indicated in light green. The error that still remains (error that is present under the null and the fitted models) is indicated in blue.
There are also parts of the plots where the fitted and null spectra are on opposite sides of the observed spectrum. In these cases, the fitted model has "explained" the error between the null and the observed, but introduced new error on the other side of the observed spectrum. This new error is indicated in red.
Turning to the specific models in Figure \ref{errorfig}, we see that the two fits differ considerably. In general, the spectrum of the fitted ERGM (left) lies between the observed spectrum and the null spectrum, indicating that the observed network is more structured (farther from random) than are networks simulated from the fitted ERGM. In contrast, portions of the spectrum of the preferential attachment model (right) are more distant from the null spectrum than is the observed spectrum. The preferential attachment model has explained more error than the ERGM (represented by more green area in its visualization), but it has also introduced structure not present in the observed network, producing more new error (more red area in the visualization), and resulting in a lower net SGOF.
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\begin{knitrout}
\definecolor{shadecolor}{rgb}{0.969, 0.969, 0.969}\color{fgcolor}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{FMHspectralerrorplots}
\end{knitrout}
\caption{Illustration of spectral qualities of the two best fitted models in Table \ref{FMHtab}. The green and red indicate improvements and worsening of model fit, respectively, from a change from a null to the fitted model. Blue indicates error left unexplained from the null model.}
\label{errorfig}
\end{figure}
\subsection{SGOF as an objective function: Collaborations among jazz musicians}
There are sometimes cases when one wishes to implement algorithmic models that do not have an intrinsic means of fitting to observed data. In this case, SGOF can be useful as an objective function in an exploration of the algorithm's parameter space. To illustrate this type of application, we consider the network of jazz collaborations described by \cite{gleiser2003community}.
One theoretically plausible algorithmic model of how collaboration networks are formed is that of \cite{saramaki2004scale}. In this model, one assumes some network exists at $t_0$ to initialize the model. In subsequent time points, new individuals arrive and form ties to those already present by means of short random walks from a randomly selected node serving as the point of entry into the network.
For musicians, the idea would be that after collaborating with some initial partner, one is likely to get to know one's partner's partners, and so on. In addition to being theoretically plausible, this algorithm generates networks with skewed degree distributions and local clustering, as we observe in the jazz collaborations data set.
To assess the fit of this model, one must first find the best values for the model's parameters, which we will do by appeal to SGOF. In implementing the algorithm, we left two key parameters to be fitted. The first is the mean number of edges to add with each new node added to the network. The second is how many steps in a random walk a new node would take before forming new relationships to existing members of the network. We then generated 100 simulated networks using each combination of parameters, and calculated the SGOF for each pair of parameter values.
The result of this process are shown in Figure \ref{gofGradient}, and indicate that the best fit occurs when the average number of edges added per node is 9, and the random walk distance is a single step. Thus we can not only use SGOF as a diagnostic tool, but also as a means for identifying the parametric model settings that will be optimal under this criterion.
\begin{figure}[htb]
\begin{knitrout}
\definecolor{shadecolor}{rgb}{0.969, 0.969, 0.969}\color{fgcolor}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{jazzimage}
\end{knitrout}
\caption{SGOF for different combinations of parameter values for an algorithm based on \cite{saramaki2004scale} fitted to the network of Jazz collaborations described in \cite{gleiser2003community} }
\label{gofGradient}
\end{figure}
\section{Future Extensions}
\subsection{Hypothesis testing}
We have presented SGOF as a goodness of fit statistic, analogous to $R^2$. Using spectral distances, it is also possible to construct one and two-sample hypothesis tests for the purposes of formal rejection of certain models in favor of others. Space does not permit a full discussion of how such tests would be constructed; however, the authors will present this material in a separate manuscript.
\subsection{Directed graphs}
While the properties of the Laplacian spectrum of undirected graphs have been widely studied and applied, the spectral properties of directed graphs are less well-established. The present paper has therefore focused on undirected, possibly weighted, networks to establish the SGOF, but further work should consider the different properties of directed graphs. For now, we limit ourselves to the following remarks.
The Laplacian matrix for directed networks has been defined differently from that of undirected networks. In particular, \cite{chung2005laplacians} defines the Laplacian of directed networks as follows. First, given adjacency matrix, $A$, calculate a matrix, $P$, such that
\begin{equation}
P(i,j)=\frac{A_{ij}}{\displaystyle\sum_k A_{ik}}.
\end{equation}
Then, treating $P$ as the transition matrix of a Markov chain, calculate the Perron vector, $\phi$, which is the all-positive left eigenvector of $P$ corresponding to the stationary distribution of the Markov chain (for strongly connected graphs). Define $\Phi$ as the matrix with $\phi$ on the diagonal and zeros elsewhere, and $I$ in the standard way as the identity matrix. Finally, the Laplacian for directed graphs is defined as
\begin{equation}
L = I-\frac{\Phi^{1/2}P\Phi^{-1/2}\Phi^{-1/2}P^T\Phi^{1/2}}{2} .
\end{equation}
One feature of this definition is that $L$ is undirected and therefore has real-valued eigenvalues. Future work should consider the properties of this matrix from the point of view of goodness of fit, but also consider alternative transformations of the adjacency matrix for spectral analysis.
\subsection{Statistical properties of Laplacian eigenvalues}
Under certain density conditions, the distribution of eigenvalues of the null model follows the 'semi-circle law' \citep{wigner1955characteristic,chung2003spectra}, but these conditions are restrictive enough that we have chosen to calculate the null errors in the SGOF by simulation rather than by reference to the semi-circle law.
The statistical properties (e.g. consistency and efficiency) of the eigenvalues of ensembles of networks other than the null model depend on the details of the model from which they are generated, and it is not clear a priori what can be said about the statistical properties of the SGOF for fitted models in general. As with the null model, the distribution of eigenvalues from certain narrowly defined models have been studied \citep{farkas2001spectra, bolla2004distribution,zhang2014spectra}. It is not yet clear from the present body of research, however, what can be said about the statistical properties of the SGOF in the general case.
Since we cannot derive the statistical properties of the SGOF analytically, in order to provide one practical point of reference, we have conducted a simulation-based exploration of the properties of 100-node density-only models, under a range of densities. These simulations support the following tentative conclusions. The means of individual eigenvalues are stable across sample sizes (where sample size refers to the number of simulated networks from which the mean spectrum is calculated). The standard deviations of individual eigenvalues from Erd\H{o}s-R\'enyi random graphs are asymptotically consistent, but biased downwards for small numbers of simulated networks. Likewise, the $5^{th}$ and $95^{th}$ quantiles of individual eigenvalues are asymptotically consistent, but biased toward the median for small samples of simulated networks.
Given the above, we recommend using 100 simulations of the null model to calculate standard errors or quantiles of the distribution of SGOF for exploratory modeling and at least 1000 simulations for published results. Furthermore, we strongly recommend examining the distribution of spectra simulated from fitted models to establish that sufficient sample sizes have been obtained when calculating the SGOF. Future work should seek to derive more general conclusions about the statistical properties of spectral distances for network models.
\section{Conclusion}
We have proposed a new measure of goodness of fit for network models based on the spectrum of the graph Laplacian: "spectral goodness of fit" (SGOF), and provided code with which SGOF can be easily implemented. The properties of SGOF fill gaps left by the current set of goodness of fit indicators, making it complementary to existing methods.
Table \ref{summarytab} summarizes the properties of each approach to goodness of fit. Analogous to the standard $R^2$, the SGOF statistic measures the percent improvement in network structure explained over a null model. By measuring fit relative to fixed reference points, SGOF can be said to provide an "absolute" measure of goodness of fit.
\begin{table}[htb]
\caption{Summary of properties of goodness of fit measures}
\label{summarytab}
\begin{tabular}{l ccc }
\hline\hline
&Struct. stats&AIC&SGOF\\
\cline{2-4}
Absolute Measure of GOF&&&Yes\\
Relative Measure of GOF&&Yes&Yes\\
Sensitive to structure only&Yes&&Yes\\
Hypothesis test of model fit&Yes&&\\
Sensitive to model specification&&Yes&\\
Requires Likelihood Function&&Yes&\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
Prior methods had provided relative measures of fit (AIC), and hypothesis testing of fit for specific subgraph statistics, but until now there was no absolute measure of fit for network structure as a whole. Ultimately, however, we see SGOF as playing a complementary role to existing techniques. For example, when a research question concerns a specific structural tendency (say, to transitive closure), one should use both structural statistics as well as SGOF (and even AIC if applicable, to assess model parsimony).
In addition to providing an absolute measure of fit, the SGOF allows the comparison of models fit by diverse means and of diverse functional forms. We hope that the ability to compare fit among dissimilar models will facilitate building on and refining prior work, as well as greater engagement with research models and results from outside of any given researcher's own methodological tradition.
\section*{References Cited}
\bibliographystyle{plainnat}
|
\section{Introduction}\label{sec1}
\par
The realization of an unconventional superfluid state beyond the $^{40}$K\cite{Regal2004} and $^6$Li\cite{Zwierlein2004,Kinast2004,Bartenstein2004} superfluid Fermi gases is one of the most exciting challenges in cold Fermi gas physics. Although no one has succeeded in this attempt, various possibilities have been so far explored, such as a $p$-wave superfluid\cite{Regal2003,Zhang2004,Schunck2005,Ohashi2005,Ho2005,Gurarie2005,Levinsen2007,Iskin2005,Inotani2012}, the Berezinskii-Kosterlitz-Thouless state\cite{Feld2011,Sommer2012,Iskin2009,Watanabe2013,Bauer2014}, a superfluid state with hetero-Cooper-pairs\cite{Liu2003,Forbes2005,Wille2008a,Taglieber2008,Voigt2009,Costa2010,Naik2010,Spiegelhalder2010,Tiecke2010,Lin2006,Wu2006,Iskin2006,Iskin2007,Pao2007,Parish2007,Orso2008,Baranov2008,Gezerlis2009,Diener2010,Stoof1,Stoof2,Takemori2012,Lan2013,Hanai2013}, the Sarma phase\cite{Stoof1,Stoof2,Sarma1963,Sheehy2007}, a Fermi superfluid with a spin-orbit interaction\cite{Lin2011,Wang2012,Cheuk2012,Jiang2011}, and a dipolar Fermi superfluid\cite{Baranov,Endo}. Once one of them is realized, one could clarify its superfluid properties, maximally using the high tunability of Fermi gases\cite{Chin2010} and various experimental techniques\cite{Chin2004,Stewart2008,Gaebler2010,Ketterle2008,Salomon2010,Ketterle2011,Martin2012}. Since an ultracold Fermi gas is expected as a useful quantum simulator for strongly interacting Fermi systems, this challenge would also be important on the viewpoint of this application.
\par
Among various possibilities, we pick up the hetero-pairing state\cite{Liu2003,Forbes2005,Wille2008a,Taglieber2008,Voigt2009,Costa2010,Naik2010,Spiegelhalder2010,Tiecke2010,Lin2006,Wu2006,Iskin2006,Iskin2007,Pao2007,Parish2007,Orso2008,Baranov2008,Gezerlis2009,Diener2010,Stoof1,Stoof2,Takemori2012,Lan2013,Hanai2013} in this paper. This unconventional superfluid state is expected in a $^6$Li-$^{40}$K mixture, and is characterized by Cooper pairs composed of different species\cite{Liu2003,Forbes2005,Wille2008a,Taglieber2008,Voigt2009,Costa2010,Naik2010,Spiegelhalder2010,Tiecke2010,Lin2006,Wu2006,Iskin2006,Iskin2007,Pao2007,Parish2007,Orso2008,Baranov2008,Gezerlis2009,Diener2010,Stoof1,Stoof2,Takemori2012,Lan2013,Hanai2013}. Although the superfluid phase transition of this Fermi-Fermi mixture has not been reported yet, the Fermi degenerate regime has been achieved\cite{Taglieber2008,Spiegelhalder2010}. In addition, since a tunable interaction associated with a Feshbach resonance between $^6$Li and $^{40}$K atoms\cite{Wille2008a,Costa2010,Naik2010}, as well as the formation of $^6$Li-$^{40}$K hetero molecules\cite{Voigt2009}, has been realized, the observation of superfluid behaviors seems imminent. Since the condensation of hetero pairs is also discussed in, for example, an exciton gas\cite{Yoshioka2011,Stolz2012,Yoshioka2013,High2012,Versteegh2012}, an exciton-polariton gas\cite{Imamoglu1996,Tassone1999,Deng2002,Kasprzak2006}, as well as a dense quark matter\cite{Barrois1977,Bailin1984}, the realization of a superfluid $^6$Li-$^{40}$K Fermi gas would give great impact on these fields.
\par
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.5\linewidth,keepaspectratio]{fig1.png}
\end{center}
\caption{(Color online) Calculated superfluid phase transition temperature $T_{\rm c}$ in a mass-imbalanced Fermi gas\cite{Hanai2013}. We take $m_{\rm L}/m_{\rm H}=0.9$, where $m_{\rm L}$ ($m_{\rm H}$) is a mass of a light (heavy) atom. TMA: (non-self-consistent) $T$-matrix approximation. ETMA: Extended $T$-matrix approximation. As usual, the interaction strength is measured in terms of the inverse scattering length $(k_{\rm F}a_s)^{-1}$ (where $k_{\rm F}$ is the Fermi momentum). The temperature is normalized by the Fermi temperature $T_{\rm F}=k_{\rm F}^2/(2m)$, where $m^{-1}=[m_{\rm L}^{-1}+m_{\rm H}^{-1}]/2$.}
\label{fig1}
\end{figure}
\par
In the current stage of research for the hetero Fermi superfluid, the evaluation of the superfluid phase transition temperature $T_{\rm c}$ is a crucial theoretical issue. In our recent paper\cite{Hanai2013}, we showed that the ordinary (non-self-consistent) $T$-matrix approximation (TMA)\cite{Perali2002}, which has been extensively used to successfully clarify various interesting BCS-BEC crossover physics in the mass-{\it balanced} case\cite{Stewart2008,Gaebler2010,Chen2009,Tsuchiya2009,Tsuchiya2010,Watanabe2010,Hu2010,Watanabe2012}, breaks down in the presence of mass imbalance, to unphysically give double-valued $T_{\rm c}$ in the crossover region, as shown in Fig. \ref{fig1}. In Ref. \cite{Hanai2013}, we overcame this difficulty by employing an extended $T$-matrix approximation (ETMA)\cite{Kashimura2012,Tajima2014}, which involves higher order pairing fluctuations beyond the TMA. However, apart from the recovery of the expected single-valued $T_{\rm c}$ (see Fig \ref{fig1}), the ETMA was found to give vanishing $T_{\rm c}$ in the BCS regime when $m_{\rm L}/m_{\rm H}\ll 1$, as shown in Fig. \ref{fig2}(a) (where $m_{\rm L}$ ($m_{\rm H}$) is a mass of a light (heavy) atom). Since this predicts that a $^6$Li-$^{40}$K mixture has a critical interaction strength, below which the superfluid instability is absent (see the dotted line in Fig. \ref{fig2}(a)), it is a crucial issue to inspect the correctness of this.
\par
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.9\linewidth,keepaspectratio]{fig2.png}
\end{center}
\caption{(Color online) Calculated $T_{\rm c}$ as functions of the interaction strength $(k_{\rm F}a_{\rm s})^{-1}$ and the ratio $m_{\rm L}/m_{\rm H}$ of mass imbalance. (a) Extended $T$-matrix approximation (ETMA). (b) Self-consistent $T$-matrix approximation (SCTMA). The dashed line shows the case of a $^6$Li-$^{40}$K mixture ($m_{\rm L}/m_{\rm H}=6/40=0.15$). The open circles are the BEC phase transition temperature $T_{\rm BEC}$ in an ideal molecular Bose gas, given by Eq. (\ref{BEC}).}
\label{fig2}
\end{figure}
\par
In this paper, we extend the ETMA to the self-consistent $T$-matrix approximation (SCTMA)\cite{Haussmann1999,Zwerger,Enss}, to calculate $T_{\rm c}$ in a mass-imbalanced Fermi gas. We clarify that the vanishing $T_{\rm c}$ seen in Fig. \ref{fig2}(a) is an artifact, originating from an internal inconsistency of the ETMA. As shown in Fig. \ref{fig2}(b), the superfluid phase transition actually always occurs in the presence of mass imbalance, which is one of our main results in this paper.
\par
Using the SCTMA, we also examine single-particle properties of a mass-imbalanced Fermi gas. As in the mass-balanced case, this system is found to exhibit the pseudogap phenomenon in the BCS-BEC crossover region. However, details of this many-body phenomenon are shown to be different between light atoms and heavy atoms. Since such a component-dependent pseudogap phenomenon never occurs in a mass-balanced Fermi gas, it is characteristic of a Fermi gas with mass imbalance.
\par
This paper is organized as follows. In Sec. II, we explain the self-consistent $T$-matrix approximation in the presence of mass imbalance. In Sec. III, we examine $T_{\rm c}$. Here, we explain why the ETMA incorrectly gives the vanishing $T_{\rm c}$ in the highly mass-imbalanced regime, as well as the reason why this problem is solved in the SCTMA. In Sec. \ref{sec4}, we calculate the single-particle density of states, as well as the single-particle spectral weight, to see how pseudogap phenomena differently appear in the light component and heavy component. In Sec. IV, we consider the case of a $^6$Li-$^{40}$K mixture. Throughout this paper, we set $\hbar=k_{\rm B}=1$, and the system volume $V$ is taken to be unity, for simplicity.
\par
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.65\linewidth,keepaspectratio]{fig3.png}
\end{center}
\caption{(a) Self-energy $\Sigma_\sigma(\bm p,i\omega_n)$ in the self-consistent $T$-matrix approximation (SCTMA). The double solid line is the dressed Green's function $G_\sigma$ in Eq. (\ref{sctmag}). (b) Particle-particle scattering matrix $\Gamma(\bm q,i\nu_n)$ is the SCTMA. The dotted line describes the pairing interaction $-U$. In this figure, $-\sigma$ means the opposite component to $\sigma={\rm L},{\rm H}$.
}
\label{fig3}
\end{figure}
\par\par
\section{Formulation}\label{sec2}
\par
We consider a two-component Fermi gas with mass imbalance, described by the BCS-type Hamiltonian,
\begin{equation}
H = \sum_{\bm{p},\sigma={\rm L,H}}\xi_{\bm{p},\sigma}c^{\dagger}_{\bm p,\sigma}c_{\bm p,\sigma}
-U\sum_{\bm q}\sum_{\bm p, \bm{p}'}
c^{\dagger}_{\bm p + \bm q/2,{\rm L}}c^\dagger_{-\bm p + \bm q/2,{\rm H}}c_{-\bm {p}' + \bm q /2,{\rm H}}c_{\bm{p}'+\bm q /2,{\rm L}}.
\label{HAM}
\end{equation}
Here, $c_{{\bm p},{\rm L}}$ and $c_{{\bm p},{\rm H}}$ describe a light atom with a mass $m_{\rm L}$ and a heavy atom with a mass $m_{\rm H}$, respectively. $\xi_{\bm p, \sigma}=p^2/(2m_\sigma)-\mu_{\sigma}$ ($\sigma={\rm L,H}$) is the kinetic energy of a Fermi atom, measured from the Fermi chemical potential $\mu_\sigma$. $-U~(<0)$ is a pairing interaction, which is related to the $s$-wave scattering length $a_s$ as,
\begin{equation}
\frac{4\pi a_s}{m}=\frac{-U}{1-U\sum_{\bm p}\frac{m}{p^2}},
\label{eq.as}
\end{equation}
where $m=2m_{\rm L}m_{\rm H}/(m_{\rm L}+m_{\rm H})$ is twice the reduced mass. As in the mass-balanced case, we measure the interaction strength in terms of $a_s$ in this paper. The weak-coupling BCS regime and the strong-coupling BEC regime are then characterized by $(k_{\rm F}a_s)^{-1}\ \raise.3ex\hbox{$<$}\kern-0.8em\lower.7ex\hbox{$\sim$}\ -1$ and $1 \ \raise.3ex\hbox{$<$}\kern-0.8em\lower.7ex\hbox{$\sim$}\ (k_{\rm F}a_s)^{-1}$, respectively (where $k_{\rm F}=(3\pi^2 N)^{1/3}$ is the Fermi momentum, and $N$ is the total number of Fermi atoms). The BCS-BEC crossover region is given by $-1 \ \raise.3ex\hbox{$<$}\kern-0.8em\lower.7ex\hbox{$\sim$}\ (k_{\rm F}a_s)^{-1}\ \raise.3ex\hbox{$<$}\kern-0.8em\lower.7ex\hbox{$\sim$}\ 1$.
\par
In this paper, we measure the momentum $p$, energy $\omega$, and temperature $T$, in terms of, respectively, the Fermi momentum $k_{\rm F}=(3\pi^2 N)^{1/3}$, Fermi energy $\varepsilon_{\rm F}=k_{\rm F}^2/(2m)$, and Fermi temperature $T_{\rm F}=\varepsilon_{\rm F}$, of a mass-balanced free Fermi gas with the atomic mass $m=2m_{\rm L}m_{\rm H}/(m_{\rm L}+m_{\rm H})$ and the particle number $N$. We briefly note that, while $k_{\rm F}$ remains unchanged in a mass-imbalanced Fermi gas, $\varepsilon_{\rm F}$ is different from the Fermi energy $\varepsilon_{\rm F}^\sigma=k_{\rm F}^2/(2m_\sigma)$ of each component in the presence of mass imbalance.
\par
The single-particle thermal Green's function is given by,
\begin{equation}
G_\sigma({\bm p},i\omega_n)=\frac{1}{i\omega_n - \xi _{\bm p,\sigma}-\Sigma_\sigma(\bm p,i\omega_n)},
\label{sctmag}
\end{equation}
where $\omega_n$ is the fermion Matsubara frequency. The self-energy $\Sigma_\sigma(\bm p,i\omega_n)$ describes strong-coupling corrections to single-particle excitations. In the SCTMA\cite{Haussmann1999}, $\Sigma_\sigma(\bm p,i\omega_n)$ is diagrammatically described as Fig. \ref{fig3}. Summing up the diagrams, we obtain
\begin{equation}
\Sigma_\sigma({\bm p},i\omega _n)=T\sum _{\bm q,\nu _n}\Gamma(\bm q,i\nu _n)
G_{-\sigma}({\bm q}-{\bm p},i\nu_n-i\omega_n).
\label{sctma}
\end{equation}
Here, $\nu_n$ is the boson Matsubara frequency, and $-\sigma$ denotes the opposite component to $\sigma={\rm L},{\rm H}$. $\Gamma(\bm q,i\nu_n)$ is the particle-particle scattering matrix describing fluctuations in the Cooper-channel, which is given by, in the SCTMA,
\begin{equation}
\Gamma(\bm q, i\nu _n)={-U \over 1-U\Pi(\bm q,i\nu_n)},
\label{GAM}
\end{equation}
where
\begin{eqnarray}
\Pi(\bm q, i\nu_n)&=&T\sum_{\bm p,i\omega _n}G_{\rm L}(\bm p + \bm q/ 2,i\nu_n+i\omega_n)G_{\rm H}(-\bm p+\bm q /2,-i\omega_n)
\label{PI}
\end{eqnarray}
is the pair correlation function.
\par
As usual, we determine $T_{\rm c}$ from the Thouless criterion $\big[\Gamma (\bm q=0,i\nu_n=0) \big]^{-1}=0$\cite{Haussmann1999,Thouless1960}, which gives
\begin{equation}
1=U\Pi(\bm q=0,i\nu_n=0).
\label{GAP}
\end{equation}
We solve this $T_{\rm c}$ equation, together with the equations for the number $N_\sigma=N/2$ of Fermi atoms in the $\sigma$ component,
\begin{equation}
N_\sigma =T\sum_{\bm p,i\omega_n}G_{\bm p\sigma}(i\omega_n),
\label{number}
\end{equation}
to self-consistently determine $(T_{\rm c},\mu_{\rm L},\mu_{\rm H})$. Above $T_{\rm c}$, we only solve the number equation (\ref{number}), to determine $(\mu_{\rm L}, \mu_{\rm H})$.
\par
We note that the SCTMA is a consistent theory in the sense that the dressed Green's function $G_\sigma$ in Eq. (\ref{sctmag}) is used everywhere in the diagrams in Fig. \ref{fig3}. In this sense, the ETMA employed in our previous paper\cite{Hanai2013} has an internal inconsistency. That is, while the dressed Green's function is used in the fermion loop in Fig. \ref{fig3}(a), the bare Green's function,
\begin{equation}
G_\sigma^0(\bm p,i\omega_n)={1 \over i\omega_n-\xi_{\bm p \sigma}},
\label{GAM0}
\end{equation}
is used in the particle-particle scattering matrix $\Gamma({\bm q},i\nu_n)$ in Fig. \ref{fig3}(b). Because of this, the ETMA pair correlation function $\Pi({\bm q},i\nu_n)$ in Eq. (\ref{GAM}) is in the lowest order with respect to the pairing interaction $-U$ as
\begin{eqnarray}
\Pi_{\rm ETMA}(\bm q, i\nu_n)&=&T\sum_{\bm p,i\omega _n}G^0_{\rm L}(\bm p + \bm q/ 2,i\nu_n+i\omega_n)G^0_{\rm H}(-\bm p+\bm q /2,-i\omega_n)
\nonumber\\
&=&-\sum_{\bm p}\frac{1-f(\xi_{\bm{p}+\bm{q}/2,{\rm L}})-f(\xi_{-\bm{p}+\bm{q}/2,{\rm H}})}{i\nu_n-\xi_{\bm{p}+\bm{q}/2,{\rm L}}-\xi_{-\bm{p}+\bm{q}/2,{\rm H}}}.
\label{PIetma}
\end{eqnarray}
Here, $f(\varepsilon)=[e^{\varepsilon/T}+1]^{-1}$ is the Fermi distribution function. Thus, although the number equations in the ETMA use the dressed Green's function involving strong-coupling corrections, the Thouless criterion, $[\Gamma_{\rm ETMA}(0, 0)]^{-1}=0$, gives the BCS-type $T_{\rm c}$-equation,
\begin{equation}
1={U \over 2}\sum_{\bm p}
{\displaystyle \tanh{\xi_{\bm{p},{\rm L}} \over 2T}+\tanh{\xi_{\bm{p},{\rm H}} \over 2T}
\over
\xi_{\bm{p},{\rm L}}+\xi_{\bm{p},{\rm H}}
},
\label{gapETMA}
\end{equation}
where $\Gamma_{\rm ETMA}(\bm{q},i\nu_n)=(-U)/(1-U\Pi_{\rm ETMA}(\bm{q},i\nu_n))$. In Sec. III, we will find that this inconsistent treatment is the origin of the vanishing $T_{\rm c}$ seen in Fig. \ref{fig2}(a). We briefly note that, when we replace all the dressed Green's functions in Fig. \ref{fig3} by the bare ones, the ordinary non-self-consistent $T$-matrix approximation\cite{Perali2002} is recovered.
\par
We also examine strong-coupling corrections to single-particle excitations in a mass-imbalanced Fermi gas. As usual, we calculate the single-particle density of states $\rho_\sigma(\omega)$, as well as the single-particle spectral weight $A_\sigma({\bm p},\omega)$, from the SCTMA Green's function in Eq. (\ref{GAM}) as,
\begin{equation}
\rho_\sigma(\omega)=-{1 \over \pi} \sum_{\bm p} {\rm Im} \big[G_\sigma(\bm p,i\omega_n \rightarrow \omega+i\delta) \big],
\label{DOS}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
A_\sigma({\bm p},\omega)=-{1 \over \pi}
{\rm Im}
[G_\sigma({\bm p},i\omega_n\to \omega+i\delta],
\label{sp}
\end{equation}
where $\delta$ is an infinitesimally small positive number. The density of states $\rho_\sigma(\omega)$ equals the momentum summation of the spectral weight $A_\sigma({\bm p},\omega)$ for a given energy $\omega$.
\par
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.45\linewidth,keepaspectratio]{fig4.png}
\end{center}
\caption{(Color online) (a) Effective Fermi momenta ${\tilde k}_{{\rm F}.\sigma}$ in the SCTMA. We take $(k_{\rm F}a_s)^{-1}=-0.5$. We also show ${\tilde k}_{{\rm F},\sigma}^0=\sqrt{2m_\sigma\mu_\sigma}$ in the SCTMA. The ETMA also gives almost the same result for ${\tilde k}_{{\rm F},\sigma}^0$, although we do not explicitly show it here. (b) $T_{\rm c}$ when $(k_{\rm F}a_s)^{-1}=-0.5$. SCTMA: Self-consistent $T$-matrix approximation. ETMA: Extended $T$-matrix approximation. MF: Mean-field approximation.
}
\label{fig4}
\end{figure}
\par
\par
\section{Superfluid phase transition and effects of mass imbalance}\label{sec3}
\par
As we have already shown in Fig. \ref{fig2}(b), the SCTMA always gives a finite $T_{\rm c}$, even in the presence of mass imbalance. Thus, the BCS-BEC crossover phenomenon, which has been already observed in $^{6}$Li and $^{40}$K Fermi gases, is also expected in a $^6$Li-$^{40}$K mixture ($m_{\rm L}/m_{\rm H}=0.15$). We emphasize that the ETMA gives the different prediction that this Fermi-Fermi mixture does not exhibit the superfluid phase transition in the BCS regime\cite{Hanai2013}.
\par
To explain the reason for this difference, we introduce the effective Fermi momentum ${\tilde {\bm k}}_{{\rm F},\sigma}$, which is determined from the equation for the pole of the analytic continued dressed Green's function $G_\sigma({\bm p},i\omega_n\to \omega+i\delta)$ at $\omega=0$,
\begin{equation}
{{\tilde {\bm k}}_{{\rm F},\sigma}^2 \over 2m_\sigma}-\mu_\sigma
+ {\rm Re}\big{[} \Sigma_\sigma({\tilde {\bm k}}_{{\rm F},\sigma},i\omega_n
\to \omega+i\delta=0+i\delta)\big{]}=0.
\label{kFstar}
\end{equation}
For a free Fermi gas at $T=0$, ${\tilde k}_{{\rm F},\sigma}$ just equals the Fermi momentum $k_{\rm F}=(3\pi^2N)^{1/3}$. Thus, this quantity physically describes the size of a Fermi surface in the $\sigma$ component\cite{note}. As shown in Fig. \ref{fig4}(a), the SCTMA gives ${\tilde k}_{{\rm F},{\rm L}}\simeq{\tilde k}_{{\rm F},{\rm H}}$, indicating that the Fermi surface in the light component has almost the same size as that in the heavy component, irrespective of the ratio $m_{\rm L}/m_{\rm H}$. In a sense, this is reasonable, because the number $N/2$ of Fermi atoms in the $\sigma$ component is roughly estimated as $N/2\sim (4\pi {\tilde k}_{{\rm F},\sigma}^3/3)/(2\pi/L)^3$ (where $L$ is the system size), which is independent of the atomic mass $m_\sigma$. Since the superfluid phase transition in the BCS regime is dominated by the pair formation between a light atom with the momentum ${\bm p}~(\simeq{\tilde {\bm k}}_{{\rm F},{\rm L}})$ and a heavy atom with $-{\bm p}~(\simeq -{\tilde {\bm k}}_{{\rm F},{\rm H}})$, the (approximate) coincidence of two Fermi surfaces is favorable to the superfluid instability. As a result, the SCTMA, which consistently uses the dressed Green's function $G_\sigma({\bm p},i\omega_n)$ in both the $T_{\rm c}$-equation (\ref{GAP}) and the number equation (\ref{number}), always gives a finite $T_{\rm c}$, as shown in Fig. \ref{fig4}(b).
\par
On the other hand, the ETMA uses the bare Green's function $G^0_\sigma({\bm p},i\omega_n)$ in the $T_{\rm c}$-equation (\ref{gapETMA}). Thus, while the coincidence of the two Fermi surfaces is included in the number equation, it is not in the $T_{\rm c}$ equation (\ref{gapETMA}). Indeed, the bare Green's function in Eq. (\ref{GAM0}) gives the effective Fermi surface size as, not ${\tilde k}_{{\rm F},\sigma}$, but
\begin{equation}
{\tilde k}^0_{{\rm F},\sigma}=\sqrt{2m_\sigma\mu_\sigma},
\label{kfstar0}
\end{equation}
which remarkably depends on $\sigma={\rm L},{\rm H}$, as shown in Fig. \ref{fig4}(a). Thus, the $T_{\rm c}$-equation in the ETMA is affected by the mismatch of two Fermi surfaces (${\tilde k}_{{\rm F},{\rm L}}^0\ne {\tilde k}_{{\rm F},{\rm H}}^0$), leading to the suppression of the superfluid phase transition, as in the case of metallic superconductivity under an external magnetic field. To see this pair-breaking effect in a clear manner, it is convenient to rewrite Eq. (\ref{gapETMA}) in the form,
\begin{equation}
1={U \over 2}
\sum_{\bm p}
{\displaystyle
\tanh{{\tilde \xi}_{{\bm p},{\rm L}}+h \over 2T}
+
\tanh{{\tilde \xi}_{{\bm p},{\rm H}}-h \over 2T}
\over
{\tilde \xi}_{{\bm p},{\rm L}}+{\tilde \xi}_{{\bm p},{\rm H}}
},
\label{ETMAgap2}
\end{equation}
where ${\tilde \xi}_{{\bm p},\sigma}=(m/m_\sigma)[p^2/(2m)-\mu]$, with $\mu=[\mu_{\rm L}+\mu_{\rm H}]/2$. Apart from the factor $m/m_{\sigma}$ in ${\tilde \xi}_{{\bm p},\sigma}$, Eq. (\ref{ETMAgap2}) has the same form as the $T_{\rm c}$-equation in a Fermi gas with an atomic mass $m$ and the Fermi chemical potential $\mu$, under an external magnetic field,
\begin{equation}
h={m_{\rm L}\mu_{\rm L}-m_{\rm H}\mu_{\rm H} \over m_{\rm L}+m_{\rm H}}.
\label{eq.h}
\end{equation}
When $(k_{\rm F}a_s)^{-1}=-0.5$, Fig. \ref{fig4}(b) shows that $T_{\rm c}$ in the ETMA disappears at $m_{\rm L}/m_{\rm H}\simeq 0.44$, at which one obtains ${\tilde k}_{{\rm F},{\rm L}}^0/k_{\rm F}=0.85$ and ${\tilde k}_{{\rm F},{\rm H}}^0/k_{\rm F}=0.61$. Substituting these into Eq. (\ref{eq.h}), we obtain $h=0.15T_{\rm F}$, which is comparable to the value of the superfluid phase transition temperature $T_{\rm c}=0.14T_{\rm F}$ at $m_{\rm L}/m_{\rm H}=1$. This clearly indicates that the absence of the superfluid phase when $m_{\rm L}/m_{\rm H}\le 0.44$ in Fig. \ref{fig4}(b) is due to the `magnetic field' $h$ in Eq. (\ref{eq.h}). However, since $h$ actually originates from the internal inconsistency of the ETMA, we conclude that the vanishing $T_{\rm c}$ seen in Fig. \ref{fig2}(a) is an artifact of this approximation.
\par
We briefly note that the ETMA becomes consistent, when the dressed Green's function $G_\sigma$ in the number equation (\ref{number}) is replaced by the bare one $G_\sigma^0$ in Eq. (\ref{GAM0}). In this simple mean-field approximation, the number equation gives ${\tilde k}^0_{{\rm F}.{\rm L}}\simeq{\tilde k}^0_{{\rm F},{\rm H}}$, leading to $h\simeq 0$. Thus, we obtain a finite $T_{\rm c}$ for an arbitrary ratio $m_{\rm L}/m_{\rm H}$ of mass imbalance, as shown in Fig. \ref{fig4}(b) (although the magnitude of $T_{\rm c}$ is overestimated, because of the neglect of strong-coupling corrections).
\par
In the strong-coupling BEC regime, the system is well described by a Bose gas of $N/2$ tightly bound molecules\cite{Nozieres1985,Melo1993,Ohashi2002}, so that the difference between the ETMA and the SCTMA is not important, as far as we consider $T_{\rm c}$. Indeed, Fig. \ref{fig2} shows that the both approximations give almost the same $T_{\rm c}$ in the BEC regime. In this figure, we also compare our results with the BEC phase transition temperature $T_{\rm BEC}$ in an ideal gas of $N_{\rm B}=N/2$ hetero-molecules with the molecular mass $M=m_{\rm L}+m_{\rm H}$, given by
\begin{equation}
T_{\rm BEC}={2\pi \over M}\Bigl({N_{\rm B} \over \zeta(3/2)}\Bigr)^{2/3}.
\label{BEC}
\end{equation}
The good agreement of the SCTMA and ETMA results with $T_{\rm BEC}$ at $(k_{\rm F}a_s)^{-1}=2$ supports the validity of the molecular picture in this regime, even in the presence of mass imbalance.
\par
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.4\linewidth,keepaspectratio]{fig5.png}
\end{center}
\caption{(Color online) Calculated single-particle density of states $\rho_\sigma(\omega)$ in a mass-imbalanced Fermi gas at $T_{\rm c}$. We take $m_{\rm L}/m_{\rm H}=0.15$ (which corresponds to a $^6$Li-$^{40}$K Fermi mixture). (a) Light component. (b) Heavy component. For comparison, we also show the density of states $\rho(\omega)$ in the mass-balanced case in panel (c).
}
\label{fig5}
\end{figure}
\par
\section{Component-dependent pseudogap phenomena in a mass-imbalanced Fermi gas}\label{sec4}
\par
Figures \ref{fig5} shows the single-particle density of states $\rho_\sigma(\omega)$ at $T_{\rm c}$ in the case of a $^6$Li-$^{40}$K mixture ($m_{\rm L}/m_{\rm H}=0.15$). Panel (a) clearly shows that the density of states $\rho_{\rm L}(\omega)$ in the light component exhibits a dip structure when $(k_{\rm F}a_s)^{-1}=-0.5$, which becomes wider for a stronger pairing interaction. Since the superfluid order parameter vanishes at $T_{\rm c}$, this is just the pseudogap associated with pairing fluctuations. This result is qualitatively the same as the mass-balanced case shown in panel (c).
\par
Although both light atoms and heavy atoms equally contribute to pairing fluctuations (Note that a preformed Cooper pair always consists of a light atom and a heavy atom.), Fig. \ref{fig5}(b) shows that the pseudogap in the heavy component is not so clear as the case of light component. That is, a dip structure seen at $(k_{\rm F}a_s)^{-1}=-0.5$ no longer exists in the unitarity limit ($(k_{\rm F}a_s)^{-1}=0$), although a clear pseudogap is still seen in panel (a). In the BEC regime at $(k_{\rm F}a_s)^{-1}=1$, exactly speaking, there exists a wide pseudogap around $\omega=0$, which is, however, very shallow, so that it is almost invisible in this figure. This result is also quite different from the clear pseudogap structure seen in panel (a) at this interaction strength.
\par
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.9\linewidth,keepaspectratio]{fig6.png}
\end{center}
\caption{(Color online) Calculated intensity of the spectral weight $A_\sigma({\bm p},\omega)$ in a unitary Fermi gas at $T=T_{\rm c}$, normalized by $\varepsilon_{\rm F}^{-1}$. The left and right panels show $A_{\rm L}(\bm p,\omega)$ and $A_{\rm H}(\bm p,\omega)$, respectively.}
\label{fig6}
\end{figure}
\par
Strong-coupling corrections to single-particle excitations can also be seen in the single-particle spectral weight $A_\sigma({\bm p},\omega)$ in Eq. (\ref{sp}). In the mass-balanced case, the pseudogap phenomenon appearing in the spectral weight may be understood as a particle-hole coupling effect by pairing fluctuations\cite{Tsuchiya2009}. Indeed, in Fig. \ref{fig6}(a1), besides a spectral peak line along the particle dispersion ($\xi_{\bm p}\sim p^2/(2m)-k_{\rm F}^2/(2m)$), we slightly see a broad peak line along the hole branch ($\xi^{\rm h}_{\bm p}\sim-[p^2/(2m)-k_{\rm F}^2/(2m)]$), which crosses the particle branch around $\omega=0$ to modify the particle dispersion. Since the density of states $\rho_\sigma(\omega)$ is obtained from the momentum summation of the spectral weight $A_\sigma({\bm p},\omega)$ for a given $\omega$, this modification around $\omega=0$ is directly related to the pseudogap structure in $\rho_\sigma(\omega)$ around $\omega=0$ (see Fig. \ref{fig5}).
\par
In the light component, the same effect on the particle branch occurs in the presence of mass imbalance, as shown in Figs.\ref{fig6}(a2) and (a3). In particular, in the highly mass-imbalanced case (panel (a3)), the spectral peak of the particle branch is remarkably broadened around $\omega=0$ by the particle-hole coupling effect, leading to the suppression of the density of states $\rho_{\rm L}(\omega\sim 0)=\sum_{\bm p}A_{\rm L}({\bm p},\omega\sim 0)$, which gives the pseudogap structure in Fig. \ref{fig5}(a) at $m_{\rm L}/m_{\rm H}=0.15$.
\par
In the case of heavy atoms, on the other hand, the right panels in Fig. \ref{fig6} show that the modification of the particle branch around $\omega=0$ is less remarkable, compared with the case of light atoms. This result is consistent with the density of states shown in Fig. \ref{fig5}(b).
\par
To understand the above component-dependent pseudogap phenomenon, we explain the following two keys. The first key is that the light atoms and heavy atoms have different Fermi temperatures as
\begin{equation}
T_{\rm F}^{\rm L}={k_{\rm F}^2 \over 2m_{\rm L}}>T_{\rm F}^{\rm H}={k_{\rm F}^2 \over 2m_{\rm H}}.
\label{eqTF}
\end{equation}
Since thermal effects in a Fermi gas are dominated by, not the temperature $T$ itself, but the {\it scaled} temperature $T/T_{\rm F}^\sigma$, heavy fermions always feel a higher scaled temperature than light fermions at a temperature $T$. Thus, the pseudogap in $\rho_{\rm H}(\omega)$ may be smeared out thermally, even when the pseudogap is still seen in $\rho_{\rm L}(\omega)$. In addition, since the difference of these scaled temperatures becomes larger for higher temperatures, the pseudogap in $\rho_{\rm H}(\omega)$ disappears at a lower temperature than in $\rho_{\rm L}(\omega)$. We explicitly confirm this in Fig. \ref{fig7} (density of states), as well as in Fig. \ref{fig8} (spectral weight).
\par
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.5\linewidth,keepaspectratio]{fig7.png}
\end{center}
\caption{(Color online) Single-particle density of states $\rho_\sigma(\omega)$ above $T_{\rm c}$. We take $m_{\rm L}/m_{\rm H}=0.15$ and $(k_{\rm F}a_s)^{-1}=-0.5$. (a) Light component. (b) Heavy component.}
\label{fig7}
\end{figure}
\par
\begin{figure}[!ht]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.95\linewidth,keepaspectratio]{fig8.png}
\end{center}
\caption{(Color online) Single-particle spectral weight $A_\sigma(\bm p,\omega)$ above $T_{\rm c}$. (a1)-(a3) Light component. (b1)-(b3) Heavy component. We take $m_{\rm L}/m_{\rm H}=0.15$, and $(k_{\rm F}a_s)^{-1}=-0.5$.}
\label{fig8}
\end{figure}
\par
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.5\linewidth,keepaspectratio]{fig9.png}
\end{center}
\caption{(Color online) Density of states $\rho_\sigma(\omega)$, using the approximate Green's function ${\tilde G}^{\rm PG}_\sigma$ in Eq. (\ref{PGG3}). (a) Light component. (b) Heavy component. We take $m_{\rm L}/m_{\rm H}=0.15$, $\Delta_{\rm PG}/\varepsilon_{\rm F}=0.3$, and $\mu_\sigma=k_{\rm F}^2/(2m_\sigma)$.
}
\label{fig9}
\end{figure}
\par
The second key to understand the component-dependent pseudogap phenomenon is the particle-hole coupling by pairing fluctuations. Noting that the particle-particle scattering matrix $\Gamma({\bm q}=0,i\nu_n=0)$ in Eq. (\ref{GAM}) diverges at $T_{\rm c}$, the self-energy $\Sigma_\sigma({\bm p},i\omega _n)$ in Eq. (\ref{sctma}) can be approximated to, near $T_{\rm c}$\cite{Tsuchiya2009},
\begin{equation}
\Sigma_\sigma({\bm p},i\omega _n)\simeq
\Sigma_\sigma^{\rm Hartree}-G_{-\sigma}(-{\bm p},-i\omega_n)\Delta_{\rm pg}^2,
\label{sctma2}
\end{equation}
where $\Sigma_\sigma^{\rm Hartree}=-UT\sum_{{\bm p},i\omega_n}G_{-\sigma}({\bm p},i\omega_n)$ is the ordinary Hartree term, and $\Delta_{\rm pg}^2=-T\sum _{\bm q,\nu _n}[\Gamma(\bm q,i\nu _n)+U]~(>0)$ is the so-called pseudogap parameter\cite{Chen2009}. When we simply treat the Green's function $G_{-\sigma}$ in Eq. (\ref{sctma2}) within the Hartree approximation ($[G_{-\sigma}(-\bm p, -i\omega_n)]^{-1}=-i\omega_n-\xi_{\bm p, -\sigma}-\Sigma_\sigma^{\rm Hartree}$), Eq. (\ref{sctmag}) is approximated to
\begin{eqnarray}
G^{\rm PG}_\sigma({\bm p},i\omega_n)=
{1 \over \displaystyle
i\omega_n-\xi_{{\bm p},\sigma}-
{\Delta_{\rm PG}^2 \over i\omega_n+\xi_{{\bm p},-\sigma}}
}.
\label{PGG}
\end{eqnarray}
(The unimportant Hartree term $\Sigma^{\rm Hartree}_\sigma$ has been absorbed into the Fermi chemical potential $\mu_\sigma$, for simplicity.) Equation (\ref{PGG}) indicates that the pseudogap parameter $\Delta_{\rm PG}$, which physically describes effects of pairing fluctuations, works as a coupling between a particle branch ($\omega=\xi_{{\bm p},\sigma}$) and a hole branch ($\omega=-\xi_{{\bm p},-\sigma}$). In addition, because Eq. (\ref{PGG}) can be written in the same form as the particle component of the BCS Green's function as
\begin{eqnarray}
G^{\rm PG}_\sigma({\bm p},i\omega_n)=
{i\omega_n+\xi_{{\bm p},-\sigma} \over
[i\omega_n-\xi_{{\bm p},\sigma}][i\omega_n+\xi_{{\bm p},-\sigma}]-\Delta_{\rm PG}^2},
\label{PGG2}
\end{eqnarray}
$\Delta_{\rm PG}$ is found to play a similar role to the BCS superfluid order parameter $\Delta$. Thus, the approximate Green's function in Eq. (\ref{PGG}) gives a BCS-like clear gap structure in both $\rho_{\rm L}(\omega)$ and $\rho_{\rm H}(\omega)$ (see $\rho_\sigma(\omega)$ at $\gamma=0$ in Fig. \ref{fig9}).
\par
The component-dependent pseudogap phenomenon is then immediately obtained, when one phenomenologically includes finite widths of the peak lines in Figs.\ref{fig6} and \ref{fig8} as
\begin{eqnarray}
{\tilde G}^{\rm PG}_\sigma({\bm p},i\omega_n\to\omega+i\delta)=
{1 \over \displaystyle
\omega+i\gamma-\xi_{{\bm p},\sigma}-
{\Delta_{\rm PG}^2 \over \omega+i\gamma+\xi_{{\bm p},-\sigma}}
}.
\label{PGG3}
\end{eqnarray}
Here, the phenomenological damping rate $\gamma$ is assumed to take the same constant value between the two components, for simplicity. Using Eq. (\ref{PGG3}), one finds that the pseudogap in $\rho_{\rm H}(\omega)$ is more easily smeared out by the damping rate $\gamma$ than that in $\rho_{\rm L}(\omega)$, as shown in Fig. \ref{fig9}. When we simply consider the spectral weight $A_\sigma({\bm p},\omega=0)$ of the phenomenological Green's function $\tilde G_\sigma({\bm p},\omega)=[\omega+i\gamma-\xi_{{\bm p},\sigma}]^{-1}$, given by
\begin{equation}
A_\sigma({\bm p},\omega=0)=
{1 \over \pi}
{4m_\sigma^2\gamma \over [p^2-{\tilde k}^2_{{\rm F},\sigma}]^2
+4m_\sigma^2\gamma^2},
\label{PGG4}
\end{equation}
the density of states $\rho_\sigma(\omega=0)=\sum_{\bm p}A_\sigma({\bm p},\omega=0)$ is found to be dominated by the spectral weight in the momentum region,
\begin{equation}
{\tilde k}^2_{{\rm F},\sigma}-2m_\sigma\gamma\ \raise.3ex\hbox{$<$}\kern-0.8em\lower.7ex\hbox{$\sim$}\ p^2\ \raise.3ex\hbox{$<$}\kern-0.8em\lower.7ex\hbox{$\sim$}\ {\tilde k}^2_{{\rm F},\sigma}+2m_\sigma\gamma.
\label{PGG5}
\end{equation}
This region is much wider for the heavy component than the light component, when $m_{\rm L}/m_{\rm H}\ll 1$. Thus, in the former, the modification of the particle dispersion around $p={\tilde k}_{{\rm F},{\rm H}}$ by the particle-hole coupling effect is easily hidden by the wider momentum summation, compared with the case of light component, leading to the different pseudogap phenomenon between the two.
\par
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.5\linewidth,keepaspectratio]{fig10.png}
\end{center}
\caption{(Color online) Pseudogap temperature $T_\sigma^*$ in a unitary Fermi gas, as a function of the ratio $m_{\rm L}/m_{\rm H}$ of mass imbalance. PG1: Pseudogap regime where a dip structure appears in both $\rho_{\rm L}(\omega)$ and $\rho_{\rm H}(\omega)$. PG2: Pseudogap region where the pseudogap is only seen in $\rho_{\rm L}(\omega)$. NF: Normal Fermi gas where the pseudogap phenomenon is absent. SF: Superfluid phase. $T_{\rm F}^{\rm H}$ is the Fermi temperature in the heavy component.
}
\label{fig10}
\end{figure}
\par
\section{Phase diagram of a mass-imbalanced Fermi gas}
\par
To determine the pseudogap region, we conveniently introduce the pseudogap temperature $T_{\sigma}^*$ as the temperature at which the pseudogap appears in the density of states $\rho_\sigma(\omega)$\cite{Tsuchiya2009}. As expected, Fig. \ref{fig10} shows that $T_{\rm L}^*>T_{\rm H}^*$.
\par
This result naturally leads to the existence of two pseudogap regions. In the region $T_{\rm c}\le T\le T_{\rm H}^*$ (`PG1' in Fig. \ref{fig10}), the pseudogap appears in both the light component and heavy component. Besides this ordinary case, we also obtain the other pseudogap regime where the pseudogap only appears in the light component (`PG2' in Fig. \ref{fig10}). In Fig. \ref{fig10}, while PG1 and PG2 exist when $m_{\rm L}/m_{\rm H}>0.15$, PG2 only exists in the highly mass-imbalanced regime when $m_{\rm L}/m_{\rm H}\le 0.15$. Since PG2 is absent in the mass-balanced case, this pseudogap regime is characteristic of a mass-imbalanced Fermi gas.
\par
Figure \ref{fig10} shows that the pseudogap temperature $T_{\rm L}^*$ in the light component becomes higher than $T_{\rm F}^{\rm H}$ in the case of $m_{\rm L}/m_{\rm H}\ll 1$. This means that the pseudogap phenomenon can still occur in the light component, even when the heavy component is in the classical regime ($T>T_{\rm F}^{\rm H}$). Indeed, as shown in Fig. \ref{fig11}, $\rho_{\rm L}(\omega)$ still exhibits the pseudogap phenomenon, when $T/T_{\rm F}=0.05$ (which satisfies $T_{\rm F}^{\rm H}=0.025T_{\rm F}<T<T_{\rm L}^*=0.11T_{\rm F}$)\cite{note3}. In this case, the inset of Fig. \ref{fig11} shows that the particle distribution $n_{{\bm p},{\rm H}}=\langle c_{{\bm p},{\rm H}}^\dagger c_{{\bm p},{\rm H}}\rangle$ of heavy atoms is very broad around $p=k_{\rm F}$, compared with $n_{{\bm p},{\rm L}}=\langle c_{{\bm p},{\rm L}}^\dagger c_{{\bm p},{\rm L}}\rangle$, reflecting that $T_{\rm F}^{\rm H}<T<T_{\rm F}^{\rm L}$. We briefly note that this result is in contrast to the case of superfluid phase transition, which occurs only when both the components are in the Fermi degenerate regime ($T_{\rm c}<T_{\rm F}^{\rm H}<T_{\rm F}^{\rm L}$).
\par
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.5\linewidth,keepaspectratio]{fig11.png}
\end{center}
\caption{(Color online) Pseudogapped density of states $\rho_{\rm L}(\omega)$, when heavy atoms are in the classical regime. We take $m_{\rm L}/m_{\rm H}=0.0125$, and $T/T_{\rm F}=0.05$, which satisfies $T_{\rm F}^{\rm H}=0.025T_{\rm F}<T<T_{\rm L}^*=0.11T_{\rm F}<T_{\rm F}^{\rm L}=1.98T_{\rm F}$. The inset shows the particle distribution $n_{{\bm p},\sigma}=\langle c^\dagger_{{\bm p},\sigma}c_{{\bm p},\sigma}\rangle$.
}
\label{fig11}
\end{figure}
\par
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.5\linewidth,keepaspectratio]{fig12.png}
\end{center}
\caption{(a) Phase diagram of a $^6$Li-$^{40}$K Fermi gas mixture ($m_{\rm L}/m_{\rm H}=0.15$). The meanings of PG1, PG2, SF, and NF, are the same as those in Fig. \ref{fig10}. In this figure, we also draw the line, $|\mu_{\rm L}(T_{\rm c})+\mu_{\rm H}(T_{\rm c})|$, in the BEC regime when $\mu_\sigma<0$, which physically represents the binding energy of a two-body bound molecules. As in the mass-balanced case, the right side of this line may be regarded as a molecular Bose gas in the normal state (NB), rather than a Fermi gas\cite{note2}.}
\label{fig12}
\end{figure}
\par
Figure \ref{fig12} shows the phase diagram of a $^6$Li-$^{40}$K mixture ($m_{\rm L}/m_{\rm H}=0.15$). As expected from Fig. \ref{fig10}, most of the pseudogap regime is dominated by PG2, where the pseudogap only appears in the light component. In the BEC limit, the molecular binding energy $E_{\rm bind}$ is given by
\begin{equation}
E_{\rm bind}=\mu_{\rm L}(T_{\rm c})+\mu_{\rm H}(T_{\rm c})=-{1 \over ma_s^2}.
\label{BECbind}
\end{equation}
Thus, in Fig. \ref{fig12}, the line $|\mu_{\rm L}(T_{\rm c})+\mu_{\rm H}(T_{\rm c})|$ (where $\mu_{\rm L}(T_{\rm c}) + \mu_{\rm H}(T_{\rm c})<0$) drawn in the BEC regime physically gives a characteristic temperature where two-body bound molecules start to appear. Thus, the right side of this line (NB) may be viewed as a normal Bose gas of two-body bound molecules, rather than a Fermi gas.
\par
\par
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.5\linewidth,keepaspectratio]{fig13.png}
\end{center}
\caption{(Color online) Calculated density of states $\rho_\sigma(\omega=0)$, as a function of temperature. We take $m_{\rm L}/m_{\rm H}=0.15$, and $(k_{\rm F}a_s)^{-1}=0$. $\rho_{\rm L}(\omega)$ is magnified four times.}
\label{fig13}
\end{figure}
\par
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.5\linewidth,keepaspectratio]{fig14.png}
\end{center}
\caption{(Color online) Superfluid density of states $\rho_\sigma(\omega)$ in the Sarma phase, calculated in the mean-field theory. (a) Light component. (b) Heavy component. We take $m_{\rm L}/m_{\rm H}=0.15$, $(k_{\rm F}a_s)^{-1}=0$, and $T=0.34T_{\rm F}~(=0.93T_{\rm c})$. }
\label{fig14}
\end{figure}
\par
Figure \ref{fig12} indicates that one should measure single-particle excitations in the light component, in order to observe the pseudogap phenomenon in a $^6$Li-$^{40}$K mixture. Since the achievement of the superfluid phase transition is a crucial issue in this system, this observation would be helpful to estimate to what extent we are approaching the superfluid instability. In addition, since the pseudogap is almost absent in the heavy component except for the very narrow temperature region (see Fig. \ref{fig12}), the appearance of a gap in single-particle excitation spectra in the heavy component would be a clear signature of the hetero superfluid state in this system.
\par
We briefly note that, although Fig. \ref{fig12} indicates the absence of the pseudogap temperature $T_{\rm H}^*$ around the unitarity limit, it does not necessarily mean that the heavy component behaves as a simple normal Fermi gas there. Indeed, as shown in Fig. \ref{fig13}, in the unitarity limit, the density of states $\rho_{\rm H}(\omega)$ in the heavy component at $\omega=0$ is anomalously suppressed near $T_{\rm c}$ by strong pairing fluctuations, although a dip structure does not appear in $\rho_{\rm H}(\omega)$. Since the pseudogap is a crossover phenomenon without being accompanied by any phase transition, the definition of the pseudogap temperature somehow involves ambiguity. However, even when we define the pseudogap temperature $T_\sigma^*$ as the temperature at which $\rho_\sigma(\omega=0)$ starts to be suppressed, we again obtain the relation $T_{\rm L}^*>T_{\rm H}^*$, as seen in Fig. \ref{fig13}.
\par
Before ending this section, we briefly comment on the Sarma phase\cite{Sarma1963}, which has been predicted in a highly mass-imbalanced Fermi gas\cite{Stoof1,Stoof2}. A characteristic property of this superfluid state is that the superfluid gap is not centered at $\omega=0$, as shown in Fig. \ref{fig14}. Since the pseudogap phenomenon in an ultracold Fermi gas is a precursor of the superfluid phase transition, one expects that the pairing fluctuations associated with the Sarma phase give a dip structure at $\omega\ne 0$. However, such a phenomenon is not seen in Fig. \ref{fig5}, where the pseudogap always appears around $\omega=0$. Thus, although this result does not necessarily exclude the Sarma phase in a mass-imbalanced Fermi gas, it seems difficult to confirm this possibility from the viewpoint of the pseudogap phenomenon.
\par
\par
\section{Summary}
\par
To summarize, we have discussed strong-coupling properties of an ultracold Fermi gas with different species with different masses. Extending our previous work using an extended $T$-matrix approximation (ETMA)\cite{Hanai2013} to include higher order pairing fluctuations within the framework of the self-consistent $T$-matrix approximation (SCTMA), we calculated the superfluid phase transition temperature $T_{\rm c}$ in the presence of mass imbalance in the whole BCS-BEC crossover region. We also calculated the single-particle density of states, as well as the single-particle spectral weight, to see how the presence of mass imbalance affects the pseudogap phenomenon.
\par
We showed that the superfluid phase transition always occurs even in the presence of mass imbalance. This result is quite different from our previous work within the ETMA, where the superfluid phase transition does not occur in the BCS regime when $m_{\rm L}/m_{\rm H}\ll 1$. We clarified that the ETMA result is an artifact, originating from the inconsistent treatment of the Fermi surface size between the $T_{\rm c}$-equation and the number equations $N_\sigma$ ($\sigma={\rm L},{\rm H}$). Our results in this paper predict that a $^6$Li-$^{40}$K mixture always exhibits the superfluid phase transition, irrespective of the interaction strength. Thus, the BCS-BEC crossover phenomenon is expected in this system, as in the cases of $^6$Li and $^{40}$K superfluid gases.
\par
We also showed that the pseudogap phenomena are very different between the light component and the heavy component, in spite that the both equally contribute to the formation of preformed Cooper pairs. In the presence of mass imbalance, the pseudogap structure in the density of states becomes obscure in the heavy component, compared with that in the light component. In the highly mass-imbalanced case ($m_{\rm L}/m_{\rm H}\ll 1$), the pseudogap no longer appears in the former. Since the pseudogap phenomenon always occurs in both the components in the mass-balanced case, this component-dependent pseudogap phenomenon is characteristic of a mass-imbalanced Fermi gas.
\par
The component-dependent pseudogap phenomenon also gives a higher pseudogap temperature $T_{\rm L}^*$ in the light component than the pseudogap temperature $T_{\rm H}^*$ in the heavy component, which naturally leads to two pseudogap regions. That is, while the both components exhibit the pseudogap phenomena when $T_{\rm c}\le T\le T_{\rm H}^*$, the pseudogapped density of states is only seen in the light component when $T_{\rm H}^*\le T\le T_{\rm L}^*$. In the highly mass-imbalance regime ($m_{\rm L}/m_{\rm H}\ll 1$), $T_{\rm H}^*$ no longer exists, so that light fermions only exhibit the pseudogap phenomenon there. We pointed out that that these component-dependent pseudogap phenomena originate from (1) different values of the Fermi temperatures between the two components, and (2) component-dependent particle-hole coupling effects by pairing fluctuations.
\par
For a $^6$Li-$^{40}$K mixture, our results predict that the pseudogap can be seen much more easily in the $^6$Li component, rather than in the $^{40}$K component, because this system is in the highly mass-imbalanced regime ($m_{\rm L}/m_{\rm H}=0.15\ll 1$). Since the pseudogap phenomenon is a precursor of the superfluid phase transition, the observation of this many-body phenomenon in the $^6$Li component would be helpful to assess to what extent the system is close to the superfluid instability. In addition, since the pseudogapped density of states is almost absent in the $^{40}$K component, the observation of a single-particle excitation gap in this component can be used as a signature of the hetero-superfluid phase in this system.
\par
In this paper, we have examined a uniform Fermi gas, for simplicity. In this regard, we note that each component may feel different harmonic potential in a real trapped Fermi gas, leading to a local population (spin) imbalance\cite{Lin2006,Gezerlis2009}. In addition, the photoemission-type experiment developed by the JILA group\cite{Stewart2008,Gaebler2010}, which is a powerful technique to experimentally examine single-particle properties of an ultracold Fermi gas, has no spatial resolution, so that we need to treat an observed photoemission spectrum as a spatially averaged one in a trap. Thus, to deal with these realistic situations, the extension of our work to include effects of a harmonic trap is necessary.
\par
Fermi superfluids with hetero-Cooper-pairs have been discussed in various fields, such as an exciton (polariton) gas in semiconductor physics, and color superconductivity in high-energy physics. Since the realization of a hetero pairing state seems difficult in metallic superconductivity, once the superfluid phase transition is achieved in a $^6$Li-$^{40}$K mixture, this superfluid state with a tunable pairing interaction would become a useful model system for the study of these Fermi condensates. Since the pseudogap phenomenon is deeply related to the superfluid phase transition, our results would contribute to the research toward the realization of a hetero Fermi superfluid using ultracold Fermi gases, especially a $^6$Li-$^{40}$K mixture.
\par
\begin{acknowledgements}
We thank H. Tajima for useful discussions. R.H. was supported by KLL PhD Program Research Grant, as well as Graduate School Doctoral Student Aid Program from Keio University. Y.O. was supported by Grant-in-Aid for Scientific research from MEXT in Japan (25105511, 25400418).
\end{acknowledgements}
\par
|
\section{Introduction} \label{sec:intro}
Let $R = \Bbbk[x_1, \ldots, x_n] = \bigoplus_{k \geq 0} R_k$ be the standard graded polynomial ring in $n$ variables over a field $\Bbbk$ (which is one of $\mathbb Q$, $\mathbb R$, or $\mathbb C$)
and let $\mathfrak S_n$ denote the symmetric group on $n$ letters. We are interested in the Hilbert functions and graded characters of graded artinian Gorenstein algebras which are also representations of $\mathfrak S_n$. Specifically, we will examine quotients of $R$ whose one-dimensional socles are spanned by a symmetric polynomial $F$.
Every homogeneous polynomial $F$ of degree $d$ can be expressed as a linear combination of $d$-th powers of linear forms $L_1,\ldots,L_m$ for some $m$. If we symmetrize this expression for $F$ by summing over all permutations and dividing by $n!$, we can express $F$ as a linear combination of $F_1,\ldots,F_m$ where each $F_i$ is the sum of the elements in the orbit of $L_i^d$. In this paper, we will only consider polynomials $F$ which are the sum of the orbit of the $d$-th power of a single linear form (i.e., $m=1$).
For example, let $n=4$ and consider the linear form
\[ L=x_1 + x_2 + 2x_3 + 3x_4 \ .
\]
The degree $7$ symmetric polynomial
\[ F = \sigma_1 L^7 + \cdots + \sigma_{12} L^7 \]
spans the one-dimensional socle of the graded artinian Gorenstein algebra $R/I_F$ where $I_F$ consists of all $f \in R$ with $\partial F/ \partial f = 0$.
The dimensions of the homogeneous components of $R/I_F$ are recorded in its Hilbert function $\mathrm{HF}_{R/I_F}(k) := \dim_\Bbbk (R/I_F)_k$, although it is often convenient to present them in a generating function called a Hilbert series:
\[ \mathrm{HS}_{R/I_F}(t) := \sum_{k \geq 0} \dim_\Bbbk (R/I_F)_k t^k.
\]
Currently, there is no known description of all Hilbert functions that arise from graded Gorenstein algebras (except for $n=2,3$ \cite[Theorem 1.44]{MR1735271} \cite{MR0485835}).
In order to find the Hilbert function of an artinian graded algebra with a given socle, one typically computes the ranks of a collection of Catalecticant matrices --- one for each degree \cite{MR1702103}.
In our example, however, $R/I_F$ has additional structure which
will allow us to find that its Hilbert series is
\[ \mathrm{HS}_{R/I_F}(t) = 1 + 4t + 9t^2 + 12t^3 + 12t^4 + 9t^5 + 4t^6 + t^7.
\]
Our point of view is illustrated as follows: since $F$ is a symmetric polynomial, $I_F$ is stable under the action of $\mathfrak S_n$. Thus, $I_F$ and its homogeneous components $(I_F)_k$ are representations of $\mathfrak S_n$. So, the quotient $R/I_F = \bigoplus_{k \geq 0} (R/I_F)_k$, where $(R/I_F)_k = R_k/(I_F)_k$, is a graded representation of $\mathfrak S_n$. If we denote the \emph{character} of a finite dimensional representation $V$ of $\mathfrak S_n$ by $\raisebox{2pt}{\large$\chi$}_V: \mathfrak S_n \to \Bbbk$,
then the \emph{graded character} of $R/I_F$ is defined by
\[ \raisebox{2pt}{\large$\chi$}_{R/I_F}(t) := \sum_{k\geq0} \raisebox{2pt}{\large$\chi$}_{(R/I_F)_k} t^k.
\]
This encodes the algebra's structure as a graded representation much like the Hilbert series does for its structure as a graded vector space.
Recall that since any representation of $\mathfrak S_n$ is a direct sum of irreducible representations, and the irreducible representations of $\mathfrak S_n$ are in one-to-one correspondence with partitions $\lambda \vdash n$, $\lambda = (\lambda_1,\ldots, \lambda_r)$, $\lambda_1 \geq \cdots \geq \lambda_r \geq 1$, we can write
\[ \raisebox{2pt}{\large$\chi$}_{(R/I_F)_k} = \sum_{\lambda \vdash n} m_\lambda \raisebox{2pt}{\large$\chi$}^\lambda
\]
where $m_\lambda \in \mathbb N$ and $\raisebox{2pt}{\large$\chi$}^\lambda$ is the character of the irreducible respresentation corresponding to $\lambda$.
Writing $\raisebox{2pt}{\large$\chi$}^{(\lambda_1,\ldots,\lambda_r)}$ as $\raisebox{2pt}{\large$\chi$}^{\lambda_1\cdots\lambda_r}$,
the graded character of $R/I_F$, for $F$ as above, is
\begin{align*}
\raisebox{2pt}{\large$\chi$}_{R/I_F}(t)
= \qquad &\raisebox{2pt}{\large$\chi$}^4 \\
{}+ (&\raisebox{2pt}{\large$\chi$}^4 + \raisebox{2pt}{\large$\chi$}^{31})t \\
{}+ (&\raisebox{2pt}{\large$\chi$}^4 + 2\raisebox{2pt}{\large$\chi$}^{31} + \raisebox{2pt}{\large$\chi$}^{22})t^2 \\
{}+ (&\raisebox{2pt}{\large$\chi$}^4 + 2\raisebox{2pt}{\large$\chi$}^{31} + \raisebox{2pt}{\large$\chi$}^{22} + \raisebox{2pt}{\large$\chi$}^{211})t^3\\
{}+ (&\raisebox{2pt}{\large$\chi$}^4 + 2\raisebox{2pt}{\large$\chi$}^{31} + \raisebox{2pt}{\large$\chi$}^{22} + \raisebox{2pt}{\large$\chi$}^{211})t^4\\
{}+ (&\raisebox{2pt}{\large$\chi$}^4 + 2\raisebox{2pt}{\large$\chi$}^{31} + \raisebox{2pt}{\large$\chi$}^{22})t^5 \\
{}+ (&\raisebox{2pt}{\large$\chi$}^4 + \raisebox{2pt}{\large$\chi$}^{31})t^6 \\
{}+\phantom{(} &\raisebox{2pt}{\large$\chi$}^4 t^7.
\end{align*}
In this paper, we describe the graded characters of Gorenstein algebras $R/I_F$ whose socles are spanned by a form $F$ which is the sum of the orbit of a power of a linear form $L$. (Our only additional requirements are that the coefficients of $L$ are real and that they do not sum to zero. The latter requirement is essentially equivalent to the embedding dimension of $R/I_F$ being $n$.) The graded characters of such algebras are palindromic, as in the example above, and the multiplicities of the irreducible characters in each degree can be computed directly from certain Hall-Littlewood polynomials, which is the content of our main theorem (see Theorem \ref{thm:maintheorem}).
In fact, the graded character of $R/I_F$ depends on the degree of $F$ and the number of repeated coefficients in $L$, but not on the values of those coefficients. Furthermore, the Hilbert function of $R/I_F$ can be recovered from the graded character by replacing each $\raisebox{2pt}{\large$\chi$}^\lambda$ occurring in $\raisebox{2pt}{\large$\chi$}_{R/I_F}(t)$ with the numbers $f^\lambda$ which count the number of standard Young tableaux with shape $\lambda$ and which is equal to the dimension of the irreducible representation of type $\lambda$. For an introduction to the representation theory of the symmetric group we recommend \cite{MR1824028} (and \cite{MR2538310} to see how these representations are realized in the polynomial ring).
Since artinian Gorenstein algebras are characterized by having a one-dimensional socle,
it follows that graded artinian Gorenstein algebras which admit an action of $\mathfrak S_n$ come in two types, which correspond to the only two one-dimensional representations of $\mathfrak S_n$. The socle of the algebra is either
\begin{enumerate}[(i)]
\item the trivial representation and spanned by a symmetric polynomial, or
\item the alternating representation and spanned by an alternating polynomial.
\end{enumerate}
In \cite{MR1779775}, Bergeron, Garsia and Tesler
described the graded character of artinian Gorenstein algebras of type (ii).
The graded character of such an algebra is a multiple of the graded character of the coinvariant algebra $R_\mu$, where $\mu = (1,\ldots, 1) \vdash n$. Roth \cite{MR2134302} extended their result to any artinian algebra whose socle is spanned by alternating forms.
Morita, Wachi and Watanabe \cite{MR2542134} found the Hilbert function of each isotypic piece of the algebra
$A(n,k) = \Bbbk[x_1,\ldots,x_n]/(x_1^k,\ldots,x_n^k)$ for each $n$ and $k$. The algebra $A(n,k)$ is of type $(i)$ since its socle is spanned by the symmetric monomial $F = (x_1\cdots x_n)^{k-1}$.
We will consider algebras $R/I_F$ of type (i)
where we have chosen the socle of $R/I_F$ to be spanned by a symmetric polynomial $F$ of a specific type.
The paper is organized as follows: in Section 2 we review some facts about Gorenstein graded algebras, the action of $\mathfrak S_n$ on $R$ and the apolarity module and its submodules.
In Section \ref{section:orbit sum} we apply the ideas of Section 2 to a specific type of $\mathfrak S_n$-stable submodules of $R$.
In Section \ref{section:point} we demonstrate our main theorem, which shows that the graded characters of the algebras we are considering are determined by certain algebras that were considered by, among others, DeConcini, Garsia and Procesi. This connection allows us to calculate the graded characters of our algebras.
In the final section we suggest some possibilities for further inquiry.
\textbf{Acknowledgments.} The authors would like to thank Henry de Valence and Dave Stringer who computed the first examples of graded characters for this project as part of an NSERC summer undergraduate research assistantship. We also thank Federico Galetto for many helpful conversations concerning $R_\mu$ and Zach Teitler for his helpful comments on the first version of this paper.
All three authors gratefully acknowledge the partial support of NSERC for this work.
\section{Gorenstein Algebras and Apolarity Modules} The following elementary remarks are well known and can be found, for example, in the expository article \cite{MR1381732}.
A standard graded algebra $A = R/I$ is \emph{Gorenstein} if it contains a maximal $A$-regular sequence which generates an irreducible ideal of $A$.
If $A$ is \emph{artinian} (i.e., finite dimensional as a $\Bbbk$ vector space) then the socle of $A$ is the ideal $\soc A = ( 0 : \mathfrak{m}) = \{ f \in A \mid f \mathfrak{m} = 0 \}$ where $\mathfrak{m} = \bigoplus_{k \geq 1} A_k$ is the homogeneous maximal ideal of $A$. If $A$ is artinian and Gorenstein then its socle must be one-dimensional as a vector space.
Let each $\sigma \in \mathfrak S_n$ act on a linear form $a_1x_1 + \cdots + a_nx_n \in R_1$ by
\begin{align*}
\sigma(a_1 x_1 + \cdots + a_n x_n)
&= a_1 x_{\sigma(1)} + \cdots + a_n x_{\sigma(n)} \\
&= a_{\sigma^{-1}(1) }x_1 + \cdots + a_{\sigma^{-1}(n)}x_n.
\end{align*}
This action extends to an action on $R$ which is given by
\[ (\sigma f)(x_1, \ldots, x_n) = f(x_{\sigma(1)}, \ldots, x_{\sigma(n)}).
\]
If we write a monomial in $R$ as $\mathbf{x}^\mathbf{b} = x_1^{b_1} \cdots x_n^{b_n}$, for an exponent vector $\mathbf{b} = (b_1, \ldots, b_n) \in \mathbb N^n$, then
\begin{align*}
\sigma(\mathbf{x}^{\mathbf{b}})
&= x_{\sigma(1)}^{b_1} \cdots x_{\sigma(n)}^{b_n}=x_1^{b_{\sigma^{-1}(1)}} \cdots x_n^{b_{\sigma^{-1}(n)}}.
\end{align*}
Accordingly, we define $\sigma(\mathbf{b}) = (b_{\sigma^{-1}(1)}, \ldots, b_{\sigma^{-1}(n)})$ for $\sigma \in \mathfrak S_n$ and
for any $\mathbf{b} \in \mathbb N^n$ or $\Bbbk^n$, so that $\sigma \mathbf{x}^\mathbf{b} = \mathbf{x}^{\sigma \mathbf{b}}$.
One can check that all of the above are left actions.
Moreover, if $\mathbf{a} \in \Bbbk^n$ then
$$f(\sigma \mathbf{a}) = f(a_{\sigma^{-1}(1)}, \ldots, a_{\sigma^{-1}(n)}) = (\sigma^{-1}f)(\mathbf{a}) \ .
$$
So, if $\mathbf{e}_i$ is the $i$-th standard basis vector of $\Bbbk^n$, then $\sigma(\mathbf{e}_i) = \mathbf{e}_{\sigma(i)}$.
Partial differentiation is a $\Bbbk$-bilinear operator $\partial: R \times R \to R$ where
the partial derivative of the monomial $\mathbf{x}^\mathbf{c}$ by the monomial $\mathbf{x}^\mathbf{b}$ is defined to be
\begin{align*}
\partial(\mathbf{x}^\mathbf{b}, \mathbf{x}^\mathbf{c})
&= \frac{c_1! \cdots c_n!}{(c_1-b_1)! \cdots (c_n - b_n)!} \mathbf{x}^{\mathbf{c} - \mathbf{b}} \\
&:= \frac{\mathbf{c}!}{(\mathbf{c} - \mathbf{b})!} \mathbf{x}^{\mathbf{c} - \mathbf{b}}
\end{align*}
when $\mathbf{c} \geq \mathbf{b}$ (i.e., $c_i \geq b_i$ for all $i$) and zero otherwise.
We extend this definition linearly in both components to define $\partial(f,g)$, the partial derivative of a polynomial $g$ by another polynomial $f$.
Partial differentiation endows $R$ with an $R$-module structure which is different from that of a rank-one free module. To avoid confusion,
we let $S=R$ be this $R$-module where for $f \in R$ and $g \in S$, we set $fg := \partial(f,g) \in S$. $S$ is called the \emph{apolarity module} of $R$. So the bilinear operator $\partial$ can be viewed as a map $\partial: R \times S \to S$.
Write $R = \bigoplus_{k\geq 0} R_k$, using the standard grading on $R$. Let $S = \bigoplus_{k \geq 0} S_k$ where $S_k = R_k$ as vector spaces. We consider $S$ as a graded $R$-module even though its graded components satisfy the slightly unconventional condition that $R_k S_j \subseteq S_{j-k}$ for all $j,k \in \mathbb N$ where $S_{j-k} = 0$ for $k > j$. This convention allows a polynomial $f$ to have the same degree regardless of whether it is in $R$ or $S$.
The bilinear operator $\partial$ restricts to a bilinear form $\partial_k: R_k \times S_k \to \Bbbk$ which induces two maps $R_k \to S_k^*$ and $S_k \to R_k^*$. Let $\overline f$ denote the polynomial obtained by taking the complex conjugate of the coefficients of the polynomial $f$. Since $\partial_k(f,\overline f) \neq 0$ for any $f \in R_k \setminus \{0\}$, the map $R_k \to S_k^*$ is injective and hence is an isomorphism (and similarly for the map $S_k \to R_k^*$). Thus, the bilinear form $\partial_k$ is a perfect pairing.
For any subspace $M_k$ of $S_k$, we define
\[ M_k^\perp = \{ f \in R_k \mid \forall g \in M_k,\, \partial_k(f, g) = 0 \}.
\]
Then $\partial_k$ induces a well-defined bilinear form
\[ \partial_{k,M_k}: R_k/M_k^\perp \times M_k \to \Bbbk
\]
which is also a perfect pairing. Thus, $M_k^*$ and $R_k/M_k^\perp$ are isomorphic vector spaces and hence $M_k$ and $R_k/M_k^\perp$ have the the same dimension.
If we now consider a graded submodule $M \subseteq S$, its annihilator is the homogeneous ideal
\[ \mathrm{Ann}(M) = \{ f \in R \mid \forall g \in M,\, \partial(f,g) = 0 \}
\]
and so $R/\mathrm{Ann}(M)$ is a graded algebra. The homogeneous components of $\mathrm{Ann}(M)$ are $\mathrm{Ann}(M)_k = M_k^\perp$ (see \cite[Proposition 2.5]{MR1381732}). Thus the Hilbert function of $M$ (i.e., $\mathrm{HF}_M(k) = \dim_\Bbbk M_k$) is equal to the Hilbert function of $R/\mathrm{Ann}(M)$.
Just as submodules $M$ of $S$ determine quotients $R/\mathrm{Ann}(M)$ of $R$ by taking $\mathrm{Ann}(M)_k = M_k^\perp$ for $k \geq 0$, homogeneous ideals of $R/\mathrm{Ann}(M)$ determine graded quotients of $M$. In particular, the socle of $R/\mathrm{Ann}(M)$ determines $M/\mathfrak{m} M$ (any basis of which represents a set of minimal generators of $M$) since the homogeneous components of $\soc(R/\mathrm{Ann}(M))$ and $\mathfrak{m} M$ are orthogonal under $\partial_{k,M_k}$.
This fact, proved by Macaulay \cite[\S60]{MR1281612} (and referred to as the Macaulay Correspondence), shows that artinian Gorenstein algebras are in one-to-one correspondence with principally generated submodules of the apolarity module. (See \cite[Lemma 2.12]{MR1735271} for a modern treatment of these facts.)
We would now like to consider submodules of $S$ which are also graded representations of $\mathfrak S_n$.
We have already defined an action of $\mathfrak S_n$ on $R$ and, using the same action, $S$ is also a representation of $\mathfrak S_n$. Since the homogeneous components of $R$ and $S$ are stable under the action of $\mathfrak S_n$, $R$ and $S$ are graded representations.
Partial differentiation is an invariant bilinear form in that $\partial_k(\sigma f, \sigma g) = \partial_k(f,g)$ for all $f \in R_k$, $g \in S_k$ and $\sigma \in \mathfrak S_n$. Therefore, the dual representation of $M_k$ is equivalent to $(R/\mathrm{Ann}(M))_k$. (The action of $\mathfrak S_n$ on the dual $V^*$ of a representation $V$ is given by $(\sigma f)(v) = f(\sigma^{-1} v)$ for $\sigma \in \mathfrak S_n$, $f \in V^*$ and $v \in V$.) Since $\sigma$ and $\sigma^{-1}$ are conjugate, the symmetric group has the special property that all of its representations are self-dual. Thus, $R/\mathrm{Ann}(M)$ and $M$ have the same graded characters.
Suppose $M = \langle g \rangle$ is the principal submodule of $S$ generated by $g$. As a vector space, $M$ consists of all partial derivatives of $g$. In this case, $R/\mathrm{Ann}(M)$ is an artinian Gorenstein algebra which is isomorphic to $M$ as an $R$-module. If $g$ is a homogeneous polynomial of degree $d$, then $M$ is a graded $R$-module and its homogeneous components are given by $M_k = \image \theta_{g,k}$ where $\theta_{g,k}: R_{d-k} \to S_k$ is the map
\[ \theta_{g,k}(f) = \partial(f,g).
\]
We set $\theta_g: R \to S$ to be the map $\theta_g = \bigoplus_{k \geq 0} \theta_{g,k}$ which can also be described by $\theta_g(f) = \partial(f,g)$. This map $\theta_g$ is called the \emph{Catalecticant map} of $g$ and its image is $M = \bigoplus_{k \geq 0} M_k = \langle g \rangle$.
\section{The Apolarity Module of an Orbit Sum}\label{section:orbit sum}
Let $M = \langle g \rangle$ be a principally generated submodule of $S$ where $g$ is a {\it symmetric} homogeneous polynomial $g$ of degree $d$. Then $M$ is an $\mathfrak S_n$-stable subspace of $S$ and
\text{$\theta_{g,k}: R_{d-k} \to S_k$}
is equivariant. Thus, $M_k$ and $R_{d-k}/\ker \theta_{g,k} = (R/\mathrm{Ann}(M))_{d-k}$ are equivalent representations.
As $M_{d-k}$ is also equivalent to $(R/\mathrm{Ann}(M))_{d-k}$, the graded character of $M$ is palindromic in the sense that $\raisebox{2pt}{\large$\chi$}_{M_k} = \raisebox{2pt}{\large$\chi$}_{M_{d-k}}$ for all $k$.
We now restrict our attention to a specific family of symmetric functions. Let $L$ be a linear form and $d>0$ a positive integer. Let $\{ \sigma_1 L, \dots , \sigma_\ell L \}$ be the orbit of $L$. Define
$$
F= \Sigma _{i =1}^\ell \sigma_i(L^d) .
$$
We will consider the artinian Gorenstein ring $R/I_F$ where $I_F$ is the annihilator of $M = (F) \subset S$.
Suppose $\mathbf{a} = (a_1, \ldots, a_n) \in \Bbbk^n$ and let
\[ L = a_1 x_1 + \cdots + a_n x_n \in S_1.
\]
Let $b_1, \ldots, b_r$ be all the distinct coordinates of $\mathbf{a}$.
Define $$\mu_j = | \{ i \mid a_i = b_j\} |$$ for $1 \leq j \leq r$.
Reorder $b_1,\ldots,b_r$ so that $\mu_1 \geq \mu_2 \geq \cdots \geq \mu_r \geq 1$ and let
$\mu = (\mu_1, \ldots, \mu_r)$. Thus the partition $\mu \vdash n$ \emph{associated to} $\mathbf{a}$ characterizes the number of repeated coordinates in $\mathbf{a}$.
As mentioned above, $\mathfrak S_n$ acts on the left of tuples by $\sigma(\mathbf{a}) = (a_{\sigma^{-1}(1)},\ldots, a_{\sigma^{-1}(n)})$. The stabilizer of $\mathbf{a}$ is
\[ (\mathfrak S_n)_\mathbf{a} = \{ \sigma \in \mathfrak S_n \mid \sigma \mathbf{a} = \mathbf{a}\}.
\]
Let $\ell$ be the index of the stabilizer of $\mathbf{a}$ in $\mathfrak S_n$. Then $\ell = \binom{n}{\mu} := n!/(\mu_1!\cdots \mu_r!)$.
If $\sigma_1, \dots ,\sigma_\ell$ are left coset representatives of the stabilizer of $\mathbf{a}$ in $\mathfrak S_n$ then let $F \in S_d$ be the homogeneous symmetric polynomial determined by $\mathbf{a}$, i.e.
\begin{equation}
F = \sum_{i=1}^\ell \sigma_i L^d.
\label{eq:Fdef}
\end{equation}
In order to obtain the Hilbert function of $R/I_F$ explicitly, where $F$ is as in (\ref{eq:Fdef}) above, we use the fact that $\mathrm{HF}_{R/I_F} = \mathrm{HF}_{M}$ and instead examine
\[ M = \bigoplus_{k \geq 0} \image \theta_{F,k}
\]
where $\theta_{F,k}(f) = \partial(f,F)$.
\begin{lemma}\label{lem:thetaformula}
For $F = \sum_{i=1}^\ell \sigma_i L^d \in S_d$ as described above and $\mathbf{x}^\mathbf{b}$, a monomial of degree $d-k$, we have
\[
\theta_{F,k}(\mathbf{x}^\mathbf{b})
= \frac{d!}{k!} \sum_{i=1}^\ell \mathbf{a}^{\sigma_i^{-1}(\mathbf{b})} \sigma_i L^k.
\]
\begin{proof} The proof is by induction on $d-k$.
If $d-k=0$ then $\mathbf{b} = (0,\ldots,0)$ and the formula obviously holds.
Assume that the formula above holds for every monomial $\mathbf{x}^\mathbf{b}$ of some fixed degree $d-k$. Differentiating our formula by $x_j$ gives
\begin{align*}
\partial(\mathbf{x}^{\mathbf{b} + \mathbf{e}_j},F)
&= \partial(x_j,\, \partial(\mathbf{x}^\mathbf{b}, F))\\
&= \partial\left(x_j,\ \frac{d!}{k!} \sum_{i=1}^\ell \mathbf{a}^{\sigma_i^{-1}(\mathbf{b})} \sigma_i L^k\right) \\
&= \frac{d!}{k!} \sum_{i=1}^\ell \mathbf{a}^{\sigma_i^{-1}(\mathbf{b})} \partial(x_j, \sigma_i L^k)\\
&= \frac{d!}{k!} \sum_{i=1}^\ell \mathbf{a}^{\sigma_i^{-1}(\mathbf{b})} k (\sigma_i L^{k-1}) \partial(x_j, \sigma_i L).
\end{align*}
Since $\sigma_i L = a_{\sigma_i^{-1}(1)}x_1 + \cdots + a_{\sigma_i^{-1}(n)}x_n$, we have $\partial(x_j, \sigma_i L) = a_{\sigma_i^{-1}(j)}$. Furthermore,
$a_{\sigma_i^{-1}(j)} = \mathbf{a}^{\mathbf{e}_{\sigma_i^{-1}(j)}} = \mathbf{a}^{\sigma_i^{-1}(\mathbf{e}_j)}$ where $\mathbf{e}_j$ is the $j$-th standard basis vector of $\Bbbk^n$.
So, $\mathbf{a}^{\sigma_i^{-1}(\mathbf{b})} a_{\sigma_i^{-1}(j)} = \mathbf{a}^{\sigma_i^{-1}(\mathbf{b})} \mathbf{a}^{\sigma_i^{-1}(\mathbf{e}_j)} = \mathbf{a}^{\sigma_i^{-1}(\mathbf{b} + \mathbf{e}_j)}$.
Thus,
\begin{align*}
\partial(\mathbf{x}^{\mathbf{b} + \mathbf{e}_j},F)
&= \frac{d!}{k!} \sum_{i=1}^\ell \mathbf{a}^{\sigma_i^{-1}(\mathbf{b})} k (\sigma_i L^{k-1}) \partial(x_j, \sigma_i L)\\
&= \frac{d!}{(k-1)!} \sum_{i=1}^\ell \mathbf{a}^{\sigma_i^{-1}(\mathbf{b} + \mathbf{e}_j)} \sigma_i L^{k-1},
\end{align*}
proving the formula holds for any monomial $\mathbf{x}^{\mathbf{b}+\mathbf{e}_j}$ of degree ${d- k+1}$.
\end{proof}
\end{lemma}
Recall that $\sigma_1,\ldots, \sigma_\ell$ are representatives for the left-cosets of $(\mathfrak S_n)_\mathbf{a}$.
We define the $\ell$-dimensional vector space $V$ as the span of these representatives of the left-cosets of the stabilizer of $\mathbf{a}$. Then $V$ is a representation of $\mathfrak S_n$ where $\tau(\sigma_i) := \sigma_j$ if $\tau \sigma_i \in \sigma_j (\mathfrak S_n)_\mathbf{a}$.
For any given degree $k$, we define $\phi_k : V \to S_k$ by setting
\[ \phi_k(\sigma_i) = \sigma_i L^k
\]
for $1 \leq i \leq \ell$ and extending linearly. The definition of $\phi_k$ does not depend on our choice of coset representatives since if $\tau \in \sigma_i (\mathfrak S_n)_\mathbf{a}$, then $\tau = \sigma_i \gamma$ for some $\gamma \in (\mathfrak S_n)_\mathbf{a}$ and hence $\tau L^k = \sigma_i \gamma L^k = \sigma_i L^k$. For similar reasons, $\phi_k$ is equivariant.
Let $\psi_k : R_k \to V$ be the linear map given by
\[ \psi_k(\mathbf{x}^\mathbf{b}) = \sum_{i=1}^\ell \binom{k}{\mathbf{b}} \mathbf{a}^{\sigma_i^{-1}\mathbf{b}} \sigma_i.
\]
\begin{lemma} \label{lem:rankpsi} For all $k \geq 0$, $\rank \psi_k = \rank \phi_k$.
\begin{proof}
The coefficient of $\mathbf{x}^\mathbf{b} \in S_k$ appearing in $\phi_k(\sigma_i)$ is equal to the coefficient of $\sigma_i^{-1} \mathbf{x}^\mathbf{b} = \mathbf{x}^{\sigma_i^{-1}\mathbf{b}}$ in $L^k$, which is $\binom{k}{\mathbf{b}} \mathbf{a}^{\sigma_i^{-1}\mathbf{b}}$.
If we order the monomial bases of $R_k$ and $S_k$ in the same manner, then the matrices of $\phi_k$ and $\psi_k$ are transposes of each other, and thus have the same rank.
\end{proof}
\end{lemma}
\begin{lemma} The map $\psi_k$ is equivariant.
\begin{proof}
For $\tau \in \mathfrak S_n$,
$\tau \psi_k(\mathbf{x}^\mathbf{b}) = \sum_{i=1}^\ell \binom{k}{\mathbf{b}} \mathbf{a}^{\sigma_i^{-1} \mathbf{b}} \tau \sigma_i$. In this expression, $\tau \sigma_i$ holds the place of the left coset $\tau \sigma_i (\mathfrak S_n)_\mathbf{a}$.
Let $\sigma_j$ be our chosen representative for this coset. Thus, $\tau \sigma_i (\mathfrak S_n)_\mathbf{a} = \sigma_j (\mathfrak S_n)_\mathbf{a}$ and hence $\tau \sigma_i = \sigma_j \gamma$ for some $\gamma \in (\mathfrak S_n)_\mathbf{a}$.
Rearranging we get $\sigma_i^{-1} = \gamma^{-1} \sigma_j^{-1} \tau$
and therefore $\mathbf{a}^{\sigma_i^{-1}\mathbf{b}} = \mathbf{a}^{\sigma_j^{-1} \tau \mathbf{b}}$, since $\mathbf{a}^{\gamma \mathbf{c}} = \mathbf{a}^\mathbf{c}$ for any $\gamma$ in the stabilizer of $\mathbf{a}$ and any exponent vector $\mathbf{c}$.
Thus,
\[ \tau \psi_k(\mathbf{x}^\mathbf{b}) = \sum_{i=1}^\ell \binom{k}{\mathbf{b}} \mathbf{a}^{\sigma_i^{-1} \mathbf{b}} \tau \sigma_i = \sum_{j=1}^\ell \mathbf{a}^{\sigma_j^{-1} \tau \mathbf{b}}\sigma_j = \psi_k(\tau \mathbf{b})
\]
\end{proof}
\end{lemma}
Finally, let $\nu_k: R_k \to R_k$ be the non-singular equivariant linear scaling map defined by
\[ \nu_k(\mathbf{x}^\mathbf{b}) = \binom{k}{\mathbf{b}}^{-1} \mathbf{x}^\mathbf{b}= \frac{b_1! \cdots b_n!}{k!} \mathbf{x}^\mathbf{b}.
\]
We thus have the following sequence of maps:
\[ R_{d-k} \stackrel{\nu_{d-k}}{\longrightarrow} R_{d-k} \stackrel{\psi_{d-k}}{\longrightarrow} V \stackrel{\phi_k}{\longrightarrow} S_k.
\]
The following theorem gives the ``factored'' presentation of $\theta_{F,k}$ promised earlier.
\begin{thm} \label{thm:theta} Let $F = \sum_{i=1}^\ell \sigma_i L^d \in S_d$ and let $\theta_{F,k}: R_{d-k} \to S_k$, $\nu_{k}$, $\phi_k$ and $\psi_k$ be as given above. For all $k$ with $0 \leq k \leq d$, we have
\[ \theta_{F,k} = \frac{d!}{k!}\, \phi_k \circ \psi_{d-k} \circ \nu_{d-k}.
\]
\begin{proof}
Applying the composition $\phi_k \circ \psi_{d-k} \circ \nu_{d-k}$ to a monomial $\mathbf{x}^\mathbf{b} \in R_{d-k}$ and using linearity gives
\begin{align*}
\phi_k \circ \psi_{d-k} \circ \nu_{d-k}(\mathbf{x}^\mathbf{b})
&= \binom{d-k}{\mathbf{b}}^{-1} \phi_k \circ \psi_{d-k}(\mathbf{x}^\mathbf{b})\\
&= \binom{d-k}{\mathbf{b}}^{-1} \sum_{i=1}^\ell \binom{d-k}{\mathbf{b}} \mathbf{a}^{\sigma_i^{-1}\mathbf{b}}\phi_k(\sigma_i)\\
&= \sum_{i=1}^\ell \mathbf{a}^{\sigma_i^{-1}\mathbf{b}} \sigma_i L^k.
\end{align*}
The result then follows from Lemma \ref{lem:thetaformula}.
\end{proof}
\end{thm}
The Hilbert function of $R/I_F$ is equal to the Hilbert function of the image of $\theta_F$. Thus, to determine $\mathrm{HF}_{R/I_F}(k)$ it suffices to find the rank of $\theta_{F,k} = \frac{d!}{k!} \phi_k \circ \psi_{d-k} \circ \nu_{d-k}$. Since $\nu_{d-k}$ is non-singular, it suffices to determine the rank of the composition of $\phi_k$ and $\psi_{d-k}$. To that end, we need to examine the relationship between $\image \psi_{d-k}$ and $\ker \phi_k$.
Using the distinguished basis $\sigma_1,\ldots, \sigma_\ell$ of $V$, we can define the dot
product of two vectors $v = c_1 \sigma_1 + \cdots + c_\ell \sigma_\ell$ and $w = d_1 \sigma_1 + \cdots + d_\ell \sigma_\ell$ to be $v\cdot w = c_1 \overline{d_1} + \cdots + c_\ell \overline{d_\ell}$.
In the following results, when we require $\mathbf{a}$ to have real coordinates, we still allow $\Bbbk$ to be one of $\mathbb Q$, $\mathbb R$, or $\mathbb C$.
\begin{prop}\label{prop:perpkerimg} If the coordinates of $\mathbf{a}$ are real then $\ker \phi_k$ and $\image \psi_k$ are orthogonal complements with respect to the dot product on $V$. In particular, their intersection is trivial.
\begin{proof}
Take $v \in \ker \phi_k$ and $w \in \image \psi_k$. If $v = \sum_{i=1}^\ell c_i \sigma_i$, then $\phi_k(v) = \sum_{i=1}^\ell c_i \sigma_i L^k = 0$. The coefficient of $\mathbf{x}^\mathbf{b}$ in $\sum_{i=1}^\ell c_i \sigma_i L^k$ is $\sum_{i=1}^\ell c_i \binom{k}{\mathbf{b}} \mathbf{a}^{\sigma_i^{-1} \mathbf{b}}$ and this coefficient must be zero for each monomial $\mathbf{x}^\mathbf{b}$ of degree $k$.
Since $w \in \image \psi_k$, there is a homogeneous polynomial
$f = \sum_{\mathbf{b}} r_\mathbf{b} \mathbf{x}^{\mathbf{b}}$ of degree $k$ with $w = \psi_k(f) = \sum_\mathbf{b} r_\mathbf{b} \sum_{i=1}^\ell \binom{k}{\mathbf{b}} \mathbf{a}^{\sigma_i^{-1} \mathbf{b}} \sigma_i$. Thus, $w = \sum_{i=1}^\ell d_i \sigma_i$ where $d_i = \sum_\mathbf{b} r_\mathbf{b} \binom{k}{\mathbf{b}} \mathbf{a}^{\sigma_i^{-1} \mathbf{b}}$. Since $\mathbf{a}$ is real, $\overline{d_i} = \sum_\mathbf{b} \overline{r_\mathbf{b}} \binom{k}{\mathbf{b}} \mathbf{a}^{\sigma_i^{-1} \mathbf{b}}$.
Therefore,
\begin{align*}
v \cdot w
&= \sum_{i=1}^\ell c_i \overline{d_i} \\
&= \sum_{i=1}^\ell c_i \sum_\mathbf{b} \overline{r_\mathbf{b}} \binom{k}{\mathbf{b}} \mathbf{a}^{\sigma_i^{-1} \mathbf{b}}\\
&= \sum_\mathbf{b} \overline{r_\mathbf{b}} \sum_{i=1}^\ell c_i \binom{k}{\mathbf{b}} \mathbf{a}^{\sigma_i^{-1} \mathbf{b}}\\
&= 0,
\end{align*}
since $\sum_{i=1}^\ell c_i \binom{k}{\mathbf{b}} \mathbf{a}^{\sigma_i^{-1} \mathbf{b}} = 0$ for each $\mathbf{x}^\mathbf{b}$ of degree $k$. Furthermore, $\phi_k$ and $\psi_k$ have the same rank since their matrices are transposes of each other. Thus, $(\ker \phi_k)^\perp = \image \psi_k$.
\end{proof}
\end{prop}
\begin{lemma} \label{lemma:kercontainment} If the coordinates of $\mathbf{a}$ are real and $a_1 + \cdots + a_n \neq 0$ then $\ker \phi_{k+1} \subseteq \ker \phi_k$ and $\image \psi_k \subseteq \image \psi_{k+1}$ for all $k \geq 0$.
\begin{proof}
Using Proposition \ref{prop:perpkerimg}, it suffices to show the containment of the kernels.
If we suppose $v = \sum_{i=1}^\ell c_i \sigma_i \in \ker \phi_{k+1}$, then $\sum_{i=1}^\ell c_i \sigma_i L^{k+1} =0$. Therefore $\partial(x_1+\cdots + x_n,\, \phi_{k+1}(v))$ is both zero and
\begin{align*}
\partial(x_1+\cdots + x_n,\, \phi_{k+1}(v))
&= \sum_{i=1}^\ell c_i \partial(x_1+ \cdots +x_n,\, \sigma_i L^{k+1})\\
&= \sum_{i=1}^\ell c_i (k+1) (a_1 + \cdots + a_n) \sigma_i L^k\\
&= (a_1 + \cdots + a_n) (k+1) \phi_k(v).
\end{align*}
Since we have assumed that $a_1+ \cdots + a_n \neq 0$, we have $v \in \ker \phi_k$. Thus, $\ker \phi_{k+1} \subseteq \ker \phi_k$.
\end{proof}
\end{lemma}
\begin{prop} If the coordinates of $\mathbf{a}$ are real and $a_1 + \cdots + a_n \neq 0$ then for any $i, j \geq 0$, $\ker \phi_i$ and $\image \psi_j$ meet transversely.
\begin{proof}
Since $\ker \phi_j$ and $\image \psi_j$ are orthogonal complements, we have $\ker \phi_j + \image \psi_j = V$ and $\ker \phi_j \cap \image \psi_j = 0$.
If $i \geq j$ then, by Lemma \ref{lemma:kercontainment}, $\ker \phi_i \subseteq \ker \phi_j$ and hence $\ker \phi_i \cap \image \psi_j = 0$.
If $i < j$ then, by Lemma \ref{lemma:kercontainment}, $\ker \phi_j \subseteq \ker \phi_i$ and hence $\ker \phi_i + \image \psi_j = V$.
\end{proof}
\end{prop}
\begin{prop} \label{prop:gradedcharM}
If the coordinates of $\mathbf{a}$ are real and $a_1 + \cdots + a_n \neq 0$ then for any integer $k \leq d/2$, $M_k$, $M_{d-k}$ and $\image \phi_k$ are all equivalent representations.
\begin{proof}
Fix a non-negative integer $k$ for which $k \leq d/2$ and, consequently, $k \leq \lfloor d/2 \rfloor \leq d-k$.
As the kernels of the maps $(\phi_i)_{i \in \mathbb N}$ are decreasing in $i$
and the images of $(\psi_i)_{i \in \mathbb N}$ are increasing, we have
$\ker \phi_{\lfloor d/2 \rfloor} \subseteq \ker \phi_k$ and
$\image \psi_{\lfloor d/2 \rfloor} \subseteq \image \phi_{d-k}$.
So, since $\ker \phi_{\lfloor d/2 \rfloor} + \image \psi_{\lfloor d/2 \rfloor} = V$, we have that
$\ker \phi_{k} + \image \psi_{d-k} = V$.
Finally, $M_k = \image \theta_{F, k}$ and $\theta_{F,k} = \frac{d!}{k!}\,\phi_k \circ \psi_{d-k} \circ \nu_{d-k}$ by Theorem \ref{thm:theta}. Since $\nu_{d-k}$ is surjective, we see that $M_k$ can be expressed more simply as $M_k = \image(\phi_k \circ \psi_{d-k})$. Therefore we have the following chain of equivalences:
\begin{align*}
M_k
&= \image(\phi_{k} \circ \psi_{d-k}) \\
&\cong \image \psi_{d-k} / (\ker \phi_k \cap \image \psi_{d-k}) \\
&\cong (\ker \phi_{k} + \image \psi_{d-k}) / \ker \phi_k \\
&\cong V / \ker \phi_{k} \\
&\cong \image \phi_k.
\end{align*}
As the graded character of $M$ is palindromic, $M_{d-k}$ and $M_k$ are also equivalent.
\end{proof}
\end{prop}
\begin{prop} \label{prop:hilbM} Suppose that the coordinates of $\mathbf{a}$ are real and $a_1 + \cdots + a_n \neq 0$.
The Hilbert function of $M = \langle F \rangle$, the principal submodule of $S$ generated by $F \in S_d$, is
\[ \mathrm{HF}_{M}(k) = \begin{cases} \rank \phi_k, & {\rm if\ }k \leq d/2;\\
\rank \phi_{d-k}, &{\rm if\ }k \geq d/2
\end{cases}
\]
and is unimodal.
\begin{proof}
The degree $k$ homogeneous component of $M$ is
$M_k = \image \theta_k = \image (\phi_k \circ \psi_{d-k})$ by
Theorem \ref{thm:theta} and the fact that $\nu_{d-k}$ is surjective. Thus, $\mathrm{HF}_{M}(k) = \dim_\Bbbk M_k = \rank(\phi_k \circ \psi_{d-k})$.
Since $\ker \phi_k$ and $\image \psi_{d-k}$ are transverse,
the rank of the composition of $\phi_k$ and $\psi_{d-k}$ is the minimum of their ranks. By Lemma~\ref{lem:rankpsi}, $\psi_{d-k}$
and $\phi_{d-k}$ have the same rank. Thus $\mathrm{HF}_{M}(k) = \min(\rank \phi_k, \rank \phi_{d-k})$.
Now using Lemma~\ref{lemma:kercontainment}, we see that $\rk \phi_k$ is a non-decreasing function of $k$. The formula for
$\mathrm{HF}_M(k)$ now follows. The unimodality follows immediately.
\end{proof}
\end{prop}
\section{The Orbit of a Point and the Algebras $R_\mu$ of DeConcini and Procesi} \label{section:point}
From the results of the previous section, it suffices to know the character and dimension of each $\image \phi_k$
to determine the graded character and Hilbert function of $M$.
In this section, we relate the image of the maps $\phi_k$ to the homogeneous coordinate ring
of the \mbox{$\mathfrak S_n$-orbit} of a projective point. Through this connection, we will express the graded character of $M$ in terms of a Hall-Littlewood Polynomial.
Recall that $L = a_1 x_1 + \cdots + a_n x_n$ is a fixed linear form. Let $p = [a_1: \cdots : a_n] \in \mathbb P^{n-1}$
and $\sigma p = [a_{\sigma^{-1}(1)}: \cdots: a_{\sigma^{-1}(n)}]$ for $\sigma \in \mathfrak S_n$.
The orbit of $p$ is the projective variety $X = \{ \sigma p \mid \sigma \in \mathfrak S_n\}$. Its homogeneous coordinate
ring is $\Bbbk[X] = R/I_X$, a one-dimensional arithmetically Cohen-Macaulay ring,
where $I_X$ is the ideal of homogeneous polynomials vanishing on $X$.
The following elementary lemma gives a sufficient condition for the projective orbit $X$ and the affine orbit $Y = \{ \sigma \mathbf{a} \mid \sigma \in \mathfrak S_n \}$ to have the same number of points.
\begin{lemma} If $a_1 + \cdots + a_n \neq 0$ then $X$ and $Y$ contain the same number of points.
\begin{proof}
The set $X$ is obtained from $Y$ by identifying affine points which lie on the same line through the origin. Assume that $X$ and $Y$ do not have the same size, so there must be two distinct points $\sigma_i \mathbf{a}, \sigma_j \mathbf{a} \in Y$ which represent the same projective point. Thus, for $\tau = \sigma_j^{-1} \sigma_i$, $\mathbf{a}$ and $\tau \mathbf{a} = (a_{\tau^{-1}(1)}, \ldots, a_{\tau^{-1}(n)})$ are distinct points of $Y$, but are equal in $X$. So, there must be some non-zero $z \in \mathbb C$ with $a_i = z a_{\tau^{-1}(i)}$ for all $1 \leq i \leq n$. If $i$ is contained in a cycle of $\tau^{-1}$ of length $m$ then $a_i = z a_{\tau^{-1}(i)} = z^2 a_{\tau^{-2}(i)} = \cdots = z^m a_i$. Thus, $z$ is an $m$-th root of unity. Also, since $\mathbf{a} \neq \tau \mathbf{a}$, we have $z \neq 1$. Therefore, the sum of the coordinates of $\mathbf{a}$ over the $m$-cycle of $\tau^{-1}$ containing $i$ is
\begin{align*}
a_i + a_{\tau^{-1}(i)} + \cdots + a_{\tau^{-(m-1)}(i)}
&= a_i + z^{-1} a_i + \cdots + z^{-(m-1)} a_i\\
&= a_i (1 + z^{-1} + \cdots + z^{-(m-1)} )\\
&= 0.
\end{align*}
Thus, by decomposing $\tau^{-1}$ into its cycles and summing over each cycle, we have expressed $a_1 + \cdots + a_n$ as a collection of disjoint sums which are all zero.
\end{proof}
\end{lemma}
Let $N = \bigoplus_{k \geq 0} N_k \subseteq S$ where $N_k = \image \phi_k$. Since $\phi_k:V \to S_k$ is given by $\phi(\sigma_i) = \sigma_i L^k$,
we have $N_k = {\text{span}}_\Bbbk (\sigma_1 L^k, \ldots, \sigma_\ell L^k)$.
\begin{prop} The annihilator of $N$ is $I_X$ and, furthermore, $N$ and $\Bbbk[X] = R/I_X$ are equivalent graded representations of $\mathfrak S_n$.
\begin{proof}
If $\mathbf{x}^\mathbf{b}$ is a monomial of degree $k$, then $\partial(\mathbf{x}^\mathbf{b}, L^k) = \mathbf{b}! \binom{k}{\mathbf{b}} \mathbf{a}^\mathbf{b} = k! \mathbf{a}^\mathbf{b}$ using the multinomial theorem.
Thus, for an arbitrary polynomial $f \in R_k$, we have $\partial(f, L^k) = k! f(\mathbf{a})$ by linearity and hence
\[ \partial(f, \sigma_i L^k) = \partial(\sigma_i^{-1}f, L^k) = k! (\sigma_i^{-1}f)(\mathbf{a}) = k! f(\sigma_i \mathbf{a})
\]
for all $1 \leq i \leq \ell$. By the definition of $I_X$, $f \in (I_X)_k$ if and only if $f(\sigma_i \mathbf{a}) = 0$ for all $1 \leq i \leq \ell$. Thus, $f \in (I_X)_k$ if and only if $\partial(f, \sigma_i L^k) = 0$ for all $1 \leq i \leq \ell$ and hence $(I_X)_k = N_k^\perp = \mathrm{Ann}(N)_k$ for all $k \geq 0$. Thus $I_X = \mathrm{Ann}(N)$ as both are homogeneous ideals of $R$.
As mentioned in the introduction, the $\mathfrak S_n$-invariant perfect pairings $\partial_k: R_k \times S_k \to \Bbbk$ induce equivalences between
each $(R/\mathrm{Ann}(N))_k$ and the dual representation of each $N_k$. Since the $N_k$ are self-dual, $R/I_X$ and $N$ are equivalent graded representations.
\end{proof}
\end{prop}
\begin{prop} If $a_1+\cdots +a_n \neq 0$ then $e_1 = \overline{x_1}+ \cdots +\overline{x_n}$ is not a zero divisor in $\Bbbk[X] = R/I_X$. Consequently,
$\Bbbk[X]_k \cong \bigoplus_{i=0}^k (\Bbbk[X]/(e_1))_i$ as representations for all $k \geq 0$.
\begin{proof}
If $e_1 f \in I_X$ for some $f \in R$, then $e_1(\sigma \mathbf{a}) f(\sigma \mathbf{a}) = 0$ for all $\sigma \in \mathfrak S_n$. As $e_1(\sigma \mathbf{a}) = e_1(\mathbf{a}) = a_1 + \cdots + a_n \neq 0$, we see that $f(\sigma \mathbf{a}) = 0$ for all $\sigma \in \mathfrak S_n$. That is, $f \in I_X$. Consequently, $e_1$ is not a zero divisor of $\Bbbk[X]$.
Hence, $\Bbbk[X]_k$ and $(e_1 \Bbbk[X]_{k-1}) \oplus (\Bbbk[X]/(e_1))_k$ are equivalent representations. Also,
$e_1 \Bbbk[X]_{k-1}$ and $\Bbbk[X]_{k-1}$ are equivalent. Thus the result follows by induction.
\end{proof}
\end{prop}
\begin{remark}
Again, let $Y = \{\sigma \mathbf{a} \in \mathbb A^n \mid \sigma \in \mathfrak S_n\}$ be the affine orbit of $\mathbf{a} = (a_1,\ldots, a_n)$ and let $\Bbbk[Y] = R/I_Y$
be its (inhomogeneous) coordinate ring. We define the \emph{associated graded algebra} of $\Bbbk[Y]$ to be
\[ \gr(\Bbbk[Y]) = \bigoplus_{k \geq 0} \Bbbk[Y]_{\leq k} / \Bbbk[Y]_{\leq k-1}.
\]
Take a non-zero degree $k$ polynomial $f$ and express it as $f = f_k + \cdots + f_0$ where each $f_i$ is homogeneous of degree $i$ and $f_k \neq 0$.
The \emph{leading form} of $f$ is $\LF(f) = f_k$.
The associated graded algebra $\gr(\Bbbk[Y])$ is isomorphic to $R/\gr(I_Y)$ where $\gr(I_Y) = \{ \LF(f) \mid f \in I_Y\}$.
One can see this as follows: two degree $k$ polynomials $f,g \in \Bbbk[Y]_{\leq k}$ are equal modulo $\Bbbk[Y]_{\leq k-1}$ if and only if the leading form of their difference
is in $\gr(I_Y)_k$. Thus, $\Bbbk[Y]_{\leq k} / \Bbbk[Y]_{\leq k-1}$ is isomorphic to $R_k/\gr(I_Y)_k$. One can also check that this isomorphism is equivariant.
\end{remark}
\begin{prop} If $a_1 +\cdots +a_n = t\neq 0$ then $\Bbbk[X]/(e_1-t) \cong \Bbbk[Y]$.
Furthermore $\Bbbk[X]/(e_1)$ and $\gr(\Bbbk[Y])$ are isomorphic graded algebras and equivalent representations of $\mathfrak S_n$.
\begin{proof}
For the first assertion it suffices to show that $I_X + (e_1-t) = I_Y$. Since this implies that $I_X + (e_1) = \gr(I_Y)$ the second assertion will also follow.
Clearly $I_X + (e_1-t) \subseteq I_Y$. For the opposite inclusion, consider a non-zero element $f \in I_Y$. Write
$f = f_k + \cdots + f_0 \in I_Y$ where each $f_i \in R_i$ and $f_k \neq 0$.
We homogenize $f$ with respect to $e_1(\mathbf{x})/t = (x_1+ \cdots + x_n)/(a_1 + \cdots + a_n)$ to
obtain
\[ f' = f_k + \frac{e_1(\mathbf{x})}{t}f_{k-1} + \frac{e_1(\mathbf{x})^2}{t^2}f_{k-2}+ \cdots + \frac{e_1(\mathbf{x})^k}{t^k} f_0.
\]
As $f$ vanishes on $Y$, we see that the homogeneous polynomial $f'$ vanishes on $X$. Thus, $f' \in I_X$.
Since $e_1(\mathbf{x})^s \equiv t^s \pmod{(e_1(\mathbf{x})-t)}$ we see that
$f \equiv f' \pmod{(e_1(\mathbf{x})-t})$ and thus $f \in I_X + (e_1-t)$.
\end{proof}
\end{prop}
The content of the following proposition appears in other works (cf. \cite[Theorem 4.5]{GH2008}), but we include it here for completeness.
\begin{prop} $\Bbbk[Y]_{\leq k}$ and $\gr(\Bbbk[Y])_{\leq k}$ are equivalent representations.
\begin{proof}
Consider the following short exact sequence of representations:
\[
0 \to \Bbbk[Y]_{\leq k-1}
\to \Bbbk[Y]_{\leq k} \to \Bbbk[Y]_{\leq k}/\Bbbk[Y]_{\leq k-1} \to 0.
\]
Since all short exact sequences of representations of finite groups split, $\Bbbk[Y]_{\leq k}$ and $(\Bbbk[Y]_{\leq k}/\Bbbk[Y]_{\leq k-1}) \oplus \Bbbk[Y]_{\leq k-1}$ are equivalent. So, by induction on $k$,
$\Bbbk[Y]_{\leq k}$ and $\gr(\Bbbk[Y])_{\leq k}$ are equivalent representations.
\end{proof}
\end{prop}
Connecting these equivalencies, we have shown that
\begin{prop}
\[N_k \cong \Bbbk[X]_k \cong (\Bbbk[X]/(e_1))_{\leq k} \cong \gr(\Bbbk[Y])_{\leq k} \cong \Bbbk[Y]_{\leq k}.\]
\label{prop:NandRmu}
\end{prop}
\begin{remark}
A remarkable fact, proved by Garsia and Procesi, is that $\gr(\Bbbk[Y])$ does not depend on the values of the coordinates of $\mathbf{a}$, but simply on its associated partition $\mu$ \cite[Remark 3.1]{MR1168926}. In view of that, the symbol
\[ R_\mu = \gr(\Bbbk[Y])
\]
is used to denote this algebra and $I_\mu = \gr(I_Y)$ denotes the ideal appearing in its presentation as a quotient of $R$.
\end{remark}
The algebra $R_\mu$ has a number of other descriptions.
First, like any artinian algebra, $R_\mu$ is determined by its socle. The socle of $R_\mu$ is the unique irreducible representation of type $\mu$ which appears in the homogeneous component $R_{n(\mu)}$ of degree
\[ n(\mu) = \mu_2 + 2 \mu_3 + \cdots + (r-1) \mu_r.
\]
In fact, $R_{n(\mu)}$ is the lowest degree component of $R$ in which this irreducible representation occurs.
Originally, DeConcini and Procesi \cite{MR629470} defined the ring $R_\mu$ to be the cohomology ring of the variety of flags fixed by a unipotent matrix of shape $\mu = (\mu_1,\ldots, \mu_r)$. They showed that $R_\mu$ could be presented as a quotient of $\mathbb Q[x_1,\ldots,x_n]$ by a homogeneous ideal $I_\mu$ and conjectured a set of generators for $I_\mu$. Tanisaki \cite{MR685425} conjectured a simpler set of generators for $I_\mu$ and, eventually, Weyman \cite{MR1016262} proved these conjectures. Weyman also conjectured a minimal generating set for $I_\mu$, which Biagioli, Faridi and Rosas found to be minimal in some cases and redundant in others \cite{MR2448086}. Garsia and Procesi used Tanisaki's description of $I_\mu$ to show that $R_\mu = \gr(\Bbbk[Y])$ as previously mentioned.
We refer the reader to the introduction of \cite{MR1168926} for the progression of papers that led to the graded character of $R_\mu$.
As an ungraded representation, $R_\mu$ is equivalent to the representation afforded by the left cosets of the Young subgroup indexed by $\mu$ or, equivalently \cite[\S5.4]{MR2538310}, to the subrepresentation of $R_{n(\mu)}$ which is spanned by monomials of the form $\prod_{j=1}^r (x_{i_{j,1}} x_{i_{j,2}} \cdots x_{i_{j,\,\mu_j}})^{(j-1)}$ for distinct indices $i_{j,k} \in \{1,\ldots, n\}$. The graded character of $R_\mu$ is given by the combinatorial Hall-Littlewood polynomial:
\begin{equation}
\raisebox{2pt}{\large$\chi$}_{R_\mu}(t) = Q_\mu(x_x,\dots,x_n;t) = \sum_{\lambda \vdash n} K_{\lambda, \mu}(1/t)t^{n(\mu)} \chi^\lambda
\label{eq:Rmuchar}
\end{equation}
where $K_{\lambda, \mu}(t) \in \mathbb N[t]$ are the Kostka-Foulkes polynomials \cite[Chapter III.6]{MR553598}.
Here $$Q_\mu(x_x,\dots,x_n;t) = t^{n(\nu)}Q'_\mu(x_x,\dots,x_n;t^{-1})$$
where $Q'_\mu(x_1,\ldots,x_n; t)$ is the modified Hall-Littlewood polynomial (see \cite[\S3]{MR1399504}).
The twist in formula (\ref{eq:Rmuchar}) arising from the term $K_{\lambda, \mu}(1/t)t^{n(\mu)}$ where one might expect $K_{\lambda, \mu}(t)$ makes the coefficient of $K_{\lambda, \mu}(t)$ in degree $k$ count the multiplicity of
the irreducible representation of type $\lambda$ that occurs in $(R_\mu)_{n(\mu) - k}$. That is, exponents on $t$ in $K_{\lambda, \mu}(t)$ measure degrees down from the socle of $R_\mu$, rather than up from the constants.
Since $N_k \cong \gr(\Bbbk[Y])_{\leq k} \cong (R_\mu)_{\leq k}$, the graded character of $N$ is
\begin{align*}
\raisebox{2pt}{\large$\chi$}_N(t)
&= \sum_{k \geq 0} \raisebox{2pt}{\large$\chi$}_{(R_\mu)_{\leq k}} t^k\\
&= \frac{1}{1-t} \sum_{k \geq 0} \raisebox{2pt}{\large$\chi$}_{(R_\mu)_k} t^k\\
&= \frac{1}{1-t} \raisebox{2pt}{\large$\chi$}_{R_\mu}(t).
\end{align*}
Thus we have proved
\begin{thm}\label{thm:maintheorem}
Suppose the coordinates of $\mathbf{a}$ are real and $a_1 + \cdots + a_n \neq 0$.
The graded character $\raisebox{2pt}{\large$\chi$}_M(t) = \sum_{k=0}^d \raisebox{2pt}{\large$\chi$}_{M_k}t^k$ of $M$
satisfies and is determined by the two equations
$$\raisebox{2pt}{\large$\chi$}_{M_k} = \raisebox{2pt}{\large$\chi$}_{M_{d-k}}\quad {\rm for\ }k \le d/2$$ and
\[ \raisebox{2pt}{\large$\chi$}_M(t) \equiv \frac{1}{1-t} \raisebox{2pt}{\large$\chi$}_{R_\mu}(t) \equiv \frac{1}{1-t}Q_\mu(x_1,\dots,x_n;t) \pmod{ (t^{\lfloor d/2 \rfloor + 1})}.
\]
In particular, $R/I_F$ and $M$ have the same graded character.
\end{thm}
\begin{remark}
The Hilbert function of $M$ always plateaus at the value of $\ell$. Since $R_\mu = \gr(\Bbbk[Y])$ has $\Bbbk$-dimension $\ell$ and its socle is in degree $n(\mu)$, by Proposition~(\ref{prop:NandRmu}) we have that $\dim_\Bbbk N_k = \dim_\Bbbk (R_\mu)_{\leq k} = \ell$ for any $k \geq n(\mu)$. Thus, by Proposition \ref{prop:hilbM}, $\dim_\Bbbk M_k = \ell$ for all $k$ with $n(\mu) \leq k \leq d - n(\mu)$. In particular, we need $d \geq 2 n(\mu)$ for one of the homogeneous components of $M$ to achieve dimension $\ell$.
When $d \geq 2 n(\mu)$ it is impossible to write $F$ as a sum of fewer than $\ell$ powers of linear forms since this would force the dimensions of the homogeneous components of $M$ to be smaller than $\ell$. Thus, in this case, the Waring rank of $F$ is $\ell$ and $F = \sum_{i=1}^\ell \sigma_i L^d$ is a Waring decomposition of $F$.
\end{remark}
\begin{remark}
One final observation is that Proposition~(\ref{prop:NandRmu}) implies that the Hilbert function of $N$ is strictly increasing until degree $k = n(\mu)$ and is constant thereafter. Thus, the Hilbert function of $M$ must be strictly unimodal in that it begins with a strictly increasing region, followed by a constant region and ends with a strictly decreasing region (before becoming constant at zero).
\end{remark}
\section{Further Work}
The most broad question we propose is to determine the graded characters and Hilbert functions of level artinian quotients of $R$ by $\mathfrak S_n$-stable homogeneous ideals. A graded artinian algebra is level if its socle is contained in a single degree. The ring $R_\mu$ and the coinvariant algebra $R_{1^n}$, in particular, are the most well-studied algebras of this type.
In the introduction, we mentioned the contributions of Bergeron, Garsia and Tesler \cite{MR1779775}, Roth \cite{MR2134302}, and
Morita, Wachi and Watanabe \cite{MR2542134} to this problem.
In this paper, we determined the graded characters of Gorenstein algebras whose socles were spanned by a single symmetric polynomial $F$ that is the sum of the $\mathfrak S_n$-orbit of a power of a linear form (whose coefficients are real and do not sum to zero).
It remains open to determine the graded character of $R/\mathrm{Ann}(F)$ when $F$ is an arbitrary symmetric polynomial.
As mentioned in the introduction, every homogeneous symmetric polynomial $F \in S_d$ can be written as a linear combination of orbit sums of powers of linear forms $F_1,\ldots, F_m$ with $F_i = \sigma_1 L_i^d + \cdots + \sigma_{\ell_i} L_i^d$.
We suggest that the graded character of $R/\mathrm{Ann}(F)$ may depend on the graded characters of $R/\mathrm{Ann}(F_1),\ldots, R/\mathrm{Ann}(F_m)$.
If the linear forms determining each $F_i$ are chosen generically and $d$ is sufficiently large, we expect that the character of $R/\mathrm{Ann}(F)$ will be the sum of the characters of $R/\mathrm{Ann}(F_1), \ldots, R/\mathrm{Ann}(F_m)$ in degrees where this is possible.
\bibliographystyle{amsplain}
|
\section{Introduction}\label{intro}
\subsection{Overview.} There are numerous measures designed to capture distance between distributions or -- more specifically -- overlap between components of a Gaussian mixture model. One of the oldest is the Bhattacharyya coefficient (see for instance \cite{bhatt} or \cite{fuku}), which reflects the amount of overlap between two statistical samples or distributions, a generalization of Mahalanobis distance described in \cite{day} or \cite{maclach}. In the context of information theory the most generic is the Kullback-Leibler divergence (see \cite{k-l}) -- a non-symmetric measure of difference between two distributions, also interpreted as expected discrimination information, which sets the link with possible classification performance. In \cite{inmana} an overlap coefficient is proposed that measures agreement between two distributions, it is applied to samples of data coming from normal distributions. Among more recent works, in \cite{dasgupta} a c-separation measure between multidimensional Gaussian distributions is defined, later developed in \cite{maitra} as exact-c-separation. In \cite{sun}, in the setup simplified to two clusters $k = 2$ and two dimensions $d = 2$, overlap rate is defined as a ratio of the joint density in its saddle point to its lower peak. The concept of ridge curve is introduced and further developed in \cite{ray} and \cite{ridge2}, generalized to arbitrary number of dimensions and clusters, turning the ridge curve into a ridgeline manifold of the dimension $k-1$.
All the measures use the parameters of the distributions to assess the overlap between the components and are typically formulated in terms of the underlying model. However, they can also be applied at the data level, as long as the class (or cluster) assignment is known. Then the model parameter estimates are used instead instead.
\subsection{Content.} In Section \ref{integral} we recall the generic concept of component overlap and its best linear approximation, we also show an example of an overlap assessment approach and point to common difficulties. Then, in Section \ref{fisher} we introduce what we refer to as Fisher's distinctness measure and we explain rationale behind it. Finally, in Section \ref{sim} we show results of a simulation study that illustrates how well the Fisher's coefficient can reflect the linear approximation of the original intractable overlap coefficient.
\section{Overlap of Distributions}\label{integral}
\subsection{Integral measure} The most generic and natural coefficient of overlap between components is what follows directly from the mixture definition:
\begin{equation*}
\text{MLE}_{\text{err}} = 1 - \int_{\mathbb{R}^d} \max \big( \pi_1 f_1 (\mu_1,\mathbf{\Sigma}_1), \ldots, \pi_k f_k (\mu_k,\mathbf{\Sigma}_k) \big ) (x) \mathrm{d} x,
\end{equation*}
which for $k=2$ classes simplifies to
\begin{equation}\label{eq:47}
\text{MLE}_{\text{err}} = \int_{\mathbb{R}^d} \min \big( \pi_1 f_1 (\mu_1,\mathbf{\Sigma}_1), \pi_2 f_2 (\mu_2,\mathbf{\Sigma}_2) \big ) (x) \mathrm{d} x,
\end{equation}
where for $d \geq 1$ by $f_i$, $i = 1, \ldots, k$ we denote component densities and by $\pi_i$, $i = 1, \ldots, k$ their corresponding mixing factors. Throughout this work we will assume though that equal mixing factors are assigned to all the components, which corresponds to balanced cluster sizes at the sample level.
Coefficient \eqref{eq:47} measures the actual overlap between two probability distribution and for $d=1$ is illustrated in Figure \ref{overlap}. It coincides with intuitive understanding of components' overlap and with its expected behavior --- grows with increasing within cluster dispersion (or variance, for $d = 1$) and decreasing distance between cluster centers. Also, it exhibits a strong link with classification performance, setting the upper limit for possible predictive accuracy in terms of maximum likelihood estimation (MLE) (see for instance \cite{kmb}).
Namely, best classification procedures based on likelihood ratio (MLE) or --- equivalently --- on its logarithm are given by
\begin{equation}\label{eq:45}
\text{loglik} (f_1, f_2) (x) = \text{log} \left(\frac{f_2(\mu_2, \mathbf{\Sigma}_2)(x)}{f_1(\mu_1, \mathbf{\Sigma}_1)(x)}\right).
\end{equation}
\begin{wrapfigure}[13]{r}{190pt}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.36\textwidth]{overlap}
\caption{Overlap (dark shadow) between $k = 2$ Gaussian components in $d = 1$ dimension, concept illustration.}
\label{overlap}
\end{center}
\end{wrapfigure}
For the value of \eqref{eq:45} less than a constant observation $x$ is classified to the first cluster, to the second otherwise. Hence the area of overlap between the components, as given by \ref{eq:47}, corresponds to the expected proportion of observations that are incorrectly classified by MLE-classification rule, based on the (estimated) parameters of the mixture. Therefore \eqref{eq:47} is denoted by $\text{MLE}_{\text{err}}$ and alternatively referred to as $\text{MLE}$-misclassification or error rate.
The fundamental problem with formula \eqref{eq:47}, and also one of the reasons for numerous alternative approaches to overlap assessment, is that \eqref{eq:47} is hardly tractable for mixtures with different covariance matrices in higher dimensions. Handling it analytically would require integrating functions of Gaussian density over regions whose description often does not possess a tractable formulaic description either. Therefore, it can only be treated as a theoretical overlap coefficient for Gaussian mixture models and for practical applications replaced with other approaches.
\subsection{Best linear approximation}\label{lin} The authors of \cite{ab} propose an approximation of \eqref{eq:47} --- best linear separator for $k=2$ Gaussian components in $d \geq 1$ dimensions and an algorithm to determine it for a given data set $X$. They derive a linear function of $x \in \mathbb{R}^d$ given by a vector $b \in \mathbb{R}^d$ such that for a given constant $c\in \mathbb{R}$ inequality $b^Tx \leq c$ classifies observation $x$ to the first cluster, while $b^Tx > c$ to the second. Vector $b$ and constant $c$ are obtained iteratively in order to minimize maximal probability of misclassification. As this approach will be used in our simulations, it is described below in more details following \cite{ab}.
For $x$ coming from component $l = 1,2$, $b^Tx$ has a univariate normal distribution with mean $b^T \mu_l$ and variance $b^T \mathbf{\Sigma}_l b$. As such, the probability of misclassifying observation $x$ when it comes from the first population $l=1$ equals
\begin{equation}\label{eq:51a}
\mathbb{P}_1 \left(b^Tx > c \right) = \mathbb{P}_1 \left(\frac{ b^Tx - b^T \mu_1}{b^T \mathbf{\Sigma}_1 b} > \frac{c -b^T \mu_1 }{b^T \mathbf{\Sigma}_1 b} \right) = 1 - \Phi \left( \frac{c -b^T \mu_1 }{b^T \mathbf{\Sigma}_1 b} \right) = 1 - \Phi \big( u_1 \big ),
\end{equation}
where $\Phi$ denotes cumulative distribution function for a univariate standardized normal distribution (centered at zero, with variance equal to one) and $u_1 = \frac{c -b^T \mu_1 }{b^T \mathbf{\Sigma}_1 b}$. Similarly, probability of misclassifying observation $x$ when it comes from the second population $l=2$ equals
\begin{multline}\label{eq:51b}
\mathbb{P}_2 \left( b^Tx \leq c \right) = \mathbb{P}_1 \left(\frac{b^Tx - b^T \mu_2}{b^T \mathbf{\Sigma}_2 b} \leq \frac{c -b^T \mu_2 }{b^T \mathbf{\Sigma}_2 b} \right) = \\
= \Phi \left(\frac{c -b^T \mu_2 }{b^T \mathbf{\Sigma}_2 b} \right) = 1 - \Phi \left(\frac{b^T \mu_2 -c}{b^T \mathbf{\Sigma}_2 b} \right) = 1 - \Phi \left( u_2\right),
\end{multline}
for $u_2 = \frac{b^T \mu_2 -c}{b^T \mathbf{\Sigma}_2 b}$. As $\Phi$ is monotonic, the task
\begin{equation*}
\max \big (\mathbb{P}_1(u_1), \mathbb{P}_2(u_2)\big) \longrightarrow \min_{\substack{b \in \mathbb{R}^{d} \\ c \in \mathbb{R}}}
\end{equation*}
is equivalent to
\begin{equation}\label{eq:48}
\min (u_1, u_2) \longrightarrow \max_{\substack{b \in \mathbb{R}^{d} \\ c \in \mathbb{R}}},
\end{equation}
which is more convenient to work with. As the objective is to find $b \in \mathbb{R}^d$ and $c \in \mathbb{R}$ that minimize maximal probability of misclassification, we will refer to the resulting procedure as a minimax procedure. Analytical formulation of admissible procedures for $b$ and $c$ leads to the following characterization
\begin{equation}\label{eq:49b}
b = \left(t_1 \mathbf{\Sigma}_1 + t_2 \mathbf{\Sigma}_2\right)^{-1} (\mu_2 - \mu_1)
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}\label{eq:49c}
c = b^{T} \mu_1 + t_1 b^T \mathbf{\Sigma}_1 b = b^{T} \mu_2 - t_2 b^T \mathbf{\Sigma}_2 b,
\end{equation}
where $t_1 \in \mathbb{R}$ and $t_2 \in \mathbb{R}$ are scalars. Minimax procedure is an admissible procedure with $u_1 = u_2$. As such, for $t = t_1 = (1-t_2)$ the following equality must hold
\begin{equation}\label{eq:50}
0 = u_1^2 - u_2^2 = t^2 b^T \mathbf{\Sigma}_1 b - (1-t)^2 b^T \mathbf{\Sigma}_2 b = b^T \left[t^2 \mathbf{\Sigma}_1 - (1-t)^2 \mathbf{\Sigma}_2\right]b.
\end{equation}
Equation \eqref{eq:50} for $t$ can be solved numerically by means of iterative procedure.
With the above derivations, for a mixture of $k = 2$ components in $d \geq 1$ dimensions with parameters $\mu_1, \mathbf{\Sigma}_1$ and $\mu_2, \mathbf{\Sigma}_2$ respectively, the following algorithm provides best linear separator in terms of minimizing the maximal probability of misclassification.
\begin{center}
\begin{pseudocode}[ruled]{BestLinearSeparator}{\mu_1, \mathbf{\Sigma}_1, \mu_2, \mathbf{\Sigma}_2, prec}
$initialize $ incr,crit,t \\
\REPEAT
$calculate $ b $ with \eqref{eq:49b}$ \\
$calculate $ crit $ with \eqref{eq:50}$ \\
\IF crit > prec \THEN t \GETS t - incr \\
\IF crit < -prec \THEN t \GETS t + incr \\
incr \GETS incr \cdot \frac{1}{2}
\UNTIL $criterion $ crit $ given by \eqref{eq:50} met with expected precision $ prec \\
$calculate $ c $ with \eqref{eq:49c}$ \\
$calculate $ u_1 $ and $ u_2 $ and the probabilities of misclassification with \eqref{eq:51a} and \eqref{eq:51b}$ \\
$calculate overall probability of misclassification $ \mathbb{P}_{\text{minmax}} = \max (\mathbb{P}_1 (u_1), \mathbb{P}_2 (u_2)) \\
\RETURN{\mathbb{P}_{\text{minmax}}, b, c, t}
\end{pseudocode}
\end{center}
Note that the value of assumed precision $prec$ must be given, while the values of scalar $t$, criterion $crit$ and increment $incr$ must be initialized. What is more, $\mathbb{P}_{\text{minmax}} = \mathbb{P}_1 (u_1) = \mathbb{P}_2 (u_2))$ as for the minimax procedure $u_1 = u_2$ must hold. Note, that $\mathbb{P}_{\text{minmax}}$ may be considered a measure of overlap as a result of linear approximation of criterion \eqref{eq:45}. If $\mathbf{\Sigma}_1 = \mathbf{\Sigma}_2$, formula \eqref{eq:45} and its linear approximation given by $b$ and $c$ coincide, which is sure not the case for $\mathbf{\Sigma}_1 \neq \mathbf{\Sigma}_2$.
\subsection{The challenge of replacement.} Degree of overlap between mixture components is critical for classification performance and must be assessed for simulation purposes and comparison of classification methods, hence the interest in the topic. There are many measures proposed in the literature that possess the property of being tractable even in a complex setup, however it is highly required that their behavior reflects the behavior of $\text{MLE}_{\text{err}}$ based either on \eqref{eq:47} or on its linear approximation of the previous subsection. However, this is not always the case, as shown in the below example.
\textbf{E-distance.} The method for overlap assessment proposed in \cite{szekely} does not assume underling normal mixture model, however it can be very well applied in such setup. It is considered an extension to Ward's minimum variance method (see \cite{ward}) that formally takes both into account --- heterogeneity between groups and homogeneity within groups in data. For this purpose it uses joint between-within e-distance between clusters that constitutes the basis for agglomerative hierarchical clustering procedure the authors propose. They define e-\emph{distance} between two sets of observations $X_1 = \{x_{i_1} \colon c(i_1) = 1\}$, $n_1 = \abs{X_1}$ and $X_2 = \{x_{i_2} \colon c(i_2) = 2\}$, $n_2 = \abs{X_2}$ as
\begin{multline}\label{eq:46}
\mathrm{e}(X_1, X_2) = \frac{n_1 n_2}{n_1 + n_2} \left(\frac{2}{n_1 n_2} \sum_{i_1 \colon c(i_1) = 1} \sum_{i_2 \colon c(i_2) = 2} \norm{x_{i_1} -x_{i_2}} \right.+ \\
\left.- \frac{1}{n_1^2} \sum_{i_1 \colon c(i_1) = 1} \sum_{j_1 \colon c(j_1) = 1} \norm{x_{i_1} -x_{j_1}}
- \frac{1}{n_2^2} \sum_{i_2 \colon c(i_2) = 2} \sum_{j_2 \colon c(j_2) = 2}\norm{x_{i_2} -x_{j_2}}\right).
\end{multline}
The value of e-distance between two resulting clusters may be considered a cluster structure distinctness measure. It is expected to reflect changes in within-cluster dispersion and between-cluster separation. It should also remain in tune with the theoretical structure distinctness measure given by likelihood ratio \eqref{eq:45} or its linear approximation from \cite{ab}.
\begin{figure}[!h]
\begin{narrow}{0.0\textwidth}{0.0\textwidth}
\hfill
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.49\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.9\textwidth]{heatmap_clusterability_for_thesis}
\captionof{figure}{Heatmap --- Anderson-Bahadur misclassification error w/r to growing between ($x$-axis) and within ($y$-axis) cluster dispersion.}
\label{abclu}
\end{minipage}
\hfill
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.49\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.9\textwidth]{heatmap_edistance_for_thesis}
\captionof{figure}{Heatmap --- Sz\'ekely-Rizzo e-distance \eqref{eq:46} w/r to growing between ($x$-axis) and within ($y$-axis) cluster dispersion.}
\label{edist}
\end{minipage}
\hspace*{\fill}
\end{narrow}
\end{figure}
Figures \ref{abclu} and \ref{edist} compare variability of structure distinctness measures based on Anderson-Bahadur (\cite{ab}) and Sz\'ekely-Rizzo (\cite{szekely}) proposals respectively. The former, similarly to the likelihood ratio theoretical distinctness measure, does depend on both --- between-cluster distance and within-cluster dispersion, while the latter essentially remains insensitive to within cluster dispersion, depending entirely on the between class separation. This is an empirical insight which shows substantial discrepancy between behavior of theoretical and intuitive structure distinctness measure and e-distance given by \eqref{eq:46}, and hence points to another potential difficulty when trying to replace the integral coefficient.
\section{Fisher's distinctness measure}\label{fisher}
\subsection{Model and notation.} We consider a data set $X = ( x_1, \ldots, x_n)^T, \ X \in \mathbb{R}^{n \times d}$ of $n$ observations coming from a mixture of $k$ $d$-dimensional normal distributions
\begin{equation*}
f(x) = \pi_1 f_1(\mu_1, \mathbf{\Sigma}_1)(x) + \ldots + \pi_k f_k(\mu_k, \mathbf{\Sigma}_k)(x),
\end{equation*}
where
\begin{equation*}
f_l(\mu_l,\mathbf{\Sigma}_l)(x) = \frac{1}{(\sqrt{2 \pi})^d \sqrt{\det\mathbf{\Sigma}_l}} e^{-\frac{1}{2}(x-\mu_l)^T
\mathbf{\Sigma}_l^{-1}(x-\mu_l)}.
\end{equation*}
We call each $f_l(\mu_l, \mathbf{\Sigma}_l)$, $l = 1, \ldots, k$ a component of the mixture and each $\pi_l$, $l = 1, \ldots, k$ a mixing factor of the corresponding component (see \cite{kmb} or \cite{htf} and \cite{Lipovetsky:2013aa} or \cite{Lipovetsky:2012aa} for comparison with alternative approaches). We assume that for all the components equal mixing factors are assigned $\pi_1 = \dots = \pi_k = \frac{1}{k}$. However, we allow different covariance matrices $\mathbf{\Sigma}_l$. Additionally, we assume large space dimension with respect to the number of components $d > k-1$ and take the number of components $k$ and class assignments as known.
We use lower index to indicate data set when sample estimates of parameters are used. In particular, by $\mu_X \in \mathbb{R}^d$ we denote sample mean and by $\mathbf{\Sigma}_X \in \mathbb{R}^{d \times d}$ covariance matrix for a data set $X$. For notation ease we center the data at the origin $\mu_X = 0$. We assume the covariance matrix to be of full rank, $\rank(\mathbf{\Sigma}_X) = d$. Let $T_X = n \mathbf{\Sigma}_X$ be the total scatter matrix for $X$. We recall that a simple calculation (see for instance \cite{kmb} or \cite{Lipovetsky:2013ab}) splits total scatter into its between and within cluster components $T_X = B_X + W_X$. By $\mu_{X,l}$ and $\mathbf{\Sigma}_{X,l}$ we denote empirical mean and covariance matrix for class $l$, where $l = 1, \ldots, k$. By $M_X = (\mu_{X,1}, \ldots, \mu_{X,k})$, $M_X \in \mathbb{R}^{d \times k}$ we understand a matrix of column vectors of cluster means. We assume the cluster means --- as a set of points --- to be linearly independent, so $\rank(M_X) = \min (d, k-1) = k-1$.
\subsection{Fisher's task as an eigenproblem.}\label{eigen} Originally (see \cite{fisher}), the separation was defined for $2$ classes in single dimension $v \in \mathbb{R}^d$ as the ratio of the variance between the classes to the variance within the classes
\begin{equation}\label{eq:1}
F_o(v) = \frac{v^TB_Xv}{v^TW_Xv}.
\end{equation}
and then minimized over possible directions to find the linear subspace (Fisher's discriminant) that separates the classes best
\begin{equation*}
v^* = \argmin (F_0(v)).
\end{equation*}
For our purposes we will use the formulation
\begin{equation}\label{eq8}
F(v) = \frac{1}{1 + \frac{1}{F_o(v)}} = \frac{v^TB_Xv}{v^TT_Xv},
\end{equation}
which is equivalent to \eqref{eq:1} due to $T_X = B_X + W_X$ and yields the Fisher's subspace by maximizing over possible dimensions
\begin{equation}\label{eq:2}
v^* = \argmax (F(v)).
\end{equation}
As multiplying $v$ by a constant does not change the result of \eqref{eq:2}, it can alternatively be expressed as a constrained optimization problem, namely
\begin{equation}\label{eq12}
\begin{aligned}
\max_{v \in \mathbb{R}^d } & & &v^T B_X v \\
\text{subject to} & & &v^T T_X v = 1.
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
The corresponding Lagrange function defined as
\begin{equation*}
L(v; \lambda) = v^T B_X v + \lambda\big(v^T T_X v - 1\big)
\end{equation*}
yields
\begin{equation*}
\frac{\partial L(v; \lambda)}{\partial v} = 2 B_X v - 2 \lambda T_X v = 0,
\end{equation*}
so
\begin{equation}\label{eq11}
B_X v = \lambda T_X v
\end{equation}
must hold at the solution. Problem \eqref{eq11} is a generalized eigenproblem for two matrices $B_X$ and $T_X$. As we assume covariance matrix to be well-defined, total scatter matrix $T_X$ is invertible, however $T_X^{-1} B_X$ is not necessarily symmetric so it is a priori not obvious if the eigenvalues are real. Hence, a decomposition of the matrix $T_X$ is required to reduce the generalized eigenproblem to a standard eigenproblem for a transformed matrix.
Solving a standard eigenproblem for $T_X$ we obtain
\begin{equation}\label{eq13}
T_X = A_{T_X} L_{T_X} A_{T_X}^{T}.
\end{equation}
Note, that $A_{T_X}$ is orthonormal (i.e. $A_{T_X} A_{T_X}^{T} = \mathbf{I}$ so $ A_{T_X}^{-1} = A_{T_X}^{T}$). Replacing in \eqref{eq11} matrix $T_X$ with its spectral decomposition \eqref{eq13} we get
\begin{equation*}
B_X v = \lambda A_{T_X} L_{T_X} A_{T_X}^{T} v = \lambda A_{T_X} L_{T_X}^{1/2} L_{T_X}^{1/2} A_{T_X}^{T} v,
\end{equation*}
then multiplying by $(A_{T_X} L_{T_X}^{1/2})^{-1}$ from the left and by $\mathbf{I}$ in the middle we transform it to
\begin{equation*}
L_{T_X}^{-1/2} A_{T_X}^{T} B_X A_{T_X} L_{T_X}^{-1/2} L_{T_X}^{1/2} A_{T_X}^{T} v = \lambda L_{T_X}^{1/2} A_{T_X}^{T} v.
\end{equation*}
Now, substituting
\begin{equation*}
\tilde{B} = L_{T_X}^{-1/2} A_{T_X}^{T} B_X A_{T_X} L_{T_X}^{-1/2} = \left(L_{T_X}^{-1/2} A_{T_X}^{T}\right) B_X \left(L_{T_X}^{-1/2} A_{T_X}^{T}\right)^{T}
\end{equation*}
and
\begin{equation}\label{eq15}
\tilde{v} = L_{T_X}^{1/2} A_{T_X}^{T} v
\end{equation}
we get a standard eigenproblem for $\tilde{B}$
\begin{equation}\label{eq14}
\tilde{B} \tilde{v} = \lambda \tilde{v}.
\end{equation}
Solving \eqref{eq14} and using the inverse transformation of \eqref{eq15}
\begin{equation}\label{eq16}
v = A_{T_X} L_{T_X}^{-1/2} \tilde{v},
\end{equation}
we obtain the solution $v$ to the original problem \eqref{eq11}, corresponding to the same eigenvalue $\lambda$. In particular, it proves that with our model assumptions \eqref{eq11} can be reduced to a standard eigenproblem
\begin{equation}\label{eq:36}
T_X^{-1} B_X v = \lambda v,
\end{equation}
which takes the matrix form of
\begin{equation}\label{eq:43}
\left ( T_X^{-1}B_X \right ) V = V L,
\end{equation}
where $L \in \mathbb{R}^{d \times d}$ is a diagonal matrix of eigenvalues in a non-decreasing order and $V \in \mathbb{R}^{d \times d}$ is a matrix of their corresponding column eigenvectors.
Note that there is another alternative formulation of the problem \eqref{eq11} via canonical correlation analysis (CCA), which may also come as a convenient way to see the task. In this setup Fisher's eigenvalues correspond to squared canonical correlation coefficients. We will not describe it here in details but we give references for interested readers. The approach, referred to as canonical discriminant analysis (CDA), was first mentioned in \cite{bartlett} and thoroughly described in \cite{dillon}. The overview of classical CCA is given for instance in \cite{kmb}.
\subsection{Motivation.} What we refer to as Fisher's distinctness measure was inspired by \cite{vemp}, where the idea of using the eigenproblem formulation of the Fisher's discrimination task and its respective eigenvalues for assessing certain properties of data was used.
As explained in Subsection \ref{eigen}, Fisher's discriminant task can be stated in terms of eigenproblem given by \eqref{eq:43}. Then, its $(k-1)$ eigenvectors corresponding to the $(k-1)$ non-zero eigenvalues span the Fisher's subspace. Note that there are $k-1$ non-zero eigenvalues as according to the model assumptions $\rank(T_X) = d$ and $\rank(B_X)=k-1$ and $d > k-1$. Due to \eqref{eq:43} we have
\begin{equation*}
V^T T_X^{-1} B_X V = L,
\end{equation*}
so the eigenvalues capture variability in the spanning directions. As Fisher's task is scale invariant, the increase in variability may only be due to increase in between cluster scatter or decrease in within cluster scatter so it is expected to capture increase in structure distinctness very well. As squared canonical correlation coefficients (see references in Subsection \ref{eigen}), the eigenvalues remain in the interval of $[0,1]$ which also makes them easy to compare and interpret. Additionally, except for being easy to compute numerically, they are also convenient to handle analytically, so they can easily be used in simulations as well as formal derivations and justifications. What remains, is to propose function of the eigenvalues that could serve as structure distinctness coefficient and analyze its performance. This was done by means of simulation study and described in the next section.
\section{Simulation study}\label{sim}
\subsection{Overview.} Due to its analytical complexity \eqref{eq:47} is virtually intractable for mixtures with varied covariance matrices (heterogeneous) or of higher space dimension. However, it relatively easy undergoes simulations of Monte Carlo kind and can easily be approximated numerically with the best linear approximation described in subsection \ref{lin}. As such, it may be used as a reference measure and replaced with another coefficient that reflects its behavior but offers the advantage of being computable and analytically tractable, also in a more complex setup.
The study was divided into two parts. In the first part two dimensional case was studied in details. Normal distribution was parametrized in a way that allowed for easy parameter control. Then all the possible combinations were tested and the influence of change in between cluster separation and within cluster dispersion was analysed. Three possible structure distinctness measures were compared --- exact integral measure \eqref{eq:47}, its best linear approximation described in subsection \ref{lin} and Fisher's eigenvalue. For two dimensional data, the maximum number of two clusters was analysed (due to the assumption of $d>k-1$), which led to one dimensional projections. Therefore, there was just single Fisher's eigenvalue to compare so the two dimensional step could not give grounds for function selection. The two dimensional study served as a thorough assessment of single Fisher's eigenvalue performance.
In the second step multidimensional data was analyzed. Due to high number of possible mixture parameter combinations only a random selection was considered. This step was meant to confirm satisfactory performance of Fisher eigenvalues as input for structure distinctness measure. Higher dimensionality allowed for larger number of clusters, which resulted in $(k-1) > 1$ dimensionality of Fisher's subspace. As such, it also gave grounds for selecting appropriate function to transform $(k-1)$ eigenvalues into a single structure distinctness coefficient. Minimum $\lambda^X_{\text{min}}$ and average $\bar{\lambda}^X$ over Fisher's non-zero eigenvalues were calculated as follows
\begin{equation}\label{eq:3a}
\lambda^X_\text{min} = \min_{j \in \{1, \ldots, k-1 \} } \lambda_{j}^{T_X^{-1}B_X}
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}\label{eq:3}
\bar{\lambda}^X = \frac{1}{k-1} \sum_{j = 1}^{k-1} \lambda_{j}^{T_X^{-1}B_X},
\end{equation}
and compared with the Monte Carlo estimates of the integral measure \eqref{eq:47}. Note that due to the larger number of classes allowed, wider comparisons with the best linear separator, defined for $k=2$ only, were infeasible.
Note that although the original concept \eqref{eq:47} is defined in terms of overlap (similarity) between the components, what is naturally captured by either minimum or average over non-zero Fisher's eigenvalues, reflects the opposite behavior, so should rather be referred to as distinctness (dissimilarity) measure. Therefore we compare it with $(1 - \text{MLE}_{\text{err}})$ (or $(1-\mathbb{P}_{\text{minmax}})$), which is the probability of correct $\text{MLE}$ classification (or its best linear approximation). The transition from one to another is typically straightforward, however we point that out explicitly to avoid confusion or additional transformations of the coefficients.
\begin{center}
\begin{pseudocode}[ruled]{TwoDimensionalDataGeneration}{r,\alpha,\lambda,q,k,N[]}
\FOREACH $ cluster $ l \in \{1,\ldots,k\} \DO
\BEGIN
\COMMENT{Determine cluster center $\mu$}\\
\mu \GETS \left( r \cdot \sin \left((l-1) \cdot \frac{2 \pi}{k}\right), \ r \cdot \cos \left((l-1) \cdot \frac{2 \pi}{k}\right) \right) \\
\COMMENT{Compute covariance matrix $\mathbf{\Sigma}$}\\
D \GETS \diag(\lambda,q\cdot\lambda) \quad \COMMENT{dispersion and shape matrix} \\
R \GETS \begin{pmatrix}
\cos (\alpha) & -\sin (\alpha) \\
\sin (\alpha) & \cos (\alpha)
\end{pmatrix} \quad \COMMENT{rotation matrix} \\
\mathbf{\Sigma} \GETS R D R^T \\
\COMMENT{Generate data} \\
$draw $ N[l] $ observations$ \\
$add cluster mean $ \mu $ to each observation$
\END \\
\RETURN{data}
\end{pseudocode}
\end{center}
\subsection{Two-dimensional simulations.} To allow for easy control over mixture parameters, two dimensional mixture density was parametrized in a convenient way. Cluster centers were located on a circle around origin $(0,0)$ with radius $r$ that controlled between cluster distance. To allow for heterogeneity, for each cluster covariance matrix was determined separately. Within cluster dispersion was captured by the leading eigenvalue $\lambda = \lambda_1$, cluster shape by eigenvalues' ratio $q = \lambda_2 / \lambda_1$, and cluster rotation by rotation angle $\alpha$. Based on these parameters for each component mean vector and covariance matrix were computed. For each component the data was generated with the algorithm based on Cholesky decomposition, using affine transformation property for multivariate normal distribution. The detailed description of the algorithm is provided in \cite{gener}. Assuming the number of clusters is given by $k$ and $N \in \mathbf{R}^k$ contains desired cluster sizes, the above algorithm presents subsequent steps of data generation.
\begin{figure}[!ht]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=0.32]{ellipse_scheme}
\captionof{figure}{Design of two dimensional simulations --- components' position with respect to each other.}\label{rys:11}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
The simulation design is shown in Figure \ref{rys:11}, which presents all possible combinations of component position with respect to each other. Each of $i = 1, \ldots, 6$ rows corresponds to $i \cdot \pi/6$ angle rotation for the first (red) component, while each of $j = 1, \ldots, 6$ columns corresponds to $j \cdot \pi/6$ angle rotation for the second (green) component. Altogether it yields $36$ basic mixture positions. For each position an influence of a single factor is analyzed and this includes in particular -- increase in between cluster distance (Figures \ref{rys:12a} and \ref{rys:12b}), increase in within cluster dispersion for both (Figures \ref{rys:13a} and \ref{rys:13b}) and for first (Figures \ref{rys:14a} and \ref{rys:14b}) and second (Figures \ref{rys:15a} and \ref{rys:15b}) spanning direction only. The special case of spherical clusters is analyzed separately (Figures \ref{rys:16a} to \ref{rys:16d}). All the results are available in Appendix, Section \ref{app:2dim}.
\begin{figure}[!ht]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{2dim_clu_joint}
\caption{Impact of increasing between cluster distance (second column) and within cluster dispersion (third column) for mixtures in positions as indicated in the first column. Red line indicates exact (integral) structure distinctness, green --- its linear approximate and blue --- Fisher's eigenvalue.}
\label{rys:20}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
Example of what can be observed in all the charts is shown in Figure \ref{rys:20}. Even though the values for Fisher's eigenvalue are much smaller, their variability reflects behavior of the integral measure to a large extent. It is even more in tune with the linear estimate, which is to be expected given the linear nature of the Fisher's discrimination task. Note, that the best linear approximate gives the upper bound on the precision with which a linear concept may reflect behavior of the non-linear integral measure. Also, it gives upper limit on classification accuracy using linear classifiers, which is the case of Fisher discriminant. Note also, that the component position in the upper row indicates homogeneity (i.e. equal covariance matrices for both components). This property is lost when within cluster variability increases for one of the components (last column). However, it remains when only between cluster distance is affected (middle column). Therefore, exact integral measure and its linear estimate overlap in this case.
\subsection{Multi-dimensional simulations.}
In higher dimensions direct analytical control over distance and dispersion of mixture parameters is much more complex. Additionally, there are many more combinations to examine. As such, the simulations were reduced to randomly chosen mixture parameters' combinations corresponding to the mixture position. For each position the impact of increasing between cluster distance and within cluster dispersion was analysed. The study was designed to verify adequacy of the information carried by the Fisher's eigenvalues and to select its appropriate function to serve as the structure distinctness coefficient. Results are attached in Appendix \ref{app:2dim} in Figures \ref{rys:17a} to \ref{rys:17d}. In each row charts for random but fixed set of cluster means are presented. Similarly, the set of covariance matrices is random but fixed in each column. Mean vectors and covariance matrices in $d$ dimensions were determined using \textbf{R} package \pkg{clusterGeneration}, which implements the ideas described in \cite{joe} and \cite{kurowicka}. Additionally, mean coordinates are re-scaled to lie in the interval $[-3\sqrt{d},3 \sqrt{d}]$ which corresponds to the range of the maximum three standard deviations for covariance matrix. As such, the possible overlap between components stretches from complete to negligible.
\begin{figure}[!ht]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{35dim_clu_joint}
\caption{ Effect of increasing between cluster distance (left column) and within cluster dispersion (right column). Upper row gives results for three dimensional simulations, while bottom row for five dimensional case. Green line indicates Monte Carlo estimate of the integral structure distinctness, turquoise average non-zero Fisher's eigenvalue, while blue --- Fisher's smallest non-zero eigenvalue.}
\label{rys:21}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
Again, what can be observed in all the simulation plots in Appendix \ref{app:2dim} is illustrated in Figure \ref{rys:21}. Behavior of average Fisher's eigenvalue as given by \eqref{eq:3} reflects variability of the integral measure. At the same time, minimum non-zero Fisher's eigenvalue \eqref{eq:3} is less sensitive and therefore captures the changes in distinctness to a lesser extent, which becomes even more apparent as the number of dimensions increases. As such, the average non-zero Fisher's eigenvalue tends to outperform the minimum non-zero Fisher's eigenvalue and therefore the former shall be recommended as the distinctness coefficient.
\section{Conclusions.}
In this work we derive and motivate measure of distinctness (or alternatively -- overlap) between clusters of data, generated from a Gaussian mixture model. The approach uses alternative formulation of Fisher's discrimination task, which is stated in terms of a generalized eigenproblem. We show the task is well posed in the context of the assumed model and can be reduced to a standard eigenproblem with real eigenvalues. We then express the distinctness coefficient as the average eigenvalue over the non-zero eigenvalues of the solution. We compare the behavior of the coefficient with the generic (integral) measure of structure distinctness defined in terms of the actual overlap between the corresponding distributions and its best linear approximation. Although the values of the Fisher's coefficient are lower than the values of actual overlap, their dynamic reflects very well the behavior of the generic integral measure and even better -- its best linear approximation. As opposed to the generic integral measure and its best linear approximation, the Fisher's coefficient offers the advantage of being not only numerically easily computable but also analytically tractable, even in a complex setup, regardless of the dimensionality of the space and heterogeneity of covariance matrices.
\bibliographystyle{elsarticle-num}
|
\section{Microscopics and Numerical Diagnostics}
Here, we provide a description of the microscopic spin model underlying the numerics presented in the maintext. To be specific, we consider Nitrogen-Vacancy defect centers in diamond. The electronic ground state of each NV center
is a spin-1 triplet described by the Hamiltonian,
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:Hnv}
H_{NV} = D_0 S_z^2 + \mu_e B S_z,
\end{equation}
where $D_0 = 2.87$ GHz is the zero
field splitting,
$\mu_e = - 2.8$ MHz/Gauss is the
electron spin gyromagnetic ratio, and
$B$ is a magnetic field applied parallel
to the NV axis. This electronic spin is coupled via hyperfine interactions to the $I=1/2$ nuclear spin of the $^{15}$N impurity via
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:hyperfine}
H_{HF} = A_{\parallel} S_z I_z + A_{\perp} (S_x I_x + S_y I_y),
\end{equation}
where $A_{\parallel} \sim 3.0$MHz and $A_{\perp} \sim 3.7$MHz.
We assume that the states $\ket{-1,\pm \tfrac{1}{2}}$ are far detuned by a dc magnetic field,
and tune to the crossing of $\ket{0,-\tfrac{1}{2}}$ and $\ket{1,\tfrac{1}{2}}$, where
states are labeled by $\ket{S_z,I_z}$.
The $A_{\perp}$ term in \eqref{eq:hyperfine}
mixes the $\ket{0,\tfrac{1}{2}}$ and $\ket{1,-\tfrac{1}{2}}$ states,
yielding the energy levels
shown versus magnetic field in Fig.~S1a.
We now define the
states
$\ket{A} = \beta \ket{1,-\tfrac{1}{2}} -\alpha \ket{0,\tfrac{1}{2}}$,
$\ket{B} = \ket{0,-\tfrac{1}{2}}$,
$\ket{C} = \ket{1,\tfrac{1}{2}}$,
and $\ket{D} = \alpha \ket{1,-\tfrac{1}{2}} + \beta \ket{0,\tfrac{1}{2}}$.
To allow for resonant hops of spin excitations we work
at a point where states
$\ket{B}$ and $\ket{C}$ are nearly degenerate,
setting the
coefficients $\alpha = 0.531$ and $\beta = 0.847$.
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=7.00in]{suppfig1.pdf}
\caption{ (a) Magnetic field required to tune the hyperfine coupled NV states to their desired resonances. (b) Optical dressing M-scheme which enables sufficient control to realize topological flat bands as shown in (c) }
\end{figure*}
\vspace{5mm}
\noindent The effective states we use on each NV center are $\ket{0} = | A \rangle$ and $\ket{1} = s |B\rangle + v |C\rangle + w |D\rangle$. The coefficients $s,v,w$ are determined via an optical ``M'' dressing scheme (Fig.~S1b) where the two
excited states are
$\ket{\pm} = \ket{E_x} \pm \ket{A_2}$, with
$\ket{E_x}, \ket{A_2}$ being two specific electronic excited states of the NV.
The state $\ket{1}$ is the so-called dark state of the M-scheme with $s=\Omega _2 \Omega _4/\tilde{\Omega} $, $v=\Omega _1 \Omega _3/\tilde{\Omega} $, $w=-\Omega _1\Omega _4/\tilde{\Omega} $. Note that lasers 1 and 3 must be linearly polarized,
while lasers 2 and 4 are circularly polarized. This elliptical polarization of light explicitly breaks time-reversal symmetry.
\vspace{5mm}
In the numerics presented in the main text, we use the parameterization $s_i = \sin( \alpha_i ) \sin (\theta_i) $, $v_i = \sin( \alpha_i ) \cos (\theta_i) e^{i\phi_i} $, $w_i= \cos( \alpha_i ) e^{i\gamma_i}$ where $i \in \{a,b\}$ (recall the square lattice is partitioned into $a$ and $b$ sites). The mixing angle $\tan (\theta_i) = |s_i/v_i|$ characterizes the strength of the effective dipole moment of $\ket{1}$, thereby determining the magnitude of the interactions. In the limit of $\theta_i \rightarrow 0$ one finds that the spin-flip excitation carries minimal weight in $\ket{B} = \ket{0,-\tfrac{1}{2}}$ and maximal weight in $\ket{C} = \ket{1,\tfrac{1}{2}}$. Since the electronic spin dipole moment of $\ket{B}$ is effectively zero, this implies that the dipolar interaction strength increases as $\theta_i \rightarrow 0$. While topological flat-bands can be found for a variety of parameter regimes, we find that the clearest numerics are obtained for:
$\Theta_0 = 0.615, \Phi_0 = 5.32, \theta_a = 0.598, \theta_b = 1.051, \phi_a = 1.087, \phi_b=3.402, \alpha_a = 2.844, \alpha_b= 2.258, \gamma_a=4.089,\gamma_b =4.047$. Here the bands exhibit a flatness ratio $f \approx 8.8$ (Fig.~S1c) and phase diagrams are subsequently obtained by varying $\Phi_0$ and $\theta_a$.
\begin{figure*}
\includegraphics[width=6.95in]{fig2_suppinfo_v1}
\caption{(a) Top panel depicts the two fold ground state degeneracy in the FCI phase. Bottom panel depicts the low energy spectrum for $N_{sites}=24$, $N_{particles} = 5$. The number of total low energy states agrees with that predicted by Laughlin quasihole counting. (b) Inversion breaking response in the change in the ground state energy as a function of $\Phi_0$ at $\theta_a=0.75$. Top panel shows $g=0$ data where one observes a SF $\leftrightarrow$ FCI $\leftrightarrow$ SF transition. Bottom panel depicts inversion broken data, $g=0.2$, where extra kinks corresponding to the CDW occur. (c) Changes in the ground state energy as a function of $\theta_a$ at $\Phi_0 = 5.3$ showing the CKB to FCI transition. Red circles correspond to $g=0$ and black crosses to $g=0.2$ (d) Superfluid stiffness estimated from the second derivative of the ground state energy as a function of boundary condition twists in the $\hat{X}$ and $\hat{Y}$ direction. The superfluid regions show a strong response to twists in the $x$ direction.}
\end{figure*}
\vspace{5mm}
\noindent We now provide detailed examples of the diagnostics used to determine the many-body phases which arise at finite lattice filling fraction. The topological features of the $\nu=1/2$ FCI require the presence of a two-fold ground state degeneracy on a torus (Fig.~S2a, top panel) as well as quasi-hole statistics which agree with a generalized Pauli principle (Fig.~S2a, bottom panel).
As depicted in Fig.~2 of the maintext, the quantity analogous to the Hall conductance, $\sigma_{xy} = \frac{1}{2\pi} \int \int F(\theta_x, \theta_y) d\theta_x d\theta_y = -0.5$, appears unambiguously in the response of the system to boundary-condition twists $\{\theta_x, \theta_y\}$.
To diagnose the CDW, we require ground state degeneracy with $\sigma_{xy} =0$. Moreover, twisting the boundary condition in either the $\hat{X}$ or $\hat{Y}$ direction does not affect the ground state energy suggesting an insulator. Finally, to diagnose a SF, we require a unique ground state. While our system sizes are too small to clearly observe the Goldstone mode of the SF, in contrast to the CDW, twisting the boundary condition dramatically alters the ground state energy (Fig.~S2d); this is consistent with a SF which harbors long range phase coherence and hence, whose energies would naturally be affected by twists in the boundary condition.
To determine rough phase boundaries between the FCI, CDW and SF, we examine the change in the ground state energy as a function of $\theta_a$ and $\Phi_0$. In particular, we expect stable phases to occur as ``smooth'' plateaus of $dE/d\theta_a$ ($dE/d\Phi_0$), while phase transitions ought manifest as jumps in $dE/d\theta_a$ ($dE/d\Phi_0$). Figure S2b,c depicts examples of ground state energy cuts in both the horizontal and vertical direction of the phase diagram.
For a representative horizontal cut at $\theta_a = 0.75$ one indeed observes an extra kink between the FCI and SF phase upon the breaking of inversion (Fig.~S2b). In this kink region, we find a two-fold degenerate ground state in momentum sectors $(0,0)$ and $(0,\pi)$ with $\sigma_{xy}=0$. Moreover, we find that the real-space structure factor is consistent with the intervening phase being a CDW checkerboard located on the b-site sublattice.
\section{Field theory}
Here, we provide some additional details regarding the analysis of the field theory, eq. (5) in the main text, reproduced here:
\begin{align}
\label{dual2sfcdwfqhAppendix}
\mathcal{L} &= \frac{1}{2\pi} A_e \partial a + \frac{1}{2\pi} b^\uparrow \partial b^\downarrow
- \frac{1}{2\pi} a \partial (b^\uparrow + b^\downarrow)
\nonumber \\
&+ \sum_l [|(\partial - i b^T \tau_x) \phi_{l}|^2 - V(\{\phi_l\}),
\end{align}
As stated in the main text, this theory can simultaneously describe a superfluid, a CDW and a $1/2$ Laughlin state, depending on whether the $\phi$ fields are condensed such that they gap out both the $b$ gauge fields by the Anderson-Higgs mechanism, one of the $b$ fields or neither of the $b$ fields.
We describe the algebraic steps leading to these identifications below.
\subsection{$1/2$ Laughlin state}
When all scalar fields $\phi_l$ are uncondensed ($\langle \phi_l \rangle = 0$) there is an energy gap to creating
excitations associated with $\phi_l$.
Integrating them out yields only short-range interactions among the remaining fields.
The resulting field theory is of the form
\begin{align}
\label{fqhaction1}
\mathcal{L} = \frac{1}{2\pi} A_e \partial a + \frac{1}{2\pi} b^\uparrow \partial b^\downarrow - \frac{1}{2\pi} a \partial (b^\uparrow + b^\downarrow) + \cdots,
\end{align}
where $\cdots$ include higher derivative terms for the gauge fields.
These higher derivative terms are irrelevant compared to the Chern-Simons terms and so they can be ignored at long wavelengths.
In this limit, we may integrate out $b^\uparrow$ to find the following constraint:
\begin{align}
\epsilon_{\mu \nu \lambda} \partial_\nu b^\downarrow_\lambda = \epsilon_{\mu \nu\lambda} \partial_\nu a_\lambda .
\end{align}
Inserting this constraint back into (\ref{fqhaction1}) leads to
\begin{align}
\mathcal{L} = - \frac{2}{4\pi} a \partial a + \frac{1}{2\pi} A_e \partial a .
\end{align}
This is the well-known effective Chern-Simons field theory for the $1/2$ Laughlin state (see, e.g. \cite{wen04}).
To verify the Hall conductance,
we can integrate out $a$ and obtain the effective Lagrangian for the external probe field $A_e$,
\begin{align}
\mathcal{L} = \frac{1}{2} \frac{1}{4\pi} A_e \partial A_e,
\end{align}
which directly yields the $1/2$ Hall conductance,
\begin{align}
j^\mu = \frac{\delta \mathcal{L}}{\delta A_{e;\mu}} = \frac{1}{2} \frac{1}{2\pi} \epsilon^{\mu \nu \lambda} \partial_\nu A_{e;\lambda}.
\end{align}
\subsection{Superfluid state}
Now we consider the case where both $b^\uparrow$ and $b^\downarrow$ are gapped by the Anderson-Higgs mechanism.
This occurs when $\langle \phi_{l \uparrow} \rangle \neq 0 $, and $\langle \phi_{l' \downarrow} \rangle \neq 0 $,
for some $l,l'$.
Upon integrating out $b^\uparrow$ and $b^\downarrow$, which may be accomplished at long wavelengths by simply setting $b^\alpha = 0$ in \eqref{dual2sfcdwfqhAppendix}, we obtain the effective action
\begin{align}
\mathcal{L} &= \frac{1}{2\pi} A_e \partial a - \frac{1}{g}(\epsilon_{\mu \nu \lambda} \partial_\nu a_\lambda)^2 + \cdots,
\end{align}
where we have reinstated the leading higher order Maxwell term for $a$.
The $\cdots$ include all other terms compatible with the
gauge invariance of $A_e$ and $a$, and the lattice symmetries of the problem.
In particular, this describes a theory of a massless 2+1 dimensional
gauge field, where fluctuations of $a$
physically correspond to particle density and current fluctuations, due to the coupling to the external probe field $A_e$ in the first term.
The above theory is precisely the dual action
for a superfluid, where $a$ is dual Goldstone mode of the superfluid.
As explained in the main text, in order to understand what additional lattice symmetries might be broken in this state, one must analyze the gauge invariant bilinears in $\phi$, the $\mathcal{O}_{k_x,k_y}^\pm$ operators, that transform non-trivially under the inversion and lattice translations.
\subsection{Insulating state}
When $\langle \phi_{l \alpha} \rangle \neq 0$ for only one choice of
$\alpha$, then that $b^\alpha$ is gapped by the Anderson-Higgs mechanism.
For concreteness, we consider $\alpha = \uparrow$.
Setting $b^\uparrow = 0$ then yields the following effective
action:
\begin{align}
\mathcal{L} &= \frac{1}{2\pi} A_e \partial a - \frac{1}{2\pi} a \partial b^\downarrow
+ \sum_l [|(\partial - i b^\downarrow ) \phi_{l\downarrow}|^2 - \bar{V}(\{\phi_{l\downarrow}\}),
\end{align}
where $\bar{V}$ corresponds to the previous $V$, but with the condensed bosons replaced by $c$-numbers.
The remaining uncondensed bosons are massive. Integrating them out yields,
\begin{align}
\mathcal{L} &= \frac{1}{2\pi} A_e \partial a - \frac{1}{2\pi} a \partial b^\downarrow + \cdots
\end{align}
Now, we see that integrating out $b^\downarrow$ will enforce a constraint at long wavelengths:
\begin{align}
\epsilon_{\mu \nu \lambda} \partial_\nu a_\lambda = 0.
\end{align}
This effectively Higgses $a$.
Reinstating the leading higher order terms for $A_e$ gives the action
\begin{align}
\mathcal{L} = - \frac{1}{g} (\epsilon_{\mu \nu \lambda} \partial_\nu A_{e\lambda})^2 + \cdots,
\end{align}
where $\cdots$ include other terms compatible with the lattice symmetries and gauge invariance of $A_e$.
This is the effective response theory for an insulating state, as can
be seen most simply be noting
that the boson current $j = \frac{2}{g} \partial^2 A_e = 0$ for uniform applied fields $E = \epsilon \partial A_e$.
Moreover, all excitations of this phase are gapped, and there is no fractionalization, as expected for a topologically trivial insulator.
Again, in order to identify the type of symmetry-breaking order in this insulator, we need to analyze the
fate of the gauge-invariant bilinears in $\phi_l$, which transform non-trivially under the symmetries.
From this analysis, we conclude that the insulator necessarily breaks the lattice translation symmetries
and is therefore properly identified as a CDW.
\subsection{Broken symmetry patterns}
The above states also lead to spontaneous breaking of the lattice
symmetries. Here, we will provide some additional details of the
analysis that allow us to determine the patterns of symmetry breaking
for the superfluid and CDW state shown in Fig. 3 of the main text. A more exhaustive treatment for the full Ginzburg-Landau functional will appear in a future work.
In order to diagnose the patterns of broken symmetry, we use the gauge-invariant bilinear operators that transform non-trivially under the lattice translational and inversion symmetries. These were described in the main text. We reproduce them here for convenience:
\begin{align}
\mathcal{O}_{0,0}^{\alpha} &\equiv \phi_\alpha^\dagger \phi_\alpha
\;\;\;
\mathcal{O}_{\pi,0}^\alpha \equiv \phi_\alpha^\dagger \sigma^z \phi_\alpha
\nonumber \\
\mathcal{O}_{0,\pi}^\alpha &\equiv \phi_\alpha^\dagger \sigma^x \phi_\alpha
\;\;\;
\mathcal{O}_{\pi,\pi}^\alpha \equiv \phi_\alpha^\dagger \sigma^y \phi_\alpha
\end{align}
The linear combination $\mathcal{O}_{k_x,k_y}^\pm \equiv \mathcal{O}_{kx,ky}^\uparrow \pm \mathcal{O}_{k_x,k_y}^\downarrow$ is inversion even (odd).
The two-parameter slice of the phase diagram shown in Fig. 3 used the parameters $v_2 < v_3 < 0, w_2 <0$, and $w_1, v_3, w_3 > 0$
and $u > 0$ large enough to stabilize the potential. We first consider the case where the inversion breaking parameter $g =
0$. In such a regime, one can verify that at mean-field level, when $r > 0$, all of the $\phi$ are uncondensed, all lattice symmetries are
preserved, and the system is in the FCI phase. When $r < 0$, then the system either realizes the superfluid phase (when $v_1 < v_1^c$) or
the Mott insulating CDW phase (when $v_1 > v_1^c$). At the mean field level, the critical value is $v_1^c = v_2 - 2w_1-v_3$
In the Mott insulating CDW phase, in the parameter regime described above, the minimum of the Ginzburg-Landau functional requires
$|\phi_{0\uparrow}| = |\phi_{1\uparrow}| \neq 0, \phi_{0\downarrow} = \phi_{1\downarrow} = 0$, or vice versa
($|\phi_{0\downarrow}| = |\phi_{1\downarrow}| \neq 0, \phi_{0\uparrow} = \phi_{1\uparrow} = 0$). Assuming the first case without loss of generality, we find that
the fact that $w_1 > 0$ further implies in this regime that $\phi_{0\uparrow} = \pm i \phi_{1\uparrow}$. Therefore, it is straightforward to verify:
\begin{align}
\langle \mathcal{O}_{0,0}^\uparrow \rangle \neq 0, &\;\;\langle \mathcal{O}_{\pi,0}^\uparrow \rangle = 0
\nonumber \\
\langle \mathcal{O}_{0,\pi}^\uparrow \rangle = 0, &\;\; \langle \mathcal{O}_{\pi,\pi}^\uparrow \rangle \neq 0,
\end{align}
while $\langle \mathcal{O}_{k_x, k_y}^\downarrow \rangle = 0$. Therefore we see that the CDW phase in this parameter regime has $(\pi,\pi)$ ordering, as observed in the numerics.
In the superfluid phase, in the parameter regime described above, we find that the minimum of the Ginzburg-Landau functional requires
$|\phi_{0\uparrow}| = |\phi_{1\uparrow}| = |\phi_{0\downarrow}| = |\phi_{1\downarrow}|$, and
$\phi_{0\uparrow} = \pm i \phi_{1\uparrow}$, $\phi_{0\downarrow} = \mp \phi_{1\downarrow}$. From this, we can conclude that
$\langle \mathcal{O}_{\pi,0}^\alpha \rangle = 0$, $\langle \mathcal{O}_{0,\pi}^\alpha \rangle = 0$,
and $\langle \mathcal{O}_{\pi,\pi}^\uparrow\rangle = - \langle \mathcal{O}_{\pi,\pi}^\downarrow\rangle \neq 0$. Therefore,
$\langle \mathcal{O}_{\pi,\pi}^+\rangle = 0 $ and $\langle \mathcal{O}_{\pi,\pi}^-\rangle \neq 0 $. This implies that the superfluid phase
has a non-zero order parameter with momentum $(\pi,\pi)$. Since this non-zero order parameter is inversion odd, it does not mix with the
density, which is inversion even. It does, however, mix with the current, which is inversion odd. We conclude that the superfluid has a
non-zero current order at $(\pi,\pi)$. Since the superfluid exists in the presence of strong time reversal symmetry breaking, it is reasonable that its ground state possesses non-zero average currents.
When $g > 0$, it is clear that the direct FCI to SF transition will be split into two transitions, with an intervening CDW state. This is because
when $g > 0$, as we tune $r$ from positive to negative, it is more favorable to first turn on the expectation value for $\phi_{0\downarrow}, \phi_{1\downarrow}$
when $r \sim g$, and then turn on the expecation value for the remaining fields when $r \sim -g$.
\end{document}
|
\section{Introduction.}
The goal of completely understanding and experimentally realizing
fractional Chern insulator (FCI) states \cite{NSCM11,SGS11,RB11,TMW11,SGK11,WBR12,BL13,PRS13},
analogues of the fractional quantum Hall states \cite{L83} that do not require external magnetic fields,
is by now a deep open problem in condensed matter physics~\cite{KR93,SAD05,PJ06,HSD07,MC09,SRM12,SS14}. There are several promising proposals for experimentally realizing FCI states, including the possibility of accessing this state in strained graphene \cite{GCS12} and in cold atomic \cite{CD13},
molecular \cite{YGL13} or periodically driven systems \cite{GGN14}. Nonetheless,
there are still fundamental open questions regarding the emergence and stability of this state, mainly due
to the fact that most of the current understanding of FCI states stems from the
exact diagonalization (ED) of small clusters. Accessing larger cluster sizes and thereby
clear signatures of the putative FCI state within ED often
involves a truncation of the large Hilbert space to focus only on a small, physically relevant
subspace. This is most commonly achieved by projecting the Hamiltonian to the partially filled band \cite{NSCM11,WBR12}
or by tracing over some degrees of freedom \cite{KNC14}, assumed \emph{a priori} to be physically irrelevant.
This has proven to be a successful strategy in revealing the hallmarks of the FCI state such as the topological ground state (GS) degeneracy
on the torus and the fractional Hall conductivity \cite{KVD12,KD13}, among others.
Intriguingly, there has also been numerical evidence supporting the idea that even when departing
from the Landau level paradigm the FCI state is still robust.
Within ED, it has been shown to survive even when considering bands with a finite band dispersion \cite{LLB12,GNC12,ZSH13},
higher Chern numbers \cite{BQ12,LBF12,WHC12,YGS12,WRB13a,SRB13,WRB14}, and even allowing for the interaction
energy scale to exceed single particle band gaps \cite{HSD07,SGS11,SRM12,KNC14}.
The question of whether these conventional and unconventional features survive in the thermodynamic
limit, as well as the nature of phase transitions from the FCI into neighbouring phases is still open.\\
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=8cm,page=1]{fig1_g.pdf}
\caption{\label{fig: CIcyl}
(Color online) (a) Honeycomb lattice on an infinite cylinder with an $L$-site ($L=2L_{y}$) circumference implemented in iDMRG.
(b) Hopping conventions for the Haldane model \cite{H88} used in this work. (c) Band structure for the Haldane model with optimal band flatness ratio of the lower band ($\sim 1/7$), achieved with $\cos(\phi)=t_{1}/(4t_{2})=3\sqrt{3/43}$ ($\phi=0.65$) and $m=0$.}
\end{figure}
In this work, we study a fermionic FCI at filling $1/3$ on an infinite cylinder
using the infinite density matrix renormalization group (iDMRG) method~\cite{M08,W92,KZM13}.
We characterize the topological properties of the FCI phase and study its stability.
Furthermore, we report numerical evidence
revealing the first order character of the phase transition from the FCI into a metallic state, occurring
when interactions are of the order of the band width and find no evidence
of other competing orders.
Compared to ED, the iDMRG algorithm offers the advantage that we
can consider systems of size $L_x \times L_y$ unit cells with $L_x$ being in the thermodynamic limit
and $L_y$ larger than what is tractable by ED. Furthermore, we can
conveniently probe topological properties of the state and its quasiparticles, namely
the topological entanglement entropy (EE) \cite{KP06,LW06,JWB12},
entanglement spectrum (ES)~\cite{LH08} and
the quasiparticle charges~\cite{HZQ13,ZMP13} encoded in the MPS representation of the wave function.
Indeed, this method in its finite and infinite versions, has been recently shown to be remarkably successful in describing the topological
properties of fractional quantum Hall (FQH) states~\cite{ZMP13} and realizations
of the $\mathbb{Z}_{2}$ quantum spin liquid~\cite{HSC14}, chiral spin liquid \cite{HSC14b} and
bosonic FCI states \cite{JWB12,CV13,ZKB13}. The success of iDMRG for 2D systems
relies on having low enough entanglement and short correlation lengths, a requirement which is commonly
met by gapped systems.
\section{Model.} The Haldane model for spinless fermions with nearest-neighbor interactions has the form~\cite{H88}
\begin{subequations}
\begin{eqnarray}\label{eq: Ham}
H&=&H_{0}+H_{V},\\
H_{0}&=&-\sum\limits_{ij} t_{ij}c^{\dagger}_{i}c_{j}+\sum\limits_{i} m \left(n_{A,i}-n_{B,i}\right),\\
H_{V}&=&V_{1}\sum\limits_{\left\langle ij \right\rangle} n_{A,i}n_{B,j}.
\end{eqnarray}
\end{subequations}
The non interacting part $H_{0}$, is defined on the honeycomb lattice shown in Fig.~\ref{fig: CIcyl}(b) on the infinite cylinder of circumference $L=2L_{y}$ in Fig.~\ref{fig: CIcyl}(a). Electrons are created by $c^{(\dagger)}_{i}=a^{(\dagger)}_{i},b^{(\dagger)}_{i}$ with $n_{c,i}=c^{\dagger}_{i}c_{i}$ in each of two interpenetrating triangular lattices $A$ and $B$ spanned by the lattice vectors $\mathbf{a_{1,2}}=a(3/2,\pm3/2)$, where $a$ is the lattice constant. Hopping is allowed to nearest and next-nearest neighbors (NN and NNN) sites with amplitudes $t_{\left\langle ij \right\rangle}=t_{1} \in \mathbb{R}$ and $t_{\left\langle\left\langle ij \right\rangle\right\rangle}=t_{2}e^{\pm i\phi} \in \mathbb{C}$ respectively, where $\pm\phi$ is the phase acquired by an electron hopping between atoms in the same sublattice with the sign given by the direction of the arrows in Fig.~\ref{fig: CIcyl}(b). The staggered chemical potential $m$ controls the phase transition from a CI with Chern number $C=1$ to a trivial insulator with $C=0$~\cite{H88}. The band structure for this Hamiltonian in the CI phase is shown in Fig.~\ref{fig: CIcyl}(c) for the parameters that optimize the flatness ratio for the lower band, given in the figure caption. The interaction term $H_{V}$ is a NN short-range repulsive interaction represented by a shaded oval in Fig.~\ref{fig: CIcyl}(b).\\
We obtain the matrix product state (MPS) representation of the GS variationally using the iDMRG method~\cite{M08,W92,KZM13}.
We represent the Hamiltonian using a matrix product operator (MPO) representation~\cite{ZMP13,KZM13}. The iDMRG algorithm finds iteratively an efficient representation of the ground state using a \emph{Schmidt decomposition} of the system into two half infinite cylinders and truncates it at a given (bond) dimension $\chi$. The Schmidt decomposition at a bond is given by $\left|\psi\right\rangle =\sum_{\alpha}\Lambda_{\alpha}\left|\alpha_{L}\right\rangle\otimes\left|\alpha_{R}\right\rangle$, where $\Lambda_{\alpha}$ and $\left|\alpha_{L/R}\right\rangle$ are the Schmidt coefficients and left and right Schmidt states respectively.
%
Importantly, such decomposition gives straightforward access to the entanglement properties. Note that the Schmidt values are directly related to the eigenvalues of the reduced density matrix, i.e, $\rho^{L/R}_{\alpha} = \Lambda_{\alpha}^2$ and the Schmidt states are the corresponding eigenstates.
The von-Neumann entanglement entropy $S_{\mathrm{VN}}$ and the entanglement spectrum $\left\lbrace\varepsilon_{\alpha}\right\rbrace$ \cite{LH08} can be obtained by means of the relations $S_{\mathrm{VN}}=-\sum_{\alpha}\Lambda^{2}_{\alpha}\log\left(\Lambda_{\alpha}^2\right)$ and $\Lambda_{\alpha}^{2}=e^{-\varepsilon_{\alpha}}$, respectively.
Due to its faster numerical convergence, we will also find it useful to study the infinite Renyi entropy defined by $S_{\infty}=-\log\left(\mathrm{max}\left[\Lambda^2_{\alpha}\right]\right)$. Before discussing our results, let us note that, as in the FQH case \cite{ZMP13}, we take advantage of the $U(1)$ charge conservation symmetry of the Hamiltonian, which is also a symmetry of $\rho^{L/R}$. Thus the entanglement spectrum can be resolved further into distinct $U(1)$ charge sectors $Q^{L}_{\alpha}\in \mathbb{Z}$ where $Q^{L}_{\alpha}$ label the $U(1)$ charges of the left Schmidt states.
\section{Hall conductivity and spectral flow of the CI and FCI states.}
The hallmark of the CI (FCI) state is the integer (fractional) quantization of the Hall conductivity $\sigma_{H}$.
This quantity can be written as an average of the Berry curvature over boundary conditions \cite{NTDW85}
\begin{eqnarray}\label{eq:hall_bcond}
\sigma_{H} &= \frac{e^2}{2\pi h} \int d\Phi_x d\Phi_y \, \nabla \times \mathcal{A}(\Phi_x, \Phi_y),
\end{eqnarray}
where $\Phi_x$ $(\Phi_{y})$ is the phase an electron acquires when a flux threads the cylinder in the $x$ ($y$) direction
and $\mathbf{\mathcal{A}}(\boldsymbol{\Phi}) = -i\Braket{ \Psi_0^{\boldsymbol{\Phi}}| \partial_{\boldsymbol{\Phi}} | \Psi_0^{\boldsymbol{\Phi}} }$ is the Berry connection computed from the GS wave function on the torus
$\left | \Psi_0^{\mathbf{\Phi}}\right\rangle$ for a flux $\boldsymbol{\Phi}=(\Phi_x,\Phi_y)$. In principle, calculating $\sigma_{H}$ involves repeatedly
solving for the GS in a 2D discrete flux grid.
However, iDMRG offers a great simplification~\cite{ZMP14}. Fixing the flux through the cylinder $\Phi_y$, the $U(1)$ Berry phase for
one quantum of flux insertion in $\Phi_x $ is computed from the entanglement spectrum as
\begin{equation}
e^{i \gamma(\Phi_y)} = \exp\big[ 2 \pi i\sum_\alpha \Lambda^2_{\alpha}(\Phi_y) Q^{L}_{\alpha}(\Phi_y) \big].
\label{eq:hall_gamma}
\end{equation}
Then, computing \eqref{eq:hall_bcond} reduces to $\sigma_{H}=\frac{e^2}{2\pi h}\int_{0}^{2\pi}d\Phi_{y}\partial_{\Phi_{y}}\gamma(\Phi_y)= \frac{e^2}{h} \gamma(\Phi_{y})|^{2\pi}_{0}$ \cite{ZMP14}. The flux $\Phi_{y}$ threading through the cylinder is implemented in the MPO Hamiltonian by twisting the boundary conditions such that the electrons pick up a phase $e^{i\Phi_{y}}$ when circling around the cylinder. Previous ED calculations~\cite{KVD12} have obtained $\sigma_{H}$ either directly from Eq.~\eqref{eq:hall_bcond}, requiring a summation over excited states as well as an averaging over topologically distinct GS, or by computing the vorticity of the integrand of (2) directly through knowledge of the ground-state for different twist angles~\cite{HSD07}. Within the iDMRG framework $\sigma_{H}$ is computed in practice solely from the GS wave function at $\Phi_{y}=0,2\pi$.
Note that from the definition of the reduced density matrix, the exponent in Eq.~\eqref{eq:hall_gamma} is actually $2\pi i\left\langle Q^{L}(\Phi_{y})\right\rangle$, where $\left\langle Q^{L} (\Phi_{y})\right\rangle$ is the charge polarization modulo $1$ across a cut at fixed $x$ when flux $\Phi_y$ threads the cylinder. As we adiabatically insert a flux $\Phi_{y}$, the latter quantity counts the number of charges crossing the entanglement cut~\cite{L83}.\\
In Fig.~\ref{fig: CI}(a) we show $\left\langle Q^{L}(\Phi_{y})\right\rangle$ for both the non-interacting trivial and CI cases at half filling for a cylinder with $L=6$ \footnote{The benchmarking and success of the iDMRG algorithm in describing trivial and CI phases at half-filling will be reported elsewhere \cite{MGP14}.}. The trivial insulator with $C=0$ (top blue) has no charge pumping after one flux quantum and thus $\sigma_{H}=0$. On the other hand, the CI state with $C=1$ shows that, after the insertion of one flux quantum, there is exactly one unit charge pumped across the boundary. By computing \eqref{eq:hall_bcond} as described above, we find an accurate quantization to $\sigma_{H;\mathrm{iDMRG}}=e^2/h$. Alternatively, we can visualize the charge pumping through the many-body ES $\left\lbrace\varepsilon_{\alpha}\right\rbrace$ shown in Fig.~\ref{fig: CI}(b). As mentioned above, the ES can be decomposed into different $U(1)$ corresponding to charge quantum numbers $Q_{\alpha}^{L}$. For a CI state, the adiabatic flux insertion must shift the ES by one charge sector after a single flux quantum is inserted, signalling that a unit charge has been pumped from left to right (or viceversa)~\cite{AHB11}. We find exactly such spectral flow numerically, shown in Fig.~\ref{fig: CI}(b). The calculation of the Hall conductivity and the spectral flow for the CI state obtained from iDMRG represents our first novel result.
Having understood the signatures of the CI state in iDMRG, we now address the existence and stability of the FCI state in a $\nu=1/3$ filled band of Hamiltonian Eq.~\eqref{eq: Ham}. For concreteness we focus first on the model with optimized parameters, i.e., we choose the optimal bottom band flatness ratio depicted in Fig.~\ref{fig: CIcyl}(c) and first set $V_{1}=t_{1}$, which exceeds the band width of the lower band $W\approx0.31t_{1}$ but is smaller than the band gap $\Delta\approx1.7t_{1}$.
In Fig.~\ref{fig: CI}(c), we show $\left\langle Q^{L}(\Phi_{y})\right\rangle$ and the entanglement spectrum as a function of flux $\Phi_{y}$ for up to three flux periods for a cylinder with circumference $L=12$ and $\chi=500$. From this plot, it is apparent that the GS wave-function obtained by iDMRG pumps one electron through the cut only upon insertion of \emph{three} flux quanta. We find that the Hall conductivity is $\sigma_{H;\mathrm{iDMRG}}\approx 0.33e^2/h$, consistent with a $1/3$ Laughlin-FCI state. Furthermore, the zero flux ES structure is shifted by one $U(1)$ particle sector only upon inserting three flux quanta [see Fig.~\ref{fig: CI}(d)], which provides evidence for a fractional charge pumping per cycle. We have checked convergence by confirming that larger values of $\chi$ give identical results. We emphasize that these results provide direct evidence for the charge pumping and entanglement spectral flow of an FCI state, not previously addressed with exact diagonalization. \\
\section{Characterization of topological order in the FCI state.}
The iDMRG gives direct access to a topological characterization of the FCI state~\cite{CV13,ZMP13,HZQ13}. For a topologically ordered state the finite size scaling of both $S_{\mathrm{VN}}$ and $S_{\infty}$ satisfies the area law $S=cL-\gamma_{i}$, with a non-universal constant $c$ but the same topological contribution $\gamma_{i}=\log\sqrt{\sum_{j}d^2_{j}}-\log(d_{i})$ where $d_{i}$ are the quantum dimensions of the different quasiparticles labelled by $i$~\cite{LW06,KP06}.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[angle=0,scale=0.33,page=1]{Fig2beta.pdf}
\caption[Compact Routing Example]{\label{fig: CI}
(Color online) (a) Charge pumping after one flux insertion for a half-filled trivial
insulator on a cylinder with $L=6$ and $m\neq 0$, $t_{2}=0$ and $\chi=200$ (blue upper curve) and a CI with $m= 0$, $\phi\neq 0 , t_{2} \neq 0$ and $\chi=400$ (lower green curve). The bond dimension was chosen large enough to represent the groundstate for this size \cite{MGP14}. (b) Entanglement spectrum evolution as a function of flux for the CI. The spectrum is shifted by a
unit charge after one flux quantum has been adiabatically inserted. Different charge sectors $Q^{L}$ are color coded. In (c) and (d) we show the charge pumping and ES for the $1/3$ filled lower band of the Haldane model after \emph{three} flux insertions for $L=12$ and $\chi=500$. In this case $\sigma_{H;\mathrm{iDMRG}}\sim 0.33e^2/h$ per flux quantum and the ES is shifted by a unit charge only after three flux quanta have been adiabatically inserted.}
\end{figure}
For the abelian $1/3$ Laughlin state, $d_{i}=1$ $\forall i=1,2,3$ and thus $\gamma=\log\sqrt{3}\sim 0.549$ \cite{LW06,KP06}.
We show in Fig.~\ref{fig: FCI}(c) that the extrapolation of the finite size scaling of $S$
is indeed in good agreement with this prediction resulting in $\gamma_{iDMRG}=0.50, 0.587$ for $S_{\mathrm{VN}}$ and $S_{\infty}$, respectively \footnote{For $S(L)$ in Fig.~\ref{fig: FCI} we include only those sizes that satisfy $L=6m$ with $m\in \mathbb{Z}$. Other sizes have a fractional charge per unit length on the cylinder in the Tao-Thouless limit and spontaneously break the symmetry into a charge density wave order which smears out as $L$ increases. The finite corrections for $S(L)$ when $L\neq 6m$ are thus expected to be more severe than for $L=6m$ and therefore we exclude them.}.
Using the adiabatic flux insertion, we can probe all three topologically degenerate FCI GS (minimally entangled states) since they evolve continuously into one another every flux period. Thus, the three distinct topologically equivalent GS occur at $\Phi_{y}=2\pi m$ with $m=0,1,2$. Because of translational symmetry $T_{y}$ of the cylinder, we can assign momentum quantum numbers to Schmidt states~\cite{PT12,CV13} [see Fig.~\ref{fig: FCI} (b)]. We notice that the ES of all three GS have the characteristic counting of the edge conformal field theory (CFT), further confirming the topological nature of the state~\cite{KP06,LH08}. The access to all three GS enables us to extract the quasiparticle charge $q_{a}$ of the Laughlin state anyons~\cite{ZMP13,HZQ13}. Theoretically, the quasiparticle charges can be written as $q_{a}=(a+1/2)/3=\left\lbrace 1/2,1/6,-1/6 \right\rbrace$ mod 1~\cite{ZMP13} where $a=\left\lbrace 1,0,-1 \right\rbrace$ labels the anyons and the $1/2$ factor takes into account the $\pi$
phase that is due to the periodic boundary conditions of the physical fermions. Numerically we can find the corresponding charges by noting that with each inserted flux quantum an anyon is pumped through a given cut. Thus we can directly read off from Fig.~\ref{fig: CI}(c) the quasiparticle charge from $q_{m}=\left\langle Q^{L}(\Phi_{y})\right\rangle|_{\Phi_{y}=2\pi m}=0.5,0.154,-0.154$ which are in close agreement with those expected theoretically (see Appendix \ref{app:1} for further details).
\section{Stability of the FCI state and the metal to FCI transition.}
An important advantage of the iDMRG method is that we can obtain relatively large system sizes without subspace projection.
This enables us to study the emergence and stability of the FCI state under decreasing/increasing $V_{1}$ in the presence of band mixing ~\cite{HSD07,SGS11,KNC14}.
Importantly, we will also address the character of the transition between the FCI state and possible competing orders, an issue not previously discussed in the literature
to our knowledge but essential for benchmarking future experiments.
In Fig.~\ref{fig: FCI}(c) we show the ES as a function of $V_{1}$.
We find that there are two clearly distinct phases, represented by the shaded and unshaded regions.
For $V_{1} \lesssim 2W$ we observe a phase with a dense ES and a correlation length $\xi$ which diverges as the MPS bond dimension $\chi$ is increased [see inset in Fig.~\ref{fig: FCI}(c)], which indicates the iDMRG is not converged in $\chi$.
This divergence is the expected behavior for a metallic phase,\cite{Tagliacozzo-2008,Pollmann-2009} because the logarithmically divergent entanglement of a metal requires an MPS with $\chi \to \infty$.
In contrast, for $V_{1} \gtrsim 2 W$, $\xi$ is well converged with $\chi$, indicating the state is gapped.
The contrasting behavior of $\xi$ is shown in inset in Fig.~\ref{fig: FCI}(c), which indicates a direct phase transition between a metal (shaded) and a FCI (unshaded).
Using Eq.~\eqref{eq:hall_gamma}, the entire FCI region $V_{1}\gtrsim 2W$ is found to have a robust Hall conductivity $\sigma_{H}=e^2/3h$.
The existence of a metallic phase for $V_{1} \lesssim 2W$ is expected from a perturbative renormalization group perspective, \cite{S94} since the Fermi-liquid state is expected to be robust until $V_{1} \sim W$.
Note that $\xi$ remains constant in the entire FCI region, with no apparent divergence as the transition is approached; presumably this indicates the transition is first-order. For large $V_{1}$ we find no other singularities in the ES, implying that the FCI state is stable up to arbitrary interaction strength, consistent with ED results on small clusters~\cite{HSD07,SGS11,SRM12,KNC14}. Therefore, our numerical results rule out the appearance of any intermediate competing phases.
A related open question is the stability towards NNN interactions $V_{2}$. Preliminary tests indicate that for $V_{1}= t_{1}$ the state survives up to moderate $V_{2}\lesssim W$, although further study is needed to assess the complete phase diagram as a function of $V_{1,2}$. Finally, at $V_1= t_{1}$ we have also checked the FCI phase remains for several values of the band parameters $t_2$, $\phi$ tuned away from the flatness-optimized point.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[angle=0,width=9.5cm,page=1]{Fig3.pdf}
\caption{\label{fig: FCI}
(Color online) a) Finite size scaling of the von Neumann and infinite Renyi entropies as a function of cylinder circumference $L$ for $V_{1}=t_{1}$. They extrapolate to the values $\gamma_{\mathrm{VN}}=0.50$ and $\gamma_{\infty}=0.587$ respectively. The theoretically expected value $\gamma=\frac{1}{2}\log{3}$ is indicated by an horizontal dashed line. b) Momentum resolved entanglement spectrum of the GS at $\Phi_{y}=2\pi$ for $V_{1}=t_{1}$ showing the CFT edge theory counting $\left\lbrace 1,1,2,3,5, \cdots \right\rbrace $ for each $Q^{L}$ sector (labelled by different colors). The dashed lines enclose the $Q^{L}=0$ sector counting for clarity. c) Entanglement spectrum $\varepsilon_{\alpha}$ as a function of $V_{1}/t_{1}$ with the same color coding as in b). The left shaded region is a metallic state (M) while the right unshaded region corresponds to the FCI state. Inset: Correlation length $\xi$ in units of $a$ as a function of $V_{1}/t_{1}$ for different $\chi$. The sharp discontinuity at $V_{1} \sim 2W$ signals a direct M-FCI phase transition.}
\end{figure}
\section{Conclusions.}
We have characterized the fermionic Chern and fractional Chern insulator on the Haldane model within
iDMRG on an infinite cylinder. This numerical technique enabled us to fully characterize these states by directly accessing
(i) chiral properties of the state, i.e. its Hall conductivity and entanglement spectrum spectral flow and
(ii) topological properties of the FCI state, including its finite size entanglement scaling, the charge of the anyons and
the counting of the entanglement spectrum. We have also exemplified how
to access different topologically degenerate ground states via flux insertion and shown that the state is robust against
band mixing or modifying the optimal parameters. We have presented for the first time the first order character of the metal to FCI transition from a sharp discontinuity in both the correlation length and the entanglement spectrum. Furthermore, our numerical results rule out the appearance of other competing phases, establishing a benchmark for future experiments.
\section{Acknowledgements:} We thank B. A. Bernevig for illuminating discussions, R. Mong for work on related problems
and N. Regnault for critical reading of the manuscript.
|
\section{Introduction}
Over the past decade, distributed control has become an active area in control systems society
and there has been considerable interest in distributed computation and
decision making problems of all types. Among these are consensus and flocking problems \cite{Reynolds1987},
distributed averaging \cite{Boyd2006}, multi-agent coverage problems \cite{Bullo2004},
the rendezvous problem \cite{Morse2007}, localization of sensors in a multi-sensor network \cite{Evans2004}
and the distributed management of multi-robot formations \cite{Francis2009}.
These problems have found applications in a wide range of fields including sensor networks,
robotic teams, social networks \cite{Morse2012} and electric power grids \cite{Bullo2013}.
Compared with traditional centralized
control, distributed control is believed more promising for those large-scale complex networks
because of its fault tolerance, cost saving and many inevitable physical constraints such as
limited sensing, computation and communication capabilities.
One of the basic problems arising in decentralized coordination and control
is a consensus problem, also known as an agreement problem \cite{TsThesis,Ts1986,Morse2003,Murray2004,Moreau2005,Ren2005,Basar2007}.
It arises in a number of applications including coordination of UAV's, flocking and formation control,
tracking in network of robots,
and parameter estimation~\cite{Blondel2005,Oh2007,Bullo2009,Mesbahi2010,Martinoli2013, Lopes2008,Sayed2012,RamThesis,alexthesis,kunalthesis}.
In a consensus problem,
we have a set of agents each of which has some initial
variable (a scalar or a vector). The agents are interconnected over an underlying (possibly time-varying) communication network and each agent has a local view of the network, i.e., each agent is aware of its immediate neighbors in the network and communicates with them only. The goal is to design a distributed
and local algorithm that the agents can execute to agree on a common value asymptotically.
The algorithm needs to be
local in the sense that each agent performs local computations
and communicates only with its immediate neighbors.
In this paper, we present two novel results for consensus problems and averaging dynamics.
The first contribution is the establishment of new convergence rate analysis using Lyapunov approach, which allows us to provide an exponential rate in terms of network structure
(such as longest shortest path) and the properties of the weight matrices. This rate result allows us to establish
that the convergence rate with the ratio of the form
$1-O(1/(m\log_2 m)$ is achievable on special tree-like regular graphs.
The second contribution is the development of the convergence rate result for a constrained consensus,
which is more general than that of~\cite{NOP2010}.
In contrast with~\cite{NOP2010}, we do not require the weight matrices to be doubly stochastic. In fact, it is sufficient to have rooted directed spanning trees contained in the graphs
and the existence of a specific
adjoint dynamic for the linear consensus dynamic. Our analysis makes use of the Lyapunov comparison functions
and absolute probability sequence, which have been developed in~\cite{touri2014} in the more general setting of random graphs (see also~\cite{touribook,tourithesis}).
The paper is organized as follows. In Section~\ref{sec:consensus}, we discuss the weighted-averaging algorithm for consensus problem. In Section~\ref{sec:matrices}, we review some of the recent results for cut-balanced matrices and the related adjoint dynamics for the linear consensus dynamics. Using these results, we
construct suitable Lyapunov comparison functions and study convergence properties of the weighted-averaging algorithm in Section~\ref{sec:wave-rate} for standard consensus problem, while
in Section~\ref{sec:constrained-consensus} we study
a projection-based weighted-averaging algorithm for constrained consensus. We conclude with some remarks in
Section~\ref{sec:concl}.
{\bf Notation}: \ For an integer $m\ge1$, we write $[m]$ to denote the index set $\{1,\ldots,m\}$.
We view vectors as column vectors. We write $x'$ to denote the transpose of a vector $x$ and, similarly, we use
$A'$ for the transpose of a matrix $A$. A vector is stochastic if its entries are nonnegative and
sum to 1. A matrix is said to be stochastic if its rows are stochastic vectors.
A matrix is doubly stochastic if both
$A$ and its transpose $A'$ are stochastic. A matrix $A$ entries will be denoted by $A_{ij}$ and, also, by
$[A]_{ij}$ when convenient. We use $I$ for the identity matrix.
To differentiate between
the scalar and the vector cases, we use $x_i$ to denote a scalar value associated with agent $i$
and ${\bold x}_i$ for a vector associated with agent $i$. We write $\mathbf{1}$ to denote the vector with all entries equal to 1, where the size of the vector is to be understood from the context.
Given a set $S$ with finitely many elements, we use $|S|$ to denote the cardinality of $S$.
We use $\|\cdot\|$ for the Euclidean norm, while for other $p$-norms we will write $\|\cdot\|_p$.
The Euclidean projection of a point $y$ on a convex closed set $Y$ is denoted by $\mathbb{P}_Y[y]$, i.e.,
$\mathbb{P}_Y[y]=\mathop{\rm argmin}_{z\in Y}\|y-z\|$. The distance of a point $y$ to the set $Y$ is denoted by ${\rm dist}(y,Y)$, i.e.,
${\rm dist}(y,Y)=\|y-\mathbb{P}_Y[y]\|$.
\section{Unconstrained Consensus}\label{sec:consensus}
We consider a set of $m$ agents, denoted by
$[m]=\{1,\ldots,m\}$. The agents are embedded in a communication network, which is
modeled by a directed graph $G_t=\{[m],E_t\}$, where $E_t\subseteq [m]\times [m]$
is the set of directed links. A link $(i,j)$ indicates
that agent $i$ sends information to agent $j$ at time $t$.
We will work with a sequence $\{G_t\}$ of directed graphs, where each graph $G_t$
contains a directed spanning tree rooted at one of the agents. We refer to such a graph as {\it rooted graph}.
The self-loops will be only virtually added to the graphs to model the fact that every agent has access to
its own state information. We consider the unconstrained consensus problem, formalized as follows.\\
{\bf [Unconstrained Consensus]} \
{\it Design a distributed
algorithm obeying the communication structure given by graph $G_t$ at each time $t$ and ensuring that,
for every set of initial values ${\bold x}_i(0)\in\mathbb{R}^n$, $i\in [m]$, the following limiting behavior
emerges: $\lim_{t\to\infty} {\bold x}_i(t)=c$
for all $i\in [m]$ and some $c\in\mathbb{R}^n$.}\\
The algorithms for solving consensus problems have been mainly constructed using the Laplacians of the graphs
$G_t=([m],E_t)$, e.g.\ see~\cite{Morse2003,Murray2004,Boyd2005},
or weighted-averaging (through the use of stochastic matrices)\cite{Morse2003,Blondel2005,Moreau2005,tourithesis}.
In the scalar case, a well studied approach to the problem is for each agent to
use a linear iterative update rule of the following form
$x(t+1) = W(t)x(t)$ where $x(t)$ is a vector consisting of the $x_i(t)$ and each
$W(t)$ is a stochastic matrix.
One choice is $W(t)= I -\frac{1}{\gamma}L(t)$
where $L(t)$ is the Laplacian of $G_t$ and $\gamma$ is any scalar greater than $m$ (see~\cite{Morse2003}).
An improvement on this choice was obtained in~\cite{Boyd2004,Murray2004} by replacing $\gamma$
with the maximal node degree in the graph $G_t$.
A particularly interesting improvement, which defines what has come to be known as the Metropolis algorithm,
requires only local information to define the weights $w_{ij}(t)$~\cite{Boyd2005}.
However, most of the Laplacian-based algorithms require that each $W(t)$ is also symmetric which
implicitly require bidirectional communication between agents.
Weighted-averaging algorithms get around this limitation~\cite{TsThesis}.
We will use the weighted-averaging algorithm, which is as follows.
Starting with a vector ${\bold x}_i(0)\in \mathbb{R}^n$, each agent updates at times $t=1,2,\ldots,$ by computing
\begin{eqnarray}\label{eq:wcalgo}
{\bold x}_i(t+1) = \sum_{j=1}^m A_{ij}(t) {\bold x}_j(t),
\end{eqnarray}
where the weights $A_{ij}(t)$, $i,j\in[m]$, are non-negative
and the positive values satisfy some conditions with respect to the graph $G_t$ structure, to be specified soon.
The dynamic in~\eqref{eq:wcalgo}
is linear, so we focus on the case where the variables ${\bold x}_i$ are scalars, denoted by $x_i$,
as all the results for the vector case follow immediately by coordinate-wise analysis. The agents' variables
$x_i\in\mathbb{R}$, $i\in[m]$ are stucked to form a vector $x\in\mathbb{R}^m$.
The existing analysis of the weighted-averaging is based on studying the behavior of the left-matrix products.
Specifically, as the iterates $x(t)$ are related over time by the following linear dynamic:
\begin{equation*}
x(t)=A(t)A(t-1)\cdots A(s+1)A(s)x(s)\qquad\hbox{for }t\ge s\ge0,
\end{equation*}
the convergence of the iterates generated by the algorithm
is related to the convergence of the
matrix products $A(t)A(t-1)\cdots A(1)A(0)$, as $t\to\infty$.
In particular, when the matrices
$A(t)A(t-1)\cdots A(1)A(0)$ converge to a rank one matrix, the iterates $x(t)$ converge to a consensus.
Concretely, some conditions on the graphs $G_t$ and the matrices $A(t)$ that yield such a convergence
are given in the following assumption.
\begin{assumption}\label{assume:uniform}
Let $\{G_t\}$ be a graph sequence and $\{A(t)\}$ be a sequence of $m\times m$ matrices
that satisfy the following conditions:
\begin{itemize}
\item[(a)]
Each $A(t)$ is a stochastic matrix that is compliant with the graph $G_t$, i.e.,
$A_{ij}(t)>0$ when $(j,i)\in E_t$, for all $t$.
\item[(b)] (Aperiodicity) The diagonal entries of each $A(t)$ are positive, $A_{ii}(t)>0$ for all $t$ and $i\in[m]$.
\item[(c)] (Uniform Positivity) There is a scalar $\beta>0$ such that $A_{ij}(t)\ge\beta$ whenever $A_{ij}(t)>0$.
\item[(d)] (Irreducibility) Each $G_t$ is strongly connected.
\end{itemize}
\end{assumption}
The convergence properties of the weighted-averaging algorithm have been extensively studied under
Assumption~\ref{assume:uniform} (see~\cite{TsThesis,Morse2003,Blondel2005,Morse2008a}).
Actually, in this case the matrix sequence $\{A(t)\}$ is known to be {\it ergodic} in the sense that
the limit
\[\lim_{t\to\infty} A(t)\cdots A(k+1)A(k)\quad \hbox{exists for all }k\ge0.\]
Moreover, it is known that the convergence rate of these products is geometric.
The convergence rate question has been studied in~\cite{Morse2008b,Nedic2009a,Morse2011,Nedic2009b,Ts2013}
for deterministic matrix sequences and in~\cite{Fagnani2008,Bajovic2013,touri2014} for random sequences.
In~\cite{Nedic2009b,Ts2009,Morse2011p}, the convergence rate question was addressed for the cases when
the matrices $A(t)$ are doubly stochastic;
the best polynomial-time bound on the convergence time was given in~\cite{Nedic2009b}.
Specifically, the following result is well known.
\begin{theorem}\label{thm:known}
{[Lemma 5.2.1 in~\cite{TsThesis}, Lemma 5 in~\cite{Nedic2009b}] }
Under Assumption~\ref{assume:uniform} we have
\[\lim_{t\to\infty} A(t)\cdots A(k+1)A(k)=\mathbf{1}\phi'(k)\qquad\hbox{for all }k\ge0,\]
where each $\phi(k)$ is stochastic vector. Furthermore, the convergence rate is geometric:
for all $t\ge k\ge0$,
\[\|A(t)\cdots A(k+1)A(k)-\mathbf{1}\phi'(k)\|^2\le C q^{t-k},\]
where the constants $C>0$ and $q\in (0,1)$ depend only on $m$ and $\beta$.
When the matrices $A(t)$ are doubly stochastic, we have for all $t\ge k\ge0$,
\[\left\|A(t)\cdots A(k+1)A(k)-\frac{1}{m}\mathbf{1}\1' \right\|^2\le \left(1-\frac{\beta}{2m^2}\right)^{t-k}.\]
\end{theorem}
These and the other existing rate results are not explicitly capturing the structure of the graph $G_t$ such as the longest shortest path for example.
In what follows, we develop such rate results by adopting dynamic system point of view
and applying Lyapunov approach.
This approach allows us to characterize the convergence of the weighted-averaging algorithm
with a more explicit dependence on the graph structure than that of Theorem~\ref{thm:known}.
In particular, we work with a quadratic Lyapunov comparison function proposed by
Touri~\cite{touri2011}, and
we build on the results developed in Touri's thesis~\cite{tourithesis}
(see also~\cite{touribook,touri2014}). In this approach,
an absolute probability sequence of matrices $A(t)$ play a critical role in the construction of a Lyapunov comparison function
and in establishing its rate of decrease along the iterates of the algorithm.
\section{Absolute Probability Sequence}\label{sec:matrices}
We embark on a study of the important features of stochastic matrices for convergence of the weighted-averaging
method.
The development here makes use of the notion of an absolute probability sequence
associated with a sequence $\{A(t)\}$ of stochastic matrices. This notion
was introduced by Kolmogorov~\cite{Kolmogorov}.
\begin{definition}\label{def:ap}
{\rm \cite{Kolmogorov}}
Let $\{A(t)\}$ be a sequence of stochastic matrices. A sequence of stochastic vectors $\{\pi(t)\}$ is
an absolute probability sequence for $\{A(t)\}$ if
\begin{equation}\label{eq:adjoint}
\pi'(t)=\pi'(t+1) A(t)\qquad\hbox{for all }t\ge0.\end{equation}
\end{definition}
Blackwell~\cite{Blackwell1945} has shown that {\it every sequence
of stochastic matrices has an absolute probability sequence}.
As a direct consequence of Blackwell's result,
every {\it ergodic} sequence of stochastic matrices has an absolute probability sequence
(an earlier result due to Kolmogorov~\cite{Kolmogorov}).
In particular, for an ergodic sequence $\{A(t)\}$ of stochastic matrices we have
\begin{equation}\label{eq:phi}
\lim_{\tau\to\infty} A(\tau)A(\tau-1)\cdots A(t+1) A(t) =\mathbf{1}\phi'(t),
\end{equation}
and $\{\phi(t)\}$ is an absolute probability sequence for $\{A(t)\}$.
In general, a sequence $\{A(t)\}$ of stochastic matrices may have more than one absolute probability sequence.
The following example has been communicated to us by B.~Touri:
if each of the matrices $A(t)$ is invertible and each $A(t)^{-1}$ is stochastic, then for any stochastic vector
$u$, we can construct an absolute probability sequence for $\{A(t)\}$ by letting
$\pi'(0)=u'$ and $\pi'(t+1)=\pi'(t)A(t)^{-1}$ for all $t\ge0$.
Thus, $\{A(t)\}$ has infinitely many absolute probability sequences.
We show that the absolute probability sequence is unique for an ergodic stochastic matrix sequence.
\begin{lemma}\label{lem:unique}
Let $\{A(t)\}$ be an ergodic sequence of stochastic matrices (cf.~\eqref{eq:phi}).
Then, the vector sequence $\{\phi(t)\}$ is the unique absolute probability sequence for $\{A(t)\}$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Assume that
$\{\pi(t)\}$ is another absolute probability sequence for $\{A(t)\}$. Then, we have
\[\pi'(t)
=\pi'(t+\tau)A(t+\tau-1)\cdots A(t+1)A(t)\]
for all $\tau\ge 1$ and $t\ge0$.
Thus,
\begin{align*}
\pi'(t)
&=\pi'(t+\tau)\left(A(t+\tau-1)\cdots A(t)-\mathbf{1}\phi'(t)\right) \cr
& \ +\pi'(t+\tau)\mathbf{1}\phi'(t)\cr
& = \pi'(t+\tau)\left(A(t+\tau-1)\cdots A(t)-\mathbf{1}\phi'(t)\right) + \phi'(t),
\end{align*}
where in the second equality we use
$\pi'(t+\tau)\mathbf{1}=1$. By letting $\tau\to\infty$ and using $\|\pi'(s)\|_1=1$, we obtain
\begin{align*}
&\|\pi'(t)-\phi'(t)\|_1\cr
& \le \mathop{\rm limsup}_{\tau\to\infty}\left(\|\pi'(t+\tau)\|_1\|A(t+\tau-1)\cdots A(t)-\mathbf{1}\phi'(t)\|_\infty\right) \cr
&\le \lim_{\tau\to\infty}\|A(t+\tau-1)\cdots A(t)-\mathbf{1}\phi'(t)\|_\infty
= 0.\end{align*}
\end{proof}
In the subsequent development, it will be important that a sequence $\{A(t)\}$ of
stochastic matrices has an absolute probability sequence of vectors $\pi(t)$
whose entries are uniformly bounded away from zero.
This is the case when each matrix $A(t)$ is doubly stochastic,
as we can use $\pi'(t)=\frac{1}{m}\mathbf{1}$.
Another class of matrices that have this property
is a subclass of {\it cut-balanced} matrices~\cite{touri2014} (see there the class $\mathscr{P}^*$).
(See Hendrickx and Tsitsiklis~\cite{julien2013} for cut-balancedness as studied for continuous-time systems,
and Touri~\cite{touribook,touri2014}
and Bolouki and Malham\'e~\cite{bolouki2012} for discrete-time systems.)
In what follows, we will work under the following assumption, where we view a rooted tree
$\mathsf{T}_t$ as a collection of directed edges from $E_t$.
\begin{assumption}\label{assume:minimal}
Let $\{G_t\}$ be a graph sequence and $\{A(t)\}$ be a matrix sequence such that:
\begin{itemize}
\item[(a)]
(Partial Irreducibility) Each graph $G_t$ is rooted and
each $A(t)$ is a stochastic matrix that is compliant with a rooted directed spanning tree $\mathsf{T}_t$ of $G_t$, i.e., $ A_{ij}(t)>0$ whenever $(j,i)\in \mathsf{T}_t$ for all $t\ge0$.
\item[(b)]
(Aperiodicity) The diagonal entries of each $A(t)$ are positive, $A_{ii}(t)>0$ for all $t$, and $i\in[m]$.
\item[(c)]
(Partial Uniform Positivity)
There is a scalar $\beta>0$ such that
$A_{ii}(t)\ge \beta$ and $A_{ij}(t)\ge\beta$ for all $(j,i)\in \mathsf{T}_t$ and for all $t\ge0$.
\item[(d)] The matrix sequence $\{A(t)\}$ has an absolute probability sequence
$\{\pi(t)\}$ that is uniformly bounded away from zero, i.e.,
there is $\delta\in(0,1)$ such that $\pi_i(t)\ge\delta$ for all $i$ and $t$.
\end{itemize}
\end{assumption}
One can show that Assumption~\ref{assume:uniform} implies Assumption~\ref{assume:minimal}.
\section{Weighted-Averaging Algorithm}\label{sec:wave-rate}
We analyze convergence properties of the weighted-averaging algorithm in~\eqref{eq:wcalgo}
by using a suitable Lyapunov comparison function.
\subsection{Lyapunov Comparison Function}\label{sec:lyapunov}
As indicated in~\cite{touri2014}, there are many possible constructions of Lyapunov comparison functions
by using convex functions and absolute probability sequences, i.e., the adjoint dynamic in~\eqref{eq:adjoint}.
Here, we focus on the quadratic case, where the function is of the form:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:vq}
\varphi(x,\nu)\triangleq\sum_{i=1}^m \nu_i x_i^2 - (\nu'x)^2
\ \hbox{for $x\in\mathbb{R}^m$ and $\nu\in\mathbb{R}^m_+$},
\end{equation}
for suitably chosen vectors $\nu$ (which will vary with time).
The function $\varphi$ has an equivalent form:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:phi-2}
\varphi(x,\nu)=\sum_{i=1}^m \nu_i\left( x_i - (\nu'x)\right)^2
\hbox{for $x\in\mathbb{R}^m$ and $\nu\in\mathbb{R}^m_+$},
\end{equation}
which can be seen
by expanding $\left( x_i - (\nu'x)\right)^2$.
The quadratic function $s\mapsto s^2$ has exact second order expansion, which allows us
to obtain the exact expression for the difference
$\varphi(Ax,\nu)-\varphi(x,A'\nu)$ for a stochastic matrix $A$, as seen in the following lemma.
\begin{lemma}\label{lem:qlyap}
Let $A$ be an $m\times m$ stochastic matrix. We then have
for all $x\in\mathbb{R}^m$ and all $\nu\in\mathbb{R}^m_+$,
\[\varphi(Ax,\nu) = \varphi(x,A'\nu)
- \frac{1}{2}\sum_{i=1}^m \nu_i\sum_{j=1}^m\sum_{\ell=1}^m A_{ij}A_{i\ell}(x_j-x_\ell)^2.\]
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
By the definition of $\varphi$ we have
$\varphi(Ax,\nu) = \sum_{i=1}^m \nu_i ([Ax]_i))^2 - (\nu'Ax)^2,$
where $[Ax]_i=\sum_{j=1}^m A_{ij} x_j$.
We fix an arbitrary index $i$, and we expand $([Ax]_i)^2$ to obtain
\[([Ax]_i)^2=\sum_{j=1}^m\sum_{\ell=1}^m A_{ij}A_{i\ell}x_jx_\ell.\]
Since $x_jx_\ell=\frac{1}{2}\left( x_j^2 + x_\ell^2 - (x_j-x_\ell)^2 \right),$
it follows that
\begin{eqnarray*}
([Ax]_i)^2
&=&\frac{1}{2}\sum_{j=1}^mA_{ij}\left(\sum_{\ell=1}^m A_{i\ell}\right) x_j^2
+\frac{1}{2}\sum_{\ell=1}^m A_{i\ell}\left( \sum_{j=1}^m A_{ij}\right) x_\ell^2 \cr
&& - \frac{1}{2}\sum_{j=1}^m\sum_{\ell=1}^m A_{ij}A_{i\ell}(x_j-x_\ell)^2.
\end{eqnarray*}
Note that $\sum_{\ell=1}^m A_{i\ell}=1$ since the matrix $A$ is stochastic, thus implying
\begin{eqnarray*}
([Ax]_i)^2
&=& \sum_{j=1}^mA_{ij}x_j^2 - \frac{1}{2}\sum_{j=1}^m\sum_{\ell=1}^m A_{ij}A_{i\ell}(x_j-x_\ell)^2.
\end{eqnarray*}
By multiplying the preceding relation with $\nu_i$ and by summing over $i$, we obtain
\begin{align*}
\varphi(Ax,\nu)
= & \sum_{j=1}^m\left(\sum_{i=1}^m \nu_i A_{ij}\right) x_j^2 \cr
& \ -
\frac{1}{2}\sum_{i=1}^m \nu_i\sum_{j=1}^m\sum_{\ell=1}^m A_{ij}A_{i\ell}(x_j-x_\ell)^2 - (\nu'Ax)^2.
\end{align*}
Observe that $\sum_{i=1}^m \nu_i A_{ij}=[A'\nu]_j$. Therefore, by using the definition
of the function $\varphi$ we find
\begin{eqnarray*}
\varphi(Ax,\nu)
= \varphi(x,A'\nu)
- \frac{1}{2}\sum_{i=1}^m \nu_i\sum_{j=1}^m\sum_{\ell=1}^m A_{ij}A_{i\ell}(x_j-x_\ell)^2.
\end{eqnarray*}
\end{proof}
Lemma~\ref{lem:qlyap} provides one of the fundamental relations in the assessment of the convergence rate
of the weighted-averaging algorithm.
\subsection{Convergence Rate Analysis}\label{sec:conv}
In this part, we will first
show the convergence of the weighted-averaging algorithm~\eqref{eq:wcalgo}
for the scalar case, by considering the decrease of $\varphi(x(t),\pi(t))$ over time
along the iterate sequence $\{x(t)\}$, where $\{\pi(t)\}$ is an absolute probability sequence of $\{A(t)\}$.
The decrease of this function in time can be captured exactly, as follows.
Since $x(t+1)=A(t) x(t)$ and the matrices $A(t)$ are stochastic,
by Lemma~\ref{lem:qlyap} it follows
\begin{eqnarray*}
\varphi\left( x(t+1),\pi(t+1)\right) & = & \varphi\left( A(t)x(t),\pi(t+1) \right) \cr
& = & \varphi\left( x(t),A'(t)\pi(t+1) \right) - D(t),\end{eqnarray*}
where
\begin{align}\label{eq:dec}
D(t) =\frac{1}{2}\sum_{i=1}^m \pi_i(t+1)
\sum_{j=1}^m\sum_{\ell=1}^m A_{ij}(t)A_{i\ell}(t)\left(x_j(t)-x_\ell(t)\right)^2.
\end{align}
By the definition of the adjoint dynamics in~\eqref{eq:adjoint}, we have
$A'(t)\pi(t+1)=\pi(t)$, implying that
\begin{align}\label{eq:lyap-dec}
\varphi\left( x(t+1),\pi(t+1) \right) = \varphi\left( x(t),\pi(t) \right)- D(t).\end{align}
Note that function $\varphi(\cdot,\nu)$ induces a semi norm on
$\mathbb{R}^m$ when $\nu$ is a stochastic vector, and it induces a norm when all the entries $\nu_i$ are positive.
Thus, to properly bound the decrease $D(t)$ (cf.~\eqref{eq:dec}) of the function $\varphi\left(x(t),\pi(t)\right)$, one would like to have
$\phi_i(t)>\delta$ for all $i$, for some $\delta$ and for all sufficiently large $t$.
This property can be ensured (for all $t$) by
requiring the additional properties on the matrix sequence $\{A(t)\}$ and the graph sequence $\{G_t\}$ such as
cut-balancedness
(see Lemma 9 in~\cite{touri2014}).
Once all $\pi_i(t)$ are bounded uniformly away from zero,
to further bound $D(t)$ from below, we would also like
that the value of the sum $\sum_{i=1}^m\sum_{j=1}^m\sum_{\ell=1}^m A_{ij}(t)A_{i\ell}(t)$ does not
vanish in time. These properties are ensured by Assumption~\ref{assume:minimal}, which we use
to establish the key relation for the decrease amount $D(t)$, as seen in the following lemma.
\begin{lemma}\label{lem:Dbound}
Let Assumption~\ref{assume:minimal} hold.
Consider the decrement $D(t)$ given by: for $t\ge0,$
\[D(t) =\frac{1}{2}\sum_{i=1}^m \pi_i(t+1)\sum_{j=1}^m\sum_{\ell=1}^m A_{ij}(t)A_{i\ell}(t)\left(x_j(t)-x_\ell(t) \right)^2.\]
Then, the decrement is bounded from below as follows:
\begin{eqnarray*}
D(t)\ge \frac{\delta \beta^2}{4 p^*(t) }\,\max_{j,\ell\in [m]} \left(x_{j}(t)-x_{\ell}(t) \right)^2
\quad\hbox{for }t\ge0,
\end{eqnarray*}
where $\beta>0$ and $\delta>0$ are from
Assumptions~\ref{assume:minimal}(c) and~\ref{assume:minimal}(d), respectively,
while $p^*(t)$ is the maximum number of links in any of the directed paths in the tree
$\mathsf{T}_t$ of Assumption~\ref{assume:minimal}(a).
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
We let $t\ge0$ be arbitrary but fixed.
By Assumption~\ref{assume:minimal}(d), it follows that
\[D(t)\ge \frac{\delta }{2}\sum_{i=1}^m\sum_{j=1}^m\sum_{\ell=1}^m A_{ij}(t)A_{i\ell}(t)\left(x_j(t)-x_\ell(t) \right)^2.\]
Let us observe that
\begin{eqnarray*}
\sum_{i=1}^m\sum_{j=1}^m\sum_{\ell=1}^m A_{ij}(t)A_{i\ell}(t)
& =& \sum_{j=1}^m\sum_{\ell=1}^m \left(A_{:j}(t)\right)'A_{:\ell}(t),
\end{eqnarray*}
where $A_{:j}$ denotes $j$th column vector of a matrix $A$.
From this relation, we further obtain
\begin{eqnarray}\label{eq:relD}
D(t)
\ge\delta \sum_{j=1}^m\sum_{\ell=j+1}^m \left(A_{:j}(t)\right)' A_{:\ell}(t)\left(x_j(t)-x_\ell(t) \right)^2.
\end{eqnarray}
Let $j^*$ and $\ell^*$ be two agents such that
\begin{equation}\label{eq:maxinv}
\max_{j,\ell\in [m] }|x_j(t)-x_\ell(t)|=|x_{j^*}(t)-x_{\ell^*}(t)|.\end{equation}
Note that for any node $v$ we must have
\begin{equation}\label{eq:dist-two}
\max\{ |x_{v}(t)-x_{j^*}(t)|, |x_{v}(t)-x_{\ell^*}(t)|\}\ge \frac{1}{2}|x_{j^*}(t)-x_{\ell^*}(t)|,
\end{equation}
for otherwise by the triangle inequality for the norm we would have
\begin{eqnarray*}
|x_{j^*}(t)-x_{\ell^*}(t)| & \le & |x_{v}(t)-x_{j^*}(t)| +|x_{v}(t)-x_{\ell^*}(t)| \cr
& < & |x_{j^*}(t)-x_{\ell^*}(t)|, \end{eqnarray*}
which is a contradiction.
According to Assumption~\ref{assume:minimal}(a), in the graph $G_t$ there is
a rooted directed spanning tree $\mathsf{T}_t$. Let agent $v^*$ be the root node of this tree.
Then, relation~\eqref{eq:dist-two} holds for $v=v^*$.
Without loss of generality let us assume that $j^*$ attains the maximum in~\eqref{eq:dist-two} when $v=v^*$,
i.e., $|x_{v^*}(t)-x_{j^*}(t)|\ge |x_{v^*}(t)-x_{\ell^*}(t)|,$
so that we have
\begin{equation}\label{eq:keyrelvj}
|x_{v^*}(t)-x_{j^*}(t)| \ge \frac{1}{2}|x_{j^*}(t)-x_{\ell^*}(t)|.
\end{equation}
Since $v^*$ is the root of the directed spanning tree $\mathsf{T}_t$,
there must exist a path from $v^*$ to $j^*$, i.e.,
$v^*=j_0\to j_1\to j_2\to\cdots\to j_{p}= j^*$ with links $(j_{\kappa},j_{\kappa+1})$ in the tree $\mathsf{T}_t$.
Then, using~\eqref{eq:relD} we can write
\begin{eqnarray}\label{eq:relD1}
D(t)\ge \delta \sum_{\kappa=0}^{p-1} \left(A_{:j_{\kappa}}(t)\right)' A_{:j_{\kappa+1}}(t)
\left(x_{j_\kappa}(t)-x_{j_{\kappa+1}}(t) \right)^2.
\end{eqnarray}
We now look at the coefficients $\left(A_{:j_{\kappa}}(t)\right)'A_{: j_{{\kappa}+1}}(t)$
in~\eqref{eq:relD1} along the path $v^*=j_0\to j_1\to j_2\to\cdots\to j_{p}= j^*$
For each ${\kappa}=0,\dots, p-1$, we have
\begin{align}\label{eq:c1}
\left(A_{:j_{{\kappa}}}(t)\right)'A_{:j_{{\kappa}+1}}(t) & = \sum_{i=1}^m A_{ij_{{\kappa}}}(t) A_{i j_{{\kappa}+1}}(t) \cr
&\ge A_{j_{{\kappa}+1}j_{{\kappa}} }(t) A_{j_{{\kappa}+1} j_{{\kappa}+1}}(t) \ge \beta^2,
\end{align}
where the last inequality follows by Assumption~\ref{assume:minimal}(c).
From relations~\eqref{eq:relD1} and~\eqref{eq:c1} we see that
\begin{eqnarray}\label{eq:relD2}
D(t)\ge \delta \beta^2\sum_{{\kappa}=0}^{p-1}\left(x_{j_{{\kappa}}}(t)-x_{j_{{\kappa}}+1}(t) \right)^2.
\end{eqnarray}
Since the function $s\to s^2$ is convex, we have
\begin{eqnarray*}
\frac{1}{p} \sum_{{\kappa}=0}^{p-1}\left( x_{j_{\kappa}}(t) - x_{j_{{\kappa}+1}}(t) \right)^2
& \ge & \left( \frac{1}{p}\sum_{{\kappa}=0}^{p-1}\left( x_{j_{\kappa}}(t) - x_{j_{{\kappa}+1}}(t)\right) \right)^2\cr
& = & \left( \frac{1}{p} \left(x_{j_0}(t)-x_{j_p}(t)\right) \right)^2,
\end{eqnarray*}
implying that
\[\sum_{{\kappa}=0}^{p-1}\left( x_{j_{\kappa}}(t) - x_{j_{{\kappa}+1}}(t) \right)^2\ge \frac{1}{p} \left(x_{j_0}(t) - x_{j_p}(t)\right)^2.\]
Therefore, from the preceding relation and~\eqref{eq:relD2}, by recalling that $j_0=v^*$ and $j_p=j^*$,
we obtain
\begin{eqnarray}\label{eq:relD3}
D(t)\ge \frac{\delta \beta^2}{p}\left(x_{v^*}(t)-x_{j^*}(t) \right)^2.
\end{eqnarray}
Finally, using inequality~\eqref{eq:keyrelvj} in relation~\eqref{eq:relD3} we obtain
\begin{eqnarray}\label{eq:relD4}
D(t)\ge \frac{\delta \beta^2}{4p}\left(x_{j^*}(t)-x_{\ell^*}(t) \right)^2.
\end{eqnarray}
Recall that $p$ is the number of links in the path from $v^*$ to $j^*$ in
the directed spanning tree $\mathsf{T}_t$ (rooted at $v^*$) of the graph $G_t$. Thus, $p$ is bounded from above
by the maximal number of links along the path from $v$ to any other node in the graph $G_t$,
where the paths are taken along the directed spanning tree rooted at $v^*$.
We note that $p^*$ depends on time $t$ which was fixed so far, and we have suppressed this dependence on $t$.
Recall, further that $j^*$ and $\ell^*$ are agents
with the maximal difference $|x_j(t)-x_\ell(t)|$ (see Eq.~\eqref{eq:maxinv}).
Thus, from the relation in ~\eqref{eq:relD4} we have
$D(t)\ge \frac{\delta \beta^2}{4p^*(t) }\max_{j,\ell\in [m]} \left(x_{j}(t)-x_{\ell}(t) \right)^2.$
\end{proof}
Before stating our main result, we provide an auxiliary lemma for use in the forthcoming
analysis.
\begin{lemma}\label{lem:max}
For any stochastic vector $\nu\in\mathbb{R}^m$ and any $x\in\mathbb{R}^m$ it holds that
\[\sum_{i=1}^m \nu_i(x_i-\nu'x)^2\le \max_{1\le j,\ell\le m}(x_j-x_\ell)^2.\]
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Since $\nu$ is stochastic vector, it follows that
$\sum_{i=1}^m \nu_i(x_i-\nu'x)^2
\le \max_{1\le {\kappa}\le m} (x_{\kappa}-\nu'x)^2.$
Without loss of generality, let us assume that the preceding maximum is attained
for ${\kappa}=1$,
\[(x_1 - \nu'x)^2=\max_{1\le {\kappa}\le m} (x_{\kappa}-\nu'x)^2,\]
and note that, since $\nu'\mathbf{1}=1$ we can write
$x_1 - \nu'x = x_1\nu'\mathbf{1} - \nu'x =\nu' (x_1\mathbf{1} - x).$
Using the preceding relation, the fact that $\nu$ is a stochastic vector, and
the convexity of the function $s\mapsto s^2$, we obtain
\begin{eqnarray*}
(x_1 - \nu'x)^2 &= &\left(\nu' (x_1\mathbf{1} - x)\right)^2 \le \sum_{i=1}^m\nu_i (x_1-x_i)^2\cr
&\le & \max_{1\le \ell\le m}(x_1-x_\ell)^2.\end{eqnarray*}
Therefore, we have
\[\sum_{i=1}^m \nu_i(x_i-\nu'x)^2\le \max_{1\le \ell\le m}(x_1-x_\ell)^2
\le \max_{1\le j,\ell\le m}(x_j-x_\ell)^2.\]
\end{proof}
With Lemma~\ref{lem:Dbound} in place, we can now establish a key relation for
the quadratic comparison function. The convergence result of the
weighted-averaging algorithm, as well as its convergence rate estimates, will follow from this relation.
\begin{theorem}\label{thm:key}
Under Assumption~\ref{assume:minimal}, for the iterates $\{x(t)\}$ generated by
the weighted-averaging algorithm~\eqref{eq:wcalgo} with any initial vector $x(0)\in\mathbb{R}^m$,
we have for any $t\ge k\ge0$,
\begin{eqnarray*}
&& \sum_{i=1}^m \pi_i(t)\left(x_{i}(t) - \pi(0)'x(0) \right)^2 \cr
&&\le \left(1-\frac{\delta \beta^2}{4p^*}\right)^{t-k}
\sum_{j=1}^m \pi_j(k)\left(x_{j}(k) - \pi(0)'x(0) \right)^2,
\end{eqnarray*}
where $\beta>0$ and $\delta>0$ are from
Assumptions~\ref{assume:minimal}(c) and~\ref{assume:minimal}(d), while
$p^*=\max_{s\ge0} p^*(s)$ where
$p^*(s)$ is the longest shortest path in the tree $\mathsf{T}_s$
of Assumption~\ref{assume:minimal}(a).
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
The stated relation for $t=k$ can be seen to hold by inspection. Consider now $t>k\ge0$ where $t$ and $k$ are arbitrary but fixed.
From relations~\eqref{eq:dec}--\eqref{eq:lyap-dec} and
Lemma~\ref{lem:Dbound} we obtain for all $t\ge0$,
\begin{eqnarray*}
\varphi(x(t+1),\pi(t+1))
\le \varphi(x(t),\pi(t))-\frac{\delta \beta^2}{4p^*(t) }\max_{j,\ell\in [m]} \left(x_{j}(t)-x_{\ell}(t) \right)^2.
\end{eqnarray*}
From Lemma~\ref{lem:max} it follows that
\[\max_{1\le j,\ell\le m}(x_j(t)-x_\ell(t))^2\ge \sum_{j=1}^m \pi_j(t)\left( x_j(t) - \pi(t)'x(t) \right)^2,\]
thus implying that for all $t\ge0$,
\begin{equation*}
\varphi(x(t+1),\pi(t+1))
\le \left(1-\frac{\delta \beta^2}{4p^*(t) }\right)\sum_{j=1}^m \pi_j(t)\left(x_{j}(t) - \pi(t)'x(t) \right)^2.
\end{equation*}
Hence, for all $t\ge0$,
\begin{eqnarray*}
&& \sum_{i=1}^m \pi_i(t+1)\left(x_{i}(t+1) - \pi(t+1)'x(t+1) \right)^2 \cr
&& \le \left(1-\frac{\delta \beta^2}{4p^*(t) }\right)\sum_{j=1}^m \pi_j(t)\left(x_{j}(t) - \pi(t)'x(t) \right)^2.
\end{eqnarray*}
Furthermore, from the dynamics in~\eqref{eq:wcalgo} and~\eqref{eq:adjoint}
we can see that for all $t\ge1$,
\begin{align*}
\pi(t)'x(t) &=\pi(t)'A(t-1) x(t-1)=\pi(t-1)'x(t-1) \cr
& =\cdots=\pi(0)'x(0),
\end{align*}
which yields for all $t\ge0$,
\begin{eqnarray*}
&& \sum_{i=1}^m \pi_i(t+1)\left(x_{i}(t+1) - \pi(0)'x(0) \right)^2 \cr
&& \le \left(1-\frac{\delta \beta^2}{4p^*(t) }\right)\sum_{j=1}^m \pi_j(t)\left(x_{j}(t) - \pi(0)'x(0) \right)^2.
\end{eqnarray*}
The stated relation follows by recursively using the preceding inequality for $t, t-1, \ldots,k$,
and then using $p^*(s)\le p^*$ for all $s$.
\end{proof}
Theorem~\ref{thm:key} captures the convergence rate in terms of
the longest shortest paths in the graph sequence. The quotient $q=1-\frac{\delta \beta^2}{4p^*} $
indicates the rate at which the information is diffused in the graphs $\{G_t\}$ over time,
with a small $q$ being desirable for a fast diffusion.
Several immediate consequences of Theorem~\ref{thm:key} are in place.
First, we observe that from Theorem~\ref{thm:key} it follows that
the agent iterates converge to the consensus value $\pi(0)'x(0)$,
by virtue of the lower boundedness property of
the absolute probability sequence (Assumption~\ref{assume:minimal}(d)),
i.e., $\lim_{t\to\infty}x_i(t)= \pi(0)'x(0)$ for all $i\in[m].$
When the agent variables ${\bold x}_i$ are vectors,
then by applying Theorem~\ref{thm:key} to each coordinate
of the vectors, we can see that the iterates ${\bold x}_i(t)$ generated by the weighted-averaging algorithm
are such that for any initial vectors ${\bold x}_i(0)\in\mathbb{R}^n$, $i\in[m]$,
for each coordinate index $\ell\in [n]$, and
for all $t\ge k\ge 0$, we have
\begin{eqnarray*}
&& \sum_{i=1}^m \pi_i(t)\left( [{\bold x}_{i}(t)]_\ell - c_\ell \right)^2\cr
&&\le \left(1-\frac{\delta \beta^2}{4p^*} \right)^{t-k}
\sum_{j=1}^m \pi_j(k)\left([{\bold x}_{j}(k)]_\ell - c_\ell\right)^2,
\end{eqnarray*}
where $c_\ell=\sum_{i=1}^m \pi_i(0)' [{\bold x}_i(0)]_\ell$ for all $\ell\in [n].$
By summing these relations over all coordinate indices $\ell\in[n]$, we obtain the following result.
\begin{corollary}\label{cor:vector}
Consider the vector-valued consensus problem and let Assumption~\ref{assume:minimal} hold.
Then, the iterates $\{{\bold x}_i(t)\}$, $i\in[m]$ generated by the weighted-averaging algorithm are such that
for any initial vectors ${\bold x}_i(0)\in\mathbb{R}^n$,
\begin{eqnarray*}
\sum_{i=1}^m \pi_i(t)\left\|{\bold x}_{i}(t) - c\right\|^2
\le \left(1-\frac{\delta \beta^2}{4p^*} \right)^{t-k}
\sum_{j=1}^m \pi_j(k)\left\|{\bold x}_{j}(k) - c\right\|^2
\end{eqnarray*}
for all $t\ge k\ge 0$, where the vector $c\in\mathbb{R}^n$ has coordinates given by
$c_\ell=\sum_{i=1}^m \pi_i(0)' [{\bold x}_i(0)]_\ell$ for all $\ell\in [n].$
\end{corollary}
Some further implications of Theorem~\ref{thm:key} are discussed in the following section.
\subsection{Implications of Theorem~\ref{thm:key} }
We present some implications of Theorem~\ref{thm:key} regarding the improvement of the best known rate of $O(m^2)$ and the convergence properties of the matrix products $A(t)\cdots A(k+1)A(k)$.
Let Assumption~\ref{assume:minimal} hold, and assume also that the weight matrices $A(t)$, $t\ge0$, are doubly stochastic. Then, we have $\pi(t)=\frac{1}{m}\mathbf{1}$ and the relation
of Theorem~\ref{thm:key} reduces to (after multiplication by $m$):
\begin{equation}\label{eq:dbs}
\left\|x(t) - \bar x(0)\mathbf{1} \right\|^2
\le \left(1-\frac{\beta^2}{4mp^*}\right)^{t-k}
\left\|x(k) - \bar x(0)\mathbf{1} \right\|^2,
\end{equation}
with $\bar x(0)=\frac{\mathbf{1}'x(0)}{m}$.
Since the maximum path length from the root to any other node cannot exceed $m-1$, i.e., $p^*(s)\le m-1$,
it follows that
\begin{equation*}
\left\|x(t) - \bar x(0)\mathbf{1}\right\|^2
\le \left(1-\frac{\beta^2}{4m(m-1) }\right)^{t-k}
\left\|x(k) - \bar x(0)\mathbf{1}\right\|^2.
\end{equation*}
Thus, when $\beta$ does not depend on $m$,
the convergence rate has dependency of $O(m^2)$ in terms of the number $m$ of agents,
which is the same as the rate result in~\cite{Nedic2009b}]; see Theorem~\ref{thm:known}.
Suppose now that we want to construct the graphs $G_t$ such that Assumption~\ref{assume:minimal} holds
and we want to get the most favorable rate dependency on $m$. In this case, the following result is valid.
\begin{theorem}\label{thm:mlogm}
There is a sequence $\{G_t\}$ of
regular undirected graphs such that for all $x(0)\in\mathbb{R}^m$ and all $t\ge k\ge0$,
\begin{equation*}
\left\|x(t) - \bar x(0)\mathbf{1}\right\|^2
\le q^{t-k}
\left\|x_{j}(k) - \bar x(0)\mathbf{1}\right\|^2,
\end{equation*}
with $q=1-\frac{1}{4^3m \lceil\frac{\log_2 m}{2}\rceil }$ and $\bar x(0)=\frac{\mathbf{1}'x(0)}{m}$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
We will construct an undirected graph sequence $\{G_t\}$ that satisfies
Assumption~\ref{assume:minimal}. Let $m=2^d$ for some integer $d\ge1$.
Let $t$ be arbitrary but fixed time. Select $2^d-1$ agents and construct an undirected binary tree
with these agents as nodes. Next, add one extra agent as a root with a single child (see Figure~\ref{fig:regular1}).
Thus, each agent $i$ except for the root and the leaf agents has the degree equal to 3. Consider, now connecting
all leaf-nodes with undirected edges (see Figure~\ref{fig:regular2}).
Now, all leaf-agents have degree equal to 3 except for the far most left and far most right
agents, each of which has the degree equal to~2. Connect these two agents to the root node (see Figure~\ref{fig:regular3}).
In this way, the far most left and far most right leaf agents, as well as the root agent have degree 3.
\begin{figure}[h!] \vskip -1.5pc
\centering
\subfloat[ Binary tree]{\label{fig:regular1}
\includegraphics[width=0.3\linewidth] {stage1.pdf} }
\subfloat[Connected leaves]{\label{fig:regular2}
\includegraphics[width=0.3\linewidth] {stage2.pdf}}
\subfloat[3-regular graph]{\label{fig:regular3}
\includegraphics[width=0.3\linewidth] {stage3.pdf}}
\caption{The construction of the 3-regular graph over $2^3=8$ nodes used in Theorem~\ref{thm:mlogm}.}
\vskip -1.5pc
\end{figure}
In the resulting regular undirected graph, we let
$A_{ij}(t)=\frac{1}{4}$ for all $j\in N_i(t)\cup\{i\}$ and for all $i$, so that
$\beta=\frac{1}{4}.$
The shortest path from the root agent to any other agent in the graph is at most $\lceil \frac{d}{2}\rceil$
(going down from the root of the tree to the nodes at the depth $\lceil \frac{d}{2}\rceil$, and going through the leaf nodes to reach those that are the depth larger than $\lceil \frac{d}{2}\rceil$).
Using the same construction, for all times $t$, we have that $\{A(t)\}$ is a sequence of doubly stochastic matrices, and therefore $\pi(t)=\frac{1}{m}\mathbf{1}$ for all $t$.
Thus, Assumption~\ref{assume:minimal} is satisfied, and the estimate in~\eqref{eq:dbs} reduces to
\begin{equation*}
\left\| x(t) - \bar x(0)\mathbf{1}\right\|^2
\le \left(1-\frac{1}{4^3m \lceil\frac{d}{2}\rceil }\right)^{t-k}
\left\| x(k) - \bar x(0)\mathbf{1}\right\|^2.
\end{equation*}
The result follows by noting that $d=\log_2{m}$.
\end{proof}
Theorem~\ref{thm:mlogm} shows that the exponential convergence rate with the ratio of the order
$1-O(\frac{1}{m\log_2 m})$ is achievable for consensus on some tree-like regular undirected graphs.
This improves the best known bound with the ratio of the order $1- O(\frac{1}{m^2})$
for undirected graphs and doubly stochastic matrices~\cite{Nedic2009b}.
We next consider the implication of Theorem~\ref{thm:key} for the convergence of matrix products
\[A(t:k)\triangleq A(t)\cdots A(k+1)A(k)\qquad\hbox{for all }t\ge k\ge0,\]
where $A(t:k)\triangleq A(k)$ whenever $t=k$.
\begin{theorem}\label{thm:matrix-conv}
If Assumption~\ref{assume:minimal},
then for all $t\ge k\ge0$,
\begin{equation*}
\left\| A(t:k)-\mathbf{1}\pi(k)'\right\|^2
\le \frac{1}{\delta} \left(1-\frac{\delta \beta^2}{4p^* }\right)^{t-k}
\left\| I- \mathbf{1}\pi(k)'\right\|^2.
\end{equation*}
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
By Theorem~\ref{thm:key} and the fact that $\pi'(s)x(s)=\pi'(0)x(0)$ for all $s$, we have that for all $t\ge k\ge0$,
\begin{eqnarray*}
&&\sum_{i=1}^m \pi_i(t)\left(x_{i}(t) - \pi(k)'x(k) \right)^2 \cr
&& \le \left(1-\frac{\delta \beta^2}{4p^* }\right)^{t-k}
\sum_{j=1}^m \pi_j(k)\left(x_{j}(k) - \pi(k)'x(k) \right)^2.
\end{eqnarray*}
Since $\pi_i(k)\le 1$ for all $i$ and $k$, and $\pi_i(t)\ge\delta$ by Assumption~\ref{assume:minimal}(d),
it follows that for all $t\ge k\ge0$,
\begin{equation*}
\left\| x(t) - \pi(k)'x(k) \,\mathbf{1}\right\|^2
\le \frac{1}{\delta} \left(1-\frac{\delta \beta^2}{4p^* }\right)^{t-k}
\left\| x(k) - \pi(k)'x(k)\,\mathbf{1}\right\|^2.
\end{equation*}
Noting that $x(t)=A(t:k)x(k)$ and $\pi(k)'x(k)\,\mathbf{1}=\mathbf{1}\pi(k)'\, x(k)$, we can write: for all $t\ge k\ge0,$
\begin{equation}\label{eq:trunc}
\left\| [A(t:k)-\mathbf{1}\pi(k)']x(k)\right\|^2
\le \frac{1}{\delta} \left(1-\frac{\delta \beta^2}{4p^* }\right)^{t-k}
\left\| [I- \mathbf{1}\pi(k)']x(k)\right\|^2.
\end{equation}
Since the matrices $A(t)$ do not depend on the state variables $x(s),$ $0\le s<t$, the situation is similar
to constructing
$\{x(t)\}_{t\ge k}$ by the truncated matrix sequence
$\{A(t)\}_{t\ge k}$, where the dynamic is started at time $k$ in any state $x(k)$.
Then, relation~\eqref{eq:trunc} can be seen to hold for any $x(k)\in\mathbb{R}^n$.
Let $x(k)=x\in\mathbb{R}^n$ and obtain for all $t\ge k\ge0$,
\begin{equation*}
\sup_{x\ne 0}\frac{\left\| [A(t:k)-\mathbf{1}\pi(k)']x\right\|^2}{\|x\|^2}
\le \frac{1}{\delta} \left(1-\frac{\delta \beta^2}{4p^* }\right)^{t-k}
\sup_{x\ne0}\frac{\left\| [I- \mathbf{1}\pi(k)']x\right\|^2}{\|x\|^2},
\end{equation*}
which is equivalent to the stated relation.
\end{proof}
We have the following immediate consequence of Theorem~\ref{thm:matrix-conv}, by letting $t\to\infty$.
\begin{corollary}\label{cor:ergodic}
Under Assumption~\ref{assume:minimal}, the sequence $\{A(t)\}$ is ergodic:
$\lim_{t\to\infty} A(t)\cdots A(k)=\mathbf{1}\pi(k)'$ for all $k\ge0.$
\end{corollary}
\section{Constrained Consensus}\label{sec:constrained-consensus}
In this section, we consider consensus problems where the agent values are
constrained to given sets. Such constraints are inevitable in a number of applications including motion planning and alignment problems, where each agent's position is limited to a
certain region or range \cite{Pappas2008}.
Constrained consensus was first introduced in \cite{NOP2010} where
a simple discrete-time projected constrained consensus algorithm was proposed.
The analysis of the algorithm in \cite{NOP2010} relies on convergence properties of doubly stochastic
matrices. An alternative analysis developed in \cite{ren12}
gets around this limitation and also takes into account transmission delays,
but the proofs are intricate and no convergence rate results are established.
In \cite{barrier}, a continuous-time constrained consensus algorithm
was proposed using logarithmic barrier functions.
In \cite{discarded} and \cite{singapore}, discrete-time constrained consensus algorithms were presented
for a special case in which the variable of each agent is a scalar quantity.
In the sequel, we will follow the algorithm in \cite{NOP2010}.
Unlike the existing analysis in \cite{NOP2010,ren12}, we here
adopt dynamic system point of view and apply a Lyapunov approach, as done in the unconstrained consensus problem.
This approach would allow us to provide an elegant proof of convergence
and characterize the convergence rate under appropriate assumptions.
\subsection{Projected Weighted-Averaging Algorithm}
We assume that each agent has a constraint set $X_i\subseteq\mathbb{R}^n$, which is a convex and closed,
and the agents need to agree on a common point $c\in\cap_{i=1}^m X_i$.
We will work under the following assumption on the sets $X_i$.
\begin{assumption}\label{assume:sets}
The sets $X_i\subseteq\mathbb{R}^n$ are nonempty, closed, and convex, and their
intersection is nonempty, i.e.,
$X\triangleq \cap_{i=1}^m X_i\ne\emptyset.$
\end{assumption}
The constrained consensus problem is as follows.\\
{\bf [Constrained Consensus]} \
{\it Assuming that each agent $i$ knows only its set $X_i$, design a distributed
algorithm obeying the communication structure given by graph $G_t$ at each time $t$ and ensuring that,
for every set of initial values ${\bold x}_i(0)\in\mathbb{R}^n$, $i\in [m]$, the following limiting behavior
emerges:
$\lim_{t\to\infty} {\bold x}_i(t)=c$
for all $i\in [m]$ and some $c\in X$.}\\
To solve the constrained consensus problem, we consider the algorithm proposed in~\cite{NOP2010},
which has the following form.
Assuming that each agent starts with some initial vector ${\bold x}_i(0)\in X_i$ at time $t=0$,
each agent $i$ updates at times $t=1,2,\ldots,$ as follows:
\begin{align}\label{eq:walgo}
{\bold w}_i(t+1) & = \sum_{j=1}^m A_{ij}(t) {\bold x}_j(t),\cr
{\bold x}_i(t+1) & = \mathbb{P}_{X_i}[{\bold w}_i(t+1)],
\end{align}
where $\mathbb{P}_{X_i}[\cdot]$ is the Euclidean projection on the set $X_i$.
We will show that, under Assumption~\ref{assume:minimal}
and Assumption~\ref{assume:sets}, the algorithm converges to a consensus point in
the intersection set $X$. However, unlike the results for unconstrained consensus problems,
we cannot characterize the consensus point more precisely.
We will also prove that, under some further conditions on the sets $X_i$,
the convergence rate of the algorithm is linear.
The behavior of the algorithm~\eqref{eq:walgo} is very similar to that of
the basic weighted-averaging algorithm in~\eqref{eq:wcalgo} for the unconstrained consensus.
The intuition
comes from the following observation: the iterates of the algorithm~\eqref{eq:walgo} satisfy
${\bold x}_i(t+1) = \mathbb{P}_{X_i}\left[ \sum_{j=1}^m A_{ij}(t) {\bold x}_j(t)\right].$
The inner averaging mapping (defined through $A(t)$) possesses some nice contraction properties under
Assumption~\ref{assume:minimal} on the graphs and the matrices $A(t)$.
This mapping is followed by a projection mapping, which is non-expansive.
Thus, one would expect that the resulting composite map
is also contractive,
with a nearly the same contraction constant as the averaging map.
The non-expansiveness and few other properties of the projection map are summarized below.
Given a (nonempty) closed convex set $Y\subseteq\R^n$,
the projection mapping $y\mapsto\mathbb{P}_Y[y]$ is non-expansive, i.e.,
\begin{equation}\label{eq:non-ex}
\|\mathbb{P}_Y[x]- y\|\le \|x-y\|\quad\hbox{for all $x\in\mathbb{R}^n$ and $y\in Y$},
\end{equation}
which is one of the key properties used in
the analysis of projection-based approaches.
This and other properties of the projection mapping can be found, for example,
in~\cite{Facchinei2003}, Volume 2, 12.1.13 Lemma, page 1120.
Another useful relation for the projection mapping is given by a variational inequality:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:optimalp}
\left(\mathbb{P}_Y[x]-x\right)'(y-\mathbb{P}_Y[x])\ge 0
\end{equation}
for all $x\in\R^n$ and $y\in Y$.
The relation in~\eqref{eq:optimalp}
can be obtained by noting that the vector $\mathbb{P}_Y[x]$ is the unique solution of
the minimization problem $\min_{y\in Y}\|y-x\|^2$ and
by using the optimality condition for the solution.
The formal proof of relation~\eqref{eq:optimalp} can be found for example in~\cite{ourbook},
Proposition 2.2.1(b), page 55.
\subsection{Quadratic Lyapunov Comparison Function}\label{sec:lyapunov-constr}
Our choice of Lyapunov function is similar to the Lyapunov comparison function~\eqref{eq:vq}
for the weighted-averaging algorithm in the case of an unconstrained consensus (see Section~\ref{sec:conv}). The similarity is in the use of an adjoint sequence $\{\pi(t)\}$ associated with
the matrix sequence $\{A(t)\}$ (cf.~\eqref{eq:adjoint}); however, there is a slight difference in the choice of the centering term $\nu'x$ in~\eqref{eq:vq},
which is replaced by an arbitrary value.
Specifically, we consider the function of the following form: for all $t\ge0$ and $y\in\mathbb{R}^n$,
\begin{align}\label{eq:funv}
\mathsf{V}(t,y)\triangleq\sum_{i=1}^m\pi_i(t)
\left\|{\bold x}_i(t) - y \right\|^2.
\end{align}
When the values of $y$ are constrained so that $y\in X$,
the function $\mathsf{V}$ has an important decrease property.
To establish that property we use the following result.
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma:wlema}
Let $v\in\mathbb{R}^m$ be a given vector and let $\phi\in\mathbb{R}^m$ be a given stochastic vector.
Then, we have for any $s\in\mathbb{R}$,
\[(\phi'v-s)^2
= \sum_{j=1}^m\phi_j(v_j-s)^2-\frac{1}{2}\sum_{j=1}^m\sum_{\ell=1}^m\phi_j\phi_\ell(v_j-v_\ell)^2.\]
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
We note that $\phi'\mathbf{1}=1$ since $\phi$ is stochastic vector. Thus, we have
$\phi'v-s=\phi'(v-s\mathbf{1})=\sum_{j=1}^m\phi_j(v_j-s).$
Therefore, by taking the square we obtain
\begin{eqnarray*}
(\phi'v-s)^2 = \sum_{j=1}^m\sum_{\ell=1}^m \phi_j\phi_\ell(v_j-s)(v_\ell-s).
\end{eqnarray*}
Using the identity
$ab=\frac{1}{2}\left[ a^2 +b^2 - (a-b)^2\right],$
which is valid for any $a,b\in\mathbb{R}$,
we can further write
\begin{align*}
&(\phi'v-s)^2
= \frac{1}{2}\sum_{j=1}^m\sum_{\ell=1}^m \phi_j\phi_\ell\left[(v_j-s)^2 +(v_\ell-s)^2-(v_j-v_\ell)^2\right]\cr
& = \frac{1}{2}\sum_{j=1}^m\phi_j(v_j-s)^2 \left(\sum_{\ell=1}^m \phi_\ell \right)
+\frac{1}{2}\sum_{\ell=1}^m \phi_\ell (v_\ell-s)^2\left(\sum_{j=1}^m\phi_j\right) \cr
&-\frac{1}{2}\sum_{j=1}^m\sum_{\ell=1}^m \phi_j\phi_\ell(v_j-v_\ell)^2\cr
&= \sum_{j=1}^m\phi_j(v_j-s)^2 - \frac{1}{2}\sum_{j=1}^m\sum_{\ell=1}^m \phi_j\phi_\ell(v_j-v_\ell)^2,
\end{align*}
where the last equality is obtained by using $\phi'\mathbf{1}=1$.
\end{proof}
Using Lemma~\ref{lemma:wlema}, we have the following decrease property for the function $\mathsf{V}(t,y)$
for $y\in X$.
\begin{theorem}\label{thm:fun}
Let Assumption~\ref{assume:minimal} and Assumption~\ref{assume:sets} hold.
Then, along the sequences $\{{\bold x}_i(t)\}$, $i\in[m]$, produced by the algorithm~\eqref{eq:walgo} we have
for any initial vectors ${\bold x}_i(0)\in X_i$, for $t\ge0$ and $y\in X$,
\begin{eqnarray*}
\mathsf{V}(t+1,y)
\le \mathsf{V}(t,y) - \frac{\delta \beta^2}{4 p^*}\,\max_{j,\ell\in V} \left\|{\bold x}_{j}(t) - {\bold x}_{\ell}(t) \right\|^2,
\end{eqnarray*}
where the constants $\beta>0$ and $\delta>0$ are from
Assumptions~\ref{assume:minimal}(c) and~\ref{assume:minimal}(d), respectively, while
$p^*=\max_{t\ge0} p^*(t)$ with $p^*(t)$ being the maximum number of edges in any of the paths
from a root node to any other node in the tree $\mathsf{T}_t$ from Assumption~\ref{assume:minimal}(a).
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
From the definition of ${\bold w}_i(t+1)$ in~\eqref{eq:walgo}, using the fact that the matrix $A(t)$ is stochastic
and applying Lemma~\ref{lemma:wlema} (where $\phi'=A_{i:}(t)$),
we see that the following relation is valid for each coordinate
index $\kappa\in[n]$ of the vector ${\bold w}_i(t+1)$: for any $s\in\mathbb{R}$,
\begin{align*}
&([{\bold w}_i(t+1)]_\kappa-s)^2
= \sum_{j=1}^mA_{ij}(t)([{\bold x}_j(t)]_\kappa - s)^2 \cr
& \ -\frac{1}{2}\sum_{j=1}^m\sum_{\ell=1}^m A_{ij}(t)A_{i\ell}\ell([{\bold x}_j(t)]_\kappa - [{\bold x}_\ell(t)]_\kappa)^2.
\end{align*}
Let $c\in\mathbb{R}^n$ be an arbitrary vector. Then,
by letting $s=c_{\kappa}$ in the preceding relation
and by summing over all coordinate indices $\kappa\in[n]$, we obtain the following relation:
for any $c\in\mathbb{R}^n$, for all $i\in[m]$ and all $t\ge0$,
\begin{align*}
\|{\bold w}_i(t+1) - c\|^2
& = \sum_{j=1}^m A_{ij}(t)\|{\bold x}_j(t) - c\|^2 \cr
& \ -\frac{1}{2}\sum_{j=1}^m\sum_{\ell=1}^m A_{ij}(t) A_{i\ell}(t)\|{\bold x}_j(t)-{\bold x}_\ell(t)\|^2.
\end{align*}
By multiplying with $\pi_i(t+1)$
and then summing over all $i$, we have for any $c\in\mathbb{R}^n$ and all $t\ge0$,
\begin{align}\label{eq:inter-rel}
&\sum_{i=1}^m\pi_i(t+1)\|{\bold w}_i(t+1) - c\|^2 \cr
&=\sum_{i=1}^m\pi_i(t+1)\sum_{j=1}^m A_{ij}(t)\|{\bold x}_j(t) - c\|^2 -\mathsf{D}(t),
\end{align}
where the decrement $\mathsf{D}(t)$ is given by: for all $t\ge0$,
\begin{equation}\label{eq:dec1}
\mathsf{D}(t)
= \frac{1}{2}\sum_{i=1}^m \pi_i(t+1)\sum_{j=1}^m\sum_{\ell=1}^m A_{ij}(t) A_{j\ell}(t)\|{\bold x}_j(t)-{\bold x}_\ell(t)\|^2
\end{equation}
Now, we consider the ${\bold x}$-iterates.
By the definition of ${\bold x}_i(t+1)$ in~\eqref{eq:walgo}, we have ${\bold x}_i(t+1)=\mathbb{P}_{X_i}[{\bold w}_i(t+1)]$.
Thus, by the non-expansiveness property
of the projection map $x\mapsto \mathbb{P}_{X_i}[x]$
(see~\eqref{eq:non-ex}), we obtain for all $i$, all $t\ge0$, and all $y\in X$
(note $X\subseteq X_i$ for all $i$):
$\|{\bold x}_i(t+1)-y\|^2\le \|{\bold w}_i(t+1)-y\|^2. $
Therefore, by multiplying with $\pi_i(t+1)$
and then summing over all $i$, and using the definition of $\mathsf{V}$, we see that
\begin{eqnarray}\label{eq:relac1}
\mathsf{V}(t+1,y) \le\sum_{i=1}^m\pi_i(t+1)\|{\bold w}_i(t+1)-y\|^2.
\end{eqnarray}
Letting $c=y$ in~\eqref{eq:inter-rel} and combining the resulting relation with inequality~\eqref{eq:relac1},
we obtain
\begin{eqnarray*}
\mathsf{V}(t+1,y) \le
\sum_{i=1}^m\pi_i(t+1)\sum_{j=1}^m A_{ij}(t)\|{\bold x}_j(t) - y\|^2 -\mathsf{D}(t).
\end{eqnarray*}
Exchanging the order of summations yields
\begin{eqnarray}\label{eq:relac2}
\mathsf{V}(t+1,y) & \le & \sum_{j=1}^m \left(\sum_{i=1}^m\pi_i(t+1)A_{ij}(t)\right) \|{\bold x}_j(t) - y\|^2 - \mathsf{D}(t)\cr
&= & \sum_{j=1}^m \pi_j(t)\|{\bold x}_j(t) - y\|^2 - \mathsf{D}(t),
\end{eqnarray}
where in the last equality we use $\pi_j(t)=\sum_{i=1}^m\pi_i(t+1)A_{ij}(t)$
(see the adjoint dynamic in~\eqref{eq:adjoint}).
Relation~\eqref{eq:relac2} and the definition of $\mathsf{V}(t,y)$ imply that
\begin{eqnarray}\label{eq:inter-rel1}
\mathsf{V}(t+1,y)
\le\mathsf{V}(t,y) - \mathsf{D}(t)
\ \hbox{for all $t\ge0$ and $y\in X$}.
\end{eqnarray}
It remains to bound the decrement $\mathsf{D}(t)$ in~\eqref{eq:inter-rel1} from below.
We note that the decrement $\mathsf{D}(t)$ defined in~\eqref{eq:dec1}
is a vector analog of the decrement $D(t)$ in Lemma~\ref{lem:Dbound}.
In particular, by defining the decrement $D_{\kappa}(t)$ for each coordinate sequence of ${\bold x}_i(t)$,
it can be seen that
\begin{equation}\label{eq:dec-vec}
\mathsf{D}(t)=\sum_{{\kappa}=1}^n D_{\kappa}(t),\end{equation}
where for each coordinate $\kappa\in[n]$ and for all $t\ge0$,
\begin{equation}\label{eq:dec2}
{\small D_{\kappa} (t)=\frac{1}{2}
\sum_{i=1}^m \pi_i(t+1)\sum_{j=1}^m\sum_{\ell=1}^m A_{ij}(t)A_{i\ell}(t)
\left([x_j(t)]_\kappa-[x_\ell(t)]_{\kappa} \right)^2.}
\end{equation}
Observe that the bound of Lemma~\ref{lem:Dbound} is valid for each of the decrements $D_{\kappa}(t)$,
i.e., for all ${\kappa}\in[n]$ and $t\ge0$,
\[D_{\kappa}(t)\ge \frac{\delta \beta^2}{4 p^*(t)}\,\max_{j,\ell\in [m]} \left([{\bold x}_{j}(t)]_{\kappa} - [{\bold x}_{\ell}(t)]_{\kappa} \right)^2.\]
By using $p^*(t)\le p^*$ and by summing the resulting inequalities over ${\kappa}\in[n]$,
from relations~\eqref{eq:dec-vec} and~\eqref{eq:dec2}
we obtain
\[\mathsf{D}(t)\ge \frac{\delta \beta^2}{4 p^*}\,\sum_{{\kappa}=1}^n \max_{j,\ell\in [m]}
\left( [{\bold x}_{j}(t)]_{\kappa} - [{\bold x}_{\ell}(t)]_{\kappa} \right)^2\quad\hbox{for }t\ge0.\]
By noting that
\[\sum_{{\kappa}=1}^n \max_{j,\ell\in [m]} \left( [{\bold x}_{j}(t)]_{\kappa} - [{\bold x}_{\ell}(t)]_{\kappa} \right)^2
\ge \max_{j,\ell\in [m]} \left\|{\bold x}_{j}(t) - {\bold x}_{\ell}(t) \right\|^2,\]
we arrive at the following bound
\begin{eqnarray*}
\mathsf{D}(t)\ge \frac{\delta \beta^2}{4 p^*}\,\max_{j,\ell\in [m]} \left\|{\bold x}_{j}(t) - {\bold x}_{\ell}(t) \right\|^2
\quad\hbox{for }t\ge0,
\end{eqnarray*}
which when combined with relation~\eqref{eq:inter-rel1} yields the stated relation.
\end{proof}
Theorem~\ref{thm:fun} provides the key relation that we use to establish the
convergence of the projection-based consensus algorithm, as seen in the next section.
\subsection{Convergence and Convergence Rate Results}
We first show that the algorithm correctly solves the constrained consensus problem.
Then, we investigate the rate of convergence of the algorithm in general case and some special instances.
\subsubsection{Convergence}\label{sec:conv-cc}
The following result proves that the iterates of the algorithm converge to a common point in the set $X$.
\begin{theorem}\label{thm:conv-conprob}
Let Assumption~\ref{assume:minimal} and Assumption~\ref{assume:sets} hold.
Then, the sequences $\{{\bold x}_i(t)\}$, $i\in[m]$, produced by the algorithm~\eqref{eq:walgo}
are bounded, i.e., there is a scalar $\rho>0$ such that
\[\|{\bold x}_i(t)\|\le \rho\qquad\hbox{for all $i\in [m]$ and all $t\ge0$},\]
and they
converge to a common point $x^*\in X$:
\[\lim_{t\to\infty} {\bold x}_i(t)=x^*\qquad\hbox{for some $x^*\in X$ and for all $i\in [m]$.}\]
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
We use Theorem~\ref{thm:fun}, where we
let $\tau$ and $T$ be arbitrary times with $T>\tau\ge0$.
By summing the relations given in Theorem~\ref{thm:fun} over $t=\tau,\ldots, T-1$,
we obtain for all $y\in X$ and all $T>\tau\ge0$,
\begin{eqnarray}\label{eq:mr1}
\mathsf{V}(T,y)
\le \mathsf{V}(\tau,y)
- \frac{\delta \beta^2}{4 p^*}\,\sum_{t=\tau}^{T-1}\max_{j,\ell\in [m]} \left\|{\bold x}_{j}(t) - {\bold x}_{\ell}(t) \right\|^2.
\end{eqnarray}
Based on relation~\eqref{eq:mr1}, we first show that each sequence $\{{\bold x}_i(t)\}$ is bounded.
By the definition of $\mathsf{V}(t,y)$, from~\eqref{eq:mr1} it follows that for all $y\in X$ and $T>\tau\ge0$,
\begin{align}\label{eq:mr2}
\sum_{i=1}^m \pi_i(T)\|{\bold x}_i(T) & - y\|^2
\le \sum_{j=1}^m \pi_j(\tau)\|{\bold x}_j(\tau) - y\|^2\cr
& - \frac{\delta \beta^2}{4 p^*}\,\sum_{t=\tau}^{T-1}\max_{j,\ell\in [m]} \left\|{\bold x}_{j}(t) - {\bold x}_{\ell}(t) \right\|^2.
\quad
\end{align}
Letting $\tau=0$ and dropping the non-negative terms in~\eqref{eq:mr2},
we find that for all $y\in X$ and all $T>0$,
\[\sum_{i=1}^m \pi_i(T)\|{\bold x}_i(T) - y\|^2
\le \sum_{j=1}^m \pi_j(0)\|{\bold x}_j(0) - y\|^2.\]
By letting $y\in X$ be arbitrary but fixed and using the fact that the adjoint sequence $\{\pi(t)\}$
is uniformly bonded away from zero (cf.~Assumption~\ref{assume:minimal}(d)), we conclude that
each sequence $\{{\bold x}_i(t)\}$ is bounded, i.e., there is a scalar $\rho>0$ such that
\[\|{\bold x}_i(t)\|\le \rho\qquad\hbox{for all $i\in [m]$ and all $t\ge0$},\]
where $\rho$ depends on $\pi(0)$, the initial points ${\bold x}_i(0),i\in [m],$ the parameter $\delta$
and the chosen point $y\in X$.
Thus, every sequence $\{{\bold x}_i(t)\}$ has accumulation points. We next show that
all the accumulation points of these sequences coincide, i.e.,
\begin{equation}\label{eq:same-ap}
\lim_{t\to\infty}\|{\bold x}_i(t) - {\bold x}_j(t)\|=0\qquad\hbox{for all $i,j\in [m]$}.
\end{equation}
This follows from~\eqref{eq:mr2}, where by letting $\tau=0$
and using non-negativity of $\mathsf{V}(T,y)$ we find that for all $T>0,$
\[\frac{\delta \beta^2}{4 p^*}\,\sum_{t=0}^{T-1}\max_{j,\ell\in [m]} \left\|{\bold x}_{j}(t) - {\bold x}_{\ell}(t) \right\|^2
\le \sum_{j=1}^m \pi_j(0)\|{\bold x}_j(0) - y\|^2 .\]
Therefore, by letting $T\to\infty$ we conclude that
the sequences $\{{\bold x}_j(t)\}$ have the same accumulation points (i.e.,~\eqref{eq:same-ap} is valid).
Since each sequence $\{{\bold x}_i(t)\}$ lies in the set $X_i$ and each set $X_i$ is closed,
it follows the accumulation points of each $\{{\bold x}_i(t)\}$ lie in the set $X_i$.
Furthermore, since the accumulation points are the same for all of the sequences $\{{\bold x}_i(t)\}$, $i\in [m]$,
the accumulation points must be in the intersection of the sets $X_i$, i.e., in the set $X$.
Finally, we show that the sequences $\{{\bold x}_j(t)\}$ can have only one accumulation point, thus
showing that they converge to a common point in the set $X$.
To prove this, we argue by contraposition. Suppose that there are two accumulation points
for the sequences $\{{\bold x}_i(t)\}$, $i\in [m]$.
Let $\{t_s\}$ and $\{\tau_s\}$ be the time sequences along which the iterates $\{{\bold x}_i(t)\}$ converge, respectively,
to two distinct points, say $\check{x}\in X$ and $\hat x\in X$, with $\check{x}\ne\hat x$,
\begin{equation}\label{eq:mr3}
\lim_{s\to\infty} {\bold x}_i(t_s) =\check{x},\quad \lim_{s\to\infty} {\bold x}_i(\tau_s)=\hat x,
\qquad\hbox{for all }i\in V.
\end{equation}
Without loss of generality let us assume that $t_s>\tau_s$ for all $s\ge 1$ (for otherwise we can construct such subsequences from $\{t_s\}$ and $\{\tau_s\}$).
In relation~\eqref{eq:mr2}, we let $T=t_s$ and $\tau=\tau_s$ for any $s\ge 1$, and thus, obtain
(by omitting the non-negative terms) for all $y\in X$,
\[\sum_{i=1}^m \pi_i(t_s)\|{\bold x}_i(t_s) - y\|^2
\le \sum_{j=1}^m \pi_j(\tau_s)\|{\bold x}_j(\tau_s) - y\|^2 \ \hbox{for all }s\ge1.\]
Letting $y=\hat x$ and recalling that the adjoint sequence $\{\pi(t)\}$ is bounded away from 0,
we see that
\[\delta \sum_{i=1}^m \|{\bold x}_i(t_s) - \hat x\|^2
\le \sum_{j=1}^m \pi_j(\tau_s)\|{\bold x}_j(\tau_s) - \hat x\|^2 \qquad\hbox{for all }s\ge1.\]
Now, letting $s\to\infty$ we have
\begin{align*}
\delta \lim_{s\to\infty} \left( \sum_{i=1}^m \|{\bold x}_i(t_s) - \hat x\|^2 \right)
& \le \lim_{s\to\infty} \left(\sum_{j=1}^m \pi_j(\tau_s)\|{\bold x}_j(\tau_s) - \hat x\|^2 \right)\cr
& \le \sum_{j=1}^m \lim_{s\to\infty} \|{\bold x}_j(\tau_s) - \hat x\|^2 ,\end{align*}
where in the last inequality we use $0\le \pi_j(t)\le 1$ for all $j$ and $t$.
From relation~\eqref{eq:mr3} it follows that
\[\delta \sum_{i=1}^m \|\check{x} - \hat x\|^2 \le 0,\]
thus implying $\check{x}=\hat x$, which is a contradiction.
Hence, the sequences $\{{\bold x}_i(t)\}$, $i\in [m]$, must be convergent.
\end{proof}
Theorem~\ref{thm:conv-conprob} shows that Proposition 2 in~\cite{NOP2010} holds under weaker
assumptions on the graphs and the weights.
At first, the requirement in~\cite{NOP2010} that each matrix $A(t)$ is doubly stochastic is relaxed.
At second, while here we assume that each of the graphs $G_t$ is rooted,
the results easily extend to the case studied in~\cite{NOP2010} by assuming that
the graphs are rooted over at most $B$ units of time and
that the absolute probability sequence exists for such unions of the graphs.
\subsubsection{Convergence Rate}\label{sec:conv-cc}
Our convergence rate results are obtained for sets $X_i$ that satisfy a certain regularity condition
which relates the distances from a given point to the sets $X_\ell$
with the distance from the point to the intersection set $X=\cap_{i=1}^m X_i$.
One relation that among these distances always holds. In particular, since $X\subseteq X_i$ for all $i$,
it follows that
\begin{equation}\label{eq:crit-bel}
{\rm dist}(x,X_i)\le {\rm dist}(x,X) \ \hbox{for all $x\in\R^n$ and $i\in [m]$}.\end{equation}
In our analysis, we need
an upper bound on ${\rm dist}(x,X)$ in terms of the distances ${\rm dist}(x,X_i)$, $i\in [m]$.
A related generic question is:
when the distances of a given point $y$ to a collection of closed convex sets $\{Y_i,i\in\cal{I}\}$
can be related to the distance of $y$ from the intersection set $Y=\cap_{i\in \cal I} Y_i\ne\emptyset$?
This question has been studied in the
optimization literature within the terminology of {\it error bounds} or {\it metric regularity}.
In this literature, loosely speaking, the question is when the distance ${\rm dist}(y,Y)$ is bounded from
above by a constant factor of the maximum distance $\max_{i\in\cal{I}}{\rm dist}(y,Y_i)$.
In general, the index set $\cal{I}$ can be infinite, but we restrict our attention to finite index sets only.
We will use the following definition of set regularity.
\begin{definition}\label{def:reg-set}
Let $Z\subseteq\mathbb{R}^n$ be a nonempty set.
We say that a (finite) collection of closed convex sets $\{Y_i,i\in\cal{I}\}$ is regular (in Euclidian norm)
with respect to the set $Z$,
if there is a constant $r\ge1$ such that
\[{\rm dist}(y,Y)\le r\, \max_{i\in\cal{I}} \left\{{\rm dist}(y,Y_i)\right\}\qquad\hbox{for all $y\in Z$}.\]
We refer to the scalar $r$ as a {\it regularity constant}.
When the preceding relation holds with $Z=\R^n$, we say that the sets $\{Y_i,i\in\cal{I}\}$
are {\it uniformly regular}.
\end{definition}
In view of relation~\eqref{eq:crit-bel} it follows that the regularity constant $r$ must satisfy
$r\ge1.$
Note that the regularity constant $r$ in Definition~\ref{def:reg-set} depends on the set $Z$.
It also depends on the choice of the metric and the geometry of the sets $\{Y_i,i\in\cal{I}\}$.
In general, it is hard to compute $r$, but our algorithm does not require the knowledge of such a constant.
We just provide a convergence rate result that captures the dependence on $r$.
In view of Theorem~\ref{thm:conv-conprob}, the iterate sequences $\{{\bold x}_i(t)\}$, $i\in[m]$,
are contained a ball $B(0,\rho)$ centered at the origin with a radius $\rho$.
We will assume that the sets $X_\ell$ are regular with respect to the ball $B(0,\rho)$.
Later in Section~\ref{sec:set-reg} we discuss some sufficient conditions for this regularity assumption to hold.
Under such a regularity assumption,
we show a result that is critical in the subsequent convergence rate analysis.
\begin{lemma}\label{lem:crit}
Let Assumption~\ref{assume:sets} hold.
Assume further that the sets $\{X_i,i\in [m]\}$ are regular with respect to a set $Z\subseteq\mathbb{R}^n$
with a regularity constant~$r\ge1$, and assume that
$\left(X_1\times\cdots\times X_m\right)
\cap \left(Z\times\cdots\times Z\right)\ne\emptyset.$
Let $\phi\in\mathbb{R}^m$ be a given stochastic vector.
Then, for all
$({\bold x}_1,\ldots,{\bold x}_m)\in \left(X_1\times\cdots\times X_m\right)
\cap \left(Z\times\cdots\times Z\right)$ we have
\[\max_{j,\ell\in [m]}\|{\bold x}_j - {\bold x}_\ell\|
\ge \frac{1}{r+1}\,\max_{p\in [m]} \left\|{\bold x}_p-\mathbb{P}_X\left[ \sum_{i=1}^m \phi_i {\bold x}_i\right]\right\|.\]
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let $({\bold x}_1,\ldots,{\bold x}_m)\in \left(X_1\times\cdots\times X_m\right)
\cap \left(Z\times\cdots\times Z\right)$ be arbitrary,
and define $u=\sum_{i=1}^m \phi_i {\bold x}_i$.
Let $\ell\in [m]$ be arbitrary. Consider estimating $\|{\bold x}_\ell -\mathbb{P}_X[u]\|$ as follows:
\begin{eqnarray*}
\|{\bold x}_\ell - \mathbb{P}_X[u]\|
&\le& \|{\bold x}_\ell - \mathbb{P}_X[{\bold x}_\ell]\| + \|\mathbb{P}_X[{\bold x}_\ell] - \mathbb{P}_X[u]\|\cr
&\le & r\max_{j\in [m]}\left\{ {\rm dist}({\bold x}_\ell,X_j)\right\} + \|{\bold x}_\ell - u\|.
\end{eqnarray*}
where the first inequality uses the triangle inequality for the norm. The second inequality
uses the fact $\|{\bold x}_\ell - \mathbb{P}_X[{\bold x}_\ell]\|={\rm dist}({\bold x}_\ell,X)$ and the set regularity assumption
for the first term (i.e., ${\rm dist}(y,X)\le r\max_{i}{\rm dist}(y,X_i)$ for all $y\in Z$ and the fact ${\bold x}_\ell \in Z$),
while the second term is estimated by using the non-expansiveness property of the projection map
(see~\eqref{eq:non-ex}).
By the definition of the projection, we have
\[{\rm dist}({\bold x}_\ell,X_j)=\min_{y\in X_j}\|{\bold x}_\ell - y\|\le \|{\bold x}_\ell - {\bold x}_j\|,\]
where the inequality follows by ${\bold x}_j\in X_j$ for all $j$.
Thus,
\begin{equation}\label{eq:crit1}
\|{\bold x}_\ell -\mathbb{P}_X[u]\| \le r\max_{j\in [m]}\|{\bold x}_\ell - {\bold x}_j\| + \|{\bold x}_\ell - u\|.
\end{equation}
Consider now the term $\|{\bold x}_\ell-u\|$. By the definition of $u$, this vector is a convex combination of
points ${\bold x}_i,i\in [m],$ since $\phi$ is a stochastic vector.
Thus, by the convexity of the Euclidean norm, it follows that
\[\|{\bold x}_\ell -u\|= \left\|\sum_{i=1}^m \phi_i({\bold x}_\ell-x_i) \right\|\le \sum_{i=1}^m \phi_i\|{\bold x}_\ell-{\bold x}_i\|
\le \max_{i\in [m]}\|{\bold x}_\ell - {\bold x}_i\|.\]
By substituting the preceding estimate in relation~\eqref{eq:crit1}, we obtain
\[\|{\bold x}_\ell-\mathbb{P}_X[u]\| \le (r+1)\max_{j\in [m]}\|{\bold x}_\ell - {\bold x}_j\|.\]
So far the index $\ell$ was arbitrary, so by taking the maximum over all $\ell\in [m]$,
we find that
\[\max_{\ell\in [m]} \|{\bold x}_\ell - \mathbb{P}_X[u]\| \le (r+1)\max_{j,\ell\in [m]}\|{\bold x}_\ell - {\bold x}_j\|,\]
and the desired relation follows after dividing by $r+1$.
\end{proof}
With Lemma \ref{lem:crit} in place, we investigate the rate of decrease of the Lyapunov comparison function
$\mathsf{V}(t,y)$, as
given in~\eqref{eq:funv}. We have the following result.
\begin{theorem}\label{thm:rate2}
Let Assumption~\ref{assume:minimal} and Assumption~\ref{assume:sets} hold.
Assume further that the sets $\{X_i,i\in [m]\}$ are regular,
with a regularity constant~$r\ge1$, with respect to a ball $B(0,\rho)$ which contains all the iterates
$\{{\bold x}_i(t)\}$ generated by the algorithm~\eqref{eq:walgo}.
Consider the following vectors
\begin{equation}\label{eq:def-uv}
{\bold u}(t)=\sum_{i=1}^m \pi_i(t) {\bold x}_i(t), \ {\bold v}(t)=\mathbb{P}_X[u(t)], \ \hbox{for all }t\ge0.
\end{equation}
Then, the Lyapunov comparison function $\mathsf{V}(t,{\bold v}(t))$ decreases at a geometric rate:
for all $t\ge0$,
\begin{eqnarray*}
\mathsf{V}\left(t+1,{\bold v}(t+1)\right)
\le \left(1- \frac{\delta \beta^2}{4 p^* (r+1)^2}\right) \,\mathsf{V}(t,{\bold v}(t)),
\end{eqnarray*}
where the scalars $\delta,\beta\in (0,1)$ and the integer $p^*\ge 1$
are the same as in Theorem~\ref{thm:fun}.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
In Theorem~\ref{thm:fun} we let $y={\bold v}(t)$ with ${\bold v}(t)\in X$ and we use the
definition of ${\bold u}(t)$.
Then, we have for all $t\ge0$,
\begin{align}\label{eq:rater1}
\mathsf{V}\left(t+1,{\bold v}(t)\right)
\le
\mathsf{V}\left(t,{\bold v}(t) \right)) - \frac{\delta \beta^2}{4 p^*}\,\max_{j,\ell\in [m]} \left\|{\bold x}_{j}(t) - {\bold x}_{\ell}(t) \right\|^2.
\end{align}
Next, we consider the term $V\left(t+1,{\bold v}(t)\right)$. We have
\begin{eqnarray*}
&& \mathsf{V}\left(t+1,{\bold v}(t)\right)
= \sum_{i=1}^m\pi_i(t+1)\|{\bold x}_i(t+1)-{\bold v}(t)\|^2\cr
&= &\sum_{i=1}^m\pi_i(t+1)\left\|{\bold x}_i(t+1)-{\bold v}(t+1) + \left({\bold v}(t+1) -{\bold v}(t)\right) \right\|^2.
\end{eqnarray*}
By expanding the squared-norm terms, we obtain
\begin{eqnarray*}
&&\mathsf{V}\left(t+1,{\bold v}(t)\right)
\ge \sum_{i=1}^m\pi_i(t+1)\|{\bold x}_i(t+1)-{\bold v}(t+1) \|^2 \cr
&& + 2\left(\sum_{i=1}^m\pi_i(t+1){\bold x}_i(t+1)-{\bold v}(t+1) \right)'\left({\bold v}(t+1) -{\bold v}(t)\right),
\end{eqnarray*}
where the inequality is obtained by dropping the term
$\|{\bold v}(t+1) -{\bold v}(t)\|^2$.
In view of the definition of the vector ${\bold u}(t+1)$ (cf.~\eqref{eq:def-uv}), it follows that
\begin{align*}
\mathsf{V}\left(t+1,{\bold v}(t)\right)
& = \sum_{i=1}^m\pi_i(t+1)\|{\bold x}_i(t+1)-{\bold v}(t+1) \|^2 \cr
& \ +2\left({\bold u}(t+1)-{\bold v}(t+1) \right)'\left({\bold v}(t+1) -{\bold v}(t)\right),
\end{align*}
Since ${\bold v}(t+1)$ is the projection of ${\bold u}(t+1)$ on the set $X$
and since ${\bold v}(t)\in X$, it further follows that
\[\left({\bold u}(t+1)-{\bold v}(t+1) \right)'\left({\bold v}(t+1) -{\bold v}(t)\right)\ge0\]
(see relation~\eqref{eq:optimalp}).
Hence
\begin{align*}
\mathsf{V}\left(t+1,{\bold v}(t)\right)
& \ge \sum_{i=1}^m\pi_i(t+1)\|{\bold x}_i(t+1)-{\bold v}(t+1) \|^2 \cr
&=\mathsf{V}(t+1,{\bold v}(t+1)).
\end{align*}
By combining the preceding relation with~\eqref{eq:rater1}
we can conclude that for all $t\ge0$,
\begin{eqnarray}\label{eq:rater2}
\mathsf{V}\left(t+1,{\bold v}(t+1)\right)
\le
\mathsf{V}\left(t,{\bold v}(t) \right)) - \frac{\delta \beta^2}{4 p^*}\,\max_{j,\ell\in [m]} \left\|{\bold x}_{j}(t) - {\bold x}_{\ell}(t) \right\|^2.
\end{eqnarray}
To estimate the term $\max_{j,\ell\in [m]} \left\|{\bold x}_{j}(t) - {\bold x}_{\ell}(t) \right\|^2$ from below
we use Lemma~\ref{lem:crit} with the following identification: $Z=B(0,\rho)$,
${\bold x}_i={\bold x}_i(t)$, $\phi=\pi(t)$ and $u={\bold u}(t)$, and we note that ${\bold x}_i(t)\in Z$ for all $i$ and $t$.
Thus, by Lemma~\ref{lem:crit} we have
\[\max_{j,\ell\in [m]}\|{\bold x}_j(t) - {\bold x}_\ell(t)\|\ge \frac{1}{r+1}\,\max_{p\in [m]}\|{\bold x}_p(t)-\mathbb{P}_X[{\bold u}(t)]\|.\]
In our notation, we have ${\bold v}(t)=\mathbb{P}_X[{\bold u}(t)]$ (see~\eqref{eq:def-uv}), so by using
${\bold v}(t)$ and by taking squares
in the preceding relation we obtain
\[\max_{j,\ell\in [m]}\|{\bold x}_j(t) - {\bold x}_\ell(t)\|^2
\ge \frac{1}{(r+1)^2}\,\max_{p\in [m]}\|{\bold x}_p(t) - {\bold v}(t)\|^2.\]
Since the vector $\pi(t)$ is stochastic, we have
\[\max_{p\in [m]}\|{\bold x}_p(t) - {\bold v}(t)\|^2\ge \sum_{i=1}^m \pi_i(t) \|{\bold x}_i(t) - {\bold v}(t)\|^2 =\mathsf{V}(t,{\bold v}(t)),\]
where the equality uses the definition of $\mathsf{V}(t,y)=\sum_{i=1}^m \pi_i(t) \|{\bold x}_i(t) - y\|^2$
(see~\eqref{eq:funv}).
Therefore
\begin{equation}\label{eq:rater3}
\max_{j,\ell\in [m]}\|{\bold x}_j(t) - {\bold x}_\ell(t)\|^2\ge \frac{1}{(r+1)^2}\mathsf{V}(t,{\bold v}(t)).
\end{equation}
By substituting the estimate~\eqref{eq:rater3} into inequality~\eqref{eq:rater2} we obtain
the desired relation.
\end{proof}
Using the decrease rate result for the Lyapunov comparison function $\mathsf{V}(t,y)$ of
Theorem~\ref{thm:rate2}, and the properties of the adjoint dynamics,
we can now estimate the rate of convergence of the iterates $\{{\bold x}_i(t)\}$.
\begin{theorem}\label{thm:rate3}
Let Assumption~\ref{assume:minimal} and Assumption~\ref{assume:sets} hold.
Assume further that the sets $\{X_i,i\in [m]\}$ are regular, with a regularity constant~$r\ge1$,
with respect to a ball $B(0,\rho)$ which contains all the iterates
$\{{\bold x}_i(t)\}$ generated by the algorithm~\eqref{eq:walgo}.
Then, the sequences $\{{\bold x}_i(t)\}$, $i\in[m],$ are such that for all $t\ge0,$
\[\sum_{j=1}^m {\rm dist}^2\left({\bold x}_j(t), X\right)
\le \frac{1}{\delta} \left(1- \frac{\delta \beta^2}{4 p^* (r+1)^2}\right)^t \,\mathsf{V}(0,{\bold v}(0)),\]
where ${\bold v}(0)=\mathbb{P}_X[{\bold u}(0)]$ with ${\bold u}(0)=\sum_{j=1}^m\pi_j(0) {\bold x}_j(0)$, while the scalars
$\delta,\beta\in (0,1)$ and the integer $p^*\ge 1$ are the same as in Theorem~\ref{thm:fun}.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
From Theorem~\ref{thm:rate2} it can be seen that
$\mathsf{V}\left(t,{\bold v}(t)\right)
\le \left(1- \frac{\delta \beta^2}{4 p^* (r+1)^2}\right)^t \,\mathsf{V}(0,{\bold v}(0))$
for all $t\ge0.$
The result follows by recalling that
$\mathsf{V}(t,y)=\sum_{i=1}^m \pi_i(t)\|{\bold x}_i(t) - y\|^2$, recalling the definition of ${\bold v}(t)$ (see~\eqref{eq:def-uv}),
and using the fact that the vectors $\pi(t)$ have uniformly bounded entries from below by $\delta>0$
(cf.~Assumption~\ref{assume:minimal}(d)).
\end{proof}
Theorem~\ref{thm:rate3} extends the convergence rate result obtained originally in~\cite{NOP2010},
where the convergence rate was analyzed for a special case when the matrices $A(t)$ are doubly stochastic, and
the graph is static and complete, i.e., $A(t)=\frac{1}{m}\mathbf{1}\1'$ for all $t$.
\subsubsection{Sufficient Conditions for Set Regularity}\label{sec:set-reg}
We discuss two cases of sufficient conditions for the set regularity property, namely,
the case of a polyhedral set $X$, and the case of $X$ with a nonempty interior.\\
\noindent{\bf Polyhedral Set $X$}.\quad
Let $X\subseteq\mathbb{R}^n$ be a nonempty polyhedral set.
We will show that use the description of $X$ in terms of
linear inequalities,
\[X=\{x\in\R^n \mid a_i'x\le b_i, \ i\in\cal I\},\]
where $\cal I$ is a finite index set, $a_i\in \R^n$ and $b_i\in\R$ for all $i$.
For such a set, Hoffman in~\cite{Hoffman1952} had shown that the distance from
any point $x\in\R^n$ to the set $X$ is bounded from above by the maximal distance from $x$ to any of the
hyperplanes defined by the linear inequalities, i.e.,
that there exists a constant
$r\ge1$ such that
\begin{equation}\label{eq:h-bound}
{\rm dist}(x,X)\le r\max_{i\in{\cal I} }\left\{ {\rm dist} (x,H_i)\right\} \qquad\hbox{for all }x\in\R^n,
\end{equation}
where, for every $i$, the set $H_i$ is the hyperplane given by
$H_i=\{x\in\R^n\mid a_i'x \le b_i\}$, while the constant $r$ depends
on the set of normals $\{a_i, i\in\cal I\}$ that define the hyperplanes $\{H_i, i\in\cal I\}$.
We will refer to this relation as the {\it Hoffman bound}.
We will use this bound to show that,
when each set $X_i$ is polyhedral, the sets $X_i$ are uniformly regular.
\begin{proposition}\label{prop:lin-sets}
Assume that each set $X_j$, $j\in [m]$, is given by
$X_j=\{x\in\R^n\mid (a_\ell^{(j)})'x\le b_{\ell}^{(j)},\, \ell\in {\cal I}_j\}.$
Also, assume that $X=\cap_{i=1}^m X_i$ is nonempty. Then, the sets $X_i$ are uniformly regular
with the regularity constant equal to the constant $r$
in the Hoffman bound~\eqref{eq:h-bound}, where ${\cal I}=\cup_{j=1}^m {\cal I}_j$,
i.e.,
\[{\rm dist}(x,X)\le r\max_{i\in [m]} \left\{ {\rm dist} (x,X_i) \right\} \qquad\hbox{for all }x\in\R^n.\]
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
Note that the set $X$ is the intersection of the hyperplanes that define the sets $X_i$, i.e.,
$X=\cap_{j=1}^m\left(\cap_{\ell\in {\cal I}_j} H_{\ell}^{(j)}\right),$
where $H_{\ell}^{(j)} = \{x\mid (a_\ell^{(j)})'x\le b_{\ell}^{(j)}\}$.
By the Hoffman bound, there is an $r\ge1$ such that
\begin{equation}\label{eq:dist1}
{\rm dist}(x,X)\le r\max_{j\in [m]} \max_{\ell\in {\cal I}_j}
\left\{ {\rm dist} (x,H_{\ell}^{(j)} \right\}\qquad\hbox{for all }x\in\R^n.
\end{equation}
For every $j\in [m]$, we have
$H_{\ell}^{(j)}\supseteq X_j$ for all $\ell\in{\cal I}_j$,
thus implying that for every $j\in [m]$,
\[\max_{\ell\in {\cal I}_j} \left\{ {\rm dist}(x,H_{\ell}^{(j)}) \right\}
\le {\rm dist} (x,X_i)\qquad \hbox{for all }x\in\R^n.\]
The preceding relation and~\eqref{eq:dist1} yield
\[{\rm dist}(x,X)\le r\max_{j\in [m]} \left\{ {\rm dist} (x,X_j)\right\}\qquad\hbox{for all }x\in\R^n.\]
Thus, the sets $X_i,i\in [m]$ are uniformly regular.
\end{proof}
Hence, when the sets $X_i$ are polyhedral, they are uniformly regular and thus,
also regular with respect to any ball $B(0,\rho)$ that contains the sequences $\{{\bold x}_i(t)\}$. Consequently,
when the sets $X_i$ are polyhedral, the regularity condition
of Theorem~\ref{thm:rate3} holds.\\
\noindent
{\bf Set $X$ with Nonempty Interior}.\quad
The regularity condition also holds
when the interior of the intersection set $X$ is nonempty. The proof
uses some ideas from~\cite{Gubin1967} (see the proof of Lemma 5 there).
However, in this case, the set regularity
property is not global.
\begin{proposition}\label{prop:lin-rate2}
Let Assumption~\ref{assume:sets} hold, and assume that
the set $X=\cap_{j\in [m]} X_j$ has a nonempty interior,
i.e., there is
a vector $\bar x\in X$ and a scalar $\theta>0$ such that
$\{z\in\R^n\mid \|z-\bar x\|\le \theta\}\subseteq X.$
Let $Y\subseteq\R^n$ be a bounded set.
Then, we have
\[{\rm dist}(x,X)\le r \max_{j\in [m]} \left\{ {\rm dist} (x,X_j)\right\}\qquad\hbox{for all }x\in Y,\]
with $r=\frac{1}{\theta}\max_{y\in Y}\|y-\bar x\|$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
Let $x\in \R^n$ be arbitrary. Define
${\epsilon}=\max_{j\in [m]} \left\{{\rm dist}^2(x,X_j)\right\}$ and
consider the vector
$y=\frac{{\epsilon}}{{\epsilon}+\theta}\,\bar x + \frac{\theta}{{\epsilon} +\theta}\, x.$
We show that $y\in X$. To see this note that we can write for each~$j\in [m]$,
\[y=\frac{{\epsilon}}{{\epsilon}+\theta}\, \left(\bar x + \frac{\theta}{{\epsilon}}\,(x-\mathbb{P}_{X_j}[x]) \right)
+\frac{\theta}{{\epsilon} +\theta}\,\mathbb{P}_{X_j}[x].\]
The vector $z=\bar x + \frac{\theta}{{\epsilon}}\,(x-\mathbb{P}_{X_j}[x]) $ satisfies
\[\|z-\bar x\|=\frac{\theta}{{\epsilon}}\,\|x-\mathbb{P}_{X_j}[x]\|
\le\frac{\theta}{{\epsilon}}\,\max_{j\in [m]} \|x-\mathbb{P}_{X_j}[x]\| = \theta,\]
where the last equality follows by the definition of ${\epsilon}$ and
${\rm dist}(x,X_j)=\|x-\mathbb{P}_{X_j}[x]\|$.
Thus, since $\bar x$ is an interior point of $X$, it follows that
$z\in X\subseteq X_i$ for all $i\in [m].$
Since the vector $y$ is a convex combination of $z\in X_j$ and
$\mathbb{P}_{X_j}[x]\in X_j$, by the convexity of the set $X_j$, it follows that $y\in X_j$.
Therefore, for each $j$, the vector $y$ can be written as a convex
combination of two points in $X_j$, implying that $y\in X_j$ for all $j\in [m]$.
Consequently, we have $y\in X$, so that
${\rm dist}(x,X)\le \|x-y\|=\frac{{\epsilon}}{{\epsilon} +\theta}\, \|x-\bar x\|\le \frac{{\epsilon}}{\theta}\, \|x-\bar x\|.$
Using the definition of ${\epsilon}$, we obtain
${\rm dist}(x,X)\le
\frac{1}{\theta}\|x-\bar x\|\,\max_{j\in [m]}\left\{{\rm dist}(x,X_j) \right\},$
which is valid for any $x\in\R^n$.
By using $\|x-\bar x\|\le \max_{x\in Y}\|x-\bar x\|$, we arrive at
\[{\rm dist}(x,X)\le
\left(\frac{1}{\theta}\max_{y\in Y}\|y-\bar x\|\right)
\max_{j\in [m]}\left\{{\rm dist}(x,X_j) \right\} \hbox{for all }x\in Y.\]
\end{proof}
\section{Conclusion}\label{sec:concl}
We have investigated the properties of the weighted-averaging dynamic for consensus problem using
Lyapunov approach. We have established new convergence rate results in terms of the longest shortest path
of spanning trees contained in the graph. For constrained consensus, we established exponential convergence rate
assuming some regularity conditions on the constraint sets. These results easily extend to the cases where the underlying graphs are not necessarily rooted at every instant, but rather rooted over a period of time.
\section*{Acknowledment}
The authors are deeply grateful to A.S.\ Morse, A.\ Olshevsky and B.\ Touri for valuable and insightful discussions that have significantly influenced this work.
|
\section{Introduction}
The issue of accurately pricing European options with large discrete dividends was popular in early 2000's: \cite{BenederW2001,Frishling2002,BosV2002,BosGS2003,HaugHL2003,VellekoopN2006} and is currently attracting a renewed attention [see, e.g., \cite{AmaroDF2009,SivenSP2009,VeigaW2009}] which at least in part may be attributed to the recent large corrections of stock markets and the related increases in projected dividend yields due to declining share prices.
It is interesting to note that in \cite{BenederW2001,BosV2002,BosGS2003} simple structural modifications of strike, spot or volatility parameters (based on forecast dividends and actual values of other parameter) in the conventional Black-Scholes (BS) formula (see e.g. p. 259 of \cite{Hull2006}) were suggested. Moreover, it has been claimed that some of the resulting expressions represent high-quality approximations which closely match the corresponding numerical results based on Crank-Nicolson algorithm [e.g. in \cite{BosV2002,BosGS2003}]. Later the approximations of \cite{BenederW2001,BosV2002,BosGS2003} were criticised by \cite{HaugHL2003,VellekoopN2006}, where more accurate, but essentially numerical approaches were suggested. These numerical approaches will not be the focus of our investigation.
We start our analysis by, on the one hand, reviewing the previously reported analytical approximations and, on the other hand, choosing between different versions of Crank-Nicolson numerical schemes with a primary focus on their boundary condition variations. Then, after clarifying our choice of the benchmark numerical scheme, we make an initial qualitative comparison of the existing analytical approximations for European options with large discrete dividends with Crank-Nicolson based modelling results. Unexpectedly we observe substantial deviations between the analytical and numerical results for both European Call and Put options with the discrepancy for Puts being more qualitatively significant. This can be explained by a little known Put-Call Parity violation phenomenon, which, according to our knowledge, was first mentioned by \cite{HaugHL2003} in the literature. This Parity violation is only present in discrete (non-continuous) dividend models and is due to dividend-induced changes in Put option payout shapes and resulting deviations from the conventional log-normal process induced distributions. In the simplest case of a single (large) dividend payout, one can readily obtain an exact analytic expression for the calculation of Parity violation values. However, no analytic results have been reported for a multi-dividend case. We address this issue by developing a new higher quality analytic approximation for both Calls and Puts which, among other features, is capable of taking into account the parity violation adjustment. After outlining the details of the new method, we perform a final quantitative comparison of existing and newly developed analytic methods with CN numerics and confirm that our new algorithm indeed outperforms other analytic approaches.
\section{Methods}\label{Methods}
In this paper we concentrate on analysing the stock process $S_t$ which jumps down by the amounts of dividend $d_i$ at the respective times $t_i$, and follows a geometric Brownian motion with flat volatility $\sigma$ at other times (i.e. before, in between and after dividend payouts):
\begin{equation} \label{stockprocess}
dS_t=\left(rS_t-\sum_{0<t_i\leq T} d_i \delta(t-t_i)\right)dt + \sigma S_t dW_t
\end{equation}
where $r$ is the risk-free interest rate, $\delta$ is the Dirac delta function and $W_t$ is a Wiener process (see e.g. \cite{Hull2006} for details).
We start this section by reviewing existing analytic approximations for options with discrete dividends. Then we move to discussing finer details of the utilised benchmark numerical method and compare the corresponding numerical results with different analytic approximations. Finally we discuss the observed discrepancies and outline a new solution which successfully addresses them.
\subsection{Review of existing of Black-Scholes-type analytic approximations}
In early 2000's the work of \cite{Frishling2002} initiated the discussion by highlighting the issue of significant differences between conventional analytical BS results for European options with discrete dividends and the corresponding numerical results. It points out that put/call options for stocks with discrete dividends do not allow the direct use of the conventional BS formulas:
\begin{equation} \label{BS_conven}
\begin{array}{l}
{\displaystyle
{C=S_0 \Phi(b_1)-K \exp{(-r T)} \Phi(b_2),}}
\\
\\
{\displaystyle
{P=K \exp{(-rT)} \Phi(b_2) - S_0 \Phi(-b_1),}}
\end{array}
\end{equation}
where we use the usual notations, $C$ and $P$ are a Call and a Put, respectively; $S_0$ is the corresponding current stock price (spot price), $K$ is the strike, $T$ is the term (time to maturity) of the option, $\Phi$ is the cumulative Gaussian distribution function, and $b_1$ and $b_2$ are also given by their conventional expressions: $b_1 = [\ln{(S_0/K)} + (r+\sigma^2/2) T]/(\sigma \sqrt{T})$ and $b_2 = b_1 - \sigma \sqrt{T}$.
Expressions (\ref{BS_conven}) can be easily extended to allow consideration of stocks with continuous dividend yields by making the change $S_0 \rightarrow S_0 \exp{(-q T)}$. This, in fact, defines arguably the most conventional (although not the most accurate) approximation for calculation of options for stocks with discrete dividends, corresponding to the underlying process given by Eq. (\ref{stockprocess}). Below we will refer to it as the vanilla spot adjustment approximation or simply \emph{spot approximation}. Instead of calculating a dividend yield $q$ and applying the $S_0 \rightarrow S_0 \exp{(-q T)}$ change one can equivalently subtract the present value of dividends $\displaystyle {D \equiv \sum_{0<t_i\le T}{d_i \exp{(-r t_i)}}}$, from $S_0$ to get $\displaystyle {\tilde{S}_0 = S_0 - \sum_{0<t_i\le T}{d_i \exp{(-r t_i)}}}$ and change $S_0$ into $\tilde{S}_0$ everywhere in Eq. (\ref{BS_conven}):
\begin{equation} \label{BS_spot}
\begin{array}{l}
{\displaystyle
{C=\tilde{S}_0 \Phi(b_1)-K \exp{(-r T)} \Phi(b_2),}}
\\
\\
{\displaystyle
{P=K \exp{(-rT)} \Phi(b_2) - \tilde{S}_0 \Phi(-b_1),}}
\end{array}
\end{equation}
where the $S_0 \rightarrow \tilde{S}_0$ adjustment should be done in $b_1$ and $b_2$ coefficients as well.
In addition, \cite{Frishling2002} reports another, also quite conventional, approximation to account for discrete dividends - instead of changing $S_0$ in Eq. (\ref{BS_conven}) one can adjust the strike $K$ instead:
\begin{equation} \label{BS_strike}
\begin{array}{l}
{\displaystyle
{C=S_0 \Phi(b_1)- \tilde{K} \exp{(-r T)} \Phi(b_2),}}
\\
\\
{\displaystyle
{P = \tilde{K} \exp{(-rT)} \Phi(b_2) - S_0 \Phi(-b_1),}}
\end{array}
\end{equation}
where $\displaystyle {\tilde{K} = K + \sum_{0<t_i\le T}{d_i \exp{(r (T - t_i))}}}$ and, again, the same adjustment is done in $b_1$ and $b_2$ coefficients. Below we will refer to this approximation as the vanilla strike adjustment approximation or simply \emph{strike approximation}.
After providing Eqs. (\ref{BS_spot}) and (\ref{BS_strike}) approximations \cite{Frishling2002} stops outlining analytical results and points out that both of these results may significantly differ from numerical CN modelling by either underpricing [Eq. (\ref{BS_spot})] or overpricing them [Eq. (\ref{BS_strike})] if the same volatility is used and dividends are paid as at ex-dividend days. This is because for vanilla spot and vanilla strike approximations the stock process (\ref{stockprocess}) has been strictly increased or decreased relative to the strike, but the volatility $\sigma$ has not been altered to reflect that.
\cite{BosV2002} agrees with these conclusions of \cite{Frishling2002}, but in addition suggest another BS approximation (which it also supports with reasonably involved theoretical backing):
\begin{equation} \label{BS_hybrid}
\begin{array}{l}
{\displaystyle
{C=\bar{S}_0 \Phi(b_1)- \bar{K} \exp{(-r T)} \Phi(b_2),}}
\\
\\
{\displaystyle
{P = \bar{K} \exp{(-rT)} \Phi(b_2) - \bar{S}_0 \Phi(-b_1),}}
\end{array}
\end{equation}
where $\bar{S}_0 = S_0 - D_S$ and $\bar{K} = K + D_K \exp{(r T)}$ where, in turn, $\displaystyle {D_K \equiv \sum_{0<t_i\le T}{\frac{t_i}{T} d_i \exp{(-r t_i)}}}$ and $\displaystyle {D_S \equiv \sum_{0<t_i\le T}{\frac{T - t_i}{T} d_i \exp{(-r t_i)}}} = D - D_K$. The approximation (\ref{BS_hybrid}) was claimed to be in a good agreement with CN-based numerical results, but no details for numerical modelling were provided. Below we will refer to this approximation as \emph{hybrid approximation}.
\cite{BenederW2001} uses a different approach for their approximation. They start by noting that if the local volatility of a stock process with discrete dividends is constant, then the corresponding process without dividend-induced jumps [where $S_0$ is adjusted as $\displaystyle {\tilde{S}_0 = S_0 - \sum_{0<t_i\le T}{d_i \exp{(-r t_i)}}}$] should have non-constant local volatilities:
\begin{equation} \label{local_adjustment}
\tilde{\sigma}_S(S,D,t) = \sigma(T) \frac{S}{S-D_j^{(S)}},
\end{equation}
where $\displaystyle {D_j^{(S)} = \sum_{i = j(t)}^{N}{d_i \exp{(-r t_i)}}}$ and where, in turn, $N$ is the number of dividend payouts within the $(0,T)$ interval and the sum only includes those dividend payments that occur after time $t$ [with $j(t)$ being the index number of the first dividend payment occurring at or after $t$ point of time: $t_{j-1} < t \le t_j$]. For example: $D_j^{(S)}(0) = D_1^{(S)} \equiv D$.
Furthermore, the corresponding variance $\tilde{\sigma}_S^2(S,D,t)$ may be averaged on the $(0,T)$ interval to obtain:
\begin{equation} \label{VA_spot}
\bar{\sigma}_S = \sigma \sqrt{ \left(\frac{S}{S-D_1^{(S)}}\right)^2 \frac{t_1}{T} +
\sum_{1<j<N}\left(\frac{S}{S-D_j^{(S)}}\right)^2 \frac{t_j - t_{j-1}}{T} + \frac{T - t_N}{T}} \equiv
\sigma (1 + \varepsilon_S),
\end{equation}
where $t_N$ is the timing of the last dividend payment within the $(0,T)$ interval.
To use Eq. (\ref{VA_spot}) one should simply replace $\sigma$ with $\bar{\sigma}_S$ in the spot approximation system given by Eqs. (\ref{BS_spot}). Below we will refer to this approximation as spot volatility adjusted approximation (or spot VA approximation). Note that if dividend payouts only occur in close vicinity of $t = 0$, then $\bar{\sigma}_S \approx \sigma$ with a high degree of accuracy.
It is interesting to note that \cite{BosGS2003}, independently of \cite{BenederW2001}, has suggested a more rigorously backed version of $\bar{\sigma}_S$ volatility adjustment, which, according to the analysis of \cite{HaugHL2003,VellekoopN2006}, provides slightly better agreements with numerical results. Here we will limit ourselves to analysing the spot VA approximation version of \cite{BenederW2001} only (in order not to be overwhelmed by the classification of minimally different methods). However, it is important to note that \cite{BosGS2003}, in contrast to \cite{BenederW2001}, has also outlined the possibility of yet another version of VA approximation: strike VA approximation. Note, that the authors of \cite{BosGS2003} have not provided a final explicit expression for this new approach, only mentioning that this can be ``easily done''. Thus we have chosen to present strike VA approximation by a straightforward generalisation of Eqs. (\ref{local_adjustment}) and (\ref{VA_spot}) which has a much simpler form in comparison to the corresponding expressions of \cite{BosGS2003}. We note, however, that one can obtain \cite{BosGS2003}-style strike VA volatility adjustment expression by modifying our Appendix A formulas (setting $\alpha_i = 0$ in the last formula of Appendix A).
Similar to the vanilla spot approximation generalisation of \cite{BenederW2001} described above, a vanilla strike approximation [given by Eqs. (\ref{BS_strike}) with a strike adjustment of
$\displaystyle {\tilde{K} = K + \sum_{0<t_i\le T}{d_i \exp{(-r (t_i - T))}}}$] can be chosen as a basis for a further volatility adjustment. Then, using arguments similar to spot VA case, we can rewrite Eq. (\ref{local_adjustment}) as:
\begin{equation} \label{local_adjustment2}
\tilde{\sigma}_K(S,D,t) = \sigma(T) \frac{S}{S+D_j^{(K)}},
\end{equation}
where $\displaystyle { D_j^{(K)} = \sum_{i = 1}^{j(t)}{d_i \exp{(-r t_i)}}}$ and where, in turn, the sum only includes those dividend payments that occur before time $t$ [with $j(t)$ being the index number of the last dividend payment occurring at or before $t$ point of time: $t_j \le t < t_{j+1}$. For example:
$D_j^{(K)}(T) = D_N^{(K)} \equiv D$.
Furthermore, the corresponding variance $\tilde{\sigma}_K^2(S,D,t)$ may be averaged on the $(0,T)$ interval to obtain:
\begin{equation} \label{VA_strike}
\bar{\sigma}_K = \sigma \sqrt{ \frac{t_1}{T} +
\sum_{1<j<N}\left(\frac{S}{S+D_j^{(K)}}\right)^2 \frac{t_j - t_{j-1}}{T} + \left(\frac{S}{S+D_N^{(K)}}\right)^2 \frac{T-t_N}{T}} \equiv
\sigma (1 - \varepsilon_K),
\end{equation}
where $t_N$ is the timing of the last dividend payment within the $(0,T)$ interval.
To use Eq. (\ref{VA_strike}) one should simply replace $\sigma$ with $\bar{\sigma}_K$ in the strike approximation system given by Eqs. (\ref{BS_strike}) Below we will refer to this new approximation as strike VA approximation. Note that if dividend payouts only occur in close vicinity of $t=T$, then $\bar{\sigma}_K \approx \sigma$ with a high degree of accuracy.
It is important that both spot VA and strike VA approximations essentially represent slightly different versions of the same general perturbation approach with different zeroth order approximations (vanilla spot and vanilla strike approximations respectively), and with different corresponding small parameters $\displaystyle {\varepsilon_S = \frac{D/S}{1-D/S}}$ (for spot VA) and $\displaystyle {\varepsilon_K = \frac{D/S}{1+D/S}}$ (for strike VA). In the case of $D \rightarrow S$, one can expect strike VA approximation to outperform spot VA approximation because the former tends to have a much smaller $\varepsilon$ ($\varepsilon_K \rightarrow 0.5$ versus $\varepsilon_S \rightarrow \infty$). However even $\varepsilon_K \approx 0.5$ is likely to be too large of a perturbation parameter value to provide a high quality approximation.
Before ending this subsection and moving to the description of our numerical benchmark technique, we would like to mention another interesting recent approach based on asymptotically exact, Taylor-like series expansion (TE approach of \cite{VeigaW2009}). We are grateful to the authors of this work for sharing their codes with us, allowing a quick reproduction of their results which we will compare with other methods in Section \ref{results}.
It is also important to point out that Put and Call values given by any of the approaches presented above satisfy the famous Put-Call Parity relation:
\begin{equation} \label{parity_BS}
K \exp(-r T) - P = S_0 \exp(-q T) - C,
\end{equation}
(see e.g. \cite{Hull2006} for derivation details).
\subsection{Review of Crank-Nicolson schemes}\label{CN}
Our aim is to justify our choice of a benchmark direct numerical modelling, which is based on a rather conventional version of the Crank-Nicolson (CN) scheme. However, even here we face some uncertainties about the details of its numerical implementation, which need to be resolved.
The conventional Black-Scholes equation governing the option price dynamics is given by
\begin{equation} \label{BS}
\frac{\partial V}{\partial t} - r V + r S \frac{\partial V}{\partial S} +
\frac{1}{2} \sigma^2 S^2 \frac{\partial^2 V}{\partial S^2} = 0,
\end{equation}
where the asset price (spot) is $S$, the (flat) volatility is $\sigma$, the time is $t$, and the term structure of forward interest rates is $r(t)$ [for simplicity we shall only consider flat interest rates $r(t) = r$]. This equation is integrated backward from the expiry date $T$ on a finite difference grid of asset values $S_i$ (where $ \displaystyle{i = 1, 2, 3, \ldots , N}$) using a CN finite difference scheme.
The CN method is well known in financial applications and beyond. Good reviews of the methods and its variations can be found e.g. in \cite{WilmottHD1995,TavellaR2000}. Essentially CN finite-difference systems are solved, using either a direct LU method (typically used to European options pricing), or a so called projected successive over-relaxation (PSOR) method (typically used for American option pricing). Most of the existing literature on CN is devoted to American pricing option discussions (see, e.g. \cite{ZhaoDC2007,EhrhardtM2008}) while substantially fewer works focus on European options (see, e.g. \cite{SivenSP2009} for a relatively rare example).
In general, CN algorithms for American options are significantly more complex, than their European counterparts and involve a so-called free-boundary problem formulation (see e.g. \cite{WilmottHD1995,TavellaR2000} for details). However, in this work we concentrate on European options and will only need American CN solver for the calibration/clarification of our choice of boundary conditions of its European analog. Thus, we choose not to implement a free-boundary solver, but instead, for Puts only, use a fixed boundary American CN PSOR scheme with:
\begin{equation} \label{Boundary_AM}
\begin{array}{l}
{\displaystyle
{V_N(0 \le t \le T) = 0,}}
\\
\\
{\displaystyle
{V_1(0 \le t \le T) = K - S_1}}
\end{array}
\end{equation}
boundary conditions, where index $N$ corresponds to the upper and index $1$ to the lower boundary of the discretisation grid. It is relatively easy to justify this choice, because it is well known that an early exercise is always the preferred option for American Puts if spot falls to close to zero levels (see e.g. \cite{Hull2006} for a related discussion).
For the completeness of our presentation we also state the (standard) initial conditions (which are the same both for American and European CN solvers):
\begin{equation} \label{put_IC}
V(T) = \max(K-S_i, 0),
\end{equation}
for Puts [and $V(T) = \max(S_i-K, 0)$ for Calls], where $1 \le i \le N$.
Although the choice of boundary conditions for European CN schemes is far from being straightforward, typically it is not discussed in the literature. We start our analysis of boundary conditions by reiterating some core results of \cite{HaugHL2003}, where discrete dividend option pricing is described in a methodologically consistent fashion. Among other important things, \cite{HaugHL2003} reports an observation that put option pricing is dependent on the dividend policy, i.e. an assumption of how much the company will pay if its spot price falls very low and formally $S(t_i^-) - d_i <0$, where $d_i$ is the forecasted dividend payout at $t_i$ and the minus superscript refers to the time instantaneously before $t_i$. Two policies are suggested: a Survivor policy [$d_i \rightarrow \tilde{d}_i = 0$] and a Liquidator policy [$d_i \rightarrow \tilde{d}_i = S(t_i^-)$]. Although in practice, the Survivor policy is more prudent during troubled times, for modelling purposes the Liquidator policy is often adopted explicitly or implicitly, because it provides the dividend $\tilde{d}_i(S)$ as a continuous function in $S$:
\begin{equation} \label{liquidator}
\tilde{d}_i^{(l)}(S(t_i^-))= \min(S(t_i^-),d_i),
\end{equation}
whereas the survivor policy has a discontinuity:
\begin{equation} \label{survivor}
\tilde{d}_i^{(s)}(S(t_i^-))= d_i H(d_i -S(t_i^-)),
\end{equation}
where $H(a)$ is the Heaviside step function [$H(a < 0) = 0$ , $H(a \ge 0) = 1$].
It is quite obvious now that a special care should be taken in both adjustments of the grid at discrete dividend payout days (and, for European options, boundary conditions as well).
As we work backwards on the grid through a policy-dependant dividend payment $\tilde{d}_i$ at time $t_i$, the asset price rises by the amount of the dividend. Thus, we have to introduce the shift $S(t_i^-) = S(t_i^+) + \tilde{d}_i$, which, due to the continuity of derivative price requirement, in turn, leads either to the equation
\begin{equation} \label{VshiftEURO}
V^-[S, t_i^-] = V^+[S - \tilde{d}_i, t_i^+],
\end{equation}
(for European CN scheme) or to its American counterpart version
\begin{equation} \label{VshiftAM}
V^-[S, t_i^-] = \max (V^+[S - \tilde{d}_i, t_i^+], K-S(t_i^+)),
\end{equation}
for which we only present the Put version.
European CN boundary condition formulation for stocks with discrete dividends is far less obvious and differs significantly from its continuous dividend analogue (given e.g. by \cite{SivenSP2009}). We will illustrate the problem by looking at the example of the liquidator policy (\ref{liquidator}).
It is clear that we have to adjust the standard continuous dividend version of boundary conditions [which have the form of $V_N(0 \le t \le T) = 0$ and $V_1(0 \le t \le T) = K \exp(-r (T-t)) - S_1 \exp (-q (T-t))$, where $q$ is a continuous dividend yield] into an expression which includes some discrete dividend-related negative asset price exclusion constraints. However, it may seem that there are a few possible ways to do this. Indeed, after the construction of a time dependent discounted dividend sum in a $(t,T)$ interval $\displaystyle {\tilde{D}(t) = \sum_{t \le t_i \le T} d_i \exp{(-r (t_i-t))}}$ and recalling the different approaches from the previous subsection, one may suggest at least 3 different versions of a lower boundary condition:
\begin{equation} \label{SpotBC}
V_1(0 \le t \le T) = K \exp (-r (T-t)) - \max(S_1 - \tilde{D}(t),0),
\end{equation}
\begin{equation} \label{StrikeBC}
V_1(0 \le t \le T) = [K \exp (-r (T-t)) + \tilde{D}(t)] - S_1,
\end{equation}
\begin{equation} \label{HybridBC}
V_1(0 \le t \le T) = [K \exp (-r (T-t)) + \tilde{D}_K(t)] - \max(S_1 - \tilde{D}_S(t),0),
\end{equation}
where $\displaystyle {\tilde{D}_K(t) \equiv \sum_{t \le t_i \le T} \frac{t_i d_i \exp{(-r (t_i-t))}}{T}}$ and $\displaystyle {\tilde{D}_S(t) \equiv \sum_{t \le t_i \le T} \frac{(T-t_i) d_i \exp{(-r (t_i-t))}}{T}}$.
These versions may be interpreted as the corresponding spot, strike and hybrid BS approximations from the previous subsection, respectively. By choosing $S_1$ close to zero, we can reduce Eqs. (\ref{SpotBC}-\ref{HybridBC}) to a simpler representation $V_1(0 \le t \le T) = K \exp (-r (T-t)) + \bar{D}$, where $\bar{D}$ is $0$ or $\tilde{D}$ or $\tilde{D}_K$, respectively. Without further analysis it is not obvious which of Eqs. (\ref{SpotBC}-\ref{HybridBC}) is preferable with Eqs. (\ref{SpotBC}) and (\ref{StrikeBC}) being particular strong candidates. [Note that, in contrast to Puts, Calls are indifferent to Eqs. (\ref{SpotBC}-\ref{HybridBC})-like issue, because the function $\max(S_N - \tilde{D}(t),0)$ never returns zero if $S_N$ is chosen at an appropriately high level and the upper boundary condition can be straightforwardly chosen in the form of $V_N(0 \le t \le T) = S_N - \tilde{D} - K \exp (-r (T-t)) $]. Below we adopt a simple approach of running a modelling test to comparing our 3 versions of European CN schemes for Puts [with boundary conditions (\ref{SpotBC}-\ref{HybridBC}) respectively] with the corresponding American scheme.
\begin{figure}[h]
\begin{center}
\resizebox*{11cm}{!}{\includegraphics{Fig1n.pdf}}%
\caption{Comparison of Put results given by different versions of European CN scheme (with different choice of boundary conditions) and the corresponding American CN scheme (see text for details)}%
\label{Fig1}
\end{center}
\end{figure}r
For demonstration purposes we will present our findings using a sample family of Put options: we apply flat discounting rate $r=6\%$ and flat volatility $\sigma = 30 \%$, $S_0 = \$100.0$, $K = \$100.0$ and maturity terms $T$ ranging from 1.0 to 11.00 years (with a one year increment). In addition we choose a single forecasted dividend payout of $d_1 = \$70.00$ at the $t_1 = 6.5$ year mark. The results are presented in Fig. \ref{Fig1}. One can easily see that until the first (and only) dividend payout day, the boundary conditions given by Eqs. (\ref{SpotBC}-\ref{HybridBC}) coincide and lead to identical CN results. After the $t_1 = 6.5$ year mark the situation changes and substantial differences appear. Most importantly we note that only the boundary conditions given by Eq. (\ref{SpotBC}) lead to the result which is consistent with the corresponding American Put result. Indeed, European option prices should always stay smaller than their American counterparts - a behaviour displayed by CN scheme with boundary condition (\ref{SpotBC}), but not with (\ref{StrikeBC}) or (\ref{HybridBC}).
To remove any remaining doubts we also compared our CN results [with boundary condition (\ref{SpotBC})] against a standard Monte Carlo (MC) scheme (see e.g. \cite{Wilmott2006} for a description) with Liquidator-style path adjustment at ex-dividend days. Our antithetic MC code with $10^6$ paths closely matched CN results (less than $0.05\%$ discrepancies for each of 11 Puts).
Again it is important to reiterate that the boundary condition uncertainty for European CN schemes is only present for Puts. For Calls, any choice of boundary conditions (with or without $\max$ function and with or without dividend split) leads to identical results, which is in line with an observation of \cite{HaugHL2003}, that a company dividend policy may only affect Puts, but not Calls.
\subsection{Qualitative comparison of CN numerics with analytic results}
Now we are in the position to do an initial (qualitative) comparison of different analytic methods with a benchmark numerical method [CN scheme with spot-type boundary conditions (\ref{SpotBC})]. We will present this using a sample family of European Calls and Puts. We apply flat discounting rate $r = 6 \%$ and flat implied volatility $\sigma = 30\%$ (we will also use as flat volatility for CN modelling), $S_0 = \$100.0$, $K = \$100.0$ and maturity terms $T$ ranging from 1.0 to 11.00 years (with a one year increment). The family also has regular annual dividend payouts of $d_i = \$9$ at the $t_i = 0.5, 1.5, 2.5, \ldots, 10.5$ year marks, arguably representing a real-life situation of e.g options on a profitable, but limited life-span (e.g. due to commodity reserves constraints) mining stock. We also note that our test cases have substantially higher dividends, than those considered by e.g. \cite{HaugHL2003,VellekoopN2006}. We intentionally aimed to push all approximations to their applicability limits to provide an easily observable evidence of their agreement (or disagreement) with numerics. Note that the corresponding numerical result of best performing approximations of Figs. \ref{Fig2} and \ref{Fig3} are also presented in Section \ref{results} in a tabular format. Here and below we used $\Delta t = 0.05$, $S_{\max} = 500$, $S_{\min} = 0$ and $\Delta S = 1.25$ for our CN modelling.
\begin{figure}[h]
\begin{center}
\resizebox*{11cm}{!}{\includegraphics{Fig2n.pdf}}%
\caption{Comparison of results given by different analytical approaches for a multiple dividend family of Calls (see text of the paper for details; corresponding Put results are presented in Fig. \ref{Fig3}). Spot approximation is given by Eqs. (\ref{BS_spot}); Strike approximation - by Eqs. (\ref{BS_strike}); Hybrid approximation - by Eqs. (\ref{BS_hybrid}); VA Spot approximation - by Eqs. (\ref{BS_spot}) with adjusted volatility given by Eq. (\ref{VA_spot}); VA Strike approximation - by Eqs. (\ref{BS_strike}) with adjusted volatility given by Eq. (\ref{VA_strike}); and finally CN numerical results - by modelling Eq. (\ref{BS}) with initial conditions (\ref{put_IC}) and boundary conditions (\ref{SpotBC}). }%
\label{Fig2}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[h]
\begin{center}
\resizebox*{11cm}{!}{\includegraphics{Fig3n.pdf}}%
\caption{Comparison of results given by different analytical approaches for a multiple dividend family of Puts (see text of the paper for details; corresponding Call results are presented in Fig. \ref{Fig2}). }%
\label{Fig3}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
Several conclusions can be drawn from analysis Figs. \ref{Fig2} and \ref{Fig3}:
\begin{itemize}
{\item None of presented analytical approximations is good for longer dated options (both Calls and Puts) with simpler Spot and Strike approaches being particulary different from the benchmark numerical results.
}
{\item Interestingly, the numerical results for Calls and Puts demonstrate qualitatively different trends in their disagreements with the best of analytic approximations (Hybrid and Strike VA): Calls in general follow Strike VA and Hybrid averaged trend, whereas longer-dated Puts deviate significantly below both Hybrid and Strike VA curves.
}
{\item
Qualitatively different deviations of numerical curves for Puts and Calls from their analytic counterparts implies a violation of the Put-Call parity relation (\ref{parity_BS}): if parity was preserved, then the deviation of numerics from any one of the analytic approximations presented above would be the same for Puts as it is for the corresponding Calls.
}
\end{itemize}
Thus we can formulate the two major issues to be addressed by this paper:
\begin{enumerate}
{\item Is the observed parity violation phenomenon real and if ``yes'' then how it can be explained?}
{\item Can a simple BS-type approximation better matching the benchmark numerical results be developed for pricing European Calls and Puts for equities with large discrete dividends?}
\end{enumerate}
The following two subsections will consequently address both of these questions.
\subsection{Parity violation phenomenon}
According to our knowledge the parity violation phenomenon was first described by \cite{HaugHL2003}, where, however, the term ``violation'' was not used per se - the authors have derived and presented a modified form of the parity relation (see Eq. (8) of \cite{HaugHL2003}). Due to the lack of stress on the changed form of the parity relation, the important difference between the modified relation and the conventional one may have been missed by a few of readers of \cite{HaugHL2003}, including even those referring to this paper in their own subsequent publications. Thus, in our opinion, it is important to revisit the issue and clearly reveal reasons of the parity violation phenomenon.
Let us consider a stock process $S(t)$ with a single deterministic dividend payout $D$ at time $t = t_D$ and suppose for simplicity that $r=0$. If the dividend payout is guaranteed in timing and value (e.g. by holding the corresponding amount in an escrow account), then by construction for every observable stock price $S(T)$ $(S(T) > 0)$ we have the standard parity relation at payout:
\begin{equation} \label{parity_at_payout}
C(T) - P(T) = S(T) - K.
\end{equation}
If $D(t_D) = {\rm const}$ as discussed, then it is easy to construct a portfolio at $t=0$ that has no intermediate net cashflows, and matches the right-hand side of the equation (\ref{parity_at_payout}) at time $T$. One needs to buy the stock $S$, short $K$ (to be paid back at $t=T$) and short $D$ (to be paid back at $t=T_D$). The net initial cost of such a portfolio is $S(0) - K - D$. Importantly the time $t_D$ the payments net out exactly ($D - D = 0$), and the cash flow at $t = T$ is $S(T)-K$, as we intended. Thus, we have satisfied both conditions used to derive the standard parity relation (\ref{parity_BS}), i. e. we constructed the portfolio with payout (\ref{parity_at_payout}) at $t=T$ and demonstrated the absence of non-zero cashflows in the interval $0<t<T$. Accordingly the modified parity relation stays:
\begin{equation} \label{parity_at_origin}
C(0) - P(0) = S(0) - K - D,
\end{equation}
which (after an extension of our analysis to $r \neq 0$ case) is equivalent to Eq. (\ref{parity_BS}).
However, with the Liquidator/Survivor dividend policies (described in Subsection \ref{CN}) in place the argument above does not work because there is a non-zero probability that the payments at $t=t_D$ will not cancel. Indeed, if $S(t_D) < D$, then we will not receive $D$ amount needed to cover the corresponding short position, but only either $S(t_D)$ (if Liquidator policy is in place) or $0$ (if Survivor policy is chosen). Thus, the standard parity relation (\ref{parity_at_origin}) fails. However, the true put-call parity can be found by calculating the expected
missing cashflows (e.g. by the risk-neutral valuation technique; see \cite{Hull2006} for details). But up to the dividend date, the stock price follows a standard Geometric Brownian motion, so that the original Black-Scholes formulas may be applied. For a single dividend case with Liquidator policy, such calculations result in parity violation value given by the standard BS Put pricing formula
\begin{equation} \label{singleL}
\Delta P = D \exp{(-rT_D)} \Phi(-b_2) -S_0 \Phi(-b_1),
\end{equation}
where $K$ is replaced by a non-discounted single dividend value $D$, $T_D$ is the single dividend payout timing, and $D$ and $T_D$ also replacing $K$ and $T$ in the expressions for $b_1$ and $b_2$. Note, that for a single dividend case $\Delta P$ formula does not require any volatility adjustments.
Similar calculations show that for a single dividend case with Survivor policy, the corresponding result is given by
\begin{equation} \label{singleS}
\Delta P = D \exp{(-rT_D)} \Phi(-b_2),
\end{equation}
where again no volatility adjustments are needed.
For multi-dividend cases, no exact parity violation expressions are available and we are not aware of any previously reported analytic approximations.
\subsection{New analytic Black-Scholes-type approximations for calls and puts}
All analytical approaches described in this work so far can be divided into three groups:
\begin{enumerate}
\item{Simple heuristic approaches attempting to adjust some of BS formula parameters, but not the volatility to take the effect of discrete dividends into account (Spot, Strike and Hybrid approaches)}
\item{Approaches attempting to adjust some of BS formula parameters, and \emph{then} adjust the volatility to fine-tune the correction (Spot VA and Strike VA)}
\item{Asymptotic expansion approach (TE approach)}
\end{enumerate}
It is quite easy to notice that, although there are \emph{three} simple methods of type 1 (Spot, Strike and Hybrid approaches), only \emph{two} corresponding volatility-adjusted approaches have been reported (Spot VA and Strike VA).
Moreover, these volatility adjusted approaches used Spot and Strike approximations as their starting points, which represent a rather poor choice. It is more natural to take Hybrid approximation as the starting point. Indeed, our Figs. \ref{Fig2} and \ref{Fig3} clear show that the hybrid approximation [Eqs. (\ref{BS_hybrid})] agrees reasonably well with numerics even without any further volatility adjustment. Now we are in a strong position to take one step further and construct the hybrid VA approximation in a most straightforward fashion: (i) we start with Eqs. (\ref{BS_hybrid}) where the dividends are split into $D_S$ and $D_K$ parts ($D = D_S + D_K$); (ii) then we calculate volatility adjustments as defined by Eqs. (\ref{VA_spot}) and (\ref{VA_strike}), but with $\displaystyle {D_S \equiv \sum_{0<t_i\le T}{\frac{T - t_i}{T} d_i \exp{(-r t_i)}}}$ and $\displaystyle {D_K \equiv \sum_{0<t_i\le T}{\frac{t_i}{T} d_i \exp{(-r t_i)}}}$, i.e. we calculate volatility adjustments \emph{independently} for $D_S$ and $D_K$ parts of $D$ [to distinguish newly obtained $\varepsilon_S$ and $\varepsilon_K$ from their counterparts for spot and strike VA approximations we will denote them as $\varepsilon_S^{(h)}$ and $\varepsilon_K^{(h)}$ below]; (iii) finally we calculate a new volatility adjustment coefficient as a direct product of $(1+\varepsilon_S^{(h)})$ and $(1-\varepsilon_K^{(h)})$:
\begin{equation} \label{VA_hybrid}
\bar{\sigma}_H = \sigma (1+\varepsilon_S^{(h)}) (1-\varepsilon_K^{(h)}) \equiv \sigma (1-\varepsilon_H).
\end{equation}
Note that the new perturbation parameter $\varepsilon_H$ is typically significantly smaller than $\varepsilon_S$ or $\varepsilon_K$ because of the dividend split (typically for real-life situations $D_S \approx D_K \approx D/2$) and also because the oppositely signed contributions of $\varepsilon_S^{(h)}$ and $\varepsilon_K^{(h)}$ in $(1+\varepsilon_S^{(h)}) (1-\varepsilon_K^{(h)})$ product.
To summarise: Hybrid approximation [given by Eqs. (\ref{BS_hybrid})] extended by a volatility adjustment of $\sigma \rightarrow \bar{\sigma}_H$ [given by Eq. (\ref{VA_hybrid})] explicitly describes our {\em new approximation}, which we refer to as Hybrid VA approximation. We further note, that Hybrid VA approximation for Calls is final, whereas Hybrid VA approximation for Puts needs further adjustment to account for the parity violation phenomenon.
For a single dividend case parity violation adjustment (PA) is given by Eq. (\ref{singleL}) [Liquidator dividend policy - effective Put] and Eq. (\ref{singleS}) [Survivor dividend policy - effective digital Put]. Thus we can simply calculate parity violation adjusted Puts as given by the second of Eqs. (\ref{BS_hybrid}) with an extra volatility adjustment according to Eq. (\ref{VA_hybrid}) and then subtract parity violation value given by Eq. (\ref{singleL}) or Eq. (\ref{singleS}). We refer to this approach as Hybrid VAPA (Hybrid volatility adjusted parity violation adjusted) approach. We remind that parity violation adjustment is only relevant for Puts, but not for Calls.
For multi-dividend case no explicit formula for PA is available. However, in the spirit of this paper we may suggest calculating multi-dividend PA as an effective Puts (similarly to a single dividend case). Then we can use e.g. already developed Hybrid VA approximation for the valuation of these effective Puts. Indeed, one can almost effortlessly generalise Eq. (\ref{singleL}) into:
\begin{equation} \label{multiL}
\Delta P^{(L)} = P_{{\rm eff}}^{(L)} = \bar{D}_L \exp{(-rT_D)} \Phi(-b_2) -\bar{S}_0 \Phi(-b_1),
\end{equation}
where $D_L$ is the last dividend, $T_D$ is time of the last dividend payout, $\bar{S}_0 = S_0 - \tilde{D}_S$ and $\bar{D}_L = D_L + \tilde{D}_K \exp(r T_D)$ where, in turn, $\displaystyle{\tilde{D}_S \equiv \sum_{0<t_i< T_D}{\frac{T_D - t_i}{T_D} d_i \exp{(-r t_i)}}}$ and $\displaystyle {\tilde{D}_K \equiv \sum_{0<t_i< T_D}{\frac{t_i}{T_D} d_i \exp{(-r t_i)}}}$. Note that the sums $\tilde{D}_S$ and $\tilde{D}_K$ both exclude the last dividend payout because it is already taken into account by being an effective unadjusted strike [$K \rightarrow D_L$]. In addition, volatility in Eq. (\ref{multiL}) is also adjusted according to the standard Hybrid VA approximation recipe [i.e. the correction is given by Eq. (\ref{VA_hybrid}), where now $T \rightarrow T_D$ and all summations in Eqs. (\ref{VA_spot}) and (\ref{VA_strike}) are on the $(0, T_D)$ interval and do not include the final dividend].
Multi-dividend generalisation of Eq. (\ref{singleS}) may be done in a similar fashion, but with one important difference -- the effective Put represented by Eq. (\ref{multiL}) does not include further recursive parity violation adjustments, whereas the generalisation of Eq. (\ref{singleS}) should include these recursive terms: $\displaystyle{\Delta P^{(S)}(t_N) =\sum_{i= 1}^N (-1)^{N-i} P_{{\rm eff}}^{(S)}(t_i)}$, where $t_i$ are ex-dividend days and $t_N$ is the timing of the last dividend [within the $(0, T)$ interval]. Indeed, for the Liquidator case all paths of process (\ref{stockprocess}) which collapse to zero at ex-dividend day $t_i$ will continue staying at zero and do not have any chance of path recovery above $d_{i+1}$ for the next ex-dividend date $t_{i+1}$, whereas for the Survivor case such a recovery is always possible.
We stress that the main idea of our PA approach here is to view it as effective multi-dividend Put (vanilla for Liquidator policy or digital for Survivor policy). The application of Hybrid VA algorithm for calculation of such an effective Put value is an extra step. In fact, we can utilise any other approximation for this purpose (with a preference obviously given to higher accuracy algorithms).
In the next Section we comprehensively compare the best of previously reported analytic approximation for Calls and Puts (Spot VA, Strike VA, Hybrid and TE approaches) with the corresponding CN numerics and the newly developed Hybrid VA and Hybrid VAPA analytic approximations.
We also note that the newly developed Hybrid VA approach (and its parity violation adjusted extension for Puts: Hybrid VAPA approach) are essentially based on rather heuristic ideas of \cite{BosV2002} and \cite{BenederW2001}. The later approach does not allow calculation of higher order corrections of volatility adjustment. Such corrections can be calculated by extending the result of \cite{BosGS2003}, who suggested a much more complex, but also more rigorous volatility adjustment approach. For the completeness of our analysis we extended the analysis of \cite{BosGS2003} calculating the corresponding Hybrid VA-2 approximation formulas (second [more rigorous and more complex] version of Hybrid VA method). All relevant formulas and derivation details can be found in Appendix A. Hybrid VA-2 results are also compared with numerics and other analytical approximations in the next Section.
\section{Results: final comparison of different analytic approaches with CN numerics} \label{results}
We present our findings using two sample families of European options with large discrete dividends. For both families we apply flat discounting rate $r = 6 \%$ and flat volatility $\sigma = 30\%$ (which we will also use as flat rate curve and volatility for CN modelling), $S_0 = \$100.0$, $K = \$100.0$ and maturity terms $T$ ranging from 1.0 to 11.00 years (with a one year increment). First family has only one forecasted dividend payout of $d_1 = 50.0$ at $t_1 = 364/365$ mark (i.e. one day before expiry of shortest term option (with $T=1$); thus we can observe a clear transition between the limit where the only dividend is close to expiry [for $T=1$ option] and the opposite limit where the only dividend is relatively close to the origin [e.g. for $T = 11$ option]). The second family is the same as the presented in Figs. \ref{Fig2} and \ref{Fig3}: it has regular annual dividend payouts of $d_i = 9$ at $t_i = 0.5, 1.5, 2.5, \ldots, 10.5$ year marks. First family is used essentially for "stress-testing" of our analysed analytical models, whereas the second one, as we have already mentioned, may represent a real-life situation.
\begin{table}[h]
\tbl{Comparison of different analytic methods with CN numerical results for a single-dividend family of Calls. First column shows CN numerical results. In consequent columns different analytic approximations and their corresponding relative differences with respect to CN numerics are presented.}
{\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|} \hline
& & & & & & & & & & & & & \\
$T$ & CN & Spot & Rel & Strike & Rel & Hybrid & Rel & TE & Rel & Hybrid & Rel & Hybrid & Rel \\
& & VA & diff & VA & diff & & diff & & diff & VA & diff & VA-2 & diff \\
yrs & [$\$ $] & [$\$ $] & [$\%$] & [$\$ $] & [$\% $] & [$\$ $] & [$\%$] & [$\$ $] & [$\%$] & [$\$ $] & [$\%$] & [$\$ $] & [$\%$] \\
& & & & & & & & & & & & & \\
\hline
& & & & & & & & & & & & & \\
1 & 2.18 & 3.14 & 43.9 & 2.18 & 0.2 & 2.18 & 0.1 & 5.86 & 168.6 & 2.19 & 0.2 & 2.18 & 0.2 \\
2 & 4.42 & 5.07 & 14.6 & 4.65 & 5.3 & 3.85 & -12.9 & 4.70 & 6.3 & 4.46 & 1.0 & 4.46 & 0.8 \\
3 & 6.76 & 7.12 & 5.9 & 7.40 & 10.1 & 5.90 & -12.2 & 5.69 & -15.3 & 6.81 & 1.2 & 6.77 & 0.6 \\
4 & 9.01 & 9.22 & 2.3 & 10.23 & 13.6 & 8.08 & -10.3 & 7.39 & -17.9 & 9.14 & 1.5 & 9.03 & 0.2 \\
5 & 11.23 & 11.30 & 0.6 & 13.05 & 16.2 & 10.28 & -8.5 & 9.35 & -16.7 & 11.41 & 1.6 & 11.22 & -0.1 \\
6 & 13.38 & 13.34 & -0.3 & 15.81 & 18.2 & 12.44 & -7.0 & 11.40 & -14.8 & 13.60 & 1.6 & 13.34 & -0.3 \\
7 & 15.45 & 15.33 & -0.8 & 18.50 & 19.8 & 14.55 & -5.8 & 13.45 & -13.0 & 15.70 & 1.6 & 15.38 & -0.5 \\
8 & 17.43 & 17.25 & -1.0 & 21.09 & 21.0 & 16.59 & -4.8 & 15.46 & -11.3 & 17.70 & 1.5 & 17.33 & -0.5 \\
9 & 19.32 & 19.10 & -1.2 & 23.58 & 22.0 & 18.54 & -4.0 & 17.40 & -9.9 & 19.61 & 1.5 & 19.20 & -0.6 \\
10 & 21.12 & 20.86 & -1.2 & 25.96 & 22.9 & 20.40 & -3.4 & 19.28 & -8.7 & 21.42 & 1.4 & 20.99 & -0.6 \\
11 & 22.84 & 22.56 & -1.2 & 28.25 & 23.7 & 22.19 & -2.9 & 21.08 & -7.7 & 23.15 & 1.4 & 22.69 & -0.7 \\
& & & & & & & & & & & & & \\
\hline
\end{tabular}}
\label{single_calls}
\end{table}
\begin{table}[h]
\tbl{Comparison of different analytic methods with CN numerical results for a multi-dividend family of Calls. First column shows CN numerical results. In consequent columns different analytic approximations and their corresponding relative differences with respect to CN numerics are presented. These results corresponds to Fig. \ref{Fig2}.}
{\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|} \hline
& & & & & & & & & & & & & \\
$T$ & CN & Spot & Rel & Strike & Rel & Hybrid & Rel & TE & Rel & Hybrid & Rel & Hybrid & Rel \\
& & VA & diff & VA & diff & & diff & & diff & VA & diff & VA-2 & diff \\
yrs & [$\$ $] & [$\$ $] & [$\%$] & [$\$ $] & [$\% $] & [$\$ $] & [$\%$] & [$\$ $] & [$\%$] & [$\$ $] & [$\%$] & [$\$ $] & [$\%$] \\
& & & & & & & & & & & & & \\
\hline
& & & & & & & & & & & & & \\
1 & 10.19 & 10.20 & 0.0 & 10.23 & 0.3 & 10.18 & -0.1 & 10.19 & 0.0 & 10.20 & 0.1 & 10.20 & -0.0 \\
2 & 13.22 & 13.15 & -0.5 & 13.33 & 0.8 & 13.16 & -0.4 & 13.21 & -0.1 & 13.22 & 0.1 & 13.21 & -0.1 \\
3 & 15.04 & 14.84 & -1.4 & 15.29 & 1.7 & 14.91 & -0.8 & 15.02 & -0.2 & 15.05 & 0.0 & 15.02 & -0.1 \\
4 & 16.24 & 15.82 & -2.6 & 16.67 & 2.8 & 16.01 & -1.4 & 16.21 & -0.2 & 16.24 & 0.0 & 16.22 & -0.2 \\
5 & 17.07 & 16.33 & -4.3 & 17.77 & 4.1 & 16.70 & -2.2 & 17.04 & -0.2 & 17.05 & -0.2 & 17.04 & -0.2 \\
6 & 17.66 & 16.51 & -6.5 & 18.64 & 5.5 & 17.11 & -3.1 & 17.62 & -0.2 & 17.60 & -0.4 & 17.62 & -0.2 \\
7 & 18.08 & 16.41 & -9.2 & 19.37 & 7.1 & 17.31 & -4.3 & 18.03 & -0.3 & 17.96 & -0.7 & 18.02 & -0.3 \\
8 & 18.37 & 16.06 & -12.5 & 19.99 & 8.8 & 17.34 & -5.6 & 18.32 & -0.3 & 18.17 & -1.1 & 18.31 & -0.3 \\
9 & 18.57 & 15.56 & -16.2 & 20.53 & 10.5 & 17.25 & -7.1 & 18.52 & -0.3 & 18.27 & -1.7 & 18.50 & -0.4 \\
10 & 18.72 & 14.87 & -20.6 & 21.02 & 12.3 & 17.06 & -8.8 & 18.65 & -0.4 & 18.27 & -2.4 & 18.64 & -0.4 \\
11 & 18.81 & 14.01 & -25.5 & 21.47 & 14.1 & 16.79 & -10.7 & 18.73 & -0.4 & 18.21 & -3.2 & 18.73 & -0.4 \\
& & & & & & & & & & & & & \\
\hline
\end{tabular}}
\label{multi_calls}
\end{table}
\begin{table}[h]
\tbl{Comparison of different analytic methods with CN numerical results for a multi-dividend family of Puts (Liquidator case).
First column shows CN results. In consequent columns different analytic approximations and their corresponding relative differences with respect to CN numerics are presented. These results corresponds to Fig.\ref{Fig3}.}
{\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|} \hline
& & & & & & & & & & & & & \\
$T$ & CN & Hybrid & Rel & Hybrid & Rel & Hybrid & Rel & Hybrid & Rel & Hybrid & Rel & Hybrid & Rel \\
& & & diff & PA & diff & VA & diff & VAPA & diff & VA-2 & diff & VAPA-2 & diff \\
yrs & [$\$ $] & [$\$ $] & [$\%$] & [$\$ $] & [$\% $] & [$\$ $] & [$\%$] & [$\$ $] & [$\%$] & [$\$ $] & [$\%$] & [$\$ $] & [$\%$] \\
& & & & & & & & & & & & & \\
\hline
& & & & & & & & & & & & & \\
1 & 13.10 & 13.09 & -0.1 & 13.09 & -0.1 & 13.11 & 0.1 & 13.11 & 0.1 & 13.11 & 0.0 & 13.11 & 0.0 \\
2 & 18.86 & 18.81 & -0.3 & 18.81 & -0.3 & 18.87 & 0.1 & 18.87 & 0.1 & 18.86 & 0.0 & 18.86 & 0.0 \\
3 & 23.25 & 23.13 & -0.5 & 23.13 & -0.5 & 23.26 & 0.0 & 23.26 & 0.0 & 23.24 & -0.1 & 23.24 & -0.1 \\
4 & 26.87 & 26.66 & -0.9 & 26.64 & -0.9 & 26.89 & 0.0 & 26.87 & 0.0 & 26.87 & -0.1 & 26.86 & -0.1 \\
5 & 29.92 & 29.64 & -0.9 & 29.50 & -1.3 & 29.98 & 0.2 & 29.84 & -0.3 & 29.98 & 0.2 & 29.89 & -0.1 \\
6 & 32.33 & 32.20 & -0.4 & 31.69 & -2.0 & 32.69 & 1.1 & 32.13 & -0.6 & 32.71 & 1.1 & 32.31 & -0.1\\
7 & 34.06 & 34.42 & 1.0 & 33.21 & -2.5 & 35.07 & 2.9 & 33.74 & -1.0 & 35.13 & 3.1 & 34.06 & 0.0\\
8 & 35.12 & 36.36 & 3.5 & 34.10 & -2.9 & 37.19 & 5.9 & 34.70 & -1.2 & 37.33 & 6.3 & 35.16 & 0.1 \\
9 & 35.59 & 38.07 & 6.9 & 34.47 & -3.1 & 39.09 & 9.8 & 35.12 & -1.3 & 39.32 & 10.5 & 35.69 & 0.3 \\
10 & 35.56 & 39.58 & 11.3 & 34.42 & -3.2 & 40.79 & 14.7 & 35.09 & -1.3 & 41.15 & 15.7 & 35.73 & 0.5\\
11 & 35.14 & 40.90 & 16.4 & 34.02 & -3.2 & 42.32 & 20.4 & 34.71 & -1.2 & 42.84 & 21.9 & 35.38 & 0.7\\
& & & & & & & & & & & & & \\
\hline
\end{tabular}}
\label{multi_puts}
\end{table}
Table \ref{single_calls} presents the results for single dividend family of Calls. Although different approximations typically perform well in certain limits and a lot worse in other limits, the newly developed Hybrid VA and Hybrid VA-2 approximations work consistently well for all terms $T$. Surprisingly TE approach is the worst performer for this example producing unsatisfactory results in smaller $T$ limit. Perhaps the size of disagreement can be reduced if more perturbation orders of TE approach are taken into account (we had a code supplied by the authors of \cite{VeigaW2009} where only the first two orders were available), but these tests are beyond the scope of the current work. Here we don't present the results for Puts, because for this particular single dividend example the parity violation amount is rather small ($\Delta P_L \approx 0.04$) and the quality of Put approximations is approximately defined by the corresponding Call results via the standard parity relation (\ref{parity_BS}) which approximately holds. Note, however, that for a single dividend case parity violation value may be a lot higher for Survivor dividend policy case. For example, for the single dividend family considered in Table \ref{single_calls} the corresponding Survivor parity violation value $\Delta P_S \approx 0.42 \gg 0.04$.
Table \ref{multi_calls} presents the results for multi-dividend family of Calls. The newly developed Hybrid VA and Hybrid VA-2 approximations work consistently well for all terms $T$, although the simpler Hybrid VA method starts to diverge slightly from numerics at $T > 8$. For this example TE approach works as well as Hybrid VA-2 (both methods are producing essentially identical results).
Table \ref{multi_puts} presents the results for multi-dividend family of Puts for CN numerics and a few better performing analytic approaches for Liquidator dividend policy case. Note that for parity violation adjustment (PA), $\Delta P$ calculations for Hybrid PA results are based on Hybrid method Put formulas; $\Delta P$ calculations for Hybrid VAPA results are based on Hybrid VA method Put formulas; and $\Delta P$ calculations for Hybrid VAPA-2 results are based on Hybrid VA-2 method Put formulas. Clearly PA methods substantially outperform their non-PA analogs. Also, similarly to the corresponding multi-dividend Call results, Hybrid VAPA and Hybrid VAPA-2 are clear leaders in approximation accuracy.
\section{Discussion}
In conclusion, we reviewed existing analytic approximations for vanilla European options with discrete dividends and suggested a novel algorithm, which typically provides a superior accuracy in comparison to other approaches. In addition, we spent considerable efforts in clarifying the correct choice of boundary conditions for a benchmark numerical algorithm: a finite difference Crank-Nicolson scheme. Finally we comprehensively investigated a rarely mentioned Put-Call parity violation phenomenon, and successfully applied our newly developed analytical approach for calculation of the corresponding parity violation adjustment (needed for any BS-style approximation for Puts with discrete dividends). We have not reported the related results for Greeks, but the simple form of our approximation allows for obtaining them in a rather straightforward fashion.
We note, that in the simpler representation our method generalises heuristic volatility correction formulas of \cite{BenederW2001}] and does not allow calculation of the next perturbation order to gain extra accuracy. However, we have also presented a different version of our approach which utilises advantages of the more involved method of \cite{BosGS2003} which, in principle, may allow for calculation of higher perturbation orders (see Appendix A for details).
Also we believe that the presented ideas may be useful for developing better fast algorithms/approximations for other types of options with discrete dividends, including barrier options, American options, etc. Call results can be directly used for calculation of local volatility surfaces [as in, e.g., \cite{Wilmott2006}].
\section*{Acknowledgements}
Authors are indebted to NAB Wholesale Banking MRQS group for support and useful suggestions and especially to Volf Frishling and Stephen Edney for pointing out the general topic of this work and many insightful discussions. Authors are also grateful to Uwe Wystup and Carlos Veiga for sharing their TE approach code.
\section*{Appendix A} \label{AppendixA}
Derivation details of \cite{BosGS2003} style Hybrid VA-2 formulas:
Consider the generalised hybrid framework:
\[
0\leq \alpha_i\leq 1,\ {\hat{D}_S(t) \equiv \sum_{t < t_i \le T} \alpha_i d_i \exp{(-r (t_i-t))}}\ \text{and}\ {\hat{D}_K(t) \equiv \sum_{0 \le t_i \le t} (1-\alpha_i) d_i \exp{(-r (t_i-t))}}
\]
and the adjusted stock process
\[
\hat{S}_t=S_t-\hat{D}_S(t)+\hat{D}_K(t),\ d\hat{S}_t=r\hat{S}_tdt+\hat{\sigma}(\hat{S}_t,t)\hat{S}_tdW_t.
\]
In particular, $\alpha_i=1$ gives the spot approximation model, $\alpha_i=0$ gives the strike approximation model, and $\alpha_i=(T-t_i)/T$ gives the hybrid approximation model.
The local volatility can then be written in terms of the constant volatility
\[
\hat{\sigma}(\hat{S}_t,t)=\sigma\left(1+\frac{\hat{D}_S(t)-\hat{D}_K(t)}{\hat{S}_t}\right).
\]
By perturbation theory (see Appendix B in \cite{BosGS2003}), the implied volatility $\sigma(K,T)$ can be approximated by
\[
\sigma(K,T)^2=\frac{1}{T}\int_0^T E\hat{\sigma}\left(\exp\left(rt+X_{\sigma^2 t}^{s, l ,k}\right),t\right)^2 dt.
\]
where $X_{\sigma^2 t}^{s, l ,k}$ is the time $\sigma^2 t$ value of a Brownian bridge from $s=\ln \left(S_0-\hat{D}_S(0)\right)$ to $k=\ln \left(\left(K+\hat{D}_K(t)\right)\exp(-rT)\right)$ of length $l=\sigma^2 T$. Using the properties of the brownian bridge
\[
rt+X_{\sigma^2 t}^{s, l ,k}\sim \mathcal{N}\left(x_t, \sigma^2 y_t\right)\ \text{with}\ x_t=\left(s+\frac{(k-s)t)}{T}\right)+rt,\ y_t=\frac{t(T-t)}{T},
\]
expand the expectation
\begin{align*}
&E\hat{\sigma}\left(\exp\left(rt+X_{\sigma^2 t}^{s, l ,k}\right),t\right)^2\\
={}& \sigma^2\left(1+2\left(\hat{D}_S(t)-\hat{D}_K(t)\right)E\left(e^{-\left(rt+X_{\sigma t}^{s, l ,k}\right)}\right)+\left(\hat{D}_S(t)-\hat{D}_K(t)\right)^2E\left(e^{-2\left(rt+X_{\sigma t}^{s, l ,k}\right)}\right)\right)\\
={}& \sigma^2\left(1+2\left(\hat{D}_S(t)-\hat{D}_K(t)\right)e^{-x_t+\frac{\sigma^2}{2}y_t}+\left(\hat{D}_S(t)-\hat{D}_K(t)\right)^2e^{2\left(-x_t+\sigma^2y_t\right)}\right).
\end{align*}
Finally, by using the following identities
\begin{align*}
\int_0^{\tau}e^{rt} e^{-x_t+\frac{\sigma^2}{2}y_t} dt &= e^{\frac{a^2}{2}-s}\int_0^{\tau} e^{-\frac{\left(\frac{t\sigma}{\sqrt{T}}-a\right)^2}{2}} dt=\frac{\sqrt{2\pi T}}{\sigma}e^{\frac{a^2}{2}-s}\left(\Phi(a)-\Phi\left(a-\frac{\sigma \tau}{\sqrt{T}}\right)\right)\\
\int_0^{\tau}e^{2rt} e^{2\left(-x_t+\sigma^2y_t\right)} dt &= e^{\frac{b^2}{2}-2s}\int_0^{\tau} e^{-\frac{\left(\frac{2t\sigma}{\sqrt{T}}-b\right)^2}{2}} dt=\frac{1}{\sigma}\sqrt{\frac{\pi T}{2}}e^{\frac{b^2}{2}-2s}\left(\Phi(b)-\Phi\left(b-\frac{2\sigma \tau}{\sqrt{T}}\right)\right),
\end{align*}
where
\[
a=\frac{s-k}{\sqrt{T}\sigma}+\frac{\sqrt{T}\sigma}{2},\ b=\frac{s-k}{\sqrt{T}\sigma}+\sqrt{T}\sigma
\]
and $\Phi$ is the cumulative Gaussian distribution function, the closed form of the implied volatility $\sigma(K,T)^2$ can be computed to be
\begin{align*}
\sigma(K,T)^2={}&\frac{\sigma^2}{T}\int_0^T \Bigg(1+2\left(\hat{D}_S(t)-\hat{D}_K(t)\right)e^{-x_t+\frac{\sigma^2}{2}y_t}+\left(\hat{D}_S(t)-\hat{D}_K(t)\right)^2e^{2\left(-x_t+\sigma^2y_t\right)}\Bigg) dt\\
={}&\sigma^2+2\sigma\sqrt{\frac{2\pi}{T}}e^{\frac{a^2}{2}-s}\Bigg[\sum_i \alpha_i d_i e^{-rt_i}\left(\Phi(a)-\Phi\left(a-\frac{\sigma t_i}{\sqrt{T}}\right)\right)\\
&-\sum_i (1-\alpha_i) d_i e^{-rt_i}\left(\Phi\left(a-\frac{\sigma t_i}{\sqrt{T}}\right)-\Phi\left(a-\sigma\sqrt{T}\right)\right)\Bigg]\\
&+\sigma\sqrt{\frac{\pi}{2T}} e^{\frac{b^2}{2}-2s}\Bigg[\sum_{i,j}\alpha_i d_i \alpha_j d_j e^{-r(t_i+t_j)}\left(\Phi(b)-\Phi\left(b-\frac{2\sigma\min(t_i, t_j)}{\sqrt{T}}\right)\right)\\
&+\sum_{i,j}(1-\alpha_i) d_i (1-\alpha_j) d_j e^{-r(t_i+t_j)}\left(\Phi\left(b-\frac{2\sigma\max(t_i, t_j)}{\sqrt{T}}\right)-\Phi\left(b-2\sigma\sqrt{T}\right)\right)\\
&-2\sum_{i>j}\alpha_i d_i (1-\alpha_j) d_j e^{-r(t_i+t_j)}\left(\Phi\left(b-\frac{2\sigma t_j}{\sqrt{T}}\right)-\Phi\left(b-\frac{2\sigma t_i}{\sqrt{T}}\right)\right)\Bigg].
\end{align*}
\vspace{15mm}
|
\section{%
\@startsection
{section}%
{1}%
{\z@}%
{0.8cm \@plus1ex \@minus .2ex}%
{0.5cm}%
{%
\normalfont\small\bfseries
\centering
}%
}%
\def\@hangfrom@section#1#2#3{\@hangfrom{#1#2}\MakeTextUppercase{#3}}%
\def\subsection{%
\@startsection
{subsection}%
{2}%
{\z@}%
{.8cm \@plus1ex \@minus .2ex}%
{.5cm}%
{%
\normalfont\small\bfseries
\centering
}%
}%
\def\subsubsection{%
\@startsection
{subsubsection}%
{3}%
{\z@}%
{.8cm \@plus1ex \@minus .2ex}%
{.5cm}%
{%
\normalfont\small\itshape
\centering
}%
}%
\def\paragraph{%
\@startsection
{paragraph}%
{4}%
{\parindent}%
{\z@}%
{-1em}%
{\normalfont\normalsize\itshape}%
}%
\def\subparagraph{%
\@startsection
{subparagraph}%
{5}%
{\parindent}%
{3.25ex \@plus1ex \@minus .2ex}%
{-1em}%
{\normalfont\normalsize\bfseries}%
}%
\def\section@preprintsty{%
\@startsection
{section}%
{1}%
{\z@}%
{0.8cm \@plus1ex \@minus .2ex}%
{0.5cm}%
{%
\normalfont\small\bfseries
}%
}%
\def\subsection@preprintsty{%
\@startsection
{subsection}%
{2}%
{\z@}%
{.8cm \@plus1ex \@minus .2ex}%
{.5cm}%
{%
\normalfont\small\bfseries
}%
}%
\def\subsubsection@preprintsty{%
\@startsection
{subsubsection}%
{3}%
{\z@}%
{.8cm \@plus1ex \@minus .2ex}%
{.5cm}%
{%
\normalfont\small\itshape
}%
}%
\@ifxundefined\frontmatter@footnote@produce{%
\let\frontmatter@footnote@produce\frontmatter@footnote@produce@endnote
}{}%
\def\@pnumwidth{1.55em}
\def\@tocrmarg {2.55em}
\def\@dotsep{4.5pt}
\setcounter{tocdepth}{3}
\def\tableofcontents{%
\addtocontents{toc}{\string\tocdepth@munge}%
\print@toc{toc}%
\addtocontents{toc}{\string\tocdepth@restore}%
}%
\def\tocdepth@munge{%
\let\l@section@saved\l@section
\let\l@section\@gobble@tw@
}%
\def\@gobble@tw@#1#2{}%
\def\tocdepth@restore{%
\let\l@section\l@section@saved
}%
\def\l@part#1#2{\addpenalty{\@secpenalty}%
\begingroup
\set@tocdim@pagenum{#2}%
\parindent \z@
\rightskip\tocleft@pagenum plus 1fil\relax
\skip@\parfillskip\parfillskip\z@
\addvspace{2.25em plus\p@}%
\large \bf %
\leavevmode\ignorespaces#1\unskip\nobreak\hskip\skip@
\hb@xt@\rightskip{\hfil\unhbox\z@}\hskip-\rightskip\hskip\z@skip
\par
\nobreak %
\endgroup
}%
\def\tocleft@{\z@}%
\def\tocdim@min{5\p@}%
\def\l@section{%
\l@@sections{}{section
}%
\def\l@f@section{%
\addpenalty{\@secpenalty}%
\addvspace{1.0em plus\p@}%
\bf
}%
\def\l@subsection{%
\l@@sections{section}{subsection
}%
\def\l@subsubsection{%
\l@@sections{subsection}{subsubsection
}%
\def\l@paragraph#1#2{}%
\def\l@subparagraph#1#2{}%
\let\toc@pre\toc@pre@auto
\let\toc@post\toc@post@auto
\def\listoffigures{\print@toc{lof}}%
\def\l@figure{\@dottedtocline{1}{1.5em}{2.3em}}
\def\listoftables{\print@toc{lot}}%
\let\l@table\l@figure
\appdef\class@documenthook{%
\@ifxundefined\raggedcolumn@sw{\@booleantrue\raggedcolumn@sw}{}%
\raggedcolumn@sw{\raggedbottom}{\flushbottom}%
}%
\def\tableft@skip@float{\z@ plus\hsize}%
\def\tabmid@skip@float{\@flushglue}%
\def\tabright@skip@float{\z@ plus\hsize}%
\def\array@row@pre@float{\hline\hline\noalign{\vskip\doublerulesep}}%
\def\array@row@pst@float{\noalign{\vskip\doublerulesep}\hline\hline}%
\def\@makefntext#1{%
\def\baselinestretch{1}%
\reset@font
\footnotesize
\leftskip1em
\parindent1em
\noindent\nobreak\hskip-\leftskip
\hb@xt@\leftskip{%
\Hy@raisedlink{\hyper@anchorstart{footnote@\the\c@footnote}\hyper@anchorend}%
\hss\@makefnmark\
}%
#1%
\par
}%
\prepdef
\section{Introduction}
HD 142527 (spectral type F6 IIIe, \citealt{hd142527spectype}; age = 5$\pm$1.5 Myr, distance = 140$\pm$20 pc, \citealt{hd142527parameters}) is a young Herbig Ae/Be star with a complex circumstellar environment. It hosts a wide circumstellar disk, consisting of both dust and gas, located beyond $\sim$~ 100 AU \citep{hd142527discovery}. Within 100 AU, the dust and gas density decline rapidly, revealing an apparent gap. An inner disk is also thought to exist beyond $\sim$~ 5-10 AU, but its outer extent is not well-constrained \citep{hd142527midir,hd142527newsed}. The surface of the outer disk may contain water ice \citep{honda}--thought to be an essential ingredient for giant planet formation \citep{kokubo}. Recently \cite{hd142527biller} interferometrically detected a low-mass stellar companion within the inner disk, and \cite{hd142527close} directly imaged the $\sim$~ 0.25 M$_{\odot}$ companion using Magellan adaptive optics (MagAO) by detecting a strong H$\alpha$ emission line that indicates gas accretion. Interestingly, \cite{hd142527streamers} detected gaseous streamers that appear to be crossing the disk gap on the opposite side of the companion, suggesting that both the primary and secondary stars are accreting gas from inside the gap, where warm gas is thought to exist \citep{hd142527warmgas}.
These recent findings raise several important questions: Is the secondary responsible for creating the wide gap? Since it is accreting gas, does it also have a \textit{circumsecondary} disk of dust? If it is surrounded by dust, did the dust originate in the inner or outer disk? To address these questions, high-contrast imaging capable of detecting dust at $<$ 0$\farcs$ 1 is required. In this Letter, we report the direct detection of HD 142527B at $Y$ band (0.95-1.14 $\mu$m) in total intensity, along with an offset source of polarized light, suggesting that dust is falling onto or orbiting the companion.
\section{Observations and Data Reduction}
\label{sec:obs}
\begin{figure*}[t]
\centering
\subfloat[]{\label{fig:PDI}\includegraphics[scale=0.45]{PDI.eps}}
\subfloat[]{\label{fig:PDIPAR}\includegraphics[scale=0.45]{PDIPAR.eps}} \\
\subfloat[]{\label{fig:ADI}\includegraphics[scale=0.45]{ADI.eps}}
\subfloat[]{\label{fig:ADISN}\includegraphics[scale=0.45]{ADISN.eps}} \\
\caption{(a): PDI-processed $P_{\bot}$ image of the outer disk at $Y$ band. The outer disk is easily recovered. (b): PDI-processed $P_{\|}$ image, which contains $\sim$~ zero signal at the location of the outer disk, as expected. (c): Zoomed-in total intensity image, obtained by reducing the data using ADI+PCA. The known companion, HD 142527B, is detected near its expected location. The negative residuals on either side of the companion are caused by self-subtraction in the ADI+PCA reduction. The yellow dot in this and other figures represents the location of the primary star. (d): SNRE map showing that the companion is detected at S/N $\sim$~ 14.}
\label{fig:normal}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\subfloat[]{\label{fig:PDIzoom}\includegraphics[scale=0.42]{PDIzoom.eps}} \\
\subfloat[]{\label{fig:ADIPDI}\includegraphics[scale=0.42]{ADIPDI.eps}} \\
\subfloat[]{\label{fig:ADIPDISN}\includegraphics[scale=0.42]{ADIPDISN.eps}} \\
\caption{(a): Final zoomed-in $P_{\bot}$ image generated using ODD, showing a bright point-source near the location of HD 142527B. (b): $P_{\bot}$ image, after additional PSF subtraction using ADI+PCA. The source is clearly detected and all other artifacts are removed. (c): SNRE map, showing that the polarized source is detected at S/N $\sim$~ 11.}
\label{fig:ADIPDIimages}
\end{figure}
Observations of HD 142527 were carried out using the Gemini Planet Imager (GPI; \citealt{gpi}) on the Gemini-South Telescope at Cerro Pachon, Chile on the night of UT 25 April 2014 as part of the Early Science campaign. Images were obtained in polarized light at $Y$ band. GPI has a plate scale of 14.14 $\pm$ 0.01 mas/pixel \citep{gpiplatescale} and a field of view of 2$\farcs$ 8 on a side. Observing conditions were good, with seeing at or below 0$\farcs$ 75 for most of the night. To minimize the radial extent of saturation on the detector, we used the shortest possible integration time of 1.5 s and coadded 10 of these frames (15 s total per image). One image was obtained at each of the following half-wave plate angles: 0$^{\circ}$, 45$^{\circ}$, 22$^{\circ}$, 67$^{\circ}$\footnote{At the time of the observations, the Gemini Phase II software was incompatible with half-angle increments such that 22.5$^{\circ}$ ~and 67.5$^{\circ}$ ~were set to integer values.}, and then the sequence was repeated until 50 images were obtained, resulting in a total integration of 12.12 minutes. The instrument pupil was fixed during the observations, resulting in a total field of view rotation on the detector of 29.75$^{\circ}$ ~and enabling angular differential imaging (ADI; \citealt{adi}). A PSF reference star, HIP 82885, was imaged immediately afterwards using the same instrumental setup for a total integration of 2.9 minutes. Images of HD 142527 were saturated within 0$\farcs$ 05; images of the PSF reference star were not saturated (though some pixels were in the non-linear regime\footnote{http://www.gemini.edu/sciops/instruments/gpi/instrument-performance/detector-characteristics}).
We used the GPI IDL data reduction package (v. 1.1)\footnote{http://docs.planetimager.org/pipeline/} to split each raw image into a datacube consisting of the ordinary and extraordinary beams. The processing pipeline locates the two polarization spots created by each lenslet and then constructs one image for each orthogonal polarization state. It also corrects for bad pixels and destripes the images.
Next we processed the images using our custom high-contrast imaging reduction routines written in Matlab. We divided each image by the number of coadds and the integration time to obtain units of counts/s. We then registered each image by calculating the center of light while ignoring saturated pixels. At this point, the dataset consisted of 50 ordinary beam images and 50 extraordinary beam images.
To confirm the known outer disk structure, we followed the ``double ratio" polarized differential imaging (PDI) method (see \citealt{hd142527vltpol2} and references therein for more details), which yields $P_{\bot}$, the tangential polarization flux, and $P_{\|}$, the radial polarization flux. For this near face-on disk, $P_{\|}$ should contain $\sim$~ zero signal and is thus a measure of the noise. After constructing these image sets, we rotated the images by their parallactic angles plus an instrumental offset to obtain North-up, East-left. To compute this offset, we reduced GPI spectral calibration data taken earlier in the April observing run on the Theta 1 Ori multiple star system at $H$ band. Using the known PA of the B$_{2}$-B$_{3}$ component from \cite{lairdtrapmagao}, which has very little proper motion over timescales of $\sim$~ 1 year, we determined that an additional 3$^{\circ}$ ~of clockwise rotation was needed to align the images with true North\footnote{\cite{gpiplatescale} found a rotational offset closer to $\sim$~ 1$^{\circ}$; however, this was not computed using the Theta 1 Ori system.}. Fig. \ref{fig:PDI} and Fig. \ref{fig:PDIPAR} show the final $P_{\bot}$ and $P_{\|}$ images, respectively. The outer disk is clearly detected at high S/N, and no similar structures are evident in the radial polarization image. Furthermore, the known polarization ``holes" at position angles (PA) of $\sim$~ 0$^{\circ}$ ~and 160$^{\circ}$ ~\citep{hd142527vltpol2,hd142527vltpol} are recovered at approximately the same locations.
\subsection{Recovering the companion in total intensity}
To detect HD 142527B in total intensity, we first added the 50 ordinary beam images with the 50 extraordinary beam images, yielding 50 total intensity images. We then reduced this dataset using our custom ADI pipeline in combination with Principal Component Analysis (PCA; \citealt{pca}). We varied the number of modes used to generate the PSFs, rotated the images by their parallactic angles to obtain North-up, East-left, and combined them using a mean with sigma clipping. The final number of modes was 8 (out of 50), since this resulted in a point-source being detected at a maximum S/N per resolution element (SNRE)\footnote{This was computed by convolving the final image with a Gaussian of FWHM = 38.2 mas, masking out the companion and computing the standard deviations in 1 pixel wide annuli as a function of radius, then dividing the Gaussian-smoothed image by these noise values.} $\sim$~ 14 near the expected location of HD 142527B, based on the astrometry from \cite{hd142527biller} and \cite{hd142527close}. The final total intensity image and the corresponding SNRE map are shown in Fig. \ref{fig:ADI} and Fig. \ref{fig:ADISN}, respectively. These images, in particular the SNRE map, show that the object is radially extended, suggesting that additional signal resides \textit{outside} the point-source.
\subsection{Recovering polarized light near the companion}
To determine whether any polarized light is being scattered from the circumsecondary environment of HD 142527B, we combined the ``double difference" method (e.g., \citealt{doubledifference,hinkley4796}) with the ``double ratio" method. Specifically, we used PCA optimization to improve the PSF subtraction step in the former method and then used the latter method to correct for imperfect alignment of the half-wave plate \citep{hd142527vltpol2}. We refer to the combined method employed here as Optimized Double Differencing (ODD), which we describe below.
Typically, double differencing starts by generating $Q$ and $U$ images, which themselves are the differences of the ordinary and extraordinary beam images taken at various half-wave plate angles. The ordinary and extraordinary beam images are taken simultaneously, so the unpolarized star light is a good representation of the PSF. To improve the PSF subtraction in this step, we generated an optimal PSF from all of the available extraordinary images at a given half-wave plate angle using PCA. In other words, for the 0$^{\circ}$ ~half-wave plate angle, a given $Q$ image was generated using Eq. \ref{eqn:eq1},
\begin{equation}
Q_{i} = O^{0\hbox{$^{\circ}$}}_{i} - PSF(E^{0\hbox{$^{\circ}$}}_{1:K}),
\label{eqn:eq1}
\end{equation}
where $i \in [1,12]$, with 12 being the number of images in a given half-wave plate sequence, $O$ ($E$) refers to the ordinary (extraordinary) beam of the polarized image, $PSF$ is the optimal PSF generated by PCA from the appropriate extraordinary images, and $K$ is the number of modes used to construct the PSF (here = 12). $-Q$, $U$, and $-U$ were generated in a similar manner using the 45$^{\circ}$, 22$^{\circ}$, and 67$^{\circ}$ ~half-wave plate angle images, respectively.\footnote{Because off-axis sources rotate throughout observations, the polarization signal also rotates. This means that double differencing will result in a potentially biased polarized signal, depending on the speed and magnitude of the sky rotation between images. In our case, this bias is expected to be small and is outweighed by the gain in final S/N using ODD.}
The final $Q$ and $U$ images were computed in the normal manner (e.g., $Q - (-Q) = 2Q$). We then used the $Q$ and $U$ images to calculate $P_{\bot}$ and $P_{\|}$, following the double ratio method \citep{hd142527vltpol2}. At this point, if we rotate and combine the $P_{\bot}$ images, we detect a bright point-source near the location of HD 142527B in total intensity (Fig. \ref{fig:PDIzoom}). However, we can improve this detection by taking advantage of the ADI setup of the instrument and employing additional PSF subtraction on the (unrotated) $P_{\bot}$ images. We again used PCA, this time with 3 modes (out of 12).\footnote{We note that the PSFs used in this step were generated from the images themselves. Since they contain the (rotating) companion in polarized light, the flux of any recovered signal will have been attenuated.} After PSF subtracting, we rotated the images by their parallactic angles to obtain North-up, East-left and combined the images using a mean with sigma clipping. The final image is shown in Fig. \ref{fig:ADIPDI}, wherein the same point-source originally seen in Fig. \ref{fig:PDIzoom} is now recovered at S/N $\sim$~ 11 (Fig. \ref{fig:ADIPDISN}), and all other artifacts have been removed. To check that the recovered source was not an instrumental polarization artifact, we repeated the above reduction on the $P_{\|}$ images. The final image did not show any similar structures near the polarized source, validating the detection.
\section{Results}
\label{sec:results}
\subsection{Astrometry}
To compute the astrometry of the point-source in total intensity (Fig. \ref{fig:ADI}) and polarized intensity (Fig. \ref{fig:ADIPDI}), we calculated the center of light in 3x3 pixel boxes centered on the brightest pixel near the location of the sources in each image. We assumed astrometric uncertainties of 0.5 pixels in the $x$ and $y$ directions, since GPI is just barely Nyquist-sampled at $Y$ band\footnote{$$\lambda$$/D at $Y$ band is 26.7 mas (1.9 pixels). By comparing the measured widths of inserted and recovered Gaussians with the width of the recovered companion, we found that the GPI PSF had a width of $\sim$~ 38.2 mas (2.67 pixels). This satisfies the Nyquist requirement.}. In total intensity, the source has a separation from the primary of 88.25 $\pm$ 10.1 mas and PA of 123 $\pm$ 9.2$^{\circ}$. In polarized intensity, the source has a separation of 107.2 $\pm$ 10.1 mas and a PA of 121.84 $\pm$ 7.56$^{\circ}$. These locations are shown in Fig. \ref{fig:astrometry}, along with the previously published astrometry from 2012-2013 \citep{hd142527biller,hd142527close}. For reference we also plot the preliminary location of HD 142527B from MagAO/H$\alpha$ observations repeated in April 2014 (separation = 79.7$\pm$5.6 mas, PA = 119.5$\pm$ 8.17$^{\circ}$; Follette et al., in prep.). The location of the source in total intensity from GPI generally agrees with the expected location of HD 142527B based on orbital motion over the course of $\sim$~ 1 year. It is marginally discrepant with the new MagAO location, though at 1.4$\sigma$ confidence. Thus we consider our source to be the companion. Interestingly, the projected separation of the polarized source is larger than that of the companion by $\sim$~ 19.2 mas = 2.7 AU, at $\sim$~ 2$\sigma$ confidence. However, this significance comes from the absolute astrometric uncertainty. Because both positions were measured in the same way using the same instrument, the \textit{relative} uncertainty is likely much smaller, meaning 2$\sigma$ is a lower limit.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.45]{astrometry2.eps}
\caption{Astrometry of the HD 142527 circumstellar environment. The blue and pink points are the polarized and total intensity locations, respectively, from this work. The green point is the location from \cite{hd142527biller} using Sparse Aperture Masking (SAM) with the VLT. The red point is the location from \cite{hd142527close} using MagAO imaging at H$\alpha$, and the orange point is the preliminary location from the same observations repeated in April 2014 (Follette et al., in prep.). The yellow asterisk marks the location of the primary star.}
\label{fig:astrometry}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Companion photometry in total intensity}
We computed the companion photometry in total intensity by repeatedly inserting and recovering a scaled, mean-combined image of the unsaturated PSF, HIP 82885, at the same radius but $\sim$~ 180$^{\circ}$ ~away from the measured location of the companion. We varied the scale factor until the brightness of the artificial companion matched the measured brightness and S/N of the real companion (Fig. \ref{fig:fakesn}). Because the PSF image was non-linear in the central few pixels, we assumed a conservative uncertainty of 0.5 mag for the companion photometry. The optimal scale factor for the PSF was 0.055, corresponding to $\Delta Y_{PSF}$ $\sim$~ 3.2. We used the stellar models from \cite{newkurucz} to fit the literature photometry of HIP 82885, including extinction given its distance of $\sim$~ 850 pc \citep{van}. This yielded an apparent $Y$ mag of $\sim$~ 8.2, which corresponds to the companion having $Y$ $\sim$~ 11.4$\pm$ 0.5. This is marginally (1.7$\sigma$) fainter than the apparent magnitude of the companion at $H$ band (10.5$\pm$0.2; \citealt{hd142527biller}).
We also note that Fig. \ref{fig:fakesn} shows that the companion is clearly extended in the radial direction, compared to the scaled artificial PSF inserted 180$^{\circ}$ ~away. While not convincing on its own, this lends credence to the notion that an additional signal resides \textit{outside} the location of HD 142527B.
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.45]{ADIFakeSN.eps}
\caption{SNRE map of the total intensity image including the inserted and recovered scaled PSF. The red circles mark the locations of the real and artificial sources. Residual signal is located outside the position of HD 142527B, whereas no similar signal is seen near the artificial source on the opposite side of the star.}
\label{fig:fakesn}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Polarization fraction near the companion}
We next computed the polarization fraction near the companion, since this can be informative of dust grain properties (\citealt{perrinabaur,grahampolarized}; and references therein). Typically one computes the ratio $p = P/I$, where $P$ is the image of the source in polarized light and $I$ is the image of the source in total intensity. Normally, for a disk of dust around a single central star, one performs PSF subtraction in total intensity to remove the star light and thus compute $I$ (e.g., \citealt{perrinabaur,hd142527vltpol2}). In our case, the polarized source is around the \textit{secondary}. This makes computing $p$ problematic because it is difficult to subtract the total intensity of the companion itself without also subtracting the circumsecondary source. Nonetheless, we can still compute a lower limit, $p_{min}$, recognizing that the companion's photospheric light is included. We accomplished this as follows: we considered $P$ to be our final polarized intensity image of the offset source (Fig. \ref{fig:ADIPDI}), and $I$ to be our final total intensity image of the companion (Fig. \ref{fig:ADI}). As Fig. \ref{fig:fakesn} shows, this image also contains scattered light extending away from the companion at the location of the polarized source. We computed $P/I$ and measured $p_{min}$ as the median in a 3x3 pixel box centered on the peak location of the polarized source. By inserting and recovering artificial sources, we verified that the attenuation due to ADI+PCA was comparable in both the $P$ and $I$ images, meaning no additional flux-correction factors were required. Therefore $p_{min} \approx 10\%$.
\section{Discussion and Summary}
\label{sec:discussion}
We have detected HD 142527B in total intensity at $Y$ band at approximately its expected location. Its brightness is marginally fainter than at $H$ band, perhaps suggesting that the companion is red at $Y-H$ like it is at 1.6-4 $\mu$m ~\citep{hd142527biller}. We also detected a point-source in polarized light whose projected separation from the primary is larger than the companion's by $\sim$~ 2.7 AU (at $>$2$\sigma$ confidence). The detection of polarized light is a strong indicator of scattering dust particles. This dust is mostly scattering light from the primary, since the $Y$ band flux received from the primary at the polarized source location is $\sim$~ 3 times higher than the flux received from the companion. Assuming the polarized source is spatially separated from the companion, this system may resemble a scaled up version of the LkCa 15 system, which is thought to host a young protoplanet separated from one or more dust clumps \citep{krauslkca}.
The detection of polarized light near HD 142527B complicates its classification. Because the scattering dust is likely falling onto or orbiting the companion, it is possible that this dust contributes to the total intensity that has been directly detected at other wavelengths. If this is the case, the reported masses for the companion (0.1-0.4 M$_{\odot}$; \citealt{hd142527biller,hd142527close}) should be viewed as \textit{upper} limits only. To determine the lower limit on the companion mass, one would need to detect and subtract the contribution to the total light from the dust near the companion. Unfortunately, this is a daunting task because PSF subtraction on a faint \textit{secondary} at $<$ 0$\farcs$ 1 is extremely difficult.
Nonetheless, we can still make some inferences on the physical processes that would be occurring in the circumsecondary environment depending on the mass of the companion. Indeed the disk morphology and gap width depend uniquely on the binary mass ratio and orbital eccentricity \citep{eccbinarydisk}. If the companion is a low-mass star, then most of the light we see at $Y$ band is coming from the companion's photosphere, rather than the circumsecondary material. This in turn means that the true fractional polarization, $p$, would be much larger than $p_{min} \approx 10\%$. Since the outer disk also has large fractional polarizations ($\sim$~ 20-50$\%$ \citep{hd142527vltpol2}), this could indicate that the dust near the companion is similar to the dust in the outer disk. Depending on the orbital eccentricity of the companion, which can be constrained in a few more years, the dust near the companion might have been swept up from the outer disk along its orbit.
If, on the other hand, the companion is a gas giant planet or protoplanet, then the light we see at $Y$ band (and at other wavelengths) is dominated by the circumsecondary dust, meaning the true fractional polarization would be small. This could indicate that the dust near the companion is \textit{different} from the dust in the outer disk. The dust near the companion might then originate from the inner disk. This would suggest that dust grains from the outer disk are not following the gap-crossing gas \citep{hd142527streamers}. It might also mean that multiple planets are responsible for the observed wide disk gap, since photoevaporation is unlikely in this accreting system \citep{dodsondynamics}.
This intriguing system and its multiple components must be monitored and observed at additional wavelengths (e.g., with GPI, MagAO, and/or SPHERE) so that these differing physical processes can be distinguished. The detection of the companion and nearby dust in polarized light in just 12 minutes of integration at $<$ 0$\farcs$ 1 suggests that ODD in concert with ADI+PCA can be a powerful tool for detecting dust around off-axis point-sources. In particular, older planets with their own circumplanetary disks or rings may even be detectable by current facilities like GPI in the coming years.
\acknowledgments
We are grateful to Marshall Perrin, Fredrik Rantakyro, Pascale Hibon, and the GPI science and instrument teams for their help obtaining, processing, and reducing the data. We thank the referee for helpful comments and suggestions.
\section{Package options}
\newitem Package Option: \texttt{obeyspaces}
Ordinarily, all spaces are ignored in the url-text. The
``\texttt{[obeyspaces]}'' option allows spaces, but may introduce
spurious spaces when a url containing ``\cs{}'' characters is given in
the argument to another command.
So if you need to obey spaces you can say
``\cs{usepackage}\texttt{[obeyspaces]\char`\{url\char`\}}'', and if
you need both spaces and backslashes, use a defined-url.
\newitem Package Option: \texttt{hyphens}
Ordinarily, breaks are not allowed after ``\texttt{-}'' characters
because this leads to confusion. (Is the ``\texttt{-}'' part of the
address or just a hyphen?)
The package option ``\texttt{[hyphens]}'' allows breaks after explicit
hyphen characters. The \cs{url} command will \textbf{never ever}
hyphenate words.
\newitem Package Option: \texttt{spaces}
Likewise, given the ``\texttt{[obeyspaces]}'' option, breaks are not
usually allowed after the spaces, but if you give the options
``\texttt{[obeyspaces,spaces]}'', \cs{url} will allow breaks at those
spaces.
\begin{quote}
Note that it seems logical to allow the sole option
``\texttt{[spaces]}'' to let input spaces indicate break points, but
not to display them in the output. This would be easy to implement,
but is left out to avoid(?)\ confusion.
\end{quote}
\newitem Package Option: \texttt{lowtilde}
Normal treatment of the \verb+~+ character is to use the font's
``\cs{textasciitilde}'' character, if it has one (or claims to).
Otherwise, the character is faked using a mathematical ``\cs{sim}''.
The ``\texttt{[lowtilde]}'' option causes a faked character to be used
always (and a bit lower than usual).
\newitem Package Option: \texttt{allowmove}
This option suppresses the test for \cs{url} being used in a so-called
moving argument (check ``fragile command''). Using it will enable \cs{url}
to function in more contexts, but when it does fail, the error message
may be incomprehensible.
\section{Defining a defined-url}
Take for example the email address ``\url{mysel
which could not be given (using ``\cs{url}'' or ``\cs{verb}'') in a
caption or parbox due to the percent sign. This address can be
predefined with
\begin{quote}
\verb|\urldef{\myself}\url{mysel
\verb+\urldef{\myself}\url|mysel
\end{quote}
and then you may use ``\cs{myself}'' instead of
``\verb+\url{mysel
in an argument, and even in a moving argument like a caption because a
defined-url is robust.
\section{Style}
You can switch the style of printing using ``\verb+\urlstyle{+$xx$\verb+}+'',
where ``$xx$'' can be any defined style. The pre-defined styles are
``\texttt{tt}'', ``\texttt{rm}'', ``\texttt{sf}'' and ``\texttt{same}''
which all allow the same linebreaks but use different fonts~--- the
first three select a specific font and the ``\texttt{same}'' style
uses the current text font. You can define your own styles with
different fonts and/or line-breaking by following the explanations
below. The ``\cs{url}'' command follows whatever the currently-set
style dictates.
\section{Alternate commands}
It may be desireable to have different things treated differently, each
in a predefined style; e.g., if you want directory paths to always be
in typewriter and email addresses to be roman, then you would define new
url-like commands as follows:
\begin{quote}
\verb+\DeclareUrlCommand+\meta{command}\verb+{+\meta{settings}\verb+}+\\
\verb+\DeclareUrlCommand\email{\urlstyle{rm}}+\\
\verb+\DeclareUrlCommand\directory{\urlstyle{tt}}+.
\end{quote}
In fact, this \cs{directory} example is exactly the \cs{path}
definition which might be pre-defined by the package. Furthermore,
basic \cs{url} is defined with
\begin{quote}
\verb+\DeclareUrlCommand\url{}+,
\end{quote}
without any \emph{settings}, so it uses whatever \cs{urlstyle}
and other settings are already in effect.
You can make a defined-url for these other styles, using the usual
\cs{urldef} command as in this example:
\begin{quote}
\verb+\urldef{\myself}{\email}{mysel
\end{quote}
which makes \cs{myself} act like
\verb+\email{mysel
if the \cs{email} command is defined as above. The \cs{myself}
command would then be robust.
\section{Defining styles}
Before describing how to customize the printing style, it is best to
mention something about the unusual implementation of \cs{url}. Although
the material is textual in nature, and the font specification required
is a text-font command, the text is actually typeset in \emph{math} mode.
This allows the context-sensitive linebreaking, but also accounts for
the default behavior of ignoring spaces. (Maybe that underlying design
will eventually change.) Now on to defining styles.
To change the font or the list of characters that allow linebreaks, you
could redefine the commands \cs{UrlFont}, \cs{UrlBreaks},
\cs{UrlSpecials}, etc., directly in the document, but it is better to
define a new `url-style' (following the example of \cs{url@ttstyle}
and \cs{url@rmstyle}) which defines all of \cs{UrlBigbreaks},
\cs{UrlNoBreaks}, \cs{UrlBreaks}, \cs{UrlSpecials}, and \cs{UrlFont}.
\subsection{Changing font}
The \cs{UrlFont} command selects the font. The definition of
\cs{UrlFont} done by the pre-defined styles varies to cope with a
variety of \LaTeX{} font selection schemes, but it could be as simple
as \verb+\def\UrlFont{\tt}+. Depending on the font selected, some
characters may need to be defined in the \cs{UrlSpecials} list because
many fonts don't contain all the standard input characters.
\subsection{Changing linebreaks}
The list of characters after which line-breaks are permitted is
given by the two commands (list macros)
\cs{UrlBreaks} and \cs{UrlBigBreaks}. They consist of repeating
\cs{do}\cs{c} for each relevant character \texttt{c}.
The differences are that `BigBreaks' typically have a lower penalty (more
easily chosen) and do not break within a repeating sequence (e.g.,
``\verb+DEC::NODE+'').
(For gurus: `BigBreaks' are treated as mathrels while `Breaks' are mathbins;
see \textit{The TeXbook}, p.\,170.) The result is that a series of
consecutive `BigBreak'
characters will break at the end and only at the end; a series of
`Break' characters will break after the first and after every following
\emph{pair}; there will be no break between a `Break' character and a
following `BigBreak' char; breaks are permitted when a `BigBreak'
character is followed by `Break' or any other char. In the case
of \texttt{http://} it doesn't matter whether \texttt{:} is a
`Break' or `BigBreak'~--- the breaks are the same in either case; but
for (now ancient) \emph{DECnet} addresses using \texttt{::} it was
important to prevent breaks \emph{between} the colons, and that is why
colons are `BigBreaks'. (The only other `BigBreak' character is,
optionally, the hyphen; slashes are regular `Break's.)
It is possible for characters to prevent breaks after the next
following character (this is used for parentheses). Specify these in
\cs{UrlNoBreaks}.
You can allow some spacing around the breakable characters by assigning
\begin{quote}
\verb+\Urlmuskip = 0mu plus 1mu+
\end{quote}
(with \texttt{mu} units because of math mode).
You can change the penalties used for BigBreaks and Breaks by assigning
\begin{quote}
\verb+\mathchardef\UrlBreakPenalty=100+\\
\verb+\mathchardef\UrlBigBreakPenalty=100+
\end{quote}
The default penalties are \cs{binoppenalty} and \cs{relpenalty}.
These have such odd non-\LaTeX{} syntax because I don't expect people
to need to change them often. (The \verb+\mathchardef+ does not relate to
math mode; it is only a way to store a number without consuming registers.)
\subsubsection{Arbitrary character actions}
You can do arbitrarily complex things with characters by specifying
their definition(s) in \cs{UrlSpecials}. This makes them `active' in
math mode (mathcode \texttt{"8000}). The format for setting
each special character \texttt{c} is:
\verb+\do\c{+\meta{definition}\verb+}+, but other definitions not
following this style can also be included.
Here is an example to make ``\texttt{!}''\ inside \cs{url} force a line break
instead of being treated verbatim (it uses \LaTeX's \cs{g@addto@macro}):
\begin{quote}
\verb+\makeatletter \g@addto@macro\UrlSpecials{\do\!{\newline}}+
\end{quote}
Here is another overly-complicated example to put extra flexible
muglue around each ``\texttt{/}'' character, except when followed
by another ``\texttt{/}'', as in ``\texttt{http://}'', where extra
spacing looks poor.
\begin{quote}
\begin{verbatim}
\newmuskip\Urlslashmuskip
\Urlslashmuskip=2mu plus2mu minus2mu
\g@addto@macro\UrlSpecials{\do\/{\futurelet\Urlssnext\finishUrlspaceyslash}}
\def\futurelet\Urlssnext\finishUrlspaceyslash{\futurelet\Urlssnext\finishUrlspaceyslash}
\def\finishUrlspaceyslash{%
\mskip\Urlslashmuskip
\mathchar8239
\ifx\Urlssnext/\mskip-\Urlslashmuskip
\else\mskip\Urlslashmuskip \fi
}
\end{verbatim}
\end{quote}
If this sounds confusing~\dots{} well, it is! But I hope you
won't need to redefine breakpoints~--- the default assignments seem to
work well for a wide variety of applications. If you do need to make
changes, you can test for breakpoints using regular math mode and the
characters ``\texttt{+=(a}''.
\section{Yet more flexibility}
You can also customize the presentation of verbatim text by defining
\cs{UrlRight} and/or \cs{UrlLeft}. An example for ISO formatting of
urls surrounded by \verb+< >+ is
\begin{quote}
\begin{verbatim}
\DeclareUrlCommand\url{\def\UrlLeft{<url:\ }\def\UrlRight{>}%
\urlstyle{tt}}
\end{verbatim}
\end{quote}
The meanings of \cs{UrlLeft} and \cs{UrlRight} are \emph{not}
reproduced verbatim. This lets you use formatting commands there, but
you must be careful not to use \TeX's special characters
(\verb+\^
to reprocess the verbatim text, but the format of the definition is special:
\begin{quote}
\verb+\def\UrlLeft#1\UrlRight{+\,\dots\ do things with \verb+#1+ \dots\,\verb+}+
\end{quote}
Yes, that is \verb+#1+ followed by \cs{UrlRight} then the definition (a \TeX\
macro with delimited arguments). For example, to produce a hyper\TeX\ hypertext
link:
\begin{quote}
\verb+\def\UrlLeft#1\UrlRight
\verb+ \special{html:<a href="#1">}#1\special{html:</a>}}+
\end{quote}
Using this technique, \path{url.sty} can provide a convenient
interface for performing various operations on verbatim text. You
don't even need to print out the argument! For greatest efficiency in
such obscure applications, you can define a null url-style where all
the lists like \cs{UrlBreaks} are empty.
Please note that this method is \emph{not} how the hyperref package
manages urls for its \cs{url} command, even though it makes use of
\path{url.sty}. Instead, hyperref's \cs{url} reads its argument in
a less-verbatim manner than described above, produces its hyperlink,
and invokes \cs{nolinkurl} to format the text. \cs{nolinkurl} is
the \cs{url} command descibed herein.
\end{document}
|
\section{Introduction}
The axion $a$ appears in the Peccei-Quinn (PQ) mechanism to solve the
strong CP problem in QCD~\cite{Peccei:1977hh,Kim:1986ax} via the
following interaction
\begin{equation}
{\cal L}_{\rm PQ} = \frac{\alpha_s}{16\pi F_a}
a \epsilon^{\mu\nu\rho\sigma} F_{\mu\nu}^{a} F_{\rho\sigma}^{a},
\end{equation}
where $\alpha_s$ is the QCD fine-structure constant, $F_a$ is the
decay constant of axion, and $F_{\rho\sigma}^{a}$ is the
field-strength tensor of gluon. The axion predicts various effects on
cosmology~\cite{Kawasaki:2013ae}. In particular, it is a good
candidate of cold dark matter (CDM) in the
universe~\cite{Preskill:1982cy,Turner:1985si}. If the PQ symmetry is
broken during inflation, the axion obtains isocurvature
fluctuations~\cite{Axenides:1983hj,Seckel:1985tj,Linde:1985yf} and the
high-scale inflation indicated by the BICEP2~\cite{Ade:2014xna} yields
too large isocurvature fluctuation inconsistent with observations~\cite{Kawasaki:2008sn,Hikage:2012be}.\footnote{ See, however,
Sec.~\ref{sec:dis} for more on this issue. }
A more natural situation is that the PQ symmetry is restored during
inflation. Actually, for example, the PQ field can have a (positive)
Hubble mass through the Planck-suppressed coupling to the inflaton,
which easily stabilizes the PQ scalar at the origin during inflation.
Then there is no axion isocurvature problem. Instead, the PQ symmetry
breaking after inflation produces topological defects: axionic strings
and axionic domain walls. The formation of stable domain walls cause
cosmological disaster, hence the domain wall number must be equal to
one so that the string-wall system collapses soon after the
formation~\cite{Sikivie:1982qv}.\footnote{ One can introduce an
explicit PQ breaking term to make domain walls unstable even in the
case where the domain wall number is larger than one. However, it
changes the potential minimum of the axion and the $\theta$ angle
reappears. In order to make domain walls harmless while the
$\theta$ angle remains small, some level of tuning is
required~\cite{Hiramatsu:2012sc}. We do not consider such a case in
this paper. } It is shown that the axions radiated from the
string-wall system gives a dominant contribution to the relic axion
CDM density and it constrains the PQ scale as~\cite{Hiramatsu:2012gg}
\begin{equation}
F_a \lesssim (2.0-3.8)\times 10^{10}\,{\rm GeV}.
\end{equation}
If the curvature of the potential of the PQ scalar field at the origin is smaller than its
vacuum expectation value (VEV) times its coupling to particles in
thermal bath, the thermal inflation is likely to take place before the
PQ phase transition. For instance, in supersymmetry (SUSY), the
radial component of the PQ scalar is often massless in the SUSY limit
and can obtain a soft SUSY breaking mass, which we call saxion.
In a class of SUSY axion models, if the PQ symmetry is restored during
inflation, the saxion is trapped at the origin due to thermal effects
and it causes a brief period of late-time inflation, called thermal
inflation~\cite{Yamamoto:1985rd,Lazarides:1985ja,Lyth:1995hj,
Choi:1996vz,Chun:2000jr,Kim:2008yu}, before the PQ phase transition.
Even in the non-SUSY case, thermal inflation may take place if the
self coupling constant of the PQ scalar is smaller than its coupling
to particles in thermal bath. (We call the
radial component of the PQ scalar as saxion even in the non-SUSY
case.) After thermal inflation ends, the saxion coherent oscillation
dominates the universe and finally the saxion decay reheats the
universe.
However, this scenario does not always work.
This is because the saxion often dominantly decays into the axion pair,
resulting in the axion dominated universe, which contradicts with observational constraint on the amount of dark radiation.
In this paper, we study how to avoid the overproduction of axion dark
radiation with some examples. We show that, by taking account of the
thermal dissipation effect on the
saxion~\cite{Moroi:2012vu,Mukaida:2012qn,Moroi:2013tea}, interactions
with the thermal plasma can efficiently dissipate the energy of the
saxion coherent oscillation into thermal plasma without producing too
much axionic dark radiation: namely the PQ scalar can participate in
the thermal plasma again even after the PQ phase transition. In
addition, we also point out that if there exists a heavy CP-odd
scalar, whose existence depends on the stabilization mechanism of the
saxion potential, the overproduction constraint can be further relaxed
owing to its late time decay.
On the other hand, in a class of SUSY axion models, if the PQ scalar
participates in the thermal plasma after the PQ phase transition, the
axino that might be protected by the (approximate) R-parity will be
thermally populated, and it could potentially cause the overproduction
problem depending on the stabilization of saxion. We show that the
axino overproduction can be avoided with some concrete models.
\section{Basic ingredients} \label{sec:cos}
\subsection{
Decay and dissipation rates in thermal bath
}
In this paper we consider the hadronic axion model~\cite{Kim:1979if}.
We discuss the saxion dynamics with the following Lagrangian
\begin{equation}
\mathcal L =|\partial \phi|^2
- (\lambda \phi \Psi\bar \Psi + {\rm h.c.})
+ m_\phi^2|\phi|^2 - V_{\rm stab}(\phi),
\end{equation}
where $\Psi$ and $\bar\Psi$ are PQ quarks with (anti-)fundamental
representations of color SU(3), and $V_{\rm stab}$ denotes the
potential term that stabilizes the saxion $\phi$ at appropriate scale
$\langle|\phi|\rangle \equiv f_a = F_a/\sqrt{2}$. We take $f_a\sim 10^{9-10}$\,GeV to avoid the
cosmological and astrophysical constraints. In this section, we
concentrate on rather general aspects of the saxion dynamics which
does not depend on the detail of $V_\text{stab}$. In the next section
we will discuss $V_{\rm stab}$.
Let us suppose that $\phi$ is placed at the origin during inflation
due, for example, to the Hubble-induced mass term. Note that even if
$\phi$ is placed far from the origin during inflation, it is
eventually trapped at the origin $\phi = 0$ due to the efficient
particle production at the enhanced symmetry point and its
back reaction onto $\phi$~\cite{Moroi:2013tea} unless the coupling,
$\lambda$, or the reheating temperature, $T_\text{R}$, is suppressed.
(See also Sec.~\ref{sec:dis}.) Since $\Psi$ and $\bar\Psi$ are massless
there, they are thermalized after the reheating. It generates the
thermal mass for $\phi$ as $m_T \sim \lambda T$. Thermal inflation
takes place at the temperature $T_{\rm end} < T < T_{\rm beg}$ where
$T_{\rm beg} \sim \sqrt{m_\phi f_a}$ and $T_{\rm end} \sim
m_\phi/\lambda$.\footnote{Here we have assumed that the reheating
temperature is higher than $T_{\rm beg}$.}
After thermal inflation ends, the saxion begins a coherent oscillation
around the potential minimum. The perturbative decay rate of the
saxion into the axion pair is given by~\cite{Chun:1995hc}
\begin{equation}
\Gamma_{\phi \to 2a} = \frac{1}{64\pi} \frac{m_s^3}{f_a^2},
\end{equation}
where $m_s$ is the saxion mass around the potential minimum, which is
same order of $m_\phi$. In the following, we do not distinguish $m_s$
from $m_\phi$ unless otherwise stated since it depends on the
stabilization of PQ scalar potential. It also decays into the gluon
pair, but such a decay mode is subdominant because such a process is
loop-suppressed. Therefore the universe would be dominated by the
axion dark radiation if the saxion perturbatively decays into the
axion pair.
Fortunately, the axion overproduction constraint may be relaxed by
appropriately taking account of thermal dissipation effect on the
saxion in the thermal
plasma~\cite{Moroi:2012vu,Mukaida:2012qn,Moroi:2013tea}. The dominant
dissipation comes from the interaction with the thermal plasma via the
dimension five operator suppressed by $f_a$, which is obtained from
integrating out $\Psi$ and $\bar\Psi$ around $\left< |\phi| \right> =
f_a$. Then, as one can guess from the dimensional analysis, the
reaction rate with the thermal plasma may be proportional to
$T^3/f_a^2$~\cite{Anisimov:2000wx}. In fact, for $m_\phi \gg g_s^2
T$, the Landau cut contribution also becomes important, which
corresponds to the inverse processes of thermal saxion
production~\cite{Graf:2012hb} proportional to $T^3 / f_a^2$.\footnote{
For a larger saxion mass, $m_\phi \gg g_s T$, the perturbative decay
into two gluons becomes important.
} On the opposite limit, the pole contribution regulated by its
thermal width gives the dominant contribution, and the detailed
resummation leads to the following dissipation rate of the saxion
coherent oscillation \cite{Moore:2008ws,Laine:2010cq}:
\begin{equation}
\Gamma^{\rm (dis)}_\phi \simeq \frac{b\alpha_s^2 T^3}{f_a^2}\times
\begin{cases}
1 &\text{for}~~ m_\phi \ll g_s^4 T \\
\sqrt{g_s^4 T / m_\phi} &\text{for}~~ g_s^4 T \ll m_\phi \ll g_s^2 T
\end{cases},
\end{equation}
where $b$ is a numerical constant.\footnote{
Here we have assumed that
the oscillation period is much slower than the interaction time
scale of the thermal plasma: $m_s \ll T$,
which is marginally satisfied during the course of dynamics.
} In the case of quark gluon plasma, $b\simeq 1/(32\pi^2 \log \alpha_s^{-1})$ \cite{Laine:2010cq}; we
adopt this value of $b$ in our numerical calculation.\footnote
{Strictly speaking, if the PQ quarks are also charged under
SU(2)$_\text{L}$, there is a contribution from the weak gauge
interaction. In addition, in a class of SUSY axion models, there
exist contributions from PQ squarks and gauginos. We neglect those
contributions in the following discussion since they are
model-dependent.}
The axions, which are produced non-thermally by the decay of the
saxion oscillation, also interact with the thermal plasma. Since
their typical energy/momentum are given by $m_\phi$ that may be much
smaller than the cosmic temperature at their production, the dissipation rate
of non-thermally produced axions might be different from axion thermal
production rate studied in Refs.~\cite{Graf:2010tv,Salvio:2013iaa}.
For $p \lesssim g_s^2 T$, where $p$ is the typical momentum of the axion, the Landau cut contribution which
corresponds to the axion thermal production may be suppressed.
Rather, the pole contribution regulated by its thermal width may give
the dominant contribution as in the case of the above saxion
oscillation. However, contrary to the saxion case, the interaction
term can be expressed as $aF_{\mu\nu}^a\tilde F^{a\mu\nu}= a\partial_\mu K^\mu\sim (\partial_\mu a) K^\mu$, and hence the axion
energy/momentum times temperature should be picked up rather than the
thermal mass squared of gauge bosons. As a result, we expect a
suppression factor, $p^2 / (g_s^4 T^2)$, for the non-thermally
produced axion dissipation rate compared with the saxion dissipation
rate. Using one-loop computation with the Breit-Wigner
approximation for the spectral function of gauge bosons, we checked
that the suppression factor exists. (See Appendix \ref{sec:app}.)
Our estimation of the axion dissipation rate is given by
\begin{align}
\Gamma_a^\text{(dis)} = \frac{\alpha_s^2 T^3}{32 \pi^2 f_a^2}
\times
C
\frac{p^2}{g_s^4 T^2} f(x),
\label{Gamma_adis}
\end{align}
where $x=p/(g_s^4 T)$, and the function $f(x)$ is
given in the Appendix [Eq.~\eqref{eq:function}].
In our numerical analysis, we take
\begin{align}
p = \frac{m_\phi}{2} \text{min} \left( 1, \frac{a_\text{dec}}{a(t)} \right),
\end{align}
with $a_\text{dec}$ and $a(t)$ being the scale factor at the cosmic
time $\Gamma_{\phi\rightarrow 2a}^{-1}$ and at the time $t$,
respectively.
In addition, we note here that Eq.\ \eqref{Gamma_adis} merely provides
an order-of-estimate of the dissipation rate of axion. In order to
take account of the uncertainty, we explicitly introduce the parameter
$C \sim {\cal O} (1)$.
\subsection{
Boltzmann equations
}
After the thermal inflation, the energy densities of the saxion
oscillation, axion, and radiation, which are denoted as $\rho_\phi$,
$\rho_a$, and $\rho_r$, respectively, evolve as
\begin{align}
&\dot\rho_\phi + 3H \rho_\phi =
- (\Gamma_\phi^{\rm (dis)} + \Gamma_{\phi\to 2a}) \rho_\phi
\label{rhophidot}
\\
&\dot\rho_a + 4H\rho_a =
\Gamma_{\phi\to 2a}\rho_\phi - \Gamma_a^{\rm (dis)}\rho_a,
\label{rhoadot}
\\
&\dot\rho_r + 4H\rho_r =
\Gamma_\phi^{\rm (dis)}\rho_\phi + \Gamma_a^{\rm (dis)}\rho_a,
\label{rhordot}
\end{align}
where $H$ is the expansion rate of the universe.
Thus, after a few Hubble times after the PQ phase transition, due to the dissipation effect, the
temperature increases to
\begin{align}
T_\text{max}
\sim \min \left[ T_c, \,
\left( \frac{30}{\pi^2 g_\ast} \right)^{\frac{1}{4}}
\sqrt{m_\phi f_a}\right],
\end{align}
where
\begin{align}
T_c = \left( \frac{30}{\pi^2 g_\ast} \right)
\frac{b\alpha_s^2 m_\phi M_P}{f_a}
\sim 10^7\,{\rm GeV} \left( \frac{200}{g_\ast} \right)
\left( \frac{m_\phi}{1\,{\rm PeV}} \right)
\left( \frac{10^{10}\,{\rm GeV}}{f_a} \right),
\end{align}
with $M_P\simeq 2.4\times 10^{18}\ {\rm GeV}$ being the reduced Planck
scale.
Notice that $T_\text{max}\sim T_c$
when the dissipation rate is smaller than the expansion rate for
$T\sim T_c$ so that the effect of the dissipation is ineffective. If
the dissipation rate can become larger than the Hubble parameter, the
energy density of the saxion coherent oscillation is expected to be
transferred to the radiation within a few Hubble time. In other
words, the PQ scalar takes part in the thermal plasma again. The
condition is written as
\begin{align}
\label{eq:cond1}
\left.\frac{\Gamma^{\rm (dis)}_\phi}{H}\right |_{T=T_{c}} \sim
\left( \frac{30}{\pi^2 g_\ast} \right)^3
\frac{( b\alpha_s^2 m_\phi^{1/2} )^4 M_P^4}{f_a^6}
\sim
\left( \frac{200}{g_\ast} \right)^3
\left( \frac{m_\phi}{3\,{\rm PeV}} \right)^2
\left( \frac{10^{10}\,{\rm GeV}}{f_a} \right)^6 \gtrsim 1.
\end{align}
In the above estimation, we have implicitly assumed that the saxion
dominates the universe before the dissipation becomes effective.
However, in general, it is possible that the saxion dominantly decays
into axions at first, and then the axions which dominate the universe
transport their energy into radiation. The decay mode into axion
dominates when
\begin{align}
\left. \frac{\Gamma^\text{(dis)}_\phi}{\Gamma_{\phi \to 2a}}
\right|_{T \sim \sqrt{m_\phi f_a}}
&= \left( \frac{30}{\pi^2 g_\ast} \right)^{3/4}
\left( 64\pi b \alpha_s^2 \right)
\left( \frac{f_a}{m_\phi} \right)^{3/2} \nonumber \\
\label{eq:axion_dom}
&\sim 10
\left( \frac{200}{g_\ast} \right)^{4/3}
\left( \frac{10\,\text{PeV}}{m_\phi} \right)^{3/2}
\left( \frac{f_a}{10^{10}\,\text{GeV}} \right)^{3/2}
\lesssim 1.
\end{align}
Note that the ratio between the saxion decay rate into the axion pair and
the Hubble parameter $H$ at the end of thermal inflation is given by
\begin{equation}
\left.\frac{\Gamma_{\phi \to 2a}}{H}\right |_{T=T_{\rm end}}
\sim \frac{m_\phi^2 M_P}{64\pi f_a^3} \sim
10^{-2} \left( \frac{m_\phi}{1\,{\rm PeV}} \right)^2
\left( \frac{10^{10}\,{\rm GeV}}{f_a} \right)^3.
\end{equation}
If this ratio is larger than one, and also if $\Gamma_{\phi
\to 2a}$ is larger than $\Gamma_\phi^{\rm (dis)}$, the saxion soon
decays into the axion pair within one Hubble time.
In this case, the temperature can be estimated as
\begin{align}
T_\text{max} \sim \min\left[ \delta T_{c},\,
\left( \frac{30}{\pi^2 g_\ast} \right)^{\frac{1}{4}}
\sqrt{m_\phi f_a}
\right],
\end{align}
where $\delta$ is a numerical factor; $\delta \propto
(f_a /M_P)^{n/(n+1)}$ with $n = 0$ -- $2$ for $f(x) \propto
x^{n-2}$. The condition for axion thermalization is given by
\begin{align}
\label{eq:cond2}
\left.\frac{\Gamma^{\rm (dis)}_a}{H}\right |_{T=\delta T_{c}} \sim
\left( \frac{30}{\pi^2 g_\ast} \right)^3
\frac{( \delta b\alpha_s^2 m_\phi^{1/2} )^4 M_P^4}{f_a^6}
\sim
\delta^4
\left( \frac{200}{g_\ast} \right)^3
\left( \frac{m_\phi}{3\,{\rm PeV}} \right)^2
\left( \frac{10^{10}\,{\rm GeV}}{f_a} \right)^6 \gtrsim 1.
\end{align}
If these conditions [Eqs.~\eqref{eq:cond1}, \eqref{eq:cond2}] are satisfied, the temperature increases up to
$T\sim T_\text{max}$ within a few Hubble time after thermal inflation and the
saxion coherent oscillation disappears without producing too much
axion dark radiation.
As one can see, in the case of the axion CDM,
the mass scale $m_\phi$ should be larger than ${\cal O}(1)$\,PeV
in order for the PQ scalar to take part in the thermal plasma,\footnote{
\label{fn:thermal}
Thermal saxions decay into axions immediately
when they become non-relativistic,
which results in tiny contribution to dark radiation.
Thermal axions also have tiny contribution to dark radiation.
} which implies the maximum temperature to be $T_\text{max} \sim {\cal
O}(10^{7})$\,GeV for $m_\phi \sim {\cal O} (1)$\,PeV.
Note that such a value of $m_\phi$ is suggested by high-scale SUSY breaking models~\cite{Ibe:2011aa,ArkaniHamed:2012gw,Arvanitaki:2012ps}.
The detailed discussion on which parameters the overproduction of axion dark
radiation can be avoided is performed with some examples in the
following, since it is model dependent.
Before going into details of models, let us briefly give general
comments. PQ quarks, $\Psi$ and $\bar\Psi$, become massive after the
saxion obtains a VEV and they can soon decay if there is a mixing
between PQ quarks and SM fermions~\cite{Moroi:2013tea}. In a class of
SUSY axion models, for $(m_\phi, f_a) \sim ({\cal O} (1)\,\text{PeV} ,
{\cal O} (10^{10})\,\text{GeV})$, gravitinos are thermally
produced~\cite{Bolz:2000fu}, but its abundance is not so large and it
does not cause cosmological problems for $m_{3/2} \sim \mathcal
O(100)\,$TeV. The axion multiplet, saxions, axions and axinos, will
also be thermally populated if the dissipative effect is efficient.
In particular, the axino whose stability might be protected by the
(approximate) R-parity must decay well before
Big-Bang nucleosynthesis (BBN) to avoid
cosmological constraints. The axino mass crucially depends on the
saxion stabilization model. Below we will discuss it with two models
(Model 2 and 3).
\section{Cosmology: model-dependent discussion
}
In the following subsections, we study in detail the dynamics of the
saxion after the thermal inflation, and show how the overproduction
constraint of axion dark radiation is relaxed with some bench mark
models. First, we consider the simple non-SUSY case (Model 1), where
it is shown that the overproduction constraint is relaxed by
interactions with the thermal plasma. Then, we consider SUSY axion
models with two stabilization mechanisms of the saxion potential:
radiative stabilization (Model 2) and higher dimensional
superpotential with another PQ field (Model 3). In particular, in the
latter case (Model 3), we show that the overproduction constraint is
further relaxed by the late time decay of the heavy CP-odd scalar.
In addition,
in a class of SUSY axion models,
there exists the axino which might be protected by the (approximate) R-parity,
and hence it could potentially overclose the universe due to the thermal production,
if the dissipation of the PQ scalar is efficient.
Since the axino overproduction problem crucially depends on the stabilization mechanism of the saxion,
we also discuss how to avoid this problem separately with two cases (Model 2 and 3).
\subsection{Model 1}
Let us first consider the non-SUSY case where the saxion potential is
simply given by
\begin{align}
\label{eq:nonsusy}
V = \frac{m_\phi^2}{2 f_a^2} \left( |\phi|^2 - f_a^2 \right)^2.
\end{align}
In this case, all the necessary ingredients are already given in the
previous subsection. Hence one can calculate the effective neutrino
number of axion dark radiation for each parameter $(m_\phi, f_a)$ by
numerically solving Eqs.~\eqref{rhophidot} -- \eqref{rhordot}.
\begin{figure}[th]
\centering
\subfigure[{\bf Left Panel}: $(m_\phi, f_a)=(50\, \text{PeV},10^{10}\, \text{GeV})$]{
\includegraphics[width=0.45\columnwidth,clip]{ev_b1_50pev_fa10.eps}
\label{fig:left}}
\subfigure[{\bf Right Panel}: $(m_\phi, f_a)=(10\, \text{TeV},5\times10^{8}\, \text{GeV})$]{
\includegraphics[width=0.45\columnwidth,clip]{ev_b1_10tev_fa5e8.eps}
\label{fig:right}}
\caption{\small
{\bf Left/Right Panel} shows evolution of various quantities
as a function of $H$ normalized by
one at the PQ phase transition, $H_\text{PT}$:
$\rho_\phi/\rho_{\phi, \text{PT}}$ [black],
$\rho_\text{rad}/\rho_{\phi, \text{PT}}$ [{\color[rgb]{1.000000,0.400000,0.400000}pink}],
$\rho_a/\rho_{\phi,\text{PT}}$ [{\color{blue}blue}];
with $\rho_\bullet$ being the energy density of $\bullet$.
Note that $\rho_\phi$ and $\rho_a$ denote the energy density of the
saxion coherent oscillation and that of
the axion produced from it respectively,
and both does not contain that from thermal plasma.
See also footnote~\ref{fn:thermal}.
}
\label{fig:ev}
\end{figure}
The results are shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:ev}, which shows evolution of
various quantities after the PQ phase transition as a function of
Hubble time $H^{-1}$ normalized by that at the PQ phase transition,
$H_\text{PT}^{-1}$. The black, pink and blue lines represent
evolution of the energy densities of the saxion coherent oscillation,
radiation, and the non-thermal axion produced from the saxion coherent
oscillation normalized by that of the initial saxion coherent
oscillation, $\rho_{\phi, \text{PT}}$. In the case with $(m_\phi,f_a)
= (50 \,\text{PeV}, 10^{10} \, \text{GeV})$ [Left Panel of
Fig.~\ref{fig:left}], the saxion coherent oscillation first loses its
energy into axion and radiation within a few Hubble times. Then, the
non-thermally produced axions interact with radiation and reduce their
number. In this specific parameter, the predicted effective number of
extra radiation is $\Delta N_\text{eff} \sim 0.4$. On the other hand,
in the case with $(m_\phi,f_a) = (10 \,\text{TeV}, 5 \times 10^{8} \,
\text{GeV})$ [Right Panel of Fig.~\ref{fig:right}], the saxion
coherent oscillation can lose almost all the energy before the decay
into axions dominates.
The resultant axion dark radiation is $\Delta N_\text{eff} \sim 0.2$.
Fig.~\ref{fig:cntr} shows contour of $\Delta N_{\rm eff}=1$ on
$(m_\phi, f_a)$ plane for $T_{\rm end} = m_\phi$ (corresponding to
$\lambda \sim 1$) (left panel) and $T_{\rm end} = 10m_\phi$
(corresponding to $\lambda \sim 0.1$) (right panel).\footnote
{If $f_a\lesssim T_{\rm end}$, $T_{\rm end}$ becomes larger than
the postulated value due to the thermal mass of $\phi$ generated
by its self coupling. We do not consider such a parameter region.
(In Fig.~\ref{fig:cntr}, such a region is shaded in blue.)}
In the figure, we take account of the fact that our estimation of the
dissipation has uncertainty factor owing to both the model dependence
({\it e.g.,} contributions from other gauge group, gauginos) and
theoretical uncertainties. Thus, we vary the dissipation rate and
show how much the bound changes; for this purpose, we have varied the
$C$-parameter in Eq.\ \eqref{Gamma_adis}. The upper and lower
boundaries of the band shown in Fig.\ \ref{fig:cntr} correspond to
$C=1$ and $C=10$, respectively. Above the band, $\Delta N_\text{eff}$
becomes smaller than one. The black dashed line represents the
contour $\Delta N_\text{eff} = 1$ without the thermal dissipation. We
can see that the region with small enough $\Delta N_{\rm eff}$ is
significantly enlarged by taking account of the effect of axion
dissipation. In particular, in the case where $\phi$ couples to the
PQ fermions relatively strongly (i.e, $\lambda\sim 1$), $m_\phi$ is
required to be close to $f_a$ if the effect of thermal dissipation is
neglected; this is in order to avoid the saxion domination after the
PQ phase transition. With the proper inclusion of the effects of
thermal dissipation, $m_\phi$ much smaller than $f_a$ becomes allowed
even if $\lambda\sim 1$.
\begin{figure}[th]
\centering
\subfigure[{\bf Left Panel}: $T_{\rm end} = m_\phi$]{
\includegraphics[width=0.45\columnwidth,clip]{cntr_lam1.eps}
\label{fig:cntr_l}}
\subfigure[{\bf Right Panel}: $T_{\rm end} = 10m_\phi$]{
\includegraphics[width=0.45\columnwidth,clip]{cntr_lam01.eps}
\label{fig:cntr_r}}
\caption{\small {\bf Left} and {\bf Right Panel} shows a contour of
$\Delta N_\text{eff} = 1$ as a function of $(m_\phi, f_a)$ for
$T_{\rm end} = m_\phi$ and $T_{\rm end} = 10m_\phi$ respectively.
The upper and lower boundaries of the band [{\color{Dandelion}yellow}] correspond
to $C=1$ and $C=10$, respectively. Above the band, $\Delta
N_\text{eff}$ becomes smaller than one. The black dashed line
represents the contour $\Delta N_\text{eff} = 1$ without the thermal
dissipation. In the {\color{cyan}blue} shaded region, $T_{\rm end}$ becomes
(typically) larger than the postulated value due to the self
coupling of $\phi$, and hence such a region is irrelevant.}
\label{fig:cntr}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Model 2}
Next, let us consider the SUSY axion model. First, we focus on the
possibility that the running of the soft mass of $\phi$ induces the
radiative symmetry breaking at an appropriate
scale~\cite{Abe:2001cg,Nakamura:2008ey}. We consider the following
superpotential:
\begin{equation}
W_{\rm PQ} = \lambda_Q \phi Q\bar Q + \lambda_L \phi L \bar L,
\end{equation}
where $\phi$ denotes the PQ scalar, $\bar Q (Q)$ and $L (\bar L)$ are
chiral multiplets in the (anti-)fundamental representation of SU(5).
Then, the renormalization group equations (RGEs) for the Yukawa
coupling constants are
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:rge_1}
\begin{split}
\frac{d\lambda_Q}{dt} &= \frac{\lambda_Q}{16\pi^2}
(\gamma_\phi + \gamma_Q + \gamma_{\bar Q}), \\
\frac{d\lambda_L}{dt} &= \frac{\lambda_L}{16\pi^2}
(\gamma_\phi + \gamma_L + \gamma_{\bar L}),
\end{split}
\end{equation}
where $t=\log E$ (with $E$ being the energy scale) and
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:rge_2}
\begin{split}
\gamma_\phi &= 3\lambda_Q^2 + 2\lambda_L^2,\\
\gamma_Q = \gamma_{\bar Q} &= \lambda_Q^2
-\frac{8}{3}g_3^2 -\frac{2}{15}g_1^2 ,\\
\gamma_L = \gamma_{\bar L} &= \lambda_L^2
-\frac{3}{2}g_2^2 -\frac{3}{10}g_1^2.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
In addition, the renormalization group equations for the soft
SUSY breaking parameters are given by
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:rge_3}
\begin{split}
\frac{dm_\phi^2}{dt} &= \frac{1}{8\pi^2}\left[
3\lambda_Q^2(m_\phi^2+m_Q^2+m_{\bar Q}^2) +
2\lambda_L^2(m_\phi^2+m_L^2+m_{\bar L}^2)
\right] ,\\
\frac{dm_Q^2}{dt} = \frac{dm_{\bar Q}^2}{dt} &= \frac{1}{8\pi^2}\left[
\lambda_Q^2(m_\phi^2+m_Q^2+m_{\bar Q}^2)
\right] ,\\
\frac{dm_L^2}{dt} = \frac{dm_{\bar L}^2}{dt} &= \frac{1}{8\pi^2}\left[
\lambda_L^2(m_\phi^2+m_L^2+m_{\bar L}^2)
\right],
\end{split}
\end{equation}
where $m_X$ (with $X=Q,\bar{Q},L,\bar{L}$) denote the soft SUSY
breaking scalar mass parameters for the scalar components in
corresponding chiral multiplet. Here we have ignored gaugino masses
by assuming that gaugino masses are much smaller than those of
sfermions as in the pure gravity mediation model.
In this model, the dynamics of the PQ scalar after the PQ phase
transition is almost the same as the model 1. Therefore, from
Fig.~\ref{fig:cntr}, we can understand the parameter region on
$(m_\phi, f_a)$ plane, where the overproduction of axion dark
radiation is avoided. For instance, the axion CDM implies that the
mass scale, $m_\phi$, should be larger than ${\cal O} (1)$\,PeV. To
see if the radiative symmetry breaking really occurs,
we have solved the
RGEs with the boundary condition at the GUT scale as $m_\phi^2 = m_Q^2
= m_L^2 = (10\,{\rm PeV})^2$ and $\lambda_Q=\lambda_L= 1.0$ and $0.7$.
The result is shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:mphi}. It is seen that
$m_\phi^2$ becomes negative at some intermediate scale. In
particular, for $\lambda_{Q,L}\simeq 0.7$, the VEV of $\phi$ can be
around $10^{10}$\,GeV. Thus the cosmological scenario studied in the
previous section works.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics
width=8cm,
clip]{mphi_.eps}
\caption {\small RGE evolution of the soft mass of the PQ scalar $m_\phi^2$.
Red-solid and green-dashed lines are for $\lambda_{Q,L}(M_{\rm
GUT})=0.7$ and $1$, respectively.}
\label{fig:mphi}
\end{figure}
However, this model suffers from the axino overproduction. In this
model, the axino mass arises only radiatively and is suppressed
compared with the gravitino mass~\cite{Goto:1991gq,Nakamura:2008ey}. It is
estimated as $m_{\tilde a} \sim (5/16\pi^2)^2\lambda^4 m_{3/2}$. Thus
it is lighter than the gauginos and it likely becomes the lightest
SUSY particle (LSP). If the thermal dissipation is effective, the
axion multiplet takes part in the thermal plasma and hence axinos are
thermally populated, which results in overproduction of the axino.
Hence the presence of stable axino LSP is problematic. Below we list
some possibilities to avoid the axino overproduction.
\begin{itemize}
\item
If one introduces another LSP, the problem may be avoided.
For example in a singlet extensions of the minimal SUSY standard model~\cite{Ellwanger:2009dp},
the singlino-like neutralino can be the LSP.
In this case the axino can decay into the singlino LSP through the singlino-gaugino mixing, which is suppressed by the SUSY breaking scale.
The axino decay temperature is then estimated as
\begin{align}
T_{\tilde a} \sim 10^{-2}\,{\rm GeV} ~
\lambda^6\left(\frac{(1{\rm TeV})^2}{\mu M}\right)
\left( \frac{m_{3/2}}{1\,{\rm PeV}} \right)^{3/2} \left( \frac{10^{10}\,{\rm GeV}}{f_a} \right),
\end{align}
where $M$ denotes gaugino mass scale and $\mu$ is the higgsino mass.
In order for the axino to decay well before BBN, relatively light
neutralino mass spectrum is needed. In addition, singlino also has to
decay before BBN, which requires (small) R-parity violation. Note
that if the axino decays after the QCD phase transition, the axion
abundance is diluted and upper bound on the PQ scale is
relaxed~\cite{Kawasaki:1995vt}.
\item
The axino may become heavier if there is a sizable $A$-term,
\begin{equation}
V \supset A_\phi \lambda \phi \Psi \bar\Psi + {\rm h.c.},
\end{equation}
which yields the axino mass as $m_{\tilde a} \sim (\lambda^2/16\pi^2)
A_\phi$~\cite{Goto:1991gq} and it can exceed the anomaly mediation
contribution to the gaugino masses~\cite{Randall:1998uk} if $A_\phi
\sim m_{3/2}$. Actually we naturally have $A_\phi \sim m_{3/2}$ if
the SUSY breaking field $z$ has no gauge quantum number, as in the
Polonyi model. The gauginos are also expected to obtain masses of
$\sim m_{3/2}$, but the axino can be heavier if the coupling between
gaugino and Polonyi field happens to be relatively small. Then the
axino decays into gaugino. Note that, in this case, the assumption on
RGEs, Eqs.~\eqref{eq:rge_1}--\eqref{eq:rge_3}, is marginally satisfied
since the gauginos are lighter than the gravitino. If the Wino is
LSP, Winos produced by the axino decay annihilate efficiently and its
abundance can become smaller than the DM
abundance~\cite{Moroi:2013sla}. In this case, however, there arises a
cosmological Polonyi problem~\cite{Coughlan:1983ci,Banks:1993en} which
cannot be solved even in the presence of thermal inflation. In
Sec.~\ref{sec:dil}, we will discuss this issue and how to solve it.
\end{itemize}
\subsection{Model 3}
Let us consider the following model with two PQ scalar $\phi$ and $\bar\phi$~\cite{Murayama:1992dj}:
\begin{equation}
W_{\rm PQ} =\lambda \phi \Psi\bar \Psi + \frac{\phi^n \bar\phi}{M^{n-2}},
\end{equation}
where $\phi$ and $\bar\phi$ are assumed to have PQ charges of $+1$ and $-n$, respectively, and $M$ is a cutoff scale.
Then the scalar potential is
\begin{equation}
V = -m_\phi^2|\phi|^2 + m_{\bar\phi}^2|\bar\phi|^2 + \frac{|\phi|^{2(n-1)}}{M^{2(n-2)}} \left( |\phi|^2 + n^2|\bar\phi|^2 \right)
+\left\{ (n-2)m_{3/2} \frac{\phi^n\bar\phi}{M^{n-2}} +{\rm h.c.} \right\},
\end{equation}
where the parameters $m_\phi^2$ and $m_{\bar\phi}^2$ are both taken to
be positive. For computational simplicity, we assume $m_{\bar\phi}^2
\ll m_\phi^2$. Then the potential minimum lies at
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
v_\phi \equiv \langle|\phi |\rangle &\simeq \left[
\left( m_\phi^2 + \frac{(n - 2)^2}{n^2}m_{3/2}^2 \right) \frac{M^{2n-4}}{n}
\right]^{\frac{1}{2n-2}}, \\
v_{\bar\phi} \equiv \langle|\bar\phi |\rangle &\simeq v_\phi \frac{n - 2}{n^{3/2}}
\left( \frac{m_\phi^2}{m_{3/2}^2} + \frac{(n - 2)^2}{n^2} \right)^{-1/2}.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
Thus for $n=3$, we obtain $v_\phi \sim v_{\bar\phi} \sim \sqrt{m_\phi M} \sim 10^{10}\,$GeV for
$M \sim 10^{15}\,$GeV and $m_\phi \sim 100$\,TeV.
In this model, the fermionic component of $\phi$ and $\bar\phi$, which
we denote by $\tilde a$ and $\tilde {\bar a}$ and call them as axino,
obtain both Dirac and Majorana masses after PQ scalars get VEVs. Then
the axino masses are generated as $m_{\tilde a} \sim m_\phi$. Since
they are as heavy as the gravitino, they decay into the gluino and
gluon:
\begin{equation}
\Gamma(\tilde a \to \tilde g + g) =
\frac{\alpha_s^2}{16\pi^3}
\frac{m_{\tilde a}^3}{f_a^2}
\left(1- \frac{m_{\tilde g}^2}{m_{\tilde a}^2} \right)^3.
\end{equation}
The axino decay temperature is then estimated as
\begin{equation}
T_{\tilde a} \sim 3 \times 10^5\,{\rm GeV}
\left( \frac{m_{\tilde a}}{1\,{\rm PeV}} \right)^{3/2}
\left( \frac{10^{10}\,{\rm GeV}}{f_a} \right).
\end{equation}
Thus, they are harmless.
Note that the massless axion is a mixture of the angular component of
$\phi$ and $\bar\phi$. The real components of $\phi$ and $\bar\phi$
are also mixed with each other and both $\phi$ and $\bar\phi$ begins a
coherent oscillation after thermal inflation
ends~\cite{Nakayama:2012zc}. Although the dissipation effect acts
only on $\phi$, the time scale of the mixing $(\sim m_\phi^{-1})$ is
much faster than that of the cosmic expansion and hence both the
energy density of $\phi$ and $\bar\phi$ are efficiently dissipated.
Importantly, there also exists a heavy CP-odd scalar $a'$ with a mass $\sim m_\phi$
as a mixture of the angular component of
$\phi$ and $\bar\phi$. After the end of thermal inflation, the heavy CP-odd scalar
may also begin an oscillation with an amplitude $\sim f_a$.
Its dissipation rate is expected to be the same as that of the axion except for the redshift factor,
\begin{align}
\Gamma_{a'}^\text{(dis)}
\simeq \frac{\alpha_s^2 T^3}{32 \pi^2 f_a^2}
\times C \frac{m_\phi^2}{g_s^4 T^2} f(x),
\end{align}
where $x = m_\phi / (g_s^4 T)$.
Hence above the contour shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:cntr}
it is expected to be dissipated away into the thermal plasma.
On the other hand, below this contour
the heavy CP-odd scalar survives from interactions with the thermal plasma,
and later it decays into gluons/gluinos through one-loop processes.
Since the entropy production becomes more significant for a smaller mass, $m_\phi$,
the overproduction of the axion dark radiation can be avoided in all the region shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:cntr}
owing to the combination of the thermal dissipation and of the late time entropy production
from the heavy CP-odd scalar.
Fig.~\ref{fig:ev_md3} shows evolution of same quantities in Fig.~\ref{fig:ev}
plus the energy density of heavy CP-odd scalar after the PQ phase transition
with $(m_\phi, f_a) = (50\,\text{PeV}, 10^{10}\,\text{GeV})$ and $(1\,\text{TeV}, 10^{10}\,\text{GeV})$
in the left and right panel respectively.
Here we have simply assumed that the initial energy density of heavy CP-odd scalar is
the same as that of saxion.
As one can see from the right panel [Fig.~\ref{fig:right_md3}],
the late time decay of the heavy CP-odd scalar successfully dilutes the axion dark radiation.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\subfigure[{\bf Left Panel}: $(m_\phi, f_a)=(50\, \text{PeV},10^{10}\, \text{GeV})$]{
\includegraphics[width=0.45\columnwidth,clip]{evmd3_b1_50pev_fa10.eps}
\label{fig:left_md3}}
\subfigure[{\bf Right Panel}: $(m_\phi, f_a)=(1\, \text{TeV},10^{10}\, \text{GeV})$]{
\includegraphics[width=0.45\columnwidth,clip]{evmd3_b1_1tev_fa10.eps}
\label{fig:right_md3}}
\caption{\small
{\bf Left/Right Panel} shows evolution of various quantities
as a function of $H$ normalized by
one at the PQ phase transition, $H_\text{PT}$:
$\rho_\phi/\rho_{\phi, \text{PT}}$ [black],
$\rho_\text{rad}/\rho_{\phi, \text{PT}}$ [{\color[rgb]{1.000000,0.400000,0.400000}pink}],
$\rho_a/\rho_{\phi,\text{PT}}$ [{\color{blue}blue}],
$\rho_{a'}/\rho_{\phi,\text{PT}}$ [{\color{blue}blue-dashed}],
with $\rho_\bullet$ being the energy density of $\bullet$.
Note that $\rho_\phi$ and $\rho_a$ denote the energy density of the
saxion coherent oscillation and that of
the axion produced from it respectively,
and both does not contain that from thermal plasma.
See also footnote~\ref{fn:thermal}.
}
\label{fig:ev_md3}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Dilution of unwanted relics and baryon asymmetry}
\label{sec:dil}
Thermal inflation dilutes the preexisting unwanted relics such as the
moduli, Polonyi and gravitinos as well as the baryon number.
If we consider the case where the thermal dissipation is efficient,
$f_a$ is relatively small while $m_\phi$ is of the order of PeV or
larger. Then, the $e$-folding number of the thermal inflation
is not so large.
In the present case, the dilution factor $\Delta$ is estimated to be
\begin{equation}
\Delta \sim \left( \frac{\sqrt{m_\phi f_a}}{T_{\rm end}} \right)^3 \sim
10^6 \lambda^3\left( \frac{1\,{\rm PeV}}{m_\phi} \right)^{3/2} \left( \frac{f_a}{10^{10}\,{\rm GeV}} \right)^{3/2}.
\end{equation}
For example, the final baryon asymmetry after thermal inflation is evaluated by multiplying the original baryon asymmetry
by the inverse of this factor:
\begin{equation}
\frac{n_B}{s} = \frac{1}{\Delta}\left( \frac{n_B}{s} \right)_{\rm reh},
\end{equation}
where $(n_B/s)_{\rm reh}$ denotes the baryon-to-entropy ratio evaluated as if there were no thermal inflation.
Since the dilution factor is not so huge in the typical parameters for which the dissipative effect is efficient,
it is possible that the preexisting baryon asymmetry, created e.g. by the Affleck-Dine mechanism~\cite{Affleck:1984fy,Dine:1995kz},
survives the dilution due to thermal inflation and it explains the present baryon asymmetry of the universe.
Note also that the temperature after thermal inflation increases to $T_\text{max} \sim 10^{7-8}$\,GeV,
and hence it is also possible that thermal leptogenesis~\cite{Fukugita:1986hr} works if there is a mild degeneracy among right-handed neutrino masses~\cite{Pilaftsis:2003gt,Garny:2011hg}.
On the other hand, the above dilution factor is not sufficient to solve the cosmological Polonyi/moduli problem.
If there is a singlet Polonyi/moduli field, its abundance is given by
\begin{equation}
\frac{\rho_z}{s} = \frac{1}{\Delta} \frac{T_{\rm R}^{\rm (inf)}}{8}\left( \frac{z_i}{M_P} \right)^2
\sim
\frac{10^2\,{\rm GeV}}{\lambda^3}\left( \frac{m_\phi} {1\,{\rm PeV}}\right)^{3/2} \left(\frac{10^{10}\,{\rm GeV}}{f_a} \right)^{3/2}
\left( \frac{T_{\rm R}^{(\rm inf)}} {10^9\,{\rm GeV}}\right)\left( \frac{z_i}{M_P} \right)^2,
\end{equation}
where $T_{\rm R}^{\rm (inf)}$ is the reheating temperature after
inflation and $z_i$ is the initial amplitude of the Polonyi field. If
the Polonyi mass is of the order of the gravitino, its decay produces
too much LSPs. Actually, in the model 2 discussed above, we may need
a singlet Polonyi field in order to make the
axino heavy. In this case the cosmological Polonyi problem is not
solved by thermal inflation, and we need to introduce a (small)
R-parity violation to make the LSP unstable or to rely on the
adiabatic suppression mechanism~\cite{Linde:1996cx,Nakayama:2011wqa}
to suppress the Polonyi abundance. In the model 3, on the other hand,
we do not need such a singlet Polonyi field and hence there is no
Polonyi problem.\footnote{ The Polonyi problem in the dynamical SUSY
breaking scenario was studied in
Ref.~\cite{Nakayama:2012hy,Evans:2013nka}. }
\section{Discussion} \label{sec:dis}
In this paper we have revisited the cosmology of axion models.
If the curvature of the potential of the PQ scalar field is smaller
than the PQ scale, like in a class of SUSY axion models, it is
likely that the PQ scalar field is trapped at the origin and it causes
thermal inflation. We have discussed several possibilities to avoid
the overproduction of the axion dark radiation from the saxion decay
after the thermal inflation. In general, the overproduction
constraint is relaxed by taking thermal dissipative effects on the
saxion coherent oscillation into account. This is because, owing to
the interaction with the thermal plasma, the PQ scalar can participate
in the thermal plasma even after the PQ phase transition. This
scenario works for the mass scale, $m_\phi$, larger than
$\mathcal O(10)$\,TeV -- $\mathcal O(10)$\,PeV for $f_a\sim 10^9$\,GeV -- $10^{10}$\,GeV.
We have demonstrated it with some
explicit models of the saxion stabilization. In particular, we have
shown that if there exists a heavy CP-odd scalar, depending on the
stabilization model, it can dilute the axion dark radiation due to its
late time decay. As a result, the overproduction constraint is
further relaxed.
Those studies have significant implications to the case of high-scale inflation.
However, we note here that our results are not restricted to such a case.
One interesting prediction of the SUSY axion model is that it naturally deforms the gaugino masses~\cite{Abe:2001cg,Nakayama:2013uta}.
If the gaugino masses are dominated by the anomaly mediation effect, the additional contribution from the PQ multiplet is generally
the same order.
Therefore, if gauginos are found and their masses are measured at the LHC, it may indicate a signal of the axion model.
Hereafter we comment on the recent claim of the discovery of the B-mode polarization in the cosmic microwave background anisotropy by the BICEP2 experiment~\cite{Ade:2014xna}, which indicates the high-scale inflation, such as the chaotic inflation~\cite{Linde:1983gd}.
The derived inflation scale in terms of the Hubble scale is as high as $H_{\rm inf} \simeq 10^{14}$\,GeV.
A prediction of the present scenario is the suppression of inflationary gravitational waves (GWs) at the high frequency range
at which future space laser interferometers have high sensitivities~\cite{Smith:2005mm}.
The energy density of inflationary GWs with frequency $f > f_c$ where
\begin{equation}
f_c \sim 3\,{\rm Hz}\left( \frac{\sqrt{m_\phi f_a}}{10^8\,{\rm GeV}} \right),
\end{equation}
is suppressed by the factor $\Delta^{4/3}$
and hence it may be difficult to detect~\cite{Jinno:2011sw} if the dilution factor $\Delta$ is sizable.
Instead, if the PQ phase transition is first order, there is a possibility that GWs from bubble collisions
will be in the observable range~\cite{Easther:2008sx}.
So far we have focused on the hadronic axion model, because it is the simplest setup for giving the domain wall number one.
In the DFSZ axion model~\cite{Dine:1981rt,Kim:1983dt}, the PQ scalar couples to the Higgs multiplets.
However, in this model the domain wall number is larger than one, and hence there is a serious domain wall problem
if the PQ symmetry is restored during inflation.
In order to make the domain wall number one, we need to introduce five pairs of additional PQ quarks.
Thus the coupling to the PQ quarks leads to thermal inflation as studied in this paper.
An important feature in this model is that the saxion can dominantly decay into the Higgs boson pair.
Hence we do not need thermal dissipation effects to avoid the axion overproduction.
Finally we comment on the case in which the PQ symmetry is broken during inflation.
In such a case, the high scale inflation may be excluded because of too large axion isocurvature perturbation.
This argument has some loopholes.
During inflation, the saxion may have a field value much larger than $f_a$ if the saxion obtains the negative Hubble induced mass term.
Then the magnitude of axion isocurvature fluctuation is highly suppressed~\cite{Linde:1990yj}.
The fate of the saxion field with such a large initial amplitude strongly depends on the saxion stabilization model.
In the model 2, the saxion can have a field value of $\sim M_P$ during inflation,
but it is eventually trapped at the origin after the onset of coherent oscillation as extensively studied in Ref.~\cite{Moroi:2013tea}.\footnote{
See also Refs.~\cite{Kasuya:1996ns,Kawasaki:2013iha} for the topological defect formation due to the axion self interaction.
}
The subsequent dynamics is the same as that studied in this paper.
In the model 3, the saxion tracks the temporal minimum $|\phi| \sim (HM^{n-2})^{1/(n-1)}$
as the Hubble parameter decreases and it relaxes to the true minimum without restoration of the PQ symmetry
if the coupling, $\lambda$, or the reheating temperature, $T_\text{R}^{\rm (inf)}$, is suppressed~\cite{Nakayama:2012zc}.
For $n=3$, for example, the magnitude of CDM isocurvature perturbation is given by
\begin{equation}
S_{\rm CDM} = \frac{\rho_a}{\rho_{\rm CDM}}
\frac{H_{\rm inf}^{1/2}}{\theta_i \pi M^{1/2}}
\sim 3\times 10^{-6}\left( \frac{\theta_i}{10^{-2}} \right)
\left( \frac{f_a}{10^{11}\,{\rm GeV}} \right)^{1.19}
\left( \frac{H_{\rm inf}}{10^{14}\,{\rm GeV}} \right)^{1/2}
\left( \frac{10^{18}\,{\rm GeV}}{M} \right)^{1/2},
\end{equation}
where $\theta_i$ is the initial misalignment angle and $\rho_a$ and
$\rho_{\rm CDM}$ are the energy density of axion and CDM,
respectively.\footnote{ The misalignment angle cannot be tuned beyond
$\theta_i \lesssim (H_{\rm inf}/M)^{1/2}$ since otherwise the
quantum fluctuation would be dominant over the classical
displacement of the axion field. } Since the Planck data combined
with the WMAP9 polarization data gives an upper bound as $S_{\rm CDM}
\lesssim 1\times 10^{-5}$~\cite{Ade:2013uln},
the isocurvature constraint can be avoided. However, the axion cannot
be the dominant component of CDM in this case. See also
Refs.~\cite{Higaki:2014ooa,Choi:2014uaa,Chun:2014xva} for recent
discussion in this direction. The saxion coherent oscillation with an
amplitude of $\sim f_a$ remains in this case, but it is not
cosmologically problematic~\cite{Nakayama:2012zc}.
\section*{Acknowledgments}
The work of T.M. is supported by the Japan Society for Promotion of
Science (JSPS) KAKENHI (No.~26400239 and No.~60322997). The work of
K.N. is supported by the JSPS Grant-in-Aid for Young Scientists (B)
(No.~26800121). The work of K.M. and M.T. are supported in part by JSPS
Research Fellowships for Young Scientists.
The work of M.T. is also supported by the program for Leading Graduate Schools, MEXT, Japan.
|
\section{Introduction}\label{intro}
One of the most promising probes of the universe is weak gravitational lensing and in particular that due to large-scale structure (cosmic shear). This effect is measured in galaxy surveys as very weak distortions of the intrinsic shapes of galaxies. Weak lensing is an ideal probe to map distributions of dark matter in the universe in the form of large-scale cosmic structure. It is also an excellent probe of the nature of dark energy, as it can trace a large volume of cosmic space. It is sensitive to both the growth rate of large-scale structure and the expansion history of the Universe, and can lead to significant constraints on cosmological parameters such as the matter density, the matter fluctuation amplitude, and the dark energy equation of state. Similarly, gravitational lensing is a powerful probe for testing the nature of gravity on cosmic scales. The weak lensing signal is even more powerful when combined with the galaxy density-shear cross-correlation and galaxy density-density autocorrelation. For a detailed review of weak gravitational lensing and its applications, we refer the reader to the previous review articles by \cite{SEF,Mellier1999,BSWLReview2001,Wittman2002,Refregier2003,VanwaerbekeMellier2003,Schneider2006,HoekstraJain2008,MunshiEtAl2008,Heavens2009,Bartelmann2010,Huterer2010,MasseyEtAl2010,WeinbergEtAl2013} and references therein. Further detail is also provided in Sec.~\ref{formalisms} below.
Weak lensing or cosmic shear offers multiple statistical measures for cosmological analyses. In addition to the 2-point correlation statistic (i.e., the power spectrum), the inclusion of the shear 3-point correlation statistic (i.e., the bispectrum) is particularly important for upcoming surveys, which will have the statistical power to successfully measure the 3-point correlations at high significance. Indeed, when combined with the power spectrum, the bispectrum has been shown to probe additional physics like primordial non-Gaussianity and to break degeneracies in parameter constraints that are present for the power spectrum alone and thus provides further significant improvements on parameter constraints (e.g., the review by \cite{MunshiEtAl2008} and references therein). The promise of weak lensing as a cosmological probe has been identified by the scientific community (see for example, \cite{DETFReport2006}), and has already provided complementary cosmological constraints (see specific results as discussed in Sec.~\ref{cosmicweak}). These have driven the development of much larger and more precise galaxy weak lensing surveys (e.g., the Dark Energy Survey\footnote{http://www.darkenergysurvey.org/} (DES), the Euclid mission\footnote{http://www.euclid-ec.org/}, the Hyper Suprime-Cam\footnote{http://www.naoj.org/Projects/HSC/} (HSC), the Kilo-Degree Survey\footnote{http://kids.strw.leidenuniv.nl/} (KIDS), the Large Synoptic Sky Telescope\footnote{http://www.lsst.org/lsst/} (LSST), the Square Kilometer Array\footnote{https://www.skatelescope.org/} (SKA), and the Wide-Field Infrared Survey Telescope\footnote{http://wfirst.gsfc.nasa.gov/} (WFIRST)), which will produce unprecedented weak lensing measurements in the coming decades.
However, weak lensing measurements in galaxy surveys are limited in precision by several systematic effects which must be accounted for in order to make full use of the potential of ongoing and planned weak lensing surveys (see for example, the reviews listed above and Sec.~\ref{systematics} below). These systematic effects include challenges to measuring the shape of galaxies, which are smeared or distorted due to atmospheric, camera, or reduction effects, calibration biases, difficulties in accurately determining the redshifts of such large ensembles of objects, and fundamental limits to our current understanding of the matter power spectrum and its nonlinear evolution (e.g., due to the effects of baryons) for both standard and nonstandard cosmologies. It is extremely important to understand and control these and other systematic effects of weak lensing in order to fully explore its potential as a precision cosmological probe.
One of the most serious physical systematic effects of weak lensing is the presence of the correlated intrinsic alignment of galaxies that contaminate shear correlations, and these intrinsic alignments or shapes of galaxies are the subject of this review. The intrinsic alignment of galaxies is due to a variety of physical processes including the structure formation scenarios and primordial potentials in which the galaxies formed, evolution of the galaxies and nearby structures, and particularly at late times, baryonic physics, galaxy mergers, and accretion. These correlated alignments can initially be driven by stretching or compression of initially spherically collapsing mass distributions in some gravitational gradient (e.g., \cite{CatelanKamionkowskiBlandford2001}) or by the mutual acquisition of angular momentum through tidal torquing \citep{Sciama1955,Peebles1969,Doroshkevich1970,White1984} of aspherical protogalactic mass distributions during galaxy formation. This galaxy ellipticity or angular momentum alignment and the potential for finding correlations in the alignments of galaxies has been extensively studied; see for example \cite{Djorgovski1987} and references therein for an early review of the topic. Such searches have been largely inconclusive until recent years and originally focused on correlated alignments in high-density regions as probes of structure formation. In the past decade or so, the focus has instead shifted to searching for large-scale correlations in galaxy alignments as contaminants to the weak gravitational lensing signal, and to developing methods to isolate its impact from that of weak lensing. While early work only considered such correlations between the intrinsic alignment of galaxies (labeled the $II$ correlation), \cite{HirataSeljak2004} later identified a cross-correlation between the intrinsic alignment and the lensing signal (labeled the $GI$ correlation), which has turned out to be the stronger and more problematic signal to mitigate in large weak lensing surveys that probe to high redshift. These correlations are defined in Sec.~\ref{backIA} and a more detailed discussion of the search for correlations in the intrinsic alignment in galaxies can be found in Sec.~\ref{detections}.
The intrinsic alignment of galaxies acts as a nuisance signal to the cosmic shear correlation and can strongly bias its constraints on cosmological parameters. It has been shown, for example, that constraints of the equation of state of dark energy can be biased by 50\% or more when intrinsic alignment is ignored. Similarly, the amplitude of matter fluctuations can be biased by up to 30\%. For more on these impacts and specific references, we refer the reader to Sec.~\ref{impacts}. The mitigation of these biases due to the intrinsic alignment of galaxies and development of methods to isolate or measure the intrinsic alignment signal are thus essential for future precision cosmological measurements from weak lensing surveys. Indeed, the science goals of these surveys are dependent upon an effective approach for mitigating the impact of intrinsic alignment on cosmological constraints. This is not a trivial task, but it is a manageable one toward which significant progress has been made over the last decade (see Sec.~\ref{mitigation}).
It is worth emphasizing, though, that isolating the intrinsic alignment signal has a double advantage. The first is to clean the lensing signal from this systematic effect toward its use as a precise -- and more importantly accurate -- cosmological tool. The second is that the intrinsic alignment signal itself, once isolated, provides valuable information that reflects the formation and evolution of galaxies in their respective environments, and which could help in understanding the structure formation scenarios that generated them. This intrinsic alignment signal also provides complementary cosmological information to the weak lensing signal.
In this review, we aim to provide an overview of the intrinsic alignment of galaxies focusing on their large-scale aspects and their contamination to weak gravitational lensing. We review progress toward the understanding, measurement, and mitigation of the intrinsic alignment of galaxies as it impacts precision weak lensing science and cosmology.
The review is organized as follows. We first provide a general discussion of cosmic shear as a cosmological probe and the necessary formalisms in Sec.~\ref{formalisms}. The last two decades have seen the development of a basic understanding of the intrinsic alignment of galaxies as a contaminant to the precise shear measurement goals of planned surveys, which we will review in Sec.~\ref{backIA}. A large amount of work has already been devoted to identifying and measuring the effects of the large-scale correlated intrinsic alignment signal in various weak lensing surveys to date, and the methodologies and results of this work are discussed in Sec.~\ref{detections}. We also report progress on measuring and constraining the effects of large-scale correlations of intrinsic alignment in numerical simulations in Sec.~\ref{sims}. Finally, a variety of methodologies have been developed to help address mitigating and isolating the intrinsic alignment correlations in weak lensing surveys, and these are presented in Sec.~\ref{mitigation}. We conclude with a summary and future outlook in Sec.~\ref{summary}.
\section{Gravitational lensing and cosmology}\label{formalisms}
\subsection{The standard cosmological model}\label{lcdm}
The standard model of cosmology is based on the theory of general relativity, where dynamics in the universe are described by Einstein's field equations with a cosmological constant $\Lambda$ (for brevity, we will assume units such that $c=1$ throughout),
\begin{equation}
G_{\mu\nu}+\Lambda g_{\mu\nu}=8\pi G T_{\mu\nu}.\label{eq:efe}
\end{equation}
where $G_{\mu\nu}\equiv R_{\mu\nu}-\frac{1}{2}g_{\mu\nu}R$ is the Einstein tensor representing the curvature of spacetime, $R_{\mu\nu}$ is the Ricci tensor, and $R$ the Ricci scalar. The matter content is represented by the energy momentum tensor of a perfect fluid given by
\begin{equation}
T_{\mu\nu}=(\rho+p)u_{\mu}u_{\nu}-pg_{\mu\nu},\label{eq:stress}
\end{equation}
where $\rho$ is the mass-energy density, $p$ is the isotropic pressure, $u^{\mu}$ is the tangent velocity vector of the cosmic fluid, and $g_{\mu\nu}$ is the metric, which describes the geometry of the spacetime.
On very large scales, it is assumed that the universe can be described by a metric that is globally isotropic and thus homogeneous. Its geometry is represented by the metric of Friedmann-Lemaitre-Robertson-Walker (FLRW) that can be written from the line element
\begin{equation}
ds^2=-dt^2+a^2(t)\left(\frac{dr^2}{1-kr^2}+r^2(d\theta^2+\sin^2\theta d\phi^2)\right).\label{eq:flrw}
\end{equation}
The scale factor $a(t)$ represents the time-dependent evolution of the spatial part of the metric (surfaces of constant $t$), and $k\in\{-1,0,+1\}$ determines the geometry of these spatial sections: negatively curved, flat, or positively curved, respectively.
Equation (\ref{eq:flrw}) for the FLRW metric and the energy-momentum tensor of Eq.~(\ref{eq:stress}) give the Friedmann equation from their time-time components
\begin{equation}
\frac{\dot{a}^2}{a^2}=H(t)^2=\frac{8\pi G}{3}\rho +\frac{\Lambda}{3}-\frac{k}{a^2},
\label{eq:FriedmannEq1}
\end{equation}
where $\dot{a}$ denotes a derivative of $a$ with respect to the time coordinate, and we have defined the Hubble parameter $H(t)^2\equiv \big{(}\frac{\dot{a}(t)}{a(t)}\big{)}^2$. From the combination of the space-space component and the time-time component, one can write an acceleration/deceleration equation (or second Friedmann equation)
\begin{equation}
\frac{\ddot{a}}{a}\, = \frac{4\pi G}{3}\left(\rho\, +\, 3p \right)\, +\, \frac{\Lambda}{3}.
\label{eq:FriedmannEq2}
\end{equation}
The current day ($t=t_0$) Hubble constant is denoted $H_0=H(t_0)$, and we normalize the expansion such that $a_0=a(t_0)\equiv 1$. The redshift is then related to $a$ by $a=1/(1+z)$.
The Friedmann equations represent the global, homogeneous evolution of the universe and serve as a basis for distance measurements such as the angular diameter distance given as a function of redshift $z$ by
\begin{equation}
D_A(z)=\frac{\sin_k(\chi)}{1+z},
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
\sin_k(\chi)=\left\{ \begin{array}{lcl}
k^{-1/2}\sin (k^{1/2}\chi) & & k>0 \\
\chi & & k=0 \\
|k|^{-1/2}\sinh (|k|^{1/2}\chi) & & k<0 \end{array} \right.,
\end{equation}
and the comoving distance $\chi$ is
\begin{equation}
\chi(z)=\frac{1}{H_0}\int_0^z \frac{dz'}{\sqrt{\Omega_m(1+z')^3+\Omega_k(1+z')^2+\Omega_{\Lambda}}}.
\end{equation}
We require that $1=\Omega_m+\Omega_k+\Omega_{\Lambda}$, according to $\Omega_x=\rho_x/\rho_{cr}$ being a fractional energy density relative to the critical density $\rho_{cr}=3H^2/8\pi G$. The luminosity distance is then just $D_L(z)=(1+z)^2D_A$. On large scales, the universe has been reasonably well constrained to be consistent with the concordance $\Lambda$CDM ($\Lambda$ cold dark matter) model. This model describes a flat ($k=0$) universe containing a dominant $\Lambda$ component, which causes the acceleration of the observed expansion of the universe, and some cold dark matter component, which together with baryons make up the observed matter density $\Omega_m=\Omega_{dm}+\Omega_{b}$. This model has been supported by a wide range of observations, including the cosmic microwave background (CMB) \citep{FowlerEtAl2010,DasEtAl2011,KeislerEtAl2011,ReichardtEtAl2012,AdeEtAl2014,
HinshawEtAl2013}, baryon acoustic oscillations (BAO) \citep{BeutlerEtAl2011,AndersonEtAl2012,BlakeEtAl2012,PadmanabhanEtAl2012}, constraints on $H_0$ \citep{RiessEtAl2011,FreedmanEtAl2012}, type Ia supernovae (SNe Ia) \citep{GuyEtAl2010,ConleyEtAl2011,SullivanEtAl2011,SuzukiEtAl2012}, and weak gravitational lensing \citep{BaconRefregierEllis2000,VanwaerbekeEtAl2000,RhodesRefregierGroth2001,
HoekstraEtAl2002,VanwaerbekeEtAl2002,BrownEtAl2003,JarvisEtAl2003,Heymansetal2004c,
MasseyEtAl2005,BenjaminEtAl2007,MasseyEtAl2007,SchrabbackEtAl2010,JeeEtAl2013,
KilbingerEtAl2013,heymans,KitchingEtAl2014,FuEtAl2014,HuffEtAl2014}.
The universe at smaller scales is rather lumpy and full of cosmic structures. This is represented in the standard approach by linear perturbations of the Einstein equations. This is done by replacing the spatially flat FLRW metric by the perturbed metric in, for example, the Newtonian gauge as
\begin{equation}
ds^2=-(1+2\psi)dt^2+a(t)^2(1-2\phi)dx^idx_i,
\label{eq:FLRWpert}
\end{equation}
where the $x_i$'s are comoving coordinates, and $\phi$ and $\psi$ are scalar potentials describing the scalar mode of the metric perturbations. In the case of matter domination (i.e., no shear stress) and working in Fourier $k$-space, the first-order perturbed Einstein equations give
\begin{align}
k^2\phi &= -4\pi G a^2 \rho_m \delta_m
\label{eq:Poissonsimp}\\
\phi&=\psi,
\end{align}
where the overdensity perturbation relative to the mean density of the space $\bar{\rho}_m$ is just
\begin{equation}
\delta_m = \frac{\rho_m-\bar{\rho}_m}{\rho_m}.\label{eq:densitypert}
\end{equation}
These linear density perturbations can be shown to evolve as (e.g., \cite{peebles})
\begin{equation}
\ddot{\delta}_m+2H(t)\dot{\delta}_m-4\pi G \rho_m \delta_m=0.\label{eq:growth1}
\end{equation}
For small $\delta_m$, these perturbations evolve without moving in comoving coordinates, and have a solution that can be decomposed into a linear superposition of growing ($D_1$) and decaying ($D_2$) modes. Since the standard model assumes that density perturbations have grown from early times, we consider only the growing mode, which we will refer to simply as the growth factor $D$. In a matter dominated universe, $D\propto t^{2/3}\propto a$. Eq.~(\ref{eq:growth1}) can be rewritten for $D$ as
\begin{equation}
\ddot{D}+2H\dot{D}-\frac{3}{2}\Omega_m^0 H_0^2 (1+z)^3D=0.\label{eq:growth2}
\end{equation}
For some growth factor $D$ and times $t>t_1$, the density perturbation grows simply as
\begin{equation}
\delta_m(x,t)=\delta_m(x,t_1)\frac{D(t)}{D(t_1)}.
\end{equation}
This growth factor, which describes the growth rate of large-scale structure, is used both to write the matter power spectrum and in attempts to build an analytical description of the intrinsic alignment signal below.
The resulting cosmological structure of the $\Lambda$CDM model, as shown in the results of large-scale dark matter simulations like the Millennium Simulation \citep{SpringelEtAl2005} evolved to low redshift, could easily be described as a massive, cosmic web. In this picture of large-scale structure, small perturbations in the homogeneous density field sow the seeds for the eventual development of the clusters and super-clusters of galaxies that form nodes in a web of connecting filaments and sheets of mass. Along this cosmic web, smaller halos and galaxies form, merge, and eventually are drawn toward the clusters at the nodes forming the intersection of the filaments and sheets. This filamentary structure and the massive halos that form its nodes will provide the basis for some studies of intrinsic alignment discussed below.
\begin{figure*}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{LensGeo.eps}
\caption{\label{fig:lensgeo}
The geometry of the lens equation. The observer, lens, source, and image positions are shown. The angle between the lens and image is given by $\bm{\theta}$, the angle between the lens and source by $\bm{\beta}$, and the deflection angle by $\bm{\hat{\alpha}}$. The angular diameter distance from the observer to the lens is $D_l$, from the observer to the source is $D_s$, and from the lens to the source is $D_{ls}$. For small angles, the relationship $\bm{\theta} D_{s}= \bm{\beta} D_{s}+\bm{\hat{\alpha}} D_{ls}$ holds. The impact parameter $\xi$ is also shown and can be approximated as a straight-line distance for small $\bm{\theta}$.}
\end{center}
\end{figure*}
\subsection{Gravitational lensing formalism}
A comprehensive review of gravitational lensing has been previously explored by several authors, and we will only briefly introduce the formalism of gravitational lensing here to provide a framework for discussing the impact of galaxy intrinsic alignment on weak gravitational lensing. For further information, we refer the reader to these previous reviews and early papers (e.g., \cite{Miralde1991,Kaiser1992,Blandford1992,SEF,Mellier1999,BSWLReview2001,Wittman2002,Refregier2003,VanwaerbekeMellier2003,Schneider2006,HoekstraJain2008,MunshiEtAl2008,Heavens2009,Bartelmann2010,Huterer2010,MasseyEtAl2010,WeinbergEtAl2013}) and references therein. General relativity predicts a bending angle for light in the neighborhood of some compact, spherically symmetric mass $M$ of
\begin{equation}
\hat{\alpha}=\frac{4GM}{\xi},\label{eq:bending}
\end{equation}
where $\xi$ is the minimum distance from the path of the light ray to the lensing mass, such that $\xi\gg R_{_S}$, the Schwarzschild radius of the mass. The Born approximation is typically assumed, under which the light ray is represented as a straight line in the neighborhood of the lensing mass with a single discrete bend in its path at the moment it passes closest to the lensing mass. This is valid if the actual deflection is small and the source is spherically symmetric and compact relative to the distances involved. In the weak gravitational field limit and linearized general relativity theory, the total deflection can be considered as the sum of the deflection angles due to some ensemble of lensing masses. The thin lens approximation is then used, where the deflection of the actual light ray is small compared to the typical scales over which the lensing mass distribution changes significantly. The lensing mass can then be represented as a projected surface density. The thin lens approximation is assumed to be valid for most relevant astrophysical lensing systems. Eq.~(\ref{eq:bending}) is then rewritten as the two-vector
\begin{equation}
\bm{\hat{\alpha}}(\bm{\xi})=4G\int d^2\xi'\Sigma(\bm{\xi}')\frac{\bm{\xi}-\bm{\xi'}}{|\bm{\xi}-\bm{\xi'}|^2},\label{eq:bending2}
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
\Sigma(\bm{\xi})=\int dz\rho(\xi_1,\xi_2,z)
\label{eq:Sigma}
\end{equation}
is the surface mass density, $\bm{\xi}=(\xi_1,\xi_2)$ is the impact two-vector in the lens plane, and $z$ is the perpendicular coordinate to the lens plane, which is not generally the redshift.
In an astrophysical context, the lens geometry can be depicted as in Fig.~\ref{fig:lensgeo}, which under the assumption of small angles gives the relation
\begin{equation}
\bm{\theta} D_{s}= \bm{\beta} D_{s}+\bm{\hat{\alpha}} D_{ls}.\label{eq:rellens1}
\end{equation}
$D_s$ is the angular diameter distance from the observer to the source, $D_{ls}$ is from the lens to the source, and $D_l$ is from the observer to the lens. Eq.~\ref{eq:rellens1} can be written as the familiar lens equation
\begin{equation}
\bm{\beta}= \bm{\theta} -\bm{\hat{\alpha}} \frac{D_{ls}}{D_{s}},
\label{eq:lensequation}
\end{equation}
or simply
\begin{equation}
\bm{\beta}= \bm{\theta} - \bm\alpha
\end{equation}
where $\bm\alpha\equiv \bm{\hat{\alpha}}D_{ls}/D_{s}$ is the scaled deflection angle.
One can now define the dimensionless surface mass density or convergence
\begin{equation}
\kappa(\bm{\theta})=\Sigma(D_l\bm{\theta})/\Sigma_{cr},
\label{eq:kappa}
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
\Sigma_{cr}=\frac{1}{4\pi G}\frac{D_s}{D_lD_{ls}}
\end{equation}
is the critical surface mass density. $\Sigma_{cr}$ effectively defines the crossover for a given $\Sigma(D_l\bm{\theta})$ from strong to weak lensing such that $\kappa\ge1$ is a sufficient condition for lensing with multiple images.
The scaled deflection angle can now be expressed in terms of the convergence as
\begin{equation}
\bm{\alpha}(\bm\theta)=\frac{1}{\pi}\int d^2\theta'\kappa(\bm{\theta'})\frac{\bm{\theta}-\bm{\theta'}}{|\bm{\theta}-\bm{\theta'}|^2},
\label{eq:scaledalpha}
\end{equation}
or through the use of a 2-dimensional deflection potential
\begin{equation}
\Psi(\bm\theta)=\frac{1}{\pi}\int d^2\theta'\kappa(\bm{\theta'}) \ln|{\bm{\theta}-\bm{\theta'}}|,
\label{eq:scaledalpha2}
\end{equation}
such that
\begin{equation}
\bm{\alpha}(\bm{\theta})=\nabla\Psi(\bm{\theta}).
\end{equation}
$\Psi$ then satisfies the 2-dimensional Poisson equation
\begin{equation}
\nabla^2\Psi(\bm\theta)=2\kappa(\bm{\theta}).
\end{equation}
The lens mapping can be locally linearized for sufficiently compact sources, which leads to a Jacobian matrix
\begin{align}
\bm{\mathcal{A}}(\bm{\theta}) =\left(\delta_{ij}-\frac{\partial^2\Psi(\bm{\theta})}{\partial\theta_i\partial\theta_j}\right)=
\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
1-\kappa-\gamma_1 & -\gamma_2 \\
-\gamma_2 & 1-\kappa+\gamma_1
\end{array}
\right)\,\,
\label{eq:Jacobian}
\end{align}
where the complex shear is often expressed as $\gamma=\gamma_1+i\gamma_2=|\gamma|e^{2i\phi}$. If the background universe is homogeneous and isotropic, the shape of a source is distorted only by the gravitational tidal field, described by the shear $\gamma$, with no contribution from shear due to the metric. The shape is also magnified both by isotropic focusing due to the convergence $\kappa$ and anisotropic focusing due to $\gamma$. This magnification is expressed from Eq.~(\ref{eq:Jacobian}) as
\begin{equation}
\mu=\frac{1}{\rm{det} \mathcal{A}}=\frac{1}{(1-\kappa^2)-|\gamma|^2}.
\label{eq:magnification}
\end{equation}
In more general (non-FLRW) inhomogeneous or anisotropic cosmologies, however, it is often more useful to relate the Jacobian matrix in Eq.~(\ref{eq:Jacobian}) and the lensing convergence and shear directly to the Ricci and Weyl focusing of the spacetime (e.g., \cite{SEF,seitz,clarkson,fanizza,TroxelIshakPeel2014}).
The complex shear (and thus convergence in the weak limit) is measured in practice as a function of the elliptical galaxy shape. The components of the observed ellipticity ($e=e_1+i e_2$) can be related to the major ($a$) and minor ($b$) axes of the galaxy and its orientation ($\phi$) by
\begin{align}
e=\frac{a-b}{a+b}e^{2i\phi}.
\end{align}
The observed ellipticity is then related to the shear and intrinsic ellipticity $e_I$ by (e.g., \cite{SchrammKayser1995,SeitzSchneider1997})
\begin{align}
e=\frac{e_I+\gamma}{1+\gamma^{*}e_I^{*}},\label{eq:efrome}
\end{align}
where ${}^{*}$ is the complex conjugate. For an unbiased galaxy sample with $\langle e_i\rangle=0$ and $\gamma<1$, the complex shear is estimated as
\begin{align}
\gamma=\langle e\rangle.
\end{align}
Alternately, as used in some intrinsic alignment measurements in Sec. \ref{detections}, the ellipticity can be defined as
\begin{align}
e=\frac{a^2-b^2}{a^2+b^2}e^{2i\phi},
\end{align}
with a 'shear responsivity' factor \cite{KaiserSquiresBroadhurst1995,BernsteinJarvis2002}
\begin{align}
\gamma=\frac{\langle e\rangle}{2\mathcal{R}}.
\end{align}
\subsection{Weak gravitational lensing power spectra and bispectra}\label{psbs}
We can now generalize the formalism to weak shear or convergence in a $\Lambda$CDM model, where we consider small linear matter density perturbations $\delta_m$ (e.g., Sec.~\ref{lcdm}) with an associated Newtonian potential $\Phi$. These are related by the 3D Poisson equation
\begin{equation}
\nabla^2\Phi=\frac{3}{2}H_0^2\Omega_m\frac{\delta_m}{a}.
\end{equation}
The convergence is then written
\begin{equation}
\kappa(\bm{\theta},\chi)=\frac{3}{2}H_0^2\Omega_m\int_0^{\chi}d\chi'\frac{\sin_k(\chi')\sin_k(\chi-\chi')}{\sin_k(\chi)}\frac{\delta_m(\sin_k(\chi')\bm{\theta},\chi')}{a(\chi')}.\label{eq:keff1}
\end{equation}
For an explicit, normalized distribution of sources in co-moving distance $f(\chi)$, we simply average Eq.~(\ref{eq:keff1}) over the normalized distribution and can write the source-distance weighted effective convergence as
\begin{align}
\kappa(\bm{\theta},\chi)&=\int_0^{\chi_1}d\chi W(\chi)\delta_m(\sin_k(\chi)\bm{\theta},\chi),\label{eq:keff2}
\end{align}
where
\begin{align}
W(\chi)&=\frac{3}{2}H_0^2\frac{\Omega_m}{a(\chi)}\int_{\chi}^{\chi_1}d\chi' f(\chi')\sin_k(\chi)\frac{\sin_k(\chi'-\chi)}{\sin_k(\chi')}.\label{eq:weighting}
\end{align}
$W(\chi)$ is related to the weighted lens efficiency. We have explicitly chosen as the upper bound in the integral, $\chi_1$, the horizon distance, which corresponds to the co-moving distance at infinite redshift, or the edge of the observable universe.
When we study cosmic shear, it is preferable instead to consider the statistical properties of the convergence, which is possible through the correlation function or corresponding spectrum in the harmonic space of the field. Since we have assumed that the space is isotropic and homogeneous, the field $\delta_m$ is also isotropic and homogeneous. With the assumption of Gaussian randomness in $\delta_m$, we can use Limber's approximation \citep{Limber1954,Kaiser1992} to relate the 2D convergence power spectrum and bispectrum to the 3D matter power spectrum and bispectrum. Equation (\ref{eq:keff2}) was written is such a way that it will be immediately recognizable as a weighted projection, and for the 2- and 3-point correlations of $\kappa$, we can write from Limber's approximation the convergence power spectrum and bispectrum
\begin{align}
P_{\kappa}(\ell)&=\int_0^{\chi_1}d\chi\frac{W^2(\chi)}{\sin_k^2(\chi)}P_{\delta}(k=\frac{\ell}{\sin_k(\chi)};\chi)\label{eq:spec}\\
B_{\kappa}(\ell_1,\ell_2,\ell_3)&=\int_0^{\chi_1}d\chi\frac{W^3(\chi)}{\sin_k^4(\chi)}B_{\delta}(k_1=\frac{\ell_1}{\sin_k(\chi)},k_2=\frac{\ell_2}{\sin_k(\chi)},k_3=\frac{\ell_3}{\sin_k(\chi)};\chi).\label{eq:bspec}
\end{align}
where $P_{\delta}(k=\frac{\ell}{\sin_k(\chi)};\chi)$ and $B_{\delta}(k_1=\frac{\ell_1}{\sin_k(\chi)},k_2=\frac{\ell_2}{\sin_k(\chi)},k_3=\frac{\ell_3}{\sin_k(\chi)};\chi)$ are the 3D matter power spectrum and bispectrum, respectively. One can also alternatively write the information in Eqs. (\ref{eq:spec}) \& (\ref{eq:bspec}) in terms of the correlation function or aperture mass statistic \citep{Kaiser1994,SchneiderKilbingerLombardi1995,Schneider1996,PenEtAl2003,JarvisBernsteinJain2004}. For the power spectrum, this is
\begin{align}
\xi_{+}(\theta)=&\frac{1}{2\pi}\int_0^{\infty}d\ell \ell P_{\kappa}(\ell)J_{0}(\ell\theta)\label{eq:corr2ps}\\
\langle M^2_{ap}\rangle(\theta)=&\int d\ell \frac{\ell}{2\pi}P_{\kappa}(\ell)\tilde{U}^2(\theta\ell)\label{eq:apmstat},
\end{align}
where $J_0$ is a zeroth order Bessel function of the first kind and $\tilde{U}$ is the Fourier transform of a filter function $U$ with characteristic smoothing scale $\theta$.
The linear matter power spectrum can be expressed for $k=\ell/\sin_k(\chi)$ as
\begin{align}
P_{\delta}(k,z)=A \frac{T^2(k,z)}{a^2}\frac{D^2(z)}{D^2(0)}k^{n_s},\label{eq:mps}
\end{align}
where $n_s$ is the spectral index, $T$ is a transfer function that modifies the primordial power spectrum, and $A$ is a normalization parameter that can be fixed in relation to $\sigma_8$, which measures the amplitude of matter fluctuations on scales of 8 $h^{-1}$ Mpc. The linear matter power spectrum under-predicts power on small scales, and is often modified to the nonlinear matter power spectrum $P_{nl}$ to include nonlinear effects on small scales (see for example, \cite{smith03}).
For the matter bispectrum, there are contributions both from primordial non-Gaussianity and the nonlinear clustering of matter. The bispectrum due to nonlinear clustering is often estimated through the fitting formulae of \cite{ScoccimarroCouchman2001}. The bispectrum is related to the power spectrum through second-order perturbation theory \citep{Fry1984,BernardeauEtAl2002}
\begin{align}
B_{nl}(\bm{k_1},\bm{k_2},\bm{k_3},z)=2F_2^{eff}(\bm{k_1},\bm{k_2})P_{nl}(k_1,z)P_{nl}(k_2,z)+2\textrm{ perm.},\label{eq:bfit}
\end{align}
where the $\bm{k}_i$ form a closed triangle and the effective kernel $F_2^{eff}$ is
\begin{align}
F_2^{eff}(\bm{k_1},\bm{k_2})=&\frac{5}{7}a(n,k_1)b(n,k_2)+\frac{1}{2}\frac{\bm{k_1}\cdot\bm{k_2}}{k_1k_2}\left(\frac{k_1}{k_2}+\frac{k_2}{k_1}\right)b(n,k_1)b(n,k_2)\\
&+\frac{2}{7}\left(\frac{\bm{k_1}\cdot\bm{k_2}}{k_1k_2}\right)^2c(n,k_1)c(n,k_2)\nonumber.
\end{align}
The functions $a$, $b$, and $c$ were fit by \cite{ScoccimarroCouchman2001} to numerical simulations. These reduce to $a=b=c=1$ on large scales ($k\ll k_{nl}$), and the perturbation theory prediction is recovered. This fitting function for $B_{nl}$ is only an approximation. \cite{GilMarinEtAl2012} recently presented an improved fitting formula, which modifies the functions $a$, $b$, and $c$ to reflect the ability of more recent simulations to constrain the bispectrum. These improved fitting functions are reported to have an accuracy of typically within $5\%$ when compared to simulation results.
\begin{figure}
\center
\includegraphics[height=\textwidth,angle=270]{spectrumtomo.eps}
\caption{The convergence auto- and cross-power spectra in Eq.~(\ref{eq:pstomo}) are shown for the base $\Lambda$CDM model with a cosmological constant, $\Omega_m=0.27$, $\Omega_{\Lambda}=0.73$, $n_s=0.96$, and $\sigma_8=0.84$. The redshift distribution given in Eq.~(\ref{eq:fz}) is split into two bins with boundary $z=0.8$, the median of the distribution. The auto-spectra of the lower and higher redshift bins are labeled `11' and `22', respectively, while the cross-spectrum is labeled `12'.}\label{fig:tomography}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\center
\includegraphics[height=\textwidth,angle=270]{bispectrumtomo.eps}
\caption{The convergence auto- and cross-bispectra in Eq.~(\ref{eq:bspec2}) are shown for the base $\Lambda$CDM model with a cosmological constant, $\Omega_m=0.27$, $\Omega_{\Lambda}=0.73$, $n_s=0.96$, and $\sigma_8=0.84$. The redshift distribution given in Eq.~(\ref{eq:fz}) is split into two bins with boundary $z=0.8$, the median of the distribution. The auto-bispectra of the lower and higher redshift bins are labeled `111' and `222', respectively, while the cross-bispectra are labeled `112' and `122'.}\label{fig:tomography2}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Weak gravitational lensing tomography}
Weak lensing tomography takes advantage of additional information on the redshift of source galaxies in surveys, which allows the galaxy sample to be split into multiple redshift bin slices. By correlating separately the shapes of galaxies in each redshift bin (i.e. auto-power spectra), this provides additional depth or redshift dependent information to the cosmic shear signal, and can probe physical properties like the growth rate of large-scale structure, which is a function of redshift and directly influences the theoretical matter power spectrum (Eq.~(\ref{eq:mps})). In addition to the auto-power spectra for each bin, one can also consider cross-power spectra or bispectra between tomographic bins. This not only adds more constraining information, and has been recognized as the optimal method for extracting cosmological information (e.g., \cite{Hu1999,Huterer2002,SimonEtAl2004,TakadaJain2004}), but can also be used in methods to deal with systematics in weak lensing such as the intrinsic alignment of galaxies (see Sec.~\ref{mitigation}). A tomographic galaxy sample is chosen such that each redshift bin $i$ spans from some $\chi_i(z_i)$ to $\chi_{i+1}(z_{i+1})$, with a mean $\bar{\chi}_i(\bar{z}_i)$. The weighting function is then given by
\begin{align}
W_i(\chi)&=\frac{3}{2}H_0^2\frac{\Omega_m}{a(\chi)}\int_{\chi_i}^{\chi_{i+1}}d\chi' f_i(\chi')\sin_k(\chi)\frac{\sin_k(\chi'-\chi)}{\sin_k(\chi')},\label{eq:weightbin}
\end{align}
for $\chi<\chi_{i+1}$ and zero otherwise, assuming that the true comoving distance of the source galaxy is known. The distribution $f_i(\chi)$ is the normalized comoving galaxy distribution in the $i$-th redshift bin. For spectroscopic redshift information, the true redshifts of galaxies in the $i$-th bin lie between $z_i$ and $z_{i+1}$, while for photometric redshifts (photo-z) with some photo-z probability distribution function (PDF) $p(z|z^p)$, the true redshift distribution can be smeared outside the assumed redshift bin boundaries, and the integral in Eq.~(\ref{eq:weightbin}) must be taken from zero to infinity for completeness.
A typical photo-z PDF can be written \citep{MaBernstein2008}
\begin{align}
p(z|z^P)=\frac{1-p_{\textrm{cat}}}{\sqrt{2\pi}\sigma(z^P)}\exp\left[\frac{(z-z^P)^2}{2\sigma^2(z^P)}\right]+\frac{p_{\textrm{cat}}}{\sqrt{2\pi}\sigma(z^P)}\exp\left[\frac{(z-f_{\textrm{bias}}z^P)^2}{2\sigma^2(z^P)}\right],\label{eq:pdf}
\end{align}
with a photo-z uncertainty $\sigma(z^p)=\sigma_{ph}(1+z^p)$ and fraction of catastrophic outliers $p_{cat}$ which are biased by a factor $f_{bias}$. The galaxy distribution $f_i(\chi)$ is then modified according to $p(z|z^p)$. Equations (\ref{eq:spec}) \& (\ref{eq:bspec}) are then
\begin{align}
P_{ij}(\ell)&=\int_0^{\chi_1}d\chi\frac{W_i(\chi)W_j(\chi)}{\sin_k^2(\chi)}P_{\delta}(k=\frac{\ell}{\sin_k(\chi)};\chi),\label{eq:pstomo}\\
B_{ijk}(\ell_1,\ell_2,\ell_3)&=\int_0^{\chi_1}d\chi\frac{W_i(\chi)W_j(\chi)W_k(\chi)}{\sin_k^4(\chi)}B_{\delta}(k_1=\frac{\ell_1}{\sin_k(\chi)},k_2=\frac{\ell_2}{\sin_k(\chi)},k_3=\frac{\ell_3}{\sin_k(\chi)};\chi).\label{eq:bspec2}
\end{align}
We show tomographic power spectra and bispectra for two photo-z bins in Figs. \ref{fig:tomography} \& \ref{fig:tomography2}. The two photo-z bins use a galaxy redshift distribution given by (e.g., \cite{WittmanEtAl2000})
\begin{align}
n(z)=\frac{z^2}{2z_0^3}e^{-z/z_0},\label{eq:fz}
\end{align}
which has mean redshift $z_{mean}=3z_0$. We have chosen $z_0=0.3$ to match planned survey depths for Stage IV weak lensing surveys (e.g., LSST and Euclid), as classified by \cite{DETFReport2006}. The two bins are separated by the median redshift of the sample, $z_{med}=0.8$. We assume a photo-z uncertainty $\sigma_{ph}=0.05$, but without catastrophic outliers. These tomographic cross-power spectra and bispectra have similar power to the full power spectrum and bispectrum, and the inclusion of the full set of tomographic spectra significantly increases the available information and constraining power of weak lensing surveys. Beyond increased cosmological information, the use of tomographic bins is also essential for many methods used to distinguish between weak lensing and intrinsic alignment, which is discussed in detail in Sec.~\ref{mitigation}.
\subsection{Cosmic shear as a probe for cosmological study}\label{cosmicweak}
\begin{figure}
\center
\includegraphics[height=\textwidth,angle=270]{spectrumcosmo.eps}
\caption{The convergence power spectrum in Eq.~(\ref{eq:spec}) is shown for several CDM models. The base $\Lambda$CDM model is taken to have a cosmological constant $\Lambda$, $\Omega_m=0.27$, $\Omega_{\Lambda}=0.73$, $n_s=0.96$, and $\sigma_8=0.84$. The wCDM model has dark energy equation of state $w=w_0+w_a(1-a)$. The galaxy distribution is given by Eq.~(\ref{eq:fz}).}\label{fig:pscosmo}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\center
\includegraphics[height=\textwidth,angle=270]{bispectrumcosmo.eps}
\caption{The convergence bispectrum in Eq.~(\ref{eq:bspec}) is shown for several CDM models. The base $\Lambda$CDM model is taken to have a cosmological constant $\Lambda$, $\Omega_m=0.27$, $\Omega_{\Lambda}=0.73$, $n_s=0.96$, and $\sigma_8=0.84$. The wCDM model has dark energy equation of state $w=w_0+w_a(1-a)$. The galaxy distribution is given by Eq.~(\ref{eq:fz}).}\label{fig:bscosmo}
\end{figure}
Weak gravitational lensing has emerged as one of the most promising cosmological probes. It is an ideal probe to trace the distribution of the dark and baryonic matter in the universe and to determine the matter density parameter (e.g., \cite{Schneider1996,BaconRefregierEllis2000,VanwaerbekeEtAl2000,RhodesRefregierGroth2001,WilsonEtAl2001,HoekstraEtAl2002,Hu2002a,Mellier2002,VanwaerbekeEtAl2002,BrownEtAl2003,JarvisEtAl2003,MasseyEtAl2004,Schneider2004,TaylorEtAl2004,BaconEtAl2005,MasseyEtAl2005,BenjaminEtAl2007,MasseyEtAl2007,Heavens2009,JoudakiCoorayHolz2009,SimonTaylorHartlap2009,Huterer2010,MasseyEtAl2010,SchrabbackEtAl2010,JeeEtAl2013,KilbingerEtAl2013,heymans,KitchingEtAl2014,FuEtAl2014,HuffEtAl2014,ShanEtAl2014,vanwaerbekeEtAl2013}). Weak lensing is sensitive to the growth rate of large-scale structure in the Universe as well as its expansion history. This allows it, in combination with other cosmological data, to put stringent constraints on important cosmological parameters such as the Hubble constant, the matter density parameters, and the matter fluctuation amplitude. This also makes it a powerful probe of dark energy models and parameters (e.g., \cite{HuTegmark1999,Zhu2000,Hu2002,Hu2002a,PenLuVanwaerbekeMellier2003,Bernardeau2003,BenabedWaerbeke2004,BernsteinJain2004,HuJain2004,KuhlenKeetonMadau2004,Ishak,UpadhyeIshakSteinhardt2005,HannestadEtAl2006,7i,ShapiroDodelson2007,VaccaColombo2008,Heavens2009,HollensteinEtAl2009,JoudakiCoorayHolz2009,ChongchitnanKing2010,DebonoEtAl2010,Ellis2010,SchrabbackEtAl2010,ShapiroEtAl2010,WeinbergEtAl2013,CaoCovoneZhu2012,VanderveldMortonsonHuEifler2012,HeavensAlsingJaffe2013,KitchingEtAl2014}). Last but not least, weak lensing has also proved to be a powerful probe to test general relativity and modified gravity theories at cosmological scales (e.g., \cite{Song2005,2c,IshakUpadhyeSpergel2006,ZhaoBaconTaylorHorne2006,HutererLinder2007,2j,ZhangLiguoriBeanDodelson2007,AcquavivaEtAl2008,DanielCaldwellCorrayMelchiorri2008,2k,TsujikawaTatekawa2008,BeynonBaconKoyama2009,1d,HearinZentner2009,2i,SongDore2009,ThomasAbdallaWeller2009,ZhaoPogosianSilvestriZylberberg2009,BeanTangmatitham2010,DanielEtAl2010,JainKhoury2010,TerenoSemboloniSchrabback2010,DossetEtAl2011b,DossettMoldenhauerIshak2011,ThomasEtAl2011,AsabaEtAl2013,KirkEtAl2013,SimpsonEtAl2013}).
Another useful feature of cosmic shear is that in addition to constraints derived from its power spectrum, the bispectrum is equally and particularly important for upcoming high precision surveys as listed in the introduction, many of which will be capable of making high confidence measurements of 3-point weak lensing statistics. The bispectrum has been shown to break degeneracies in the cosmological parameters and to probe additional physics like the non-Gaussianity of large-scale structure \citep{BernardeauEtAl1997,waerbekeEtAl1999,matarrese,waerbekeEtAl2001,verde,TakadaJain2003,TakadaJain2004,MunshiEtAl2008,28,VafaeiEtAl2010,huterer,SemboloniEtAl2010,munshi,FuEtAl2014}. \cite{TakadaJain2004} have demonstrated, for example, that we should expect improvements by a factor of 2-3 in constraining power of cosmological constraints for deep lensing surveys when the bispectrum is included. This has recently been used by the Canada France Hawaii Telescope Lensing Survey (CFHTLenS), who report improved constraints on $\Omega_m$, $\sigma_8$, and their combination when 3-point information is included, despite only a 2$\sigma$ detection of the third moment of the aperture mass \citep{FuEtAl2014}.
Several surveys have already provided cosmic shear measurements and put complementary constraints on cosmological parameters \citep{BaconRefregierEllis2000,VanwaerbekeEtAl2000,RhodesRefregierGroth2001,
HoekstraEtAl2002,VanwaerbekeEtAl2002,BrownEtAl2003,JarvisEtAl2003,
Heymansetal2004c,MasseyEtAl2005,BenjaminEtAl2007,MasseyEtAl2007,SchrabbackEtAl2010,JeeEtAl2013,KilbingerEtAl2013,heymans,KitchingEtAl2014,FuEtAl2014,HuffEtAl2014}. Comparisons between theoretical predictions and measurements of the convergence power spectrum, bispectrum, or other equivalent statistical measures like the aperture mass can place direct constraints on the cosmological parameters $H_0$, $\Omega_m$, $\Omega_k$, $\Omega_{\Lambda}$, and the dark energy equation of state $w$ through the growth factor $D$ and distance calculations, and explicitly as they appear in Eq.~(\ref{eq:weighting}). The amplitude of the matter power spectrum depends directly on the value of the parameter $\sigma_8$ and its scale dependence on $n_s$, the spectral index. The matter power spectrum is also sensitive to modifications to gravity, which will manifest themselves via changes to the growth of structure and distances.
To briefly demonstrate the effects of varying the cosmological parameters on the predicted power spectrum and bispectrum, the convergence power spectrum is depicted in Fig.~\ref{fig:pscosmo} for various FLRW CDM cosmologies. These include: the concordance $\Lambda$CDM model with a cosmological constant, $\Omega_m=0.27$, $\Omega_{\Lambda}=0.73$, $n_s=0.96$, and $\sigma_8=0.84$; a wCDM model with equation of state $w=w_0+w_a(1-a)$ for $w_0=-0.8$ and $w_a=0.3$; a $\Lambda$CDM model with $\Omega_m=0.2$ and $\Omega_{\Lambda}=0.80$; and a $\Lambda$CDM model with $\sigma_8=0.9$. The equilateral ($\ell=\ell_1=\ell_2=\ell_3$) convergence bispectrum is also shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:bscosmo} for the same CDM cosmologies. We assume a galaxy redshift distribution given by Eq.~(\ref{eq:fz}).
\subsection{Systematics and sources of bias in weak lensing}\label{systematics}
One of the primary challenges to successfully using weak lensing for cosmological constraints is the prevalence of observational and physical systematics and biases, which pose major challenges for large ongoing and planned lensing surveys that aim to place precision constraints on cosmological parameters. These systematic effects must be accounted for in order to make full use of the potential of ongoing and planned weak lensing surveys (see for example, \cite{CroftMetzler2000,HeavensRefregierHeymans2000,BaconRefregierCloweEllis2000,CatelanKamionkowskiBlandford2001,ErbenEtAl2001,BernsteinJarvis2002,BrownTaylorHamblyDye2002,KingSchneider2002,HirataSeljak2003a,Refregier2003,VanwaerbekeMellier2003,HeymansEtAl2004,IshakHirataMcdonaldSeljak2004,TakadaWhite2004} and the review \cite{MunshiEtAl2008} and references therein). Systematic effects in weak lensing can impact constraints either directly through the shape and redshift measurements of galaxies or through the statistical correlations of galaxy shapes. They can also enter into constraints through limitations in our theoretical modeling. These effects include challenges to measuring the shape of galaxies, which are smeared or distorted due to atmospheric, camera, or reduction effects, calibration biases, difficulties in accurately determining the redshift of such large ensembles of objects, and fundamental limits to our current understanding of the matter power spectrum and its nonlinear evolution for standard and nonstandard cosmologies. The primary physical systematic effect which biases weak lensing statistics is a correlation of the intrinsic alignment of galaxies (their ellipticities prior to lensing), which is the topic of this review.
It is thus vital to understand and control these and other systematic effects of weak lensing in order to fully explore its potential as a tool for precision cosmology (e.g., \cite{BaconRefregierCloweEllis2000,CroftMetzler2000,HeavensRefregierHeymans2000,Kaiser2000,LeePen2000,PenLeeSeljak2000,CatelanKamionkowskiBlandford2001,CrittendenNatarajanPenTheuns2001,ErbenEtAl2001,LeePen2001,BernsteinJarvis2002,BrownTaylorHamblyDye2002,HuOkamoto2002,Jing2002,KingSchneider2002,LeePen2002,HeymansHeavens2003,HirataSeljak2003a,KingSchneider2003,VanwaerbekeMellier2003,HeymansEtAl2004,IshakHirataMcdonaldSeljak2004,TakadaJain2004,TakadaWhite2004,Ishak,IshakHirata2005}). We will briefly mention some of these here, but recommend more extensive reviews on gravitational lensing (e.g., \cite{SEF,Mellier1999,BSWLReview2001,Wittman2002,Refregier2003,VanwaerbekeMellier2003,Schneider2006,HoekstraJain2008,MunshiEtAl2008,Heavens2009,Bartelmann2010,Huterer2010,MasseyEtAl2010,WeinbergEtAl2013} and references therein) for a more thorough discussion of these and additional systematics.
The most problematic source of systematics in shape measurement is in simply determining an estimate of the ellipticity, which, though not necessarily the true ellipticity of the galaxy, is unbiased when averaged over random source orientations. The primary challenge to this is smearing or distortion of the image due, for example, to atmospheric, camera, or reduction effects. This is characterized by a point spread function (PSF), mapping the true isophote to the measured isophote \citep{ValdesJarvisTyson1983,BonnetMellier1995,KaiserSquiresBroadhurst1995,LuppinoKaiser1997,Kuijken1999,BaconRefregierCloweEllis2000,Kaiser2000,ErbenEtAl2001,BernsteinJarvis2002,VanwaerbekeMellier2003,HirataSeljak2003a,Refregier2003b,JainJarvisBernstein2006,MasseyEtAl2007a}. The PSF can lead to a multiplicative bias in the ellipticity measurement, a systematic over- or under-detection of shear due to smearing out of the image, which is difficult to isolate. The PSF can also be anisotropic, which induces an additional shear. Recently, the use of gravitational lensing of the CMB to calibrate the multiplicative bias in galaxy lensing has been proposed \citep{Vallinotto2012,DasEtAl2013,KitchingEtAl2014}. Other calibration and bias effects have also been discussed, for example, by \cite{HirataSeljak2003a,HeymansHeavens2003,IshakHirataMcdonaldSeljak2004,HutererKeetonMA2005,IshakHirata2005,Ishak,HutererEtAl2006,IlbertEtAl2006,vanwaerbekeEtAl2006,ZhangJ2010}.
To use weak lensing tomography for precise cosmological constraints, and in particular to address other sources of systematics like intrinsic alignment, redshift information for each galaxy is necessary. Uncertainties in determining accurate redshifts for large samples of galaxies and their distribution can lead to systematic errors and biases in constraints from weak lensing measurements. It is infeasible to take true (spectroscopic) redshift measurements for all galaxies in a large survey, and so photometric redshift (photo-z) estimates are used. This has an associated probability distribution function (PDF), which depends on the process by which the photo-z estimate has been arrived at. There are several techniques for discriminating between galaxies at different redshifts (e.g., \cite{ConnollyEtAl1995,Benitez2000,BudavariEtAl2000,CollisterLahav2004,VanzellaEtAl2004,IlbertEtAl2006,SchneiderEtAl2006,Newman2008,BernsteinHuterer2009,ZhangEtAl2010,SheldonEtAl2012,WittmanDawson2012,McQuinnWhite2013,MenardEtAl2013,dePutterEtAl2014,GoreckiEtAl2014} and references therein), including utilizing photometric information for template fitting, using spectroscopic samples to calibrate the full photo-z sample, and using cross-correlations with the galaxy density or spectroscopic samples. A variety of methods for photo-z calibration were recently analyzed by \cite{SanchezEtAl2014}, and the accuracy of photo-z determinations is a significant driver of survey design in order to deal with systematics like intrinsic alignment (e.g., \cite{LaureijsEtAl2011}).
One of the dominant limitations to precise theoretical modeling of the matter power spectrum and bispectrum at small, nonlinear scales is the impact of baryonic physics (e.g., \cite{White2004,ZhanKnox2004,JingEtAl2006,ZentnerRuddHu2008,MeadEtAl2010,SemboloniEtAl2011,SembaloniEtAl2013,YangEtAl2013,ZentnerEtAl2013,EiflerEtAl2014,VelanderEtAl2014}), which causes changes in small scale (e.g., single halo) clustering relative to a dark matter only model and thus the matter power spectrum and bispectrum. At these strongly nonlinear scales, the impact of baryonic physics on the spectrum is potentially degenerate with the effects of intrinsic alignment. The simultaneous calibration of both effects is thus of great importance to future weak lensing surveys that seek to use the power spectrum or bispectrum at nonlinear scales for cosmological constraints.
\begin{figure}
\center
\includegraphics[width=0.65\textwidth,natwidth=610,natheight=642]{2ptia.eps}
\caption{A physical representation of the 2-point intrinsic alignment correlations $GI$ and $II$ is shown. Panels to the bottom right of each series represent the observed view of the galaxies on the sky, with unlensed galaxy shapes and the location of the lensing structure shown as dotted outlines. Panels to the upper left in each series represent the relevant physical components at different redshift slices with $z_i<z_j$. The left series of panels shows the $II$ correlation, where two galaxies (labeled $I$ and colored blue) are both intrinsically aligned with the tidal field of a structure (shown in grey) at $z_i$. This will tend to produce a correlation between the galaxy shapes. The right series of panels shows the $GI$ correlation, where a single galaxy is intrinsically aligned by a structure at $z_i$, while a background galaxy (labeled $G$ and colored red) at $z_j>z_i$ is lensed by the same structure. The direction of shearing tends to be orthogonal to the intrinsic alignment, and thus this produces an anti-correlation. Source: Reproduced from \protect\cite{TroxelIshak2012b}.}\label{fig:2ptia}
\end{figure}
\section{The intrinsic alignment of galaxies}\label{backIA}
The shapes of galaxies, expressed in terms of their ellipticities, can be used to measure the shear $\gamma$ (or alternatively convergence $\kappa$). However, this cosmic shear signal, or extrinsic alignment, can be heavily contaminated by the intrinsic shape or ellipticity of galaxies, which is a much larger contributor to single galaxy shapes than the effects of gravitational shear. There is a dominant, (Gaussian) random component to this intrinsic ellipticity, which does not contribute to the correlation of shapes. There is a second component of the intrinsic ellipticity that is due to the correlated intrinsic alignment of galaxies with the gravitational tidal field of large-scale structure or in local environments with the intrinsic alignment of other galaxies. These correlated alignments can initially be driven by stretching or compression of initially spherically collapsing mass distributions in some gravitational gradient (e.g., \cite{CatelanKamionkowskiBlandford2001}), described in Sec.~\ref{la}, or by the mutual acquisition of angular momentum through tidal torquing \citep{Sciama1955,Peebles1969,Doroshkevich1970,White1984} of aspherical protogalactic mass distributions during galaxy formation, described in Sec.~\ref{qa}. This galaxy ellipticity or angular momentum alignment and the potential for finding correlations in the alignments of galaxies has been extensively studied; see for example \cite{Djorgovski1987} and references therein for an early review of the topic. Beyond these large-scale gravitational mechanisms, there is also evidence from both simulations and measurements of small-scale alignments of galaxies (e.g., Secs.~\ref{detections} \& \ref{sims}) to indicate that nonlinear or baryonic physics, merger history, and gas infall may play a significant role in late-time alignments (or mis-alignments) of galaxies.
To introduce these effects, we can label to first order the measured shear as
\begin{equation}
\gamma^{\textrm{obs}}=\gamma+\gamma^I,\label{eq:gammai}
\end{equation}
where $\gamma$ is the true gravitational shear and $\gamma^I$ represents only the correlated part of this intrinsic alignment of galaxies, unlike in Eq. \ref{eq:efrome} where $e^I$ denotes the actual intrinsic ellipticity. Since we are concerned only with the weak limit, we can work with the lensing convergence $\kappa$ instead. From the measured $\gamma^{\textrm{obs}}$, we instead obtain
\begin{equation}
\kappa^{\textrm{obs}}=\kappa+\kappa^I. \label{eq:kappai}
\end{equation}
This observed shear or convergence can be propagated through the 2- and 3-point correlation functions to construct several intrinsic alignment correlations, which will be discussed and given a physical description in the following sections.
\subsection{The 2-point intrinsic alignment correlations}
For the 2-point correlation function, we will assume that two galaxies $i$ and $j$ with redshifts $z_i$ and $z_j$, respectively, are observed such that $z_i<z_j$. This is demonstrated qualitatively using the simple representation of the correlated intrinsic alignment signal in Eq.~(\ref{eq:gammai}), such that the observed 2-point shear correlation function is actually composed of up to four parts:
\begin{align}
\langle\gamma^{\textrm{obs}}_i\gamma^{\textrm{obs}}_j\rangle=&\langle\gamma_i\gamma_j\rangle+\langle\gamma^I_i\gamma_j\rangle+\langle\gamma_i\gamma^I_j\rangle+\langle\gamma^I_i\gamma^I_j\rangle.
\end{align}
\begin{itemize}
\item{The first term $\langle\gamma_i\gamma_j\rangle$ represents the true weak lensing component of the measurement, the gravitational shear--gravitational shear correlation, which is often labeled $GG$. This is the component of the observed shear-shear correlation that we seek to use, for example, to constrain a cosmological model or to test gravity on large scales.}
\item{The second and third terms $\langle\gamma^I_i\gamma_j\rangle+\langle\gamma_i\gamma^I_j\rangle$ are the same physical correlation, but with differently oriented components. They represent the gravitational shear--intrinsic alignment correlation, labeled $GI$. This $GI$ correlation is shown in the right series of panels in Fig.~\ref{fig:2ptia}, where some galaxy $i$ at a redshift $z_i$ is between the observer and galaxy $j$ at redshift $z_j>z_i$. The structure located at $z_i$ (shown in gray) produces a tidal field that leads to the intrinsic alignment of the nearby galaxy labeled $I$ (shown in blue), while also lensing the background galaxy labeled $G$ (shown in red) at $z_j$. The third term should be negligible in this case if $z_a$ are true redshifts, because the shear signal of galaxy $i$, which is caused by the matter between this galaxy and the observer, should be independent of any background object of sufficient separation.
As depicted in Fig.~\ref{fig:2ptia}, the gravitational shear and intrinsic alignment tend to act in orthogonal directions in a simple alignment model which is driven by interaction with the tidal field, which means that $GI$ is actually an anti-correlation. More complex models that include the impact, for example, due to the merger history of the galaxy or baryonic infall may result in an intrinsic alignment for some galaxies which causes a positive correlation with gravitational shear. This is commented on further in terms of merger rates of late-type galaxies in Secs. \ref{detections} \& \ref{sims}.}
\item{Finally, the fourth term $\langle\gamma^I_i\gamma^I_j\rangle$ represents the intrinsic alignment -- intrinsic alignment correlation, labeled $II$, and is due to two physically close galaxies ($z_i\approx z_j$) being mutually aligned by the gravitational tidal field of the structures surrounding or near to them. This is shown in the left series of panels in Fig.~\ref{fig:2ptia}, where two galaxies at $z_i$ are both aligned with the tidal field of the structure (shown in gray).}
\end{itemize}
Altogether, the measured shear 2-point correlation can be represented as the sum of
\begin{equation}
\langle\gamma^{\textrm{obs}}\gamma^{\textrm{obs}}\rangle=GG+IG+GI+II.
\end{equation}
Isolating the intrinsic alignment components $GI$, $IG$, and $II$ from the pure lensing signal $GG$ is a nontrivial exercise, which is discussed in detail in Sec.~\ref{mitigation}.
\begin{figure}
\center
\includegraphics[width=0.675\textwidth]{3ptia.eps}
\caption{A physical representation of the 3-point intrinsic alignment correlations $GGI$, $GII$, and $III$ is shown. Panels to the bottom right of each series represent the observed view of the galaxies on the sky, with unlensed galaxy shapes and the location of the lensing structure(s) shown as dotted outlines. Panels to the upper left in each series represent the relevant physical components at different redshift slices with $z_i<z_j<z_k$. The bottom series of panels shows the $III$ correlation, where three galaxies (labeled $I$ and colored blue) are intrinsically aligned with the tidal field of a structure (shown in gray) at $z_i$. This will tend to produce a correlation between the galaxy shapes. The top series of panels shows the $GGI$ correlation, where a single galaxy is intrinsically aligned by a structure at $z_i$, while two background galaxies (labeled $G$ and colored red) at $z_k,z_j>z_i$ are lensed by the same structure. Finally, the middle series of panels show the $GII$ correlation, where two foreground galaxies at the same or different redshifts are intrinsically aligned by local structures, which in turn lens a background galaxy. Both the $GGI$ and $GII$ correlations can change sign based on triangle shape and scale. Source: Reproduced from \protect\cite{TroxelIshak2012b}.}\label{fig:3ptia}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\center
\includegraphics[height=\textwidth,angle=270]{spectrumia.eps}%
\caption{The intrinsic alignment power spectra are shown with their impact on the observed lensing spectrum for the base cosmology discussed in Sec.~\ref{formalisms}. Both the linear alignment model (thin lines) and the ad hoc nonlinear alignment model (thick lines) are shown, with $C_1$ chosen to match the normalization of \protect\cite{HirataSeljak2004}. The models represent the fiducial models discussed in Secs. \ref{la} \& \ref{nla} that agree with low redshift observations of early-type galaxy alignment. The linear alignment model under-predicts the intrinsic alignment signal on small scales (large $\ell$). The magnitude of the impact of intrinsic alignment on the observed lensing spectrum is comparable to the changes in cosmology shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:pscosmo} for even a deep, stage IV survey.}\label{fig:psia}
\end{figure}
\subsection{The 3-point intrinsic alignment correlations}
Using the simple representation above, we can also decompose the measured 3-point shear correlation into four parts that represent the associated 3-point intrinsic alignment correlations with $z_i<z_j<z_k$, where permuted terms have been combined:
\begin{align}
\langle\gamma^{\textrm{obs}}_i\gamma^{\textrm{obs}}_j\gamma^{\textrm{obs}}_k\rangle&=\langle\gamma_i\gamma_j\gamma_k\rangle+\langle\gamma^I_i\gamma_j\gamma_k\rangle+2\textrm{ perm.}+\langle\gamma^I_i\gamma^I_j\gamma_k\rangle+2\textrm{ perm.}+\langle\gamma^I_i\gamma^I_j\gamma^I_k\rangle.
\end{align}
\begin{itemize}
\item {The first term $\langle\gamma_i\gamma_j\gamma_k\rangle$ represents the true weak lensing component of the measurement, labeled $GGG$. This can be combined with the $GG$ correlation above to better constrain cosmological parameters by breaking degeneracies between $\Omega_m$ and $\sigma_8$. It is also able to place limits on the levels of primordial non-Gaussianity, which is not possible at the 2-point level.}
\item {The second term $\langle\gamma^I_i\gamma_j\gamma_k\rangle$ and permutations represent the $GGI$ correlation, where a galaxy is intrinsically aligned by a nearby matter structure, which in turn contributes to the lensing of two background galaxies. For true redshifts, where $z_i<z_j<z_k$, the permutations are zero or negligible compared to the $\langle\gamma^I_i\gamma_j\gamma_k\rangle$. The $GGI$ correlation is shown in the top series of panels in Fig.~\ref{fig:3ptia}, where a galaxy labeled $I$ (shown in blue) at $z_i$ is intrinsically aligned with the tidal field of a structure (shown in gray). This structure then lenses two galaxies labeled $G$ (shown in red) at redshifts $z_j,z_k>z_i$. Like $GI$, this correlation is typically an anti-correlation, but can change sign based on the triangle shape, scale, and redshift of the galaxy triplet.}
\item {The fifth term $\langle\gamma^I_i\gamma^I_j\gamma_k\rangle$ and permutations is labeled $GII$. In this case, two foreground galaxies are intrinsically aligned by structure(s) which in turn lens a background galaxy. This is represented in the two middle series of panels in Fig.~\ref{fig:3ptia}, the upper-most of which is actually a cross-over between the GGI and GII correlations. As shown in these two series of panels, the $GII$ correlation can either be a positive or negative correlation, and the case where $z_i\approx z_j$ generally has a larger magnitude. In simple representations (see Sec.~\ref{modellingbs}), the sign of $GII$ typically changes as a function of $\ell$ between scales where the gravitational shear--intrinsic alignment and the intrinsic alignment--intrinsic alignment contributions dominate. This behavior is dependent, though, on the triangle shape, scale, and redshift of the galaxy triplet.}
\item {The last term $\langle\gamma^I_i\gamma^I_j\gamma^I_k\rangle$ is the $III$ correlation between the intrinsic ellipticities of three spatially close galaxies which are intrinsically aligned by a nearby or surrounding structure.}
\end{itemize}
Altogether, the measured shear 3-point correlation can be represented by the sum
\begin{equation}
\langle\gamma^{\textrm{obs}}\gamma^{\textrm{obs}}\gamma^{\textrm{obs}}\rangle=GGG+GGI+2\textrm{ perm.}+GII+2\textrm{ perm.}+III.
\end{equation}
Methods to disentangle these intrinsic alignment ($GGI$, $GII$, and $III$) and gravitational shear ($GGG$) components are also discussed in detail in Sec.~\ref{mitigation}.
\subsection{Analytic description of the intrinsic alignment power spectra and bispectra}
Assuming that one has knowledge of the underlying intrinsic shear field, Limber's approximation \citep{Limber1954,Kaiser1992} can be employed to write the intrinsic alignment power and bispectra described above. Instead of the weighting function in Eq.~(\ref{eq:weightbin}), which is dependent on the lensing efficiency, the contribution of the intrinsic alignment of galaxies is simply proportional to the normalized galaxy density. We will refer to $W^G_i(\chi)$ as the lensing weight from Eq.~(\ref{eq:weightbin}), while $W^I_i(\chi)=W^g_i(\chi)=f_i(\chi)$ is the intrinsic alignment weighting function. This is the same weighting function used in the Limber approximation for the galaxy density, and will be used in Sec.~\ref{sc2} to constrain the intrinsic alignment signal.
The two intrinsic alignment power spectra are then written
\begin{align}
P^{IG}_{ij}(\ell)&=\int_0^{\chi_1}d\chi\frac{W^I_i(\chi)W^G_j(\chi)}{\sin_k^2(\chi)}P_{\delta\bar{\gamma}^I}(k=\frac{\ell}{\sin_k(\chi)};\chi)\\
P^{II}_{ij}(\ell)&=\int_0^{\chi_1}d\chi\frac{W^I_i(\chi)W^I_j(\chi)}{\sin_k^2(\chi)}P_{\bar{\gamma}^I}(k=\frac{\ell}{\sin_k(\chi)};\chi),
\end{align}
where $P_{\bar{\gamma}^I}$ and $P_{\delta\bar{\gamma}^I}$ are some 3D spectra that can be related to the 3D matter power spectrum on large enough scales. Some proposed methods for modeling these spectra are reviewed in Sec.~\ref{models}. We have plotted the $GI$ and $II$ spectra relative to $GG$ in Fig.~\ref{fig:psia} for the intrinsic alignment models discussed in Secs. \ref{la} \& \ref{nla}. For the deep survey described in Sec.~\ref{formalisms}, $II$ is negligible compared to $GI$, which is of order $10\%$ of the lensing signal. The magnitude of the impact of intrinsic alignment on the observed lensing spectrum is comparable to the changes in cosmology shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:pscosmo} for even a deep, stage IV survey. In fact, the given wCDM model in Fig.~\ref{fig:pscosmo} looks very similar to the effects of $GI$ on the spectrum. A deviation from a cosmological constant of 20\% in $w_0$ for the wCDM model changes the magnitude of the spectrum by about $8\%$ at $\ell=1000$, while the reduction due to intrinsic alignment is about $10\%$
The three intrinsic alignment bispectra are similarly written
\begin{align}
B^{IGG}_{ijk}(\ell_1,\ell_2,\ell_3)&=\int_0^{\chi_1}d\chi\frac{W^I_i(\chi)W^G_j(\chi)W^G_k(\chi)}{\sin_k^4(\chi)}B_{\delta\delta\bar{\gamma}^I}(k_1=\frac{\ell_1}{\sin_k(\chi)},k_2=\frac{\ell_2}{\sin_k(\chi)},k_3=\frac{\ell_3}{\sin_k(\chi)};\chi)\\
B^{IIG}_{ijk}(\ell_1,\ell_2,\ell_3)&=\int_0^{\chi_1}d\chi\frac{W^I_i(\chi)W^I_j(\chi)W^G_k(\chi)}{\sin_k^4(\chi)}B_{\delta\bar{\gamma}^I\bar{\gamma}^I}(k_1=\frac{\ell_1}{\sin_k(\chi)},k_2=\frac{\ell_2}{\sin_k(\chi)},k_3=\frac{\ell_3}{\sin_k(\chi)};\chi)\\
B^{III}_{ijk}(\ell_1,\ell_2,\ell_3)&=\int_0^{\chi_1}d\chi\frac{W^I_i(\chi)W^I_j(\chi)W^I_k(\chi)}{\sin_k^4(\chi)}B_{\bar{\gamma}^I}(k_1=\frac{\ell_1}{\sin_k(\chi)},k_2=\frac{\ell_2}{\sin_k(\chi)},k_3=\frac{\ell_3}{\sin_k(\chi)};\chi),
\end{align}
with associated 3D bispectra $B_{\delta\delta\bar{\gamma}^I}$, $B_{\delta\bar{\gamma}^I\bar{\gamma}^I}$, and $B_{\bar{\gamma}^I}$. Unlike the power spectrum, little work has been done to properly characterize these 3D bispectra, though the relationships between the mean intrinsic shear and the underlying density field in Secs. \ref{la} \& \ref{qa} remain applicable. However, \cite{SemboloniHeymansVanwaerbekeSchneider2008} have showed that lensing bispectrum measurements are typically more strongly contaminated by intrinsic alignment compared to the lensing spectrum measurements, with $GGI$ being as large as $15-20\%$ compared to the $GGG$ lensing signal. This is discussed further in Secs. \ref{modellingbs} \& \ref{sims}.
\subsection{Modeling and characterizing the intrinsic alignment correlations}\label{models}
To evaluate the impact of the intrinsic alignment of galaxies on the cosmic shear signal, it is useful to have an analytic description of the associated intrinsic alignment power spectra and bispectra. This requires some physical model to describe the impact of the tidal field due to the underlying density distribution in the universe on the observed shapes of galaxies, similarly to the description of the lensing spectrum or bispectrum in Eq.~(\ref{eq:bspec}) in terms of the matter power spectrum. Simple models of this effect on large scales can be generally broken down into two categories, linear and quadratic alignment models, based on the order at which the alignment responds to the gravitational potential due to the linear density field $\delta_{m}$. These two models are associated with separate physical causes of the intrinsic galaxy alignment. On smaller scales, several attempts have been made to more accurately model the intrinsic alignment, including ad hoc inclusions of the nonlinear matter power spectrum and attempts to build a `halo' or semi-analytic intrinsic alignment model. A brief discussion of fitting functions for the intrinsic alignment signal from simulation measurements is also given in Sec.~\ref{sims}.
\subsubsection{Linear alignment models}\label{la}
The most commonly used model for intrinsic alignment in cosmic shear studies on large scales is the linear alignment model of \cite{HirataSeljak2004,HirataSeljak2010}, which we will refer to generally as the 'linear alignment model', and which is based on the intrinsic alignment prescription of \cite{CatelanKamionkowskiBlandford2001}. The linear alignment model follows a similar argument as linear galaxy bias theory; that is, large-scale correlations or fluctuations in the mean intrinsic ellipticity field of triaxial elliptical galaxies should be due to large-scale fluctuations in the primordial potential in which the galaxy formed during the matter dominated epoch. The relationship between gravitational shear and the linear density perturbation field is known to be
\begin{equation}
\bm{\gamma_i}=(\gamma_{i+},\gamma_{i\times})=\partial^{-2}\int_0^{\infty}d\chi W(\chi,\chi_i)(\partial_x^2-\partial_y^2,2\partial_x\partial_y)\delta_m(\chi\hat{n}_i),
\end{equation}
for partial derivatives with respect to angular position, and density perturbation $\delta_m$ at comoving distance $\chi_i$ and in angular direction $\hat{n}_i$. $W(\chi,\chi_i)$ is the integrand of Eq.~(\ref{eq:weighting}), such that $W(\chi)=\int d\chi_i W(\chi,\chi_i)$.
Following \cite{CatelanKamionkowskiBlandford2001}, one can similarly write a linear relationship between the mean intrinsic shear and the primordial Newtonian potential (or equivalently, the density perturbation field),
\begin{equation}
\bm{\gamma^I}=-\frac{C_1}{4\pi G}(\nabla_x^2-\nabla_y^2,2\nabla_x\nabla_y)S[\Psi_p].\label{eq:gammapsi}
\end{equation}
$S$ is a smoothing filter which removes galaxy-scale fluctuations and $\nabla$ is a comoving derivative. The right hand side of Eq.~(\ref{eq:gammapsi}) is a unique representation of the possible linear and local functions of $\Psi_p$, since higher order derivative terms should be negligible on large scales. The particular choice of smoothing for the potential $\Psi_p$ can also be considered to be a free component of the linear alignment model, but there is as yet no clear best choice in smoothing scale or method. The idea of a linear alignment model is also not specifically an early-time phenomenon, but could refer to linear dependence on the potential at any time. Most discussions of the linear alignment model, however, assume an early-time 'freeze-in' of alignments based on the primordial potential.
$C_1$ is a normalization constant, which has traditionally been determined from observation. A positive $C_1$ corresponds to alignment with the tidal field, in contrast with the tangential shearing due to gravitational lensing. The value of $C_1$ could in principle also be determined by a suitable analytic model of galaxy alignment or through hydrodynamical simulations of sufficient size and resolution to allow the unbiased measurement of individual galaxy shapes.
In Fourier space, the primordial potential can be related to the linear density perturbation field by
\begin{equation}
\Psi_p(\bm{k})=-4\pi G\frac{\bar{\rho}_m(z)}{\bar{D}(z)}a^2k^{-2}\delta_{m}(\bm{k}),
\end{equation}
where $\bar{D}(z)\propto D/a$ is the normalized growth factor. The density-weighted mean intrinsic shear $\bar{\gamma}^I=(1+\delta_g)\gamma^I$ at some redshift can then be written as \citep{HirataSeljak2004,HirataSeljak2010}
\begin{equation}
\bm{\bar{\gamma}^I}(\bm{k})=C_1 a^2\frac{\bar{\rho}}{\bar{D}}\int d^3\bm{k_1}\frac{(k^2_{2x}-k^2_{2y},2k_{2x}k_{2y})}{k_2^2}\delta_{m}(\bm{k_2})\left[\delta^{(3)}(\bm{k_1})+\frac{b_1}{(2\pi)^3}\delta_{m}(\bm{k_1})\right],\label{eq:weightint1}
\end{equation}
where $b_1$ is the linear galaxy bias ($\delta_g=b_1 \delta_m$) and $\bm{k}=\bm{k_1}+\bm{k_2}$ is assumed to lie perpendicular to the line of sight on the x-axis. The density weighting of $\gamma^I$ cannot be ignored as intrinsic alignment typically occurs in environments with galaxies near to each other, where $\delta_g\ge 1$.
The associated E- and B-mode power spectra for $\bar{\gamma}^I$ are then related to the linear matter power spectrum $P_{\delta}$ at some redshift through
\begin{align}
P^{EE}_{\bar{\gamma}^I}(k)=&C_1^2a^4\frac{\bar{\rho}^2}{\bar{D}^2}\left\{P_{\delta}(k)+\frac{b^2_g}{(2\pi)^3}\int d^3\bm{k_1}\left[f_E(\bm{k_1})+f_E(\bm{k_2})\right]f_E(\bm{k_2})P_{\delta}(k_1)P_{\delta}(k_2)\right\},\label{eq:iie}\\
P^{BB}_{\bar{\gamma}^I}(k)=&C_1^2a^4\frac{\bar{\rho}^2}{\bar{D}^2}\frac{b^2_g}{(2\pi)^3}\int d^3\bm{k_1}\left[f_B(\bm{k_1})+f_B(\bm{k_2})\right]f_B(\bm{k_2})P_{\delta}(k_1)P_{\delta}(k_2),\label{eq:iib}
\end{align}
where $f_{(E,B)}(k)=([k_x^2-k_y^2]/k^2,2k_xk_y/k^2)$. To first order in $P_{\delta}$, $P_{\bar{\gamma}^I}$ is purely E-mode, and the cross-power between the mean weighted shear and matter density at some redshift is given by
\begin{equation}
P^{EE}_{\delta\bar{\gamma}^I}(k)=-C_1a^2\frac{\bar{\rho}}{\bar{D}}P_{\delta}(k).\label{eq:ig}
\end{equation}
The B-mode spectrum for $\bar{\gamma}^I$ and second order term in Eq.~(\ref{eq:iib}) are both similar in magnitude, typically an order of magnitude smaller than the leading term in the E-mode spectrum, and are thus often neglected when utilizing the linear alignment model.
\subsubsection{Quadratic alignment models}\label{qa}
For spiral galaxies, the observed ellipticity is due to an inclination of the disk with respect to the line of sight, and thus the orientation of its angular momentum vector. This produces a quadratic relationship between the mean ellipticity and the primordial potential, since a tidal field both causes an anisotropic moment of inertia, leading to the spin up of angular momentum in the galaxy, while also applying a torque. While this theory of tidal torquing is widely used in studies of spiral galaxy alignment and evolution, its validity has not been well demonstrated, which may be an important caveat given the lack of confirmation of such quadratic models through large-scale measurements of intrinsic alignment. The second order contribution to the mean intrinsic shear due to tidal torquing is given by \citep{CatelanKamionkowskiBlandford2001,CrittendenNatarajanPenTheuns2001,MackeyWhiteKamionkowski2002}
\begin{equation}
\bm{\gamma^I}=C_2(T^2_{x\mu}-T^2_{y\mu},2T_{x\mu}T_{y\mu}),
\end{equation}
with the tidal tensor
\begin{equation}
T_{\mu\nu}=\frac{1}{4\pi G}\left(\nabla_{\mu}\nabla_{\nu}-\frac{1}{3}\delta_{\mu\nu}\nabla^2\right)S[\Psi_p].
\end{equation}
The density weighted mean intrinsic shear is then \cite{HirataSeljak2004}
\begin{equation}
\bm{\bar{\gamma}^I}_X(\bm{k})=C_2a^4\frac{\bar{\rho}^2}{(2\pi)^3\bar{D}^2}\int d^3\bm{k}_1'd^3\bm{k}_2'h_X(\hat{\bm{k}}_1',\hat{\bm{k}}_2')\delta_{m}(\bm{k}_1')\delta_{m}(\bm{k}_2')\left[\delta^{(3)}(\bm{k}_3')+\frac{b_1}{(2\pi)^3}\delta_{m}(\bm{k}_3')\right],
\end{equation}
for $\hat{\bm{k}}_a=\bm{k}_a/|k_a|$ and $\bm{k_3'}=\bm{k}-\bm{k_1'}-\bm{k}_2'$. For $X\in{E,B}$, $h_E=h_{xx}-h_{yy}$ and $h_B=2h_{xy}$, where
\begin{align}
h_{\lambda\mu}(\hat{\bm{u}},\hat{\bm{v}})=\left(\hat{u}_{\mu}\hat{u}_{\nu}-\frac{1}{3}\delta_{\mu\nu}\right)\left(\hat{v}_{\lambda}\hat{v}_{\nu}-\frac{1}{3}\delta_{\lambda\nu}\right).
\end{align}
The E- and B-mode power spectra can then be written as, replacing $h_E$ with $h_B$ for $P^{BB}_{\bar{\gamma}^I}$,
\begin{align}
P^{EE}_{\bar{\gamma}^I}(k)=&C_2^2 a^8 \frac{\bar{\rho}^4}{\bar{D}^4}\Bigg[\frac{2}{(2\pi)^3}\int d^3\bm{k}_1 h^2_E(\hat{\bm{k}}_1',\hat{\bm{k}}_2')P_{\delta}(k_1)P_{\delta}(k_2)\\
&+\frac{2b_1^2}{3(2\pi)^6}\int d^3\bm{k}_1'd^3\bm{k}_2' \left(h_E(\hat{\bm{k}}_1',\hat{\bm{k}}_2')+h_E(\hat{\bm{k}}_2',\hat{\bm{k}}_3')+h_E(\hat{\bm{k}}_3',\hat{\bm{k}}_1')\right)^2P_{\delta}(k_1')P_{\delta}(k_2')P_{\delta}(k_3')\Bigg].\nonumber
\end{align}
We will refer to this prescription for the intrinsic alignment power spectrum as the 'quadratic alignment model'. The quadratic alignment model predicts no $GI$ spectrum for a Gaussian $\delta_m$ and linear galaxy biasing and evolution of the density field, which are frequently made assumptions. The lack of a $GI$ spectrum for the quadratic model is consistent, though, with a null detection of $GI$ in various survey samples of late-type or blue galaxies on large scales, which are discussed in Sec.~\ref{detections}. Due to the relative success of the linear alignment model in measurements using strongly biased early-type or red galaxies and its ease of use in making predictions, the quadratic model has typically received less attention in the literature. Other investigations related to the tidal alignment of spin have also been performed by \cite{Lee2004,SchaeferMerkel2012,GiahiSaravaniSchaefer2014}. For a more thorough discussion of galactic angular momentum and its impact on galaxy alignment, we refer the reader to the review by \cite{Schaefer2009}.
\subsubsection{Modifications to the linear alignment model}\label{nla}
The linear alignment model described above is designed to capture large-scale features of the intrinsic alignment signal for elliptical galaxies, and its applicability at small scales is unclear, where nonlinear physics may enhance or reduce the mean intrinsic shear. This was addressed in an ad hoc way, for example, by modifying the implementation of Eqs. (\ref{eq:iie})-(\ref{eq:ig}) to use the nonlinear matter power spectrum in order to enhance the small scale magnitude of the intrinsic alignment spectra, following a suggestion by \cite{HirataEtAl2007}. This was shown by \cite{BridleKing2007} to better match previous models of intrinsic shear correlations on small scales by \cite{HeavensRefregierHeymans2000,HeymansEtAl2004} (the HRH$^{*}$ model, modified from the original HRH model of \cite{HeavensRefregierHeymans2000}) and recent observations of both $II$ and $GI$ by \cite{MandelbaumEtAl2006}. The HRH$^{*}$ model predicts, for example, the correlated mean intrinsic shear, $w_{++}(r_p)$, along the axis between pairs of galaxies at separation $r_p$ in the plane of the sky. The correlation function $w_{++}$ can be related to $P_{\bar{\gamma}^I}$ by
\begin{equation}
P_{\bar{\gamma}^I}(k)=2\pi\int dr_p w_{++}(r_p)J_0(kr_p)r_p,
\end{equation}
where $J_0$ is a Bessel function of the first kind. In the HRH$^{*}$ model, $w_{++}$ is
\begin{equation}
w_{++}(r_p)=\frac{A}{8\mathcal{R}^2}\int dr_{||}\left[1+\left(\frac{r}{r_0}\right)^{-\gamma_{gg}}\right]\frac{1}{1+(r/B)^2},
\end{equation}
with amplitude $A$, 3D separation $r^2=r_{||}^2+r_p^2$, galaxy clustering parameters $r_0=5.25 h^{-1}$ Mpc and $\gamma_{gg}=1.8$ \citep{HeymansEtAl2004}, and free parameter $B=1 h^{-1}$ Mpc. $\mathcal{R}\approx0.87$ converts the measured ellipticity into a shear.
The inclusion of the nonlinear matter power spectrum by \cite{BridleKing2007}, often referred to as the 'nonlinear alignment model' (NLA) in the literature, produces much better agreement between the linear alignment model and the HRH$^{*}$ model on small scales ($r_p<2 h^{-1}$ Mpc), as constrained by comparison to observations in \cite{HeymansEtAl2004,MandelbaumEtAl2006}. The name 'nonlinear alignment model' is misleading, however, as the model is not truly nonlinear. To avoid confusion with future attempts to include true nonlinear corrections to the linear alignment models, we will instead refer to the modification to the linear alignment model by \cite{BridleKing2007} as the ad hoc nonlinear alignment model ('ad hoc' NLA), as the nonlinear matter power spectrum includes the late-time nonlinear evolution of the density field in determining the intrinsic alignment redshift and scale dependence. While the inclusion of the nonlinear matter power spectrum produces the desired improvement in fit for the linear alignment model to small scale predictions and measurements, it has no consistent basis in physical theory. See also \cite{BlazekMcquinnSeljak2011} for a discussion of some inconsistencies in the original nonlinear linear alignment model.
In more recent years, further modifications to this approach have been made to attempt to reconcile this (e.g., \cite{KirkRassatHostBridle2011,KirkLaszloBridleBean2012}), late-time clustering linear alignment models (LC-LA), where the intrinsic alignments of galaxies are assumed to be seeded at early times and thus the $II$ term is related to the linear matter power spectrum, while the $GI$ term is related to the geometric mean of the linear and nonlinear matter power spectra, which allows for late-time non-linear evolution of the density field. \cite{HirataEtAl2007,JoachimiMandelbaumAbdallaBridle2011} also modified the linear alignment models to include an additional parameterized luminosity and redshift dependence to the galaxy--intrinsic alignment spectrum, such that (e.g., \cite{JoachimiMandelbaumAbdallaBridle2011})
\begin{equation}
P_{gI}(k,z,L)\equiv A b_1 P_{\delta\bar{\gamma}^I}(k,z)\left(\frac{1+z}{1+z_0}\right)^{\alpha}\left(\frac{L}{L_0}\right)^{\beta}.\label{eq:NLA}
\end{equation}
The reference parameters are chosen to be $z_0=0.3$ and a luminosity $L_0$ corresponding to $M_r=-22$. Best-fit values for various galaxy samples of $\{A,\alpha,\beta\}$ are given in Table 4\footnote{$\alpha$ is denoted $\eta_{other}$ in \protect\cite{JoachimiMandelbaumAbdallaBridle2011}} of \cite{JoachimiMandelbaumAbdallaBridle2011}. Additional redshift scaling was shown to be unnecessary to fit measurements, while there is strong evidence for the inclusion of a luminosity dependence, which is not captured by the base linear alignment models. Recent hydrodynamical simulation measurements by \cite{TennetiEtAl2014b} in the MassiveBlack-II simulation \cite{mbii} qualitatively agree with measurements by \cite{JoachimiMandelbaumAbdallaBridle2011}, with $\alpha$ consistent with zero, but a weaker luminosity dependence characterized by $\beta$. This may be due simply to difference in the galaxy samples used to measure $\beta$ in the two works. Work has also progressed to attempt to describe the intrinsic alignment signal on small scales through alternative methods, like the halo and semi-analytical approaches discussed below.
\subsubsection{Halo alignment models}\label{haloia}
To provide a more physically motivated basis for expanding the linear alignment model to smaller scales, \cite{SchneiderBridle2010} developed a framework for modeling the impact of galaxy intrinsic alignment through a halo model approach, following earlier work by \cite{SmithWatts2005} to include the effects of triaxial halos and intrinsic alignment into the halo model. The halo model, which views the universe as filled with structure represented by dark matter halos of varying mass, has been very successful for predictions of galaxy clustering \citep{SherrerBertschinger1991,ScoccimarroEtAl2001,CooraySheth2002}. The positions of galaxies are then dependent on the resulting distribution of dark matter. This leads to multiple contributions to the matter power spectrum from correlations between galaxies within a single dark matter halo (`1h' terms) and between different halos (`2h' terms).
In order to use the halo model approach to calculate the theoretical intrinsic alignment signal, \cite{SchneiderBridle2010} assigned a central galaxy to each halo, which is surrounded by (nearly) radially aligned satellite galaxies. The one- or two-halo terms are then potentially central--central ('cc'), central--satellite ('cs'), or satellite--satellite ('ss') correlations. The two-halo central--central correlation of halo pairs is assumed to follow the linear alignment model for both $P^{2h,cc}_{\bar{\gamma}^I}$ and $P^{2h,cc}_{\delta\bar{\gamma}^I}$ (i.e. Sec.~\ref{la}), where the central galaxy is assumed to be precisely centered in and to share the ellipticity of the parent halo.
The remaining non-zero one-halo E-mode spectra at some redshift were given by \cite{SchneiderBridle2010} as
\begin{align}
P^{1h,ss}_{\bar{\gamma}^I}(k)=&\int dm n(m) \frac{\langle N^s_g(N^s_g-1)|m\rangle}{\bar{n}_g^2}|w(k,\theta_k|m)|^2\bar{\gamma}^2(m)\label{eq:1hss}\\
P^{1h,ss}_{\delta\bar{\gamma}^I}(k)=&\int dm n(m) \frac{m}{\bar{\rho}} \frac{\langle N^s_g|m\rangle}{\bar{n}_g}|w(k,\theta_k|m)|\bar{\gamma}(m)u(k|m),
\end{align}
while the non-zero 2-halo terms were given as
\begin{align}
P^{2h,ss}_{\bar{\gamma}^I}(k)=&\int dm_1 n(m_1) \frac{\langle N^s_g|m_1\rangle}{\bar{n}_g}|w(k,\theta_k|m_1)|\bar{\gamma}(m_1)\nonumber\\
&\times\int dm_2 n(m_2) \frac{\langle N^s_g|m_2\rangle}{\bar{n}_g}|w(k,\theta_k|m_2)|^2\bar{\gamma}(m_2) P_{2h}(k|m_1,m_2)\\
P^{2h,ss}_{\delta\bar{\gamma}^I}(k)=&\int dm_1 n(m_1) \frac{\langle N^s_g|m_1\rangle}{\bar{n}_g}|w(k,\theta_k|m_1)|\bar{\gamma}(m_1)\\
&\int dm_2 n(m_2) \frac{m_2}{\bar{rho}}u(k|m_2) P_{2h}(k|m_1,m_2)P_{2h}(k|m_1,m_2)\nonumber\\
P^{2h,cs}_{\bar{\gamma}^I}(k)=&C_1\frac{\bar{\rho}}{\bar{D}}P_{\delta}^{lin}\int dm n(m) \frac{\langle N^s_g|m\rangle}{\bar{n}_g}b_h(m)|w(k,\theta_k|m)|\bar{\gamma}(m)u(k|m).\label{eq:2hcs}
\end{align}
These depend on the halo-halo power spectrum $P_{2h}$, the linear matter power spectrum $P_{\delta}$, and the 3D density weighted, projected ellipticity of galaxies $\bar{\gamma}^I(r,m,c)=\bar{\gamma}(r,m,c)e^{2i\phi}\sin\theta N_g u(r|m,c)$, which generally depends on position in the halo, halo mass, and concentration. $\bar{\gamma}$ is the magnitude of the projected ellipticity field, $N_g$ is the number of galaxies in the halo, $\bar{n}_g$ is the mean galaxy number density, $u(\bm{r}|m,c)\equiv \rho_{NFW}(\bm{r},m)/m$, $w(k|m)\equiv \bar{\gamma}^I(k|m)/\bar{\gamma}(m)$, and $\langle N^s_g|m\rangle$ and $\langle N^s_g(N^s_g-1)|m\rangle$ are the first and second moments of the distribution of galaxies within a halo of mass $m$.
This basic model assumes that satellite galaxies are exactly radially oriented with respect to the parent halo. \cite{SchneiderBridle2010} demonstrated that the inclusion of a probability distribution of satellite galaxy alignments with respect to the halo radial direction, based in part on the measured probability distribution of alignments by \cite{KnebeEtAl2008} from numerical simulations, causes a systematic multiplicative reduction in the amplitude of the intrinsic correlation by some factor $\bar{\gamma}_{scale}^2=0.21^2$, which is independent of the halo mass. The factor $\bar{\gamma}_{scale}$ captures the dominant, multiplicative impact on the power spectrum of having some fraction of galaxies with a non-radial orientation. Fitting functions were provided for the one-halo terms at some redshift,
\begin{align}
P^{1h,ss}_{\bar{\gamma}^I,fit}(k)=&\bar{\gamma}^2_{scale}\frac{(k/p_1)^4}{1+(k/p_2)^{p_3}}\\
P^{1h,ss}_{\delta\bar{\gamma}^I,fit}(k)=&-\bar{\gamma}_{scale}\frac{(k/p_1)^2}{1+(k/p_2)^{p_3}},
\end{align}
where $p_i(z)=q_{i1}\exp{q_{i2}z^{q_{i3}}}$. Best-fit values for $q_{ij}$ are given in \cite{SchneiderBridle2010}. The component spectra in Eqs. (\ref{eq:1hss})-(\ref{eq:2hcs}), when taken in sum, reduce naturally to the linear alignment model on large scales, while providing a more physically motivated boost to the intrinsic alignment signal on small scales to match requirements from small-scale models based on numerical simulations, as well as recent direct measurements.
The framework presented by \cite{SchneiderBridle2010} is a necessary first step toward producing more accurate, physically motivated models of intrinsic alignment on smaller scales for use in evaluating its impact in studies of weak gravitational lensing. As mentioned by the authors, improvements are likely possible by relaxing the initial assumptions made in developing the model, including: incorporating appropriately mixed spiral and elliptical populations of central and satellite galaxies, which have been shown to have different contributions to the intrinsic alignment signal (e.g., Secs. \ref{la}-\ref{qa}, \ref{detections}, \ref{sims}); allowing for misalignment between central galaxies and the parent halo, as indicated by numerical simulations (e.g., Sec.~\ref{sims}); developing a more realistic description of the mean projected intrinsic ellipticity function, which includes variation as a function of radius, mass of the halo, and galaxy type; and including an appropriate anisotropic description of satellite distribution and relative alignment with the major/minor axes in a non-spherical halo (see for example, \cite{FaltenbacherEtAl2007} and references therein). Recent work (e.g., \cite{SchneiderFrenkCole2012,TennetiEtAl2014,SifonEtAl2014}) has provided some insight into how these effects can be properly taken into account. Despite significant room for improvement, much of which is dependent on advances in our understanding of galaxy formation and evolution (e.g., the transition between one-halo and two-halo regimes), as well as the capability of providing large hydrodynamical simulations of structure formation, the halo approach for intrinsic alignment modeling disentangles to some degree the impact due to small scale correlations (one-halo) with expectations from linear large-scale physics (two-halo). This allows, for example, the fine resolution study of halos with baryonic and other effects included, to constrain the morphology, scale, mass, and redshift dependence of the input functions for the model.
\subsubsection{Semi-analytic alignment models}\label{sam}
Beyond the halo model approach to building an analytical description of the intrinsic alignment of galaxies, one might also consider a semi-analytical approach that folds in analytical models of intrinsic alignment on large scales, information from observations and dark matter simulations of cosmological scale, and small-scale galaxy and alignment properties from hydrodynamical simulations, which are as yet limited in size. \cite{JoachimiEtAl2013a,JoachimiEtAl2013b} presented such an approach to build a semi-analytical model to describe intrinsic galaxy alignment across a wide range of galaxy properties. We will summarize the process used to design the models, but refer the reader to \cite{JoachimiEtAl2013b} for a full discussion of the models' predictions for intrinsic alignment correlations across galaxy properties and redshifts, as they are too numerous to discuss fully here.
\begin{figure}
\center
\includegraphics[height=.53\textwidth,angle=270]{sam.eps}
\caption{The aperture-mass dispersion $\langle M^2_{E}\rangle(\theta)$ for the true weak lensing signal ($GG$ - black squares) and the intrinsic alignment signals ($|GI|$ - red triangles; and $II$ - blue circles) from the semi-analytical model of \protect\cite{JoachimiEtAl2013b} discussed in Sec.~\ref{sam}. Predictions for a future survey with $RIZ<24.5$ and $z_{med}\approx 0.9$ are shown for two redshift bins $0.45 < z < 0.55$ and $1.35 < z < 1.65$. The main panels show the aperture mass dispersion, while small panels show the fractional intrinsic alignment contamination $r_{IA}(\theta)$ relative to the lensing signal ($GG$). Top panels: The auto-correlation in the higher redshift bin. Middle panels: The cross-correlation between the redshift bins. Bottom panels: The auto-correlation in the lower redshift bin. Source: Reproduced with permission from \protect\cite{JoachimiEtAl2013b}, Oxford University Press on behalf of the Royal Astronomical Society.}\label{fig:sam}
\end{figure}
The semi-analytical models are approached from the perspective that we must merge large-scale correlations of galaxy ellipticities, the statistical distribution of galaxy alignments, and small-scale halo satellite alignments to achieve a fully self-consistent description of intrinsic alignment on all scales. The models take into account both early and late-type galaxies, as well as central and satellite galaxies. \cite{JoachimiEtAl2013a,JoachimiEtAl2013b} accomplish this by using dark matter halo properties determined from the Millennium Simulation \citep{SpringelEtAl2005}, but combined with (semi-)analytical models which describe the link between baryonic galaxy shapes and halo properties, including shape and alignment of satellite galaxies, based on hydrodynamical simulations (see Sec.~\ref{hydro}). These potential models are then vetted against constraints on intrinsic alignments from observations (see Sec.~\ref{detections}).
The types of galaxy alignment models used for central galaxies follow previous modeling techniques for early and late-type galaxies. Early type central galaxies are assumed to follow either the halo shape, determined using either the simple (overall halo shape) or reduced (inner halo region given increased weight) inertia tensor, with a galaxy misalignment with the halo shape (e.g., \cite{OkumuraJingLi2009}) included in some cases. Late-type central galaxies are assumed to be aligned perpendicularly to the halo angular momentum axis, with varying disk thickness-to-length ratios, and in some cases a galaxy misalignment (e.g., \cite{Bett2012}). Satellite galaxies, both late and early type, are assumed to have their primary alignment in the direction of the halo center (radial alignment). Late-type satellite galaxies have shape variations similar to the central late-type galaxies, while satellite early type galaxies have a halo distribution following from Millennium Simulation measurements, either from the simple or reduced inertia tensor, with alternate shape modifications following \cite{KnebeEtAl2008}.
An example of these models is shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:sam}, where predictions for a future survey of depth $z_{med}\approx 0.9$ are given in terms of the aperture mass dispersion $\langle M^2_{E}\rangle(\theta)$,
\begin{align}
\langle M^2_{E}\rangle(\theta)=\frac{1}{2}\int_{0}^{2\theta}d\vartheta\frac{\vartheta}{\theta^2}\left[\xi_{+}(\vartheta)T_{+}\left(\frac{\vartheta}{\theta}\right)+\xi_{-}(\vartheta)T_{-}\left(\frac{\vartheta}{\theta}\right)\right],
\end{align}
which is related to the angular correlation functions $\xi_{\pm}$ by the appropriately chosen weight functions $T_{\pm}$ \citep{SchneiderEtAl1998,SchneiderEtAl2002}. Also shown is the fractional intrinsic alignment contamination $r_{IA}(\theta)$
\begin{align}
r_{IA}(\theta)\equiv \frac{|\langle M^2_{E,GI}\rangle(\theta)+\langle M^2_{E,II}\rangle(\theta)|}{\langle M^2_{E,GG}\rangle(\theta)}.
\end{align}
For the lower redshift bin and the cross-correlation, $r_{IA}(\theta)\ge 10\%$ for all angular scales considered, while for the higher redshift bin, $1\%<r_{IA}(\theta)<10\%$, indicating that the impact of intrinsic alignment is still significant in planned surveys when computed using the results of the semi-analytical models derived by \cite{JoachimiEtAl2013a,JoachimiEtAl2013b}.
\subsubsection{Modeling of the intrinsic alignment bispectrum}\label{modellingbs}
The principles discussed above also hold for the analytical modeling of the impact of intrinsic alignment at the level of the bispectrum. However, little work has been done to rigorously explore the intrinsic alignment effects in the bispectrum, since there has until now been no survey capable of making precise enough measurements of the lensing bispectrum to warrant significant concern about the effects of intrinsic alignment in higher order correlations. Several approaches for mitigating the intrinsic alignment have been extended to the bispectrum in preparation for strong detections of the bispectrum predicted in ongoing and future surveys, however, and we describe these in Sec.~\ref{mitigation}.
Measurements of the 3-point intrinsic alignment correlations have been made by \cite{SemboloniHeymansVanwaerbekeSchneider2008} in numerical simulations, following the process developed by \cite{HeymansEtAl22006}. This is discussed in detail in Sec.~\ref{sims}, but it was shown that for low redshift samples ($z_{med}\approx 0.4$) the $III$ component dominates the lensing signal by an order of magnitude, while for deeper surveys ($z_{med}\approx 0.7$), the intrinsic alignment component comprises about $15\%$ of the $GGG$ lensing signal. In both cases, these are significantly stronger contaminations than at the 2-point level, and indicate that work to model, constrain, and mitigate the influence of intrinsic alignment on cosmological constraints using the bispectrum is very important. \cite{SemboloniHeymansVanwaerbekeSchneider2008} also provides fitting formulae for the dominant $GGI$ and $GII$ correlations in deeper surveys, which are discussed in Sec.~\ref{sims}.
In addition to simulation fitting formulae, some initial analytic estimates have also been made for the 3-point intrinsic alignment bispectra. In order to evaluate the performance of the intrinsic alignment self-calibration techniques for the bispectrum, \cite{TroxelIshak2012b,TroxelIshak2012c,TroxelIshak2012a} extended the linear alignment and halo models of Secs. \ref{nla} \& \ref{haloia} for the intrinsic alignment spectrum in an ad hoc way to the bispectrum, propagating the 2-point intrinsic alignment model through the perturbation theory result for the bispectrum given in Eq.~(\ref{eq:bfit}). This process produces reasonable magnitudes for the various 3-point intrinsic alignment correlations compared to \cite{SemboloniHeymansVanwaerbekeSchneider2008}, including a scale-dependent change of sign for the $GII$ correlation for deep surveys. The use of the given effective kernel for the intrinsic alignment bispectra is not physically motivated, however, and significant work is left to be done to appropriately express theoretical intrinsic alignment bispectra.
\cite{ShiJoachimiSchneider2010} alternately constructed a parameterized toy model for the 3D $GGI$ bispectrum to evaluate the performance of the 3-point nulling technique, which is related to the 3D matter bispectrum such that
\begin{align}
B_{\delta\delta\bar{\gamma}^I}(k_1,k_2,k_3;\chi)\equiv& -A B_{\delta}(k_{ref},k_{ref},k_{ref};\chi{z_{med}})\left(\frac{1+z}{1+z_{med}}\right)^{r-2}\\
&\times\left[\left(\frac{k_1}{k_{ref}}\right)^{2(s-2)}+\left(\frac{k_2}{k_{ref}}\right)^{2(s-2)}+\left(\frac{k_3}{k_{ref}}\right)^{2(s-2)}\right].\nonumber
\end{align}
The matter bispectrum is evaluated at the median redshift $z_{med}$ of the survey and at some scale $k_{ref}$, which was chosen to be weakly nonlinear. $A$ sets the magnitude of the bispectrum relative to simulation results, where $GGI/GGG\approx 10\%$, and $r$ and $s$ are free parameters, with default values of $r=0$ and $s=1$.
\subsection{Impacts of intrinsic alignment on cosmological constraints} \label{impacts}
The impact of intrinsic alignment on our ability to constrain cosmological models is an evolving question, which will ultimately depend on our understanding of the intrinsic alignment signal and the success of mitigation techniques employed in ongoing and future lensing surveys. The combined development of such techniques and quantifying their success and the total impact of intrinsic alignment is expected to take a central place in work leading up to first science results from these surveys. Work thus far in modeling, measurement, and mitigation of the intrinsic alignment signal, however, indicates that the presence of intrinsic alignment in the lensing signal may be a significant (e.g., Fig.~\ref{fig:sam}), but manageable obstacle in the pursuit of weak lensing as a precision cosmological probe.
The intrinsic alignment components to the lensing spectrum are generally dependent on both redshift and scale (see Secs. \ref{la}-\ref{modellingbs}), and thus while they tend to introduce an overall bias in the magnitude of the spectrum or bispectrum, this bias is more complex than a simple scaling parameter. It is clear from a comparison of Figs. \ref{fig:pscosmo} \& \ref{fig:psia} that the intrinsic alignment signal can mimic changes in cosmological parameters like $\Omega_m$ or $\sigma_8$ and modifications to the standard $\Lambda$CDM model. For example, a wCDM cosmology with significant departure from a cosmological constant alters the lensing spectrum in ways very similar to the $GI$ intrinsic alignment component. In the deep survey described above, a 20\% change in $w_0$ leads to a reduction in the magnitude of the spectrum by about 8\% at $\ell=1000$, while the presence of intrinsic alignment leads to a similar reduction of about $10\%$.
This impact of intrinsic alignment on dark energy constraints has been quantified, for example, by \cite{BridleKing2007,JoachimiBridle2010,KirkRassatHostBridle2011}. \cite{KirkRassatHostBridle2011} introduced various linear alignment-based models to the data but ignored its effect on constraints, producing significant biases in the determination of $w_0$ and $w_a$ in the dark energy equation of state relative to the case where the model was assumed to be known. This is shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:iaimpact} with 95\% confidence contours for the nonlinear linear alignment model ('HS04NL') \citep{HirataSeljak2004,HirataEtAl2007,BridleKing2007} and its correction with modified redshift scaling ('HS10NL') \citep{HirataSeljak2010}, and the modification discussed in Sec.~\ref{nla} by \cite{KirkRassatHostBridle2011} ('latest IA model'). These models differ primarily in their redshift scaling and incorporation of nonlinearities, but share the same magnitude scaling that matches low redshift measurements of intrinsic alignment in bright, early-type galaxies. This is compared to the fiducial model with a cosmological constant and a proper treatment of the intrinsic alignment signal. Even for the model used by \cite{KirkRassatHostBridle2011}, which predicts a small amplitude of intrinsic alignment contamination, the determination of the dark energy equation of state parameters are catastrophically biased for a Stage IV survey when the intrinsic alignment is ignored. Ignoring the effect of intrinsic alignment, of course, also strongly limits any attempts to test gravity on cosmological scales with cosmic shear \citep{KirkLaszloBridleBean2012}, which is particularly suited for sampling the growth rate of structure across a wide range of redshifts. These conclusions depend, though, on whether the low redshift normalization is sufficient to characterize the actual signal in the fainter, high redshift samples that will form the bulk of galaxies in future surveys.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{fig1_review.eps}%
\caption{The effects of ignoring the presence of intrinsic alignment on determining the dark energy equation of state for the shear-shear correlation. Shown are 95\% confidence contours for three intrinsic alignment models: the nonlinear linear alignment model described in Sec.~\ref{nla} ('HS04NL'), its corrected version with modified redshift scaling according to \protect\cite{HirataSeljak2010} ('HS10NL'), and the model described in \protect\cite{KirkRassatHostBridle2011} ('latest IA model'). These models differ primarily in their redshift scaling and incorporation of nonlinearities, but share the same magnitude scaling that matches low redshift measurements of intrinsic alignment in bright, early-type galaxies. Not including the effects of intrinsic alignment based on these models in a parameter fit leads to catastrophic biasing of the equation of state parameters, though these results must be considered in the context that the low redshift galaxy sample used to confirm the magnitude of the models is not representative of fainter, high redshift galaxies that make up the majority of galaxies in future surveys. Source: Reproduced with permission from \protect\cite{KirkRassatHostBridle2011}, Oxford University Press on behalf of the Royal Astronomical Society.}\label{fig:iaimpact}
\end{figure}
Impacts on constraints of $\sigma_8$ tend to be less catastrophically biased, on the order of several percent. \cite{HirataEtAl2007} found a constraint of $0.004<\Delta \sigma_8<0.1$, while \cite{MandelbaumEtAl2010} used redshift information from the WiggleZ survey to better constrain this to be near $\Delta \sigma_8=\pm 0.03$ for a Canada France Hawaii Telescope Legacy Survey (CFHTLS)-like survey with other cosmological parameters fixed. Similarly, \cite{JoachimiMandelbaumAbdallaBridle2011} placed estimates of the bias on the dark energy equation of state, $\Omega_m$ and $\sigma_8$ for a CFHTLS-like survey, where for their best case, $\Delta \sigma_8\approx 0.03$, $\Delta \Omega_m\approx-0.03$, and $\Delta w_0\approx 30\%$.
The above estimates are typically done using variants on the linear alignment model in Secs. \ref{la}\&\ref{nla}, which assumes a linear relationship with large-scale density perturbations. Models like the quadratic model in Sec.~\ref{qa}, instead are produced due to coupled angular momenta, and are constrained from current observations of late-type galaxies to produce an intrinsic alignment correlation that is smaller in magnitude than that predicted by the linear alignment model and measured for early-type galaxies. \cite{CapranicoMerkelSchaefer2012} investigated the effects of these quadratic models for intrinsic alignment on cosmological parameters for a Euclid-like survey, finding negligible bias in the dark energy question of state, and bias at the level of $\approx 2\sigma$ for $\sigma_8$ and $\Omega_m$. Beyond the use of the shear or convergence spectrum, the impact of intrinsic alignment on the number of false peaks in studies which use convergence maps has also been discussed by \cite{Fan2007}, and in 3D weak lensing studies by \cite{SimonTaylorHartlap2009,MerkelSchaefer2013}.
Finally, the presence of correlations of intrinsic alignment, while they degrade cosmological constraints produced using gravitational lensing, also hold the potential to provide additional or complementary cosmological information. This has begun to be explored in recent years. For example, \cite{SchmidtJeong2012} showed that tensor mode contributions from intrinsic alignment in the linear alignment model is much stronger than that due to gravitational lensing, and could boost the potential of galaxy surveys to constrain a stochastic gravitational wave background. \cite{ChisariEtAl2014a} also explored the impact of tensor modes due to intrinsic alignments. Similarly, \cite{ChisariDvorkin2013} discuss the potential of the cross-correlation between intrinsic alignment and galaxy density to constrain local primordial non-Gaussianity and Baryon Acoustic Oscillations (BAO). The influence of non-Gaussianity on the intrinsic spin alignments of halos is also discussed by \cite{LeePen2008,HuiZhang2008}, while that of gravitational waves on shear measurements including intrinsic alignment is discussed by \cite{SchmidtPajerZaldarriaga2014}.
The intrinsic alignment correlations themselves also are direct measurements of the structure formation history which produces the shape and alignments of the galaxies being sampled (e.g., \cite{LeePen2001}). We have already discovered (e.g., Sec.~\ref{detections}) that the intrinsic alignment signal has a strong dependence on galaxy type. This indicates the strong potential of the intrinsic alignment correlations themselves, when measured over a range of galaxy samples, to provide information about large-scale structure and galaxy formation as a function of galaxy properties, environment, and redshift. While theoretical modeling of how the galaxy formation history impacts the intrinsic alignment of galaxies is not sufficiently advanced to make accurate predictions of the intrinsic alignment signal on smaller scales, direct measurements of these correlations in future surveys will provide needed insight to improve these intrinsic alignment models.
\section{Measurements of the large-scale correlated intrinsic alignment signal}\label{detections}
In recent years there have been many attempts to directly measure the intrinsic alignment of galaxies in correlations within weak lensing surveys. These measurements include detections of both the correlation between the intrinsic ellipticity of galaxies ($II$) and the cross-correlation between intrinsic ellipticity and gravitational shear ($GI$). In general, these detections rely on either limiting measurements to situations where the intrinsic alignment signal is dominant (e.g., using large, low-redshift surveys or galaxies physically close to one another in redshift space) or to developing more complex estimators or algorithms to disentangle the lensing and intrinsic alignment information. We review in this section a number of relevant large-scale measurements or measurement-based predictions of the large-scale intrinsic alignment signal, which are most relevant to developing models or methods to measure or mitigate the intrinsic alignment signal in future large galaxy lensing surveys. There is an additional, large set of literature on measuring the intrinsic alignment properties of galaxies on smaller scales that we have not discussed in detail here, but to which we kindly refer the reader. These related studies are particularly suited for studying the detailed evolution and formation properties of galaxy alignment and its relation to galaxy evolution.
\subsection{Methods for measuring intrinsic alignment correlations in weak lensing surveys}
\subsubsection{Projected auto- and cross-correlation functions}\label{sec:projected_corr}
Projected correlation functions have been used by many authors to measure the intrinsic alignment signal in various surveys. These correlation functions are defined in real space and can be measured directly in the survey. For galaxy pairs, the auto- and cross-correlation functions can be written in terms of the ensemble average as
\begin{align}
\xi_{XX}(\textbf{r})&=\langle \bar{\gamma}_{X}^{I}(\textbf{x})\bar{\gamma}_{X}^{I}(\textbf{x+r})\rangle\nonumber \\
\xi_{gX}(\textbf{r})&=\langle \delta_g(\textbf{x})\bar{\gamma}_{X}^{I}(\textbf{x+r})\rangle,
\label{2points_corr}
\end{align}
where $\textbf{r}$ is the separation vector and $X\in\{+,\times\}$. These 2-point correlations and their 3-point equivalents are related to the power spectra and bispectra and the aperture mass statistics by relations similar to Eqs. (\ref{eq:corr2ps}) \& (\ref{eq:apmstat}). The separation vector can be divided in redshift space into a line-of-sight-separation component, $\Pi$, and a transverse separation component, $r_p$. The projected correlations are then defined as the integral along the line of sight
\begin{equation}
w_{g+}(r_p) = \int_{-\Pi}^{+\Pi}\xi_{g+}(r_p,\Pi)\,\rm d \Pi,
\label{projected_corr}
\end{equation}
and similarly for $w_{++}(r_p)$ and $w_{\times\times}(r_p)$.
One can then measure directly these correlation functions by means of estimators that can be calculated directly from the galaxy position and ellipticity (shape) measurements of a given survey. For example, \cite{MandelbaumHirataIshakSeljakBrinkmann2006,HirataEtAl2007} developed an estimator to measure the correlation functions $\xi$ in a survey by generalizing the usual LS \citep{LandySzalay1993} estimator for the galaxy correlation function
\begin{equation}
\hat\xi(r_p,\Pi) = \frac{(D-R)^2}{RR} = \frac{DD-2DR+RR}{RR},
\label{eq:lsxi}
\end{equation}
where for pairs of galaxies with separation $r_p$ and $\Pi$, $DD$ is the number of galaxy pairs from the survey catalog, $RR$ is the number of galaxy pairs in a random catalog, and $DR$ is the number of pairs between the survey catalog and the random catalog.
In analogy to Eq.~(\ref{eq:lsxi}), \cite{MandelbaumHirataIshakSeljakBrinkmann2006} defined for the galaxy-intrinsic shear correlation function the estimator
\begin{equation}
\hat\xi_{g+}(r_p,\Pi) = \frac{S_+(D-R)}{RR} = \frac{S_+D-S_+R}{RR},
\label{eq:lsxids}
\end{equation}
where $S_+D$ is the sum over all pairs with separations $r_p$ and $\Pi$ of the $+$ component of shear, i.e.
\begin{equation}
S_+D = \sum_{i\neq j| r_p,\Pi} \frac{e_+(j|i)}{2\cal R},
\label{S+D}
\end{equation}
with $e_+(j|i)$ being the $+$ component of the ellipticity of galaxy $j$ ($S_+$) measured relative to galaxy $i$ ($D$), and ${\cal R}$ is the shear responsivity. A similar expression to Eq.~(\ref{S+D}) defines $S_{+}R$ with respect to a random catalog galaxy position.
In a similar way, \cite{MandelbaumHirataIshakSeljakBrinkmann2006} used for the intrinsic shear-intrinsic shear correlation functions the estimators
\begin{align}
\hat\xi_{++} &= \frac{S_+S_+}{RR} \nonumber \\
\hat\xi_{\times\times} &= \frac{S_\times S_\times}{RR},
\label{eq:lsxiss}
\end{align}
where
\begin{align}
S_+S_+ &= \sum_{i\neq j| r_p,\Pi} \frac{e_+(j|i)e_+(i|j)}{(2{\cal R})^2} \nonumber \\
S_\times S_\times &= \sum_{i\neq j| r_p,\Pi} \frac{e_\times(j|i)e_\times(i|j)}{(2{\cal R})^2}.
\end{align}
\subsubsection{Auto- and cross-correlation functions with galaxy orientation angle dependency}\label{statmeas}
In \cite{FaltenbacherLiWhiteJingWang2009}, two new statistical measures of the intrinsic alignment correlations were developed for use in the Sloan Digital Sky Survey \citep{SDSSDR6} and the Millennium Simulation \citep{SpringelEtAl2005}. An alignment correlation function was defined such that pairs of galaxies are summed as a function not only of separation, but also of the projected angle $\theta_p$ between the major axis of the primary galaxy relative to some reference galaxy. The alignment correlation function is then written as $\xi(\theta_p,r_p,\Pi)$. The projected correlation function given by the line-of-sight integration is then
\begin{align}
w_{p}(\theta_p,r_p) &= \int_{-\Pi}^{+\Pi}\xi_{}(\theta_p,r_p,\Pi)\,\rm d \Pi.
\label{projected_corr_theta}
\end{align}
\cite{FaltenbacherLiWhiteJingWang2009} defined the estimator
\begin{equation}
\xi(\theta_p,r_p,\Pi)=\frac{Q\tilde{R}/N_{\tilde{R}}}{QR/N_{R}}-1,
\label{projected_corr_theta_est}
\end{equation}
where $Q$ represents the primary galaxy shape sample considered, $\tilde{R}$ is the reference sample, and $R$ represents the random sample. $N_{\tilde{R}}$ and $N_{R}$ are the number of galaxies in the reference and random samples, respectively. $QR$ and $Q\tilde{R}$ are the counts of cross-pairs between the samples as indicated.
The $w_{p}(\theta_p,r_p)$ statistic has been motivated both by use at small scales (sub-Mpc), in order to measure the alignment between central and satellite galaxies in clusters, and also on large scales, where it can measure the alignment of a galaxy sample with respect to the large-scale structure of the universe, which is represented by large-scale distributions of some reference sample of galaxies. This statistic was further discussed and adapted to the linear alignment model (Sec.~\ref{la}) in \cite{BlazekMcquinnSeljak2011}.
\cite{FaltenbacherLiWhiteJingWang2009} also defined a $\cos(2\theta)$-statistic, which describes the average of $\cos(2\theta_p)$ for all galaxy pairs that are considered at a given projected separation
\begin{equation}
\langle \cos(2\theta_p)\rangle(r_p)=\frac{\int_{0}^{\pi/2} \cos(2\theta_p)w_{p}(\theta_p,r_p)d\theta_p}{\int_{0}^{\pi/2}w_{p}(\theta_p,r_p)d\theta_p}.
\label{cos_2_theta}
\end{equation}
The values taken by this statistic are well-defined and informative, ranging between -1 and +1. This statistic is related to Eq.~(\ref{projected_corr}) by
\begin{equation}
\tilde{w}_{g+}(r_p)=w_p(r_p)\langle \cos(2 \theta_p) \rangle(r_p),
\end{equation}
where $\tilde{w}_{g+}$ is the unweighted $w_{g+}$. $\tilde{w}_{g+}(r_p)$ is related to $w_g(r_p,\theta)$ by
\begin{equation}
\tilde{w}_{g+}(r_p)=\frac{2}{\pi}\int^{\pi/2}_{0}d\theta \cos(2\theta)w_g(r_p,\theta).
\end{equation}
\subsubsection{E- and B-mode decompositions of intrinsic alignment autocorrelations}
The projected distortion field of galaxy shapes and images as expressed in terms of their ellipticities can be uniquely decomposed in a gradient type component (E-mode) and curl type component (B-mode). Gravitational weak lensing produces only E-modes to first-order in the deflection angle while the intrinsic alignment of galaxies ($II$) produces both E- and B-modes. This decomposition thus allows one to discriminate between the two signals \citep{CrittendenNatarajanPenTheuns2002} (see also Sec.~\ref{ebmode}). As described in \cite{CrittendenNatarajanPenTheuns2002}, the E- and B-mode components of the auto-correlation functions can be written in real space as
\begin{eqnarray}
\xi_E(r) &= &\frac{1}{2} [\xi_{+}(r) + \xi_{\times}(r)]
+ \frac{1}{2}\nabla^4 \chi^{-1} [\xi_{+}(r) - \xi_{\times}(r)] \label{eq:invE} \nonumber\\
\xi_B(r) &= & \frac{1}{2}[\xi_{+}(r) + \xi_{\times}(r)]
- \frac{1}{2}\nabla^4 \chi^{-1} [\xi_{+}(r) - \xi_{\times}(r)]\label{eq:invB},
\end{eqnarray}
where $\nabla^4 = 8D^2 + 8r^2 D^3 + r^4 D^4$, the operator $\chi =
r^4 D^4$ and $D \equiv \frac{1}{r}\frac{\partial}{\partial r}$.
It then follows that the projected E- and B-mode components of the correlation function can be written in terms of a linear combinations of the projected correlations, $w_{\pm}(r_p) \equiv w_{++}(r_p) \pm w_{\times \times}(r_p)$, as \citep{BlazekMcquinnSeljak2011}
\begin{align}
\label{l}
w_{(E,B)}(r_p) = \frac{w_+(r_p) \pm w'(r_p)}{2},
\end{align}
where $w'(r_p)$ is the non-local function of $w_-(r_p)$ given by
\begin{align}
\label{m}
w'(r_p) \equiv w_-(r_p) + 4 \int_{r_p}^{\infty}dr' \frac{w_-(r')}{r'} -12r_p^2 \int_{r_p}^{\infty}dr' \frac{w_-(r')}{r'^3}.
\end{align}
\cite{HirataSeljak2004,BlazekMcquinnSeljak2011} decomposed the linear alignment model in Sec.~\ref{la} into expressions for the E- and B-mode components in $P(\ell)$ and $w(r_p)$, which predict a zero B-mode to first order in $\delta_m$.
\subsection{Measurements of the large-scale intrinsic alignment signal}\label{det2}
Successful attempts to measure observationally an intrinsic ellipticity signal initially focused on detections of intrinsic ellipticity-intrinsic ellipticity correlations ($II$) in the form of spin-spin correlations (first weakly detected by \cite{PenLeeSeljak2000} in the Tully Catalog) and in the magnitude of the variance of the mean intrinsic galaxy ellipticity of low-redshift galaxies \citep{BrownTaylorHamblyDye2002}, which was found to be non-zero on scales between 1-100 arcmin and consistent with analytical predictions of intrinsic alignment by \cite{CrittendenNatarajanPenTheuns2001}, with an ellipticity variance of
\begin{align}
\label{eq:ellvariancecrit}
\sigma^2(\theta)\approx A z^{-2n}(1+(\theta/\theta_0)2)^{-n}.
\end{align}
The measurement by \cite{BrownTaylorHamblyDye2002} was later extended by \cite{HeymansEtAl2004}. A variety of other early studies of galaxy spin correlations have previously been reviewed by \cite{Schaefer2009} and include, for example, \cite{LeePen2001,LeePen2002,NavarroEtAl2004}. Such studies focused exclusively on correlations between intrinsic alignments of galaxies, either in the form of spin or ellipticity alignment, until the prediction of the long-range correlation between intrinsic ellipticity and the gravitational tidal field ($GI$) by \cite{HirataSeljak2004}. Measurements of $GI$ have generally had more consistent success than those of $II$ in large-scale surveys, where $II$ is often found to be consistent with zero (e.g., \cite{MandelbaumHirataIshakSeljakBrinkmann2006,MandelbaumEtAl2010}) despite generally strong detections of $GI$ in many studies.
This $GI$ correlation was first detected by \cite{MandelbaumHirataIshakSeljakBrinkmann2006}. They used various spectroscopic galaxy samples in the Sloan Digital Sky Survey Data Release 6 (SDSS DR6, \cite{SDSSDR6}) to search for the $II$ and $GI$ correlations. The authors used the projected correlation functions described in Sec.~\ref{sec:projected_corr} to measure $w_{g+}(r_p)$, $w_{++}(r_p)$, and $w_{\times\times}(r_p)$ over a range of transverse pair separations $0.3 < r_p < 60$ $h^{-1}$Mpc. They fit these measured correlation functions to a power-law model of the intrinsic alignment correlations given, for example, by
\begin{equation}
w_{g+}(r_p) = A\left(\frac{r_p}{1h^{-1}\,{\rm
Mpc}}\right)^{\alpha},
\label{eq:w-power}
\end{equation}
where $A$ represents the amplitude and $\alpha$ is a power-law exponent. A similar expression for $w_{++}$ and $w_{\times\times}$ can be written. Their results indicated a first detection of the large-scale intrinsic ellipticity-density correlation ($GI$) with confidence level greater than 99\% for galaxies with $L > L_{*}$ in the L5 and L6 galaxy samples (as well as in the overall sample of 265,908 spectroscopic galaxies), with a non-zero amplitude of the correlation function $w_{g+}(r_p)$. The analysis made no significant detection of the $II$ correlation, but was able to place upper limits on its amplitude. These results are summarized for reference in Table \ref{tab:IA_SDSS} and Fig.~\ref{fig:IA_SDSS} \citep{MandelbaumHirataIshakSeljakBrinkmann2006}. The $w_{g+}$ correlation was found to persist to the largest scales probed (i.e., 60 $h^{-1}$Mpc) and to have a sign consistent with theoretical models. This $GI$ signal was found to be dominated by the brightest galaxies, and it was suggested that weak lensing surveys should consider rejection of the brightest cluster galaxies from catalogs to limit contamination by the $GI$ correlation.
\begin{table}
\begin{center}
\caption{\label{tab:IA_SDSS}Best-fit parameters for the power-law models $A\,\,[r_p/(1 \mbox{Mpc}/h)]^{\alpha}$ to the intrinsic alignment signal \protect\citep{MandelbaumHirataIshakSeljakBrinkmann2006}; the 95 per cent confidence intervals shown here may include no constraint on $\alpha$ if the amplitude is consistent with zero at this level.}
\vspace{5 mm}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c}
\hline\hline
SDSS Sample & function & $A$ ($h^{-1}$Mpc) & $\alpha$ \\
\hline
& $w_{g+}(r_p)$ & $0.082^{+0.106}_{-0.079}$ & $-0.18^{+\infty}_{-\infty}$ \\
L3 & $w_{++}(r_p)$ & $-0.018^{+0.027}_{-0.025}$ & $-1.13^{+\infty}_{-\infty}$ \\
& $w_{\times\times}(r_p)$ & $0.005^{+0.030}_{-0.022}$ & $-0.68^{+\infty}_{-\infty}$ \\
\hline
& $w_{g+}(r_p)$ & $0.020^{+0.115}_{-0.085}$ & $0.013^{+\infty}_{-\infty}$ \\
L4 & $w_{++}(r_p)$ & $(-5.7^{+1972}_{-1314})\times 10^{-5}$ & $-5.5^{+\infty}_{-\infty}$ \\
& $w_{\times\times}(r_p)$ & $(3.8^{+259}_{-3.8})\times 10^{-4}$ & $-7.1^{+5.8}_{-\infty}$ \\
\hline
& $w_{g+}(r_p)$ & $0.30^{+0.28}_{-0.22}$ & $-0.66^{+0.54}_{-0.46}$ \\
L5 & $w_{++}(r_p)$ & $0.031^{+0.035}_{-0.031}$ & $-1.9^{+1.2}_{-\infty}$ \\
& $w_{\times\times}(r_p)$ & $0.011^{+0.030}_{-0.029}$ & $-2.4^{+\infty}_{-\infty}$ \\
\hline
& $w_{g+}(r_p)$ & $3.8^{+3.5}_{-2.2}$ & $-0.77^{+0.29}_{-0.30}$\\
L6 & $w_{++}(r_p)$ & $0.04^{+0.45}_{-0.48}$ & $-1.8^{+\infty}_{-\infty}$\\
& $w_{\times\times}(r_p)$ & $-0.25^{+1.05}_{-0.49}$ & $-2.1^{+\infty}_{-\infty}$\\
\hline
& $w_{g+}(r_p)$ & $0.098^{+0.067}_{-0.069}$ & $-0.59^{+0.65}_{-2.30}$ \\
All & $w_{++}(r_p)$ & $(4.3^{+9.3}_{-4.3})\times 10^{-3}$ & $-2.8^{+\infty}_{-\infty}$ \\
& $w_{\times\times}(r_p)$ & $(7.2^{+13.0}_{-7.2})\times 10^{-3}$ & $-2.1^{+\infty}_{-\infty}$ \\
\hline\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\end{table}
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[height=.6\textwidth,angle=270]{mus_data.eps}
\caption{\label{fig:IA_SDSS}The projected correlation functions $w_{g+}(r_p)$, $w_{++}(r_p)$, and $w_{\times\times}(r_p)$ obtained from the SDSS L3, L4, L5, and L6 galaxy samples using Pipeline II in \protect\cite{MandelbaumHirataIshakSeljakBrinkmann2006}. Each of the 10 bins contains the same range in $r_p$ for all samples, but some of the error bars have been slightly displaced horizontally for readability (except for L5). The L6 data have been multiplied by 0.1 to fit on the same scale. Errors shown are the 68\% confidence level. Source: Reproduced from \protect\cite{MandelbaumHirataIshakSeljakBrinkmann2006}.}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\begin{table*}
\begin{center}
\caption{\label{tab:IA_SDSS2} The best-fit model parameters to Eq.~(\ref{eq:wdp}) using SDSS and 2SLAQ LRGs \protect\citep{HirataEtAl2007}. Errors are the 95\% confidence limits. The amplitude $A_0$ is in units of 0.01$h^{-1}\,$Mpc.}
\vspace{5 mm}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c}
\hline\hline
Fit region & $A_0/(0.01h^{-1}\,$Mpc$)$ & $\alpha$ & $\beta$ & $\gamma$ &
$\chi^2$/dof\\
\hline
\multicolumn{6}{c}{Fits to SDSS+2SLAQ}\\
\hline
$r_p>11.9h^{-1}\,$Mpc &
$+6.0^{+2.6}_{-2.2}$ &
$-0.88^{+0.31}_{-0.34}$ &
$+1.51^{+0.73}_{-0.69}$ &
$-1.00^{+2.40}_{-3.19}$ &
33.3/28
\\
$r_p>7.5h^{-1}\,$Mpc &
$+6.4^{+2.5}_{-2.1}$ &
$-0.85^{+0.24}_{-0.25}$ &
$+1.41^{+0.66}_{-0.63}$ &
$-0.27^{+1.88}_{-2.46}$ &
42.8/36\\
$r_p>4.7h^{-1}\,$Mpc &
$+5.9^{+2.3}_{-2.0}$ &
$-0.73^{+0.19}_{-0.19}$ &
$+1.48^{+0.64}_{-0.63}$ &
$-0.56^{+2.02}_{-2.74}$&
54.9/44\\
\hline
\multicolumn{6}{c}{Fits to SDSS only}\\
\hline
$r_p>11.9h^{-1}\,$Mpc &
$+7.1^{+3.4}_{-2.7}$ &
$-0.95^{+0.32}_{-0.35}$ &
$+1.43^{+0.73}_{-0.71}$ &
$+1.94^{+4.75}_{-4.52}$&
21.3/20 \\
$r_p>7.5h^{-1}\,$Mpc &
$+7.4^{+2.9}_{-2.4}$ &
$-0.88^{+0.24}_{-0.25}$ &
$+1.31^{+0.67}_{-0.66}$ &
$+2.39^{+4.52}_{-4.30}$ &
27.9/26 \\
$r_p>4.7h^{-1}\,$Mpc &
$+6.6^{+2.7}_{-2.2}$ &
$-0.74^{+0.19}_{-0.18}$ &
$+1.44^{+0.63}_{-0.62}$ &
$+1.81^{+4.52}_{-4.40}$&
34.0/32\\
\hline\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\end{table*}
In a follow up analysis to \cite{MandelbaumHirataIshakSeljakBrinkmann2006}, \cite{HirataEtAl2007} explored a more detailed characterization of the $GI$ correlation. They used a combination of samples including 36,278 Luminous Red Galaxies (LRGs) from the SDSS spectroscopic sample with redshift range $0.15 < z < 0.35$, 7,758 LRGs from the 2dF-SDSS LRG and QSQ (2SLAQ) survey with $0.4 < z < 0.8$, and other SDSS subsamples. The formalism of Sec.~\ref{sec:projected_corr} and the pipelines of \cite{MandelbaumHirataIshakSeljakBrinkmann2006} were expanded in this study to explore the correlations as a function of redshift. The results included over 3$\sigma$ detections of the $GI$ correlation
on large scales up to 60 $h^{-1}$Mpc for all LRG subsamples within the SDSS and a 2-$\sigma$ detection for the bright subsample of the 2SLAQ. They also introduced an empirical parameterization for the large-scale $GI$ correlation of LRGs, with power-law dependence on the galaxy luminosity, redshift, and transverse separation such that
\begin{equation}
w_{\delta +}(r_p) = A_0 \left(\frac{r_p}{r_{\rm pivot}}\right)^\alpha
\left( \frac L{L_0}\right)^\beta \left(\frac{1+z}{1+z_{\rm
pivot}}\right)^\gamma.
\label{eq:wdp}
\end{equation}
Here there are 4 parameters $\{A_0,\alpha,\beta,\gamma\}$ and the galaxy luminosity $L$, which do not have the same meaning as the parameterization of the intrinsic alignment signal given in Eq. \ref{eq:NLA}. The normalization $L_0$ corresponds to absolute magnitude $M_r=-22$. The resulting best-fit model parameters $\{A_0,\alpha,\beta,\gamma\}$ are given in Table \ref{tab:IA_SDSS2} \citep{HirataEtAl2007}.
\cite{LeePen2007} also used the SDSS-DR6 spectroscopic galaxy sample to perform a comparative study of intrinsic alignment measurements between blue and red galaxies. In order to measure the intrinsic alignment signal, the authors used the 2D projection of the intrinsic spin correlation function defined as \citep{LeePen2001}
\begin{equation}
\label{eqn:2dcorr}
\eta_{2D}(r) \approx
\frac{25}{96}a^2_{\rm l}\frac{\xi^{2}(r;R)}{\xi^{2}(0;R)} +
\frac{5}{4}\varepsilon_{\rm nl}\frac{\xi(r;R)}{\xi(0;R)},
\end{equation}
where $r$ is the three dimensional separation of a galaxy pair and $\xi(r;R)$ is the 2-point correlation function of the linear density field smoothed on the Lagrangian galactic scale $R$. The parameters $a_{\rm l}$ and $\varepsilon_{\rm nl}$ represent the magnitude of the small- and large-scale correlations, respectively.
The authors selected 434,849 galaxies with axis ratio $b/a \le 0.8$, and found a 3-$\sigma$ detection of the correlation signal in the redshift range $0\le z \le 0.4$ for both blue and red galaxy samples.
For the bright blue galaxies, the signal followed a quadratic scaling (i.e., $\eta_{2D}(r)\propto \xi^2(r)$), consistent with models of tidal torquing, but had a strong amplitude only up to separations of $r \le 3h^{-1}$Mpc.
For the bright red galaxies, the scaling was found to be linear, again consistent with theoretical models of large-scale intrinsic alignment, and the signal remained detectable up to larger separations of $r\sim 6h^{-1}$Mpc. Following this work, \cite{Lee2011} used the spectroscopic galaxy sample of SDSS-DR7 \citep{SDSSDR7} to measure the intrinsic spin correlations \citep{PenLeeSeljak2000} using late-type spiral galaxies in the redshift range $0 \le z \le 0.02$. The author found an intrinsic alignment correlation at the 3.4$\sigma$ and 2.4$\sigma$ significance levels at separations of 1$h^{-1}$Mpc and 2$h^{-1}$Mpc, respectively. Measurements were again consistent with analytic models based on tidal torquing for late-type spiral galaxies, and the intrinsic correlations of the galaxy spin axes were found to be stronger than those of the underlying dark halos, consistent with recent findings from simulations (Sec.~\ref{sims}).
In the work of \cite{OkumuraJingLi2009}, the ellipticity correlation function, $c_{ab}(r) = \langle e_a(x) e_b(x + r)\rangle$, was measured using 83,773 spectroscopic LRGs from SDSS-DR6 with redshift range $0.16 \le z \le 0.47$. The authors found a detection of positive alignment between pairs of LRGs at separations of up to 30$h^{-1}$Mpc. They found marginal dependence on luminosity and no significant evidence for redshift dependence. They also considered an N-body simulation to study the effect of misalignment between central LRGs and their host dark matter halos, putting tight constraints on such a misalignment (see Sec.~\ref{misalignment} for further discussion of the misalignment angle). They found that the simulation predicts the same profile for the ellipticity correlations but with an amplitude about 4 times stronger than their measurements if the central LRGs are assumed to be perfectly aligned with their host halos. However, when misalignment is allowed, the authors were able to place a constraint on the misalignment angle dispersion of $\sigma_{\theta}=35.4^{+4.0}_{-3.3} \deg$. The authors stress that this misalignment must be taken into consideration to accurately account for intrinsic alignments in weak lensing surveys. In a follow-up paper, \cite{OkumuraJing2009}, the authors examined whether the $GI$ correlation function of the LRGs in the SDSS-DR6 can be modeled while taking into account the distribution function of the misalignment angle. They made accurate measurements of the $GI$ correlation, confirming previous results which they used in turn to put constraints on the misalignment angle. By fitting the projected correlation function $w_{g+}(r_p)$ to the data they derive the constraints $\sigma_{\theta}=34.9^{+1.9}_{-2.1} \deg$. This is in agreement with the value above from the $II$ correlations but tighter due to better constraints on the $GI$ signal. Additionally, the authors found a correlation between the axis ratios of the LRGs and their intrinsic alignments, an effect that they suggest should be taken into account in modeling intrinsic alignment for future weak lensing surveys.
After developing the alignment correlation function and the $\cos(2\theta)$ statistics described in Sec.~\ref{statmeas}, \cite{FaltenbacherLiWhiteJingWang2009} investigated the alignment between galaxies and large-scale structure from the SDSS-DR6 \cite{SDSSDR6} and the Millennium Simulation \citep{SpringelEtAl2005}. The authors found a positive detection of the alignment signal for LRGs up to projected separations of 60 $h^{-1}$Mpc, but no large-scale alignment for blue galaxies consistent with the results above in the SDSS. In the Millennium Simulation, they found a mean projected misalignment between a halo and its central region of amplitude $\sim 20^{\textrm{o}}$ that decreases slightly with the luminosity of the central region. When the central region alignments are assigned to the luminous red central galaxies, the simulation results were in agreement with the SDSS results. They found that this misalignment can cause an overestimation of the observed alignment by more than a factor of two.
\cite{LiJingFaltenbacherWang2013} then measured the intrinsic alignment of galaxies in the CMASS galaxy sample from the Baryon Oscillation Spectroscopy Survey (BOSS-DR9) \citep{AhnEtAl2012,DawsonEtAl2013} at redshift $z\approx 0.6$. The intrinsic alignment 2-point correlation function and the $\cos(2\theta_p)$ statistic (Sec.~\ref{statmeas}) were measured, and they found a significant alignment signal out to approximately 70$h^{-1}$Mpc. Using large-scale simulations, they found alignments of dark halos with masses greater than $10^{12}h^{-1}\rm M_{Solar}$ that have the same scale dependence as the observed galaxies, but with stronger amplitudes. They attribute part of this discrepancy to a misalignment between the central galaxies and their host halos. They also found that more massive galaxies show stronger alignments.
\cite{MandelbaumEtAl2010} combined galaxy shape measurements from SDSS and spectroscopic redshifts from the WiggleZ Dark Energy Survey \citep{DrinkwaterEtAl2010} to search for intrinsic alignment correlations. They used the methodology of \cite{MandelbaumEtAl2006} to attempt to measure the $GI$ correlation at intermediate-redshift ($z\approx 0.6$) for blue galaxies. The result was a null measurement for the full WiggleZ sample as well as for two redshift subsamples. The result allowed them to put upper limits on the contamination of weak lensing measurements by the intrinsic alignment of blue galaxies on large scales. They found that for a CFHTLS-like cosmic shear survey dominated by WiggleZ-like galaxies, there should be a small enough contamination by intrinsic alignment so that any bias on the value of $\sigma_8$ should be smaller than the statistical errors of the survey.
Explicitly taking into account photometric redshift uncertainties in the measurement of intrinsic alignment correlations, \cite{JoachimiMandelbaumAbdallaBridle2011} used the MegaZ-LRG photometric galaxy sample \citep{CollisterEtAl2007,AbdallaEtAl2011} plus various spectroscopic galaxy samples from the SDSS in order to measure galaxy position--shape correlations. The authors combined the SDSS shape measurements with photometric information from the MegaZ-LRG catalog allowing them to derive constraints for early-type galaxies with a redshift range extending to $\sim 0.7$. The authors developed and used a formalism that uses photometric redshifts and includes their scatter in measuring and modeling the galaxy position--shape correlations. The formalism takes into consideration the effect of the photometric redshift scatter on the spread of the number density-intrinsic shear correlations along the line of sight. It also accounts for the effects of other signals such as galaxy-galaxy lensing. The derivation of this photometric formalism is described in Section 4 and Appendix A of \cite{JoachimiMandelbaumAbdallaBridle2011}. The authors used a variant of the correlation estimator in Eq.~(\ref{eq:lsxids}), and the wide ranges in redshift and luminosity of galaxies in the survey allowed the authors to better constrain the redshift and luminosity evolution of the galaxy number density-intrinsic shear correlations, and to extrapolate their results to estimate the contamination from these correlations in future weak lensing surveys.
For separations larger than $6h^{-1}$Mpc, \cite{JoachimiMandelbaumAbdallaBridle2011} found that these correlations are consistent with the separation and redshift dependencies of a modified nonlinear version of the linear alignment model (see Secs. \ref{la} \& \ref{nla}). In order to better fit observations, an extra redshift and luminosity dependence was introduced, such that the signal is proportional to $(1+z)^{\alpha}$ with $\alpha=-0.3\pm0.8$ and to $L^{\beta}$ with $\beta=1.1^{+0.3}_{-0.2}$ (see Eq.~(\ref{eq:NLA})). The intrinsic alignment power spectrum normalization was found to be $C_1=(0.077\pm 0.008)/\rho_{cr}$ for galaxies at redshift $z=0.3$ and $M_r-22$. The specific values obtained for the various luminosity and redshift sub-samples from MegaZ and SDSS that the authors considered are given in Table 4 of \cite{JoachimiMandelbaumAbdallaBridle2011}. Finally, based on the constraints they derived on the intrinsic alignment correlations, and assuming no intrinsic alignment contribution from blue galaxies, the authors estimated the bias on cosmological parameters as determined from a CFHTLS-like tomographic cosmic shear survey. They found that the bias is smaller than the 1-$\sigma$ statistical errors when all the sub-samples are combined. However, for future weak lensing surveys with significantly higher statistical power, the same intrinsic alignment signal will constitute a serious systematic causing significant degradation in the constraints of cosmological parameters.
Galaxy position--shape correlation measurements have also been attempted at relatively smaller scales than above within the context of galaxy-galaxy lensing, which has a slightly modified formalism from typical cosmic shear correlations and thus is not reproduced here, where one considers lensing of background galaxies (sources) by foreground galaxies (lenses) (e.g., \cite{BrainerdEtAl1996,FischerEtAl2000,BernsteinNorberg2002,HirataEtAl2004}). Galaxy-galaxy lensing typically provides a stronger signal than cosmic shear, and can suffer from an intrinsic alignment correlation due to satellite objects associated with the lens galaxy being misidentified as source galaxies \citep{HirataEtAl2004,BlazekEtAl2012}. Measurements of galaxy-galaxy lensing can also be used to isolate information on the $GI$ correlation, as described by \cite{BlazekEtAl2012}. For example, \cite{HirataEtAl2004} has put stringent constraints on the intrinsic alignment signal in galaxy-galaxy lensing to be $-0.0062 < \Delta\gamma< +0.0066$ (99.9 per cent confidence) at transverse separations of 30--446 $h^{-1}$ kpc, where $\Delta\gamma$ is the mean intrinsic shear due to intrinsic alignment (see appendix A in \cite{HirataEtAl2004}). In this context of galaxy-galaxy lensing, \cite{BlazekEtAl2012} recently developed a methodology for isolating the effect of $GI$ from a photometric galaxy-galaxy lensing measurement by splitting the sample into two sets of lens-source pairs, allowing for the simultaneous isolation of the intrinsic alignment and lensing contributions to the correlated shear of galaxies. Applying this methodology to a lens sample of SDSS LRGs from DR7 selected by \cite{KazinEtAl2010} and a source sample with shape measurements from the SDSS DR8 photometric data selected by \cite{ReyesEtAl2011}, they find an intrinsic alignment signal consistent with zero. An intrinsic alignment measurement consistent with zero around stacked clusters in photo-z samples was also found by \cite{Chisari2014b}.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\begin{tabular}{c}
\includegraphics[width=.5\columnwidth]{compIIplus.eps}\\
\includegraphics[width=.5\columnwidth]{compIIcross.eps}\\
\includegraphics[width=.5\columnwidth]{compGI.eps}\\
\end{tabular}
\caption{The linear alignment model (dashed lines, Sec.~\ref{la}) and the nonlinear linear alignment model (solid lines, Sec.~\ref{nla}) are compared to observations. The models are normalized to projected measurements of $w_{++}$ in the top two panels and to measurements of $w_{g+}$ in the bottom panel. Top panel: Projected measurements by \protect\cite{OkumuraJingLi2009} of $w_{++}(r)$ are compared to model predictions. Open circles indicate measurements prior to correction by $(1+\xi_g(r))$. Middle panel: Projected measurements by \protect\cite{OkumuraJingLi2009} of $w_{\times\times}(r)$ are compared to model predictions. Bottom panel: Measurements by \protect\cite{OkumuraJing2009} of $w_{g+}(r)$ are compared to model predictions. Source: Reproduced with permission from \protect\cite{BlazekMcquinnSeljak2011}. \copyright 2011 SISSA Medialab Srl. and IOP Publishing. All rights reserved.}\label{fig:compIAmeas}
\end{figure}
These measurements contain a great deal of information related to the large-scale correlations of the intrinsic alignment of galaxies, which has been used to compare to and constrain various models of the intrinsic alignment signal on large scales. These comparisons have been combined to some extent in \cite{BlazekMcquinnSeljak2011}, for example, who recently performed a systematic analysis to test the linear alignment model using several statistics and methods (i.e., the projected correlation $w_{g+}(r_p)$, the alignment correlation function $w_p(\theta_p,r_p)$, the $\cos(2 \theta)$-statistic, and E- and B-mode decomposition). The authors found that the measurements used are generally consistent with the linear alignment model and its predictions for each statistic, and that the linear tidal alignment theory explains well a significant fraction of the observed ellipticity of LRGs on scales greater than or equal to 10 $h^{-1}$Mpc. This is shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:compIAmeas}, where the linear alignment model described in Sec.~\ref{la} (dashed lines) and nonlinear linear alignment model described in Sec.~\ref{nla} (solid lines) are compared to measurements. The top and middle panels of Fig.~\ref{fig:compIAmeas} compare projected measurements from \cite{OkumuraJingLi2009} of $w_{++}(r)$ and $w_{\times\times}(r)$, respectively, to model predictions, while measurements of $w_{g+}(r)$ from \cite{OkumuraJing2009} are compared to model predictions in the bottom panel of Fig.~\ref{fig:compIAmeas}.
Even when not attempting to make a focused measurement of intrinsic alignment in a galaxy shape catalog, surveys with enough statistical power can also take advantage of intrinsic alignment model assumptions to place limits on the level of intrinsic alignment contamination. Using a parameterized intrinsic alignment model (e.g., Sec \ref{margin}), one can simultaneously constrain the model's parameters along with cosmological parameters to obtain a simultaneous fit for the intrinsic alignment along with the cosmological model. CFHTLS \citep{FuEtAl2008} and CFHTLenS \citep{heymans} have both attempted to do this for intrinsic alignment models with a single scaling parameter $A$. \cite{FuEtAl2008} found a value of $A$ consistent with zero, and could place only weak upper limits on the intrinsic alignment contamination. \cite{heymans} were able to detect a nonzero amplitude for early-type galaxies. These approaches necessarily degrade cosmological constraints, as the number of parameters in the intrinsic alignment model increases.
Future measurements of intrinsic alignment in larger and deeper photometric and spectroscopic galaxy samples promise to place even better constraints on models of large-scale intrinsic alignment correlations, which pose a large challenge to the use of weak lensing in planned surveys to place precise and accurate constraints on cosmological parameters and models. The measurements discussed here represent only a selection of works most relevant to the study of intrinsic alignment as it impacts weak lensing, and are not meant to be a complete literature review of galaxy alignment measurements. For example, other works that focus on measurements of galaxy alignment on small or nonlinear scales, such as satellite alignments in clusters of galaxies, are numerous, but not presented here in any detail, as their connection to large-scale correlations of intrinsic alignment are not always clear, and significant work remains before a comprehensive intrinsic alignment modeling scheme (e.g., Secs. \ref{haloia} \& \ref{sam}) can effectively take advantage of such varied small scale measurements. It is likely that they will become important components in the calibration of future intrinsic alignment models tied to structure evolution.
\subsection{Measurements of the small-scale intrinsic alignment signal}
While the main focus of the measurement section above was on large-scale correlations of intrinsic alignment, it is worth mentioning a few comments and references on small-scale measurements. This brief sub-section is meant to provide a starting point for the interested reader in these other, potentially complementary fields of measurement. Each of these varying scales of intrinsic alignment measurement will likely provide input into models of intrinsic alignment in the future, particularly in the 1-halo regime, as measurements become ever more precise.
One interesting example of galaxy alignment measurements that may become impactful as survey size increases is the emerging consensus (following a long history of conflicting claims) in measurements of both spiral and elliptical galaxy alignments relative to large-scale filaments and walls of structure (e.g., \cite{JonesEtAl2010,VarelaEtAl2012,TempelEtAl2013,TempelLibeskind2013} and references therein), which are now becoming consistent with numerical predictions (see Sec.~\ref{sims}). Like these galaxy alignments relative to the large-scale filamentary structure in the universe, measurements of galaxy alignments within clusters have also had conflicting results indicating both random (e.g., \cite{HawleyPeebles1975,Thompson1976,Dekel1985,KampenRhee1990,TreveseEtAl1992,BernsteinNorberg2002,PankoEtAl2009,HaoEtAl2011,HungEbeling2012,SchneiderEtAl2013b,SifonEtAl2014,Chisari2014b}) and non-random (e.g., \cite{RoodSastry1972,Djorgovski1983,GodlowskiEtAl1998,GodlowskiEtAl2010,BaierEtAl2003,PlionisEtAl2003,PereiraKuhn2005,AugustssonBrainderd2006,FaltenbacherEtAl2007}) alignments of galaxies in clusters, despite being the early focus of intrinsic alignment measurements, but without a firm resolution as to the ultimate impact of such alignments on larger scale measurements. Some authors have also warned of the dependence on the methodology for shape measurement in identifying an alignment (e.g., \cite{HaoEtAl2011,SchneiderEtAl2013b}).
Various alignments between clusters themselves and with their brightest central galaxies or the density field, however, do have some consistent confirmations in various studies (e.g., \cite{FullerEtAl1999,ChambersEtAl2000,ChambersEtAl2002,KimEtAl2002,HopkinsBahcallBode2005,AltayEtAl2006,HashimotoEtAl2008,WangEtAl2009,GodlowskiFlin2010,NiedersteEtAl2010,HaoEtAl2011,PazEtAl2011,SmargonEtAl2012}) after some early conflicting results (e.g., \cite{Binggeli1982,StrublePeebles1985,Flin1987,Lambas1988,UlmerEtAl1989,West1989,Plionis1994}).
The statistical methods of measuring alignments in or near clusters and other components of large-scale structure are similar to some of those employed to measure the large-scale 2-point intrinsic alignment correlations. These estimators typically are related to the position angles of galaxies, rather than the ellipticity. Two of these in cluster studies are the correlation angle ($\theta_c$), the angle between the projected major axes of two clusters, and the pointing angle ($\theta_p$), the angle between the projected major axis of a cluster and the line connecting it to another cluster on the sky \cite{HopkinsBahcallBode2005}. Quantities like $\cos^2(\theta_c)$ are then measured as a function of separation, as in \cite{SmargonEtAl2012}, for example, to constrain the amount of intrinsic alignment between the structures. Similarly, for galaxies in halos, the radial alignment angle $\theta_r$, the angle between the galaxy major axis and a line connecting it to the Brightest Central Galaxy (BCG), the position angle $\theta_{pos}$, the angle between the BCG major axis and the line connecting the satellite galaxy to the BCG are often employed, and the direct alignment angle $\theta_d$, the angle between the major axes of the BCG and satellite galaxy (e.g., \cite{FaltenbacherEtAl2007}).
\section{Intrinsic alignment correlations from simulations}\label{sims}
With the first reported detections of cosmic shear that were consistent with predictions from large-scale structure (e.g., \cite{BaconRefregierEllis2000,VanwaerbekeEtAl2000,WittmanEtAl2000}), an initial investigation of the potential impact of a correlation between the previously proposed \citep{Coutts1996,LeePen2000,CatelanKamionkowskiBlandford2001} alignments of spatially close galaxies within a common tidal field ($II$) was performed by \cite{HeavensRefregierHeymans2000,CroftMetzler2000}. \cite{CroftMetzler2000}, for example, used an N-body numerical simulation of dark matter halo formation, using the ellipticity of the dark matter halo measured through the second order moment of the projected mass as a tracer for the visible ellipticity of the galaxy, and demonstrated that there was a 10-20\% contribution to the observed ellipticity correlation function due to correlated intrinsic ellipticities of galaxies on scales of up to 20 $h^{-1}$ Mpc (the simulation box size).
Since this initial detection of correlations between halo ellipticities, the size and scope of numerical simulations have improved dramatically with computational capabilities, but some basic questions regarding intrinsic alignment remain challenging to address in simulations. As commented on by \cite{CroftMetzler2000}, it has since been shown that dark matter halos and their visible galaxies are misaligned to some degree. Indeed, one of the fundamental and still open questions regarding the use of simulations to predict or constrain the large-scale correlated intrinsic alignment signal is the degree to which we can accurately predict or include in a self-consistent way, the subhalo galaxy shapes on large enough scales so as to allow the statistical calculation of shear measurements across the volume spanned by currently planned surveys. This is particularly true for estimates of the $GI$ signal, which has contributions from across the full volume of the simulation, and thus require fine enough resolution in the simulation to accurately account for individual galaxy shapes and the baryonic physics involved, while simultaneously having a large enough volume to produce shear predictions for upcoming surveys. We focus again in this section on work that informs predictions of large-scale intrinsic alignment correlations, discussing small scale measurements in simulations primarily as it relates to our ability to predict the intrinsic shapes of galaxies in large volume simulations.
\begin{figure}
\center
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{v13axisAlignments_isnap2_3d.eps}%
\caption{The angular separation between the major axes of a dark matter halo sampled in different radial bins at $z=0.5$ for various halo mass ranges (units of $\log(M_{200}/h^{-1}M_{\odot}))$ in the Millennium \& Millennium-2 Simulations (ME1 \& ME2, respectively). Shown are the mean (points) and median (lines) for each bin, with a box representing the central 50\% quantile range. There is a clear misalignment between inner and outer portions of the halo, with almost 25\% of halos having perpendicularly aligned inner and outer major axes. This misalignment has significant consequences when attempting to draw conclusions about intrinsic alignment in dark matter-only simulations. Source: Reproduced with permission from \protect\cite{SchneiderFrenkCole2012}. \copyright 2012 SISSA Medialab Srl. and IOP Publishing. All rights reserved.}\label{fig:misalign}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Measurements of intrinsic halo alignment correlations in dark matter simulations}\label{dmonly}
Following \cite{HeavensRefregierHeymans2000,CroftMetzler2000}, many large-scale intrinsic alignment measurements have been made in dark matter only simulations. Initial models of the $II$ contribution to intrinsic alignment were developed based partly on simulation results, which included the first identifications of the correlation due to intrinsic spiral and elliptical galaxy shapes by \cite{HeavensRefregierHeymans2000}. Elliptical galaxies were assumed to have the same ellipticity as their dark matter halos, while the disks of spiral galaxies were assumed to be perpendicular to the angular momentum axis of the halo. The spatial $II$ correlation function $\eta^{II}(r)=\langle e(\bm{x})e(\bm{x}+\bm{r})\rangle$, for ellipticity $e$, was fit to the simulation measurement with
\begin{equation}
\eta^{II}_{HRH}(r)=0.012 e^{-r/1.5 h^{-1}\textrm{Mpc}}.\label{eq:hrh}
\end{equation}
These results indicated shear correlations in shallow surveys like SuperCOSMOS and SDSS would be dominated by the intrinsic alignment signal and intrinsic alignments would be nonnegligible in deeper surveys. This was modified by \cite{HeymansEtAl2004} to have the form
\begin{equation}
\eta^{II}_{HRH*}(r)=\frac{A}{1+(r/B)^2},\label{eq:hrhstar}
\end{equation}
for $B=1 h^{-1}$ Mpc and free parameter $A$, with best fit $A=0.0011$. This measurement forecasted a contamination in the lowest tomographic redshift bin of planned surveys of about ~7\%. \cite{Jing2002} then presented a specific power-law fitting formula for the $II$ correlation as a function of halo mass based on simulation results from \cite{Jing1998,JingSuto1998,JingSuto2002}
\begin{equation}
\eta^{II}_{Jing}(r)=2(3.6\times 10^{-2})\frac{[M_h/(10^{10}h^{-1} \textrm{Mpc})]^{0.5}}{r^{0.4}(7.5^{1.7}+r^{1.7})}.\label{eq:jing}
\end{equation}
These results confirmed that intrinsic alignment could contribute significantly to planned weak lensing surveys.
Using the dark matter simulations by \cite{ValeWhite2003}, \cite{HeymansEtAl22006} included the potential impact from the $GI$ correlation for the first time, following previous assumptions that galaxy ellipticity follows either the parent halo ellipticity (elliptical galaxies) or angular momentum axis (spiral galaxies) (e.g. \cite{CroftMetzler2000,HeavensRefregierHeymans2000}). They compared results from these two models for galaxy ellipticity to observations by \cite{MandelbaumEtAl2006}, and provided parameterized fitting formulae for the correlation results.
Following \cite{HeymansEtAl2004}, \cite{HeymansEtAl22006} parameterized the $II$ correlation by Eq.~(\ref{eq:hrhstar}), with $B$ left as an additional free parameter for elliptical galaxies. The $GI$ correlation was parameterized to be redshift and scale dependent such that
\begin{equation}
\eta^{GI}(r)=\langle\gamma(\chi_s)e(\chi_l)\rangle=\mathcal{E}\frac{A}{\theta+\theta_0},\label{eq:h06gi}
\end{equation}
where $\chi_s$ is the comoving distance of the source galaxies, $\chi_l$ is the median comoving distance of the lens galaxy bins, $\mathcal{E}=D_l D_{ls}/D_s$ is the lensing efficiency, and there are free parameters for the amplitude $A$ and scale dependence $\theta_0$. For a fully elliptical galaxy sample, \cite{HeymansEtAl22006} found best-fit values of $A=-5.60\times 10^{-7}$ $h^{-1}$ Mpc and $\theta_0=1.83$ arcmin. For a mixed galaxy sample, $A=-1.29\times 10^{-7}$ $h^{-1}$ Mpc and $\theta_0=0.93$ arcmin. This predicts an intrinsic alignment contamination of up to 10\% for surveys with median redshift $z_m\approx 1$ on scales up to 20 arcminutes.
\cite{SemboloniHeymansVanwaerbekeSchneider2008} expanded the investigation of \cite{HeymansEtAl22006} to the 3-point correlations $GGI$, $GII$, and $III$, providing similar fitting formulae for the correlations and demonstrating a stronger intrinsic alignment contamination to the 3-point shear correlation. They assumed that the $GGI$ and $GII$ correlations can be decomposed into functions which depend only on comoving distance $\chi$ and only on angular scale $\theta$, such that
\begin{align}
\eta^{GGI}(\chi_{G_1},\chi_{G_2},\chi_L,\theta)=&E_{GGI}(\chi_{G_1},\chi_{G_2},\chi_L)F(\theta)\\
\eta^{GII}(\chi_{G},\chi_L,\theta)=&E_{GII}(\chi_{G},\chi_L)F(\theta),
\end{align}
where $\chi_{G_a}$ is the comoving distance of the source galaxies and $\chi_L<\min(\chi_{G_a})$ is the maximum lens distance. They then define
\begin{align}
E_{GGI}(\chi_{G_1},\chi_{G_2},\chi_L)=&\int_0^{\chi_L}d\chi'\frac{\sin_k(\chi_{G_1}-\chi')}{\sin_k(\chi_{G_1})}\frac{\sin_k(\chi_{G_2}-\chi')}{\sin_k(\chi_{G_2})}f(\chi')\\
E_{GII}(\chi_{G},\chi_L)=&\int_0^{\chi_L}d\chi'\frac{\sin_k(\chi_{G}-\chi')}{\sin_k(\chi_{G})}f^2(\chi')\\
F(\theta)=&A e^{-\theta/\theta_0},
\end{align}
for some comoving distribution of lenses $f(\chi)$. The best-fit values of $A$ and $\theta_0$ are given in Table 1 of \cite{SemboloniHeymansVanwaerbekeSchneider2008} for several choices of lens distribution and source redshifts. They found generally that intrinsic alignment more strongly contaminates the bispectrum relative to the power spectrum. Other investigations of intrinsic alignment in dark matter only simulations have also been carried out, for example, by \cite{DekelEtAl2001,FaltenbacherEtAl2002,PorcianiEtAl2002a,PorcianiEtAl2002b,AubertPichonColombi2004,HopkinsBahcallBode2005,LeeKangJing2005,AltayColbergCroft2006,AragonEtAl2007,KuhlenEtAl2007,FaltenbacherEtAl2008,LeeEtAl2008,PazStasyszynPadilla2008,PereiraEtAl2008,SousbieEtAl2008,PereiraBryan2010,CodisEtAl2012,AragonEtAl2013,LaigleEtAl2013}.
\subsection{Misalignment of galaxy and halo orientations in simulations}\label{misalignment}
A key question to the validity of many simulation results thus far for galaxy intrinsic alignment is whether dark matter halo properties can reasonably be used as tracers for galaxy alignment. Several attempts have been made to better identify alignments in simulations, and to explore more accurate ways to characterize or measure galaxy alignment. One approach includes attempts to characterize misalignments between dark matter halo and galaxy alignments, which may be stochastic or biased with a non-zero mean. Another is simply to push hydrodynamical simulations to larger volumes in order to measure correlations of galaxy alignments directly, without the need for relating the halo and galaxy alignment axes. The primary challenge to this is the expense of producing large enough volume hydrodynamical simulations to allow for a statistical characterization of the intrinsic alignment signal on large scales.
Using higher resolution simulations and studying 3D alignments of halos, \cite{BailinSteinmetz2005} reported that angular momentum (disk orientation) and halo misalignment has a nonzero mean of about 25$^{\textrm{o}}$. \cite{FaltenbacherLiWhiteJingWang2009} compared results from the SDSS DR6 \citep{SDSSDR6} and Millennium Simulation \citep{SpringelEtAl2005,DeLuciaBlaizot2007}, finding a better agreement between simulation and survey data when the inner part of the halo is used to determine the projected galaxy alignment, as opposed to the total halo shape, which has a misalignment of about 25$^{\textrm{o}}$ relative to the inner region. By assuming a Gaussian distribution of misalignment angles with zero mean for LRGs and their host halos, \cite{OkumuraJing2009,OkumuraJingLi2009} measured a width of about 35$^{\textrm{o}}$ in the distribution, demonstrating that the assumption of a perfect projected alignment between LRG and parent halo leads to an over-estimation of the ellipticity correlation, in agreement with \cite{FaltenbacherLiWhiteJingWang2009}. Measuring the correlations of 3D dark matter halo shapes in Millennium and Millennium-2 Simulations \citep{SpringelEtAl2005,BoylanEtAl2009}, \cite{SchneiderFrenkCole2012} confirmed the misalignment of inner and outer halo regions with a mean of about 20$^{\textrm{o}}$, which is shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:misalign}. They also provided constraints for the $II$ correlation in terms of their halo-halo alignment correlations based on inner halo shapes, and for the $GI$ correlation in terms of their halo-mass alignment correlations.
Confirming studies in dark matter simulations to find misalignments in inner and outer regions of a halo, \cite{HahnTeyssierCarollo2010} found similar results with resolved disk galaxies while studying a cosmic filament in a hydrodynamic adaptive mesh refinement (AMR) simulation. The spin vectors of gaseous and stellar disks were well aligned with the inner region of the host halo (median separation angle of 18$^{\textrm{o}}$), while poorly aligned with the total halo spin axis (median separation angle of 46-50$^{\textrm{o}}$). The alignment was also environment-dependent, with low density environments being more consistent with alignment in linear tidal torque theory, and higher density environments having less alignment, potentially due to nonlinear effects in high-density regions.
\begin{table}
\center
\caption{Central and satellite group mean 3D misalignments for three halo mass bins at various redshifts by \protect\cite{TennetiEtAl2014} in the MassiveBlack-II hydrodynamical simulation \protect\citep{mbii}.\label{mbiialign1}}
\vskip .5cm\begin{tabular}{ l c c c c c c }
\hline\hline
& \multicolumn{3}{c}{Central Galaxies} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{Satellite Galaxies} \\
Halo Mass $(h^{-1} M_{\odot})$ & $z=0.06$ & 0.3 & 1.0 & $z=0.06$ & 0.3 & 1.0 \\
\hline
$10^{10}-10^{11.5}$ & $38.12^{\textrm{o}}$ & $37.39^{\textrm{o}}$ & $33.88^{\textrm{o}}$ & $35.60^{\textrm{o}}$ & $32.71^{\textrm{o}}$ & $32.88^{\textrm{o}}$ \\
$10^{11.5}-10^{13}$ & $29.10^{\textrm{o}}$ & $26.61^{\textrm{o}}$ & $21.98^{\textrm{o}}$ & $29.32^{\textrm{o}}$ & $28.52^{\textrm{o}}$ & $27.76^{\textrm{o}}$ \\
$>10^{13}$ & $14.76^{\textrm{o}}$ & $13.47^{\textrm{o}}$ & $10.33^{\textrm{o}}$ & $27.36^{\textrm{o}}$ & $26.48^{\textrm{o}}$ & $26.10^{\textrm{o}}$ \\
\hline\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
\begin{table}
\center
\caption{Central and satellite group mean 3D misalignments for three subhalo mass bins at various redshifts by \protect\cite{TennetiEtAl2014} in the MassiveBlack-II hydrodynamical simulation \protect\citep{mbii}.\label{mbiialign2}}
\vskip .5cm\begin{tabular}{ l c c c c c c }
\hline\hline
& \multicolumn{3}{c}{Central Galaxies} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{Satellite Galaxies} \\
Subhalo Mass $(h^{-1} M_{\odot})$ & z=0.06 & 0.3 & 1.0 & z=0.06 & 0.3 & 1.0 \\
\hline
$10^{10}-10^{11.5}$ & $37.83^{\textrm{o}}$ & $37.07^{\textrm{o}}$ & $33.42^{\textrm{o}}$ & $29.00^{\textrm{o}}$ & $28.22^{\textrm{o}}$ & $28.21^{\textrm{o}}$ \\
$10^{11.5}-10^{13}$ & $28.68^{\textrm{o}}$ & $25.85^{\textrm{o}}$ & $21.30^{\textrm{o}}$ & $21.54^{\textrm{o}}$ & $20.43^{\textrm{o}}$ & $18.03^{\textrm{o}}$ \\
$>10^{13}$ & $14.00^{\textrm{o}}$ & $13.11^{\textrm{o}}$ & $9.61^{\textrm{o}}$ & $12.03^{\textrm{o}}$ & $11.73^{\textrm{o}}$ & $17.17^{\textrm{o}}$ \\
\hline\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
More recently, \cite{TennetiEtAl2014} used the MassiveBlack-II hydrodynamical simulation \citep{mbii} to explore 2D and 3D alignments of stellar and dark matter components of halos and subhalos. They define a misalignment angle between the major axes of the ellipsoid defining both stellar and dark matter components of the halo. Specific results for the misalignment angle of central and satellite halos as a function parent and subhalo masses are given in Tables \ref{mbiialign1} \& \ref{mbiialign2}, which indicate a typical misalignment angle of about $10^{\textrm{o}}-30^{\textrm{o}}$ for halos of mass $10^{10}-10^{14}h^{-1}M_{\odot}$. These results confirm earlier hydrodynamical simulation measurements of halo shape and spin orientations, (mis-)alignments, and subhalo alignments by \cite{vandenBoschEtAl2002,BailinEtAl2005,CroftEtAl2009,BettEtAl2010,KnebeEtAl2010,PichonEtAl2011,DanovichEtAl2012,StewartEtAl2013}.
\subsection{Correlated intrinsic alignments of galaxies in hydrodynamical simulations}\label{hydro}
Hydrodynamical simulations are incredibly valuable in studies of galaxy intrinsic alignment as they provide an indication of what the observable matter is doing in galaxies. Given the evidence that dark matter halo ellipticity or angular momentum is a poor tracer for the actual or projected galaxy shape, it will be necessary in the coming years to push hydrodynamical simulations to sufficient volumes and resolutions to adequately measure the unbiased shapes of a large number of galaxies to truly constrain and calibrate models of intrinsic alignment with realistic samples of galaxy shapes.
\cite{DuboisEtAl2014} specifically explored the alignment of blue, spin dominated galaxies in the Horizon-AGN simulation. They found an alignment of low-mass galaxy spins (alignments) with local filaments of large-scale structure, while high-mass galaxy spins tend to be aligned perpendicularly to the filaments. A transition mass of $M=3\times 10^{10}M_{\odot}$ is identified, consistent with \cite{CodisEtAl2012}. The high-mass galaxy misalignment is due to the merger of galaxies and was suggested by \cite{AubertPichonColombi2004,BailinSteinmetz2005}. This is opposed to low-mass galaxies, which form due to gas accretion, leading to spins parallel to the filament \citep{KimmEtAl2011,LaigleEtAl2013}. These recent high resolution results appear to support a growing consensus that galaxy spin alignment can be strongly influenced by large-scale filaments and sheets (e.g., \cite{AubertPichonColombi2004,BailinSteinmetz2005,HahnEtAl2007,AragonEtAl2007,PazStasyszynPadilla2008,SousbieEtAl2008}), which was predicted by \cite{LeePen2000,SugermanSummersKamionkowski2000}, and unify sometimes contradictory previous measurements (e.g., \cite{HattonNinin2001,FaltenbacherEtAl2002,HahnEtAl2007,ZhangEtAl2009}) with the identification of the transition mass. \cite{Cen2014} has also shown that mergers play a significant role in the reorientation of spin axes in galaxies.
\cite{CodisEtAl2014} performed a similar study of the Horizon-AGN simulation, using the angular momentum axis of a galaxy as a proxy for alignment. They found a null correlated alignment for redder galaxies, while measuring a potentially observable angular correlation in projected ellipticities in blue galaxies on the order of $\xi_{+}^{II}\approx 10^{-4}$. The measurable intrinsic alignment correlation among blue galaxies, coupled with a null result for red galaxies, is potentially conflicting with previous studies of intrinsic alignment (e.g., Secs. \ref{models} \& \ref{detections}), which find results for bluer or late-type galaxies consistent with zero on large scales and a stronger alignment for luminous red galaxies (LRGs). The authors discuss this discrepancy, and suggest, for example, the choice of angular momentum as a proxy for alignment being one reason for a null detection in red galaxies, as studies of red galaxies have typically used halo or stellar shape determination of the major axis, rather than angular momentum alignment which should be a subdominant factor in alignment of early-type galaxies. Angular momentum is instead most often associated with blue disk galaxies and the tidal torque picture of intrinsic alignment (Sec.~\ref{qa}).
The detection of blue galaxy alignment by \cite{CodisEtAl2014} is significantly diminished when assuming a thicker galaxy disk, but the stronger detection relative to \cite{JoachimiEtAl2013b} may be motivated by galaxy spin being correlated with large-scale filament structure in the universe at competitive levels to alignment within the local dark matter halo (see for example, \cite{KimmEtAl2011,DuboisEtAl2014}), which is not captured by typical halo or semi-analytical models, as used in \cite{JoachimiEtAl2013b}. The decoherence of large-scale structure at later times is also suggested to explain the measurement by \cite{CodisEtAl2014} for blue galaxies, since the correlations are measured at relatively high redshift ($z>1$), and intrinsic correlations between spins would thus decrease at later times \citep{LeeEtAl2008,JoachimiEtAl2013b}.
\cite{TennetiEtAl2014b} extended the work of \cite{TennetiEtAl2014} to measure intrinsic alignment 2-point statistics in the MassiveBlack-II simulation, finding results qualitatively in agreement with recent measurements by \cite{JoachimiMandelbaumAbdallaBridle2011}. They measured both ED position angle statistics, which cross-correlates the underlying large-scale density field with the position angle of a halo, and the projected correlation function $w_{g+}(r_p)$, described above in Eq. \ref{projected_corr}. They were able to measure 2-point intrinsic alignment statistics that are qualitatively consistent with the magnitude and redshift/luminosity dependence of direct measurements of intrinsic alignment in surveys. Using the parameterization of Eq. \ref{eq:NLA}, they found results that qualitatively agree with the measurements of \cite{JoachimiMandelbaumAbdallaBridle2011}, but with smaller luminosity dependence that may be due to differences in the galaxy samples considered. Blue galaxies were found to have stronger misalignments than red galaxies, leading to a suppressed $w_{g+}$. Radial alignment of satellites within host halos was detected, and a scale-dependent bias due to the 1-halo term was identified that is not captured by the ad hoc nonlinear alignment model. Finally, there are indications that the amplitude of the alignment is decreased by a factor of 5-18 in galaxies that are consistent with the sample to be observed by LSST, relative to measured value for LRGs.
Based on these results, there appears to be a growing consensus that precisely how one measures intrinsic alignment of galaxies in simulations has a strong effect on the resulting large-scale intrinsic alignment correlations measured. This alignment changes when one considers the inner or outer portions of a dark matter halo, which are not typically ideal tracers of the observed, baryonic component of the galaxy shape, and further large, high-resolution hydrodynamical simulations will likely be necessary to measure directly the galaxy alignment in order to place more accurate constraints on how the intrinsic alignment of galaxies may be correlated on larger scales over the volumes and depths in redshift of planned weak lensing surveys. Pursuit of a purely halo-oriented model, or even a semi-analytical model based on simulation and observational constraints, may also be challenging if spin (mis-)alignments with filaments and sheets are indeed strong enough to produce measurable correlations in future surveys. The effects of baryonic infall and mergers on galaxy (and intrinsic alignment) evolution, as informed by hydrodynamic simulations, may also play a large part in the future evolution of models of intrinsic alignment.
\section{Mitigation of intrinsic alignment in weak gravitational lensing surveys}\label{mitigation}
The study of the intrinsic alignment of galaxies has been primarily motivated in recent years as a means to improve the potential of planned weak lensing surveys, which can be substantially impacted by the unmitigated, correlated intrinsic alignment signal. This correlated intrinsic alignment acts as a primary physical systematic to the weak lensing signal, biasing the measured power. A great deal of effort has thus gone into developing methods to estimate and isolate the impact of intrinsic alignment on the observed lensing power spectrum and bispectrum. These methods include directly applying parameterized models of galaxy intrinsic alignment, but also focus on using a variety of physical properties of the intrinsic alignment signal in order to isolate it from the true lensing portion of the observed spectrum or bispectrum.
\subsection{Marginalization over parameterized intrinsic alignment models}\label{margin}
The most direct method for separating the effects of galaxy intrinsic alignment and weak gravitational lensing on the correlated shapes of galaxies in large-scale surveys is through marginalization over some parameterized model of intrinsic alignment. This model can be taken to be some physically motivated model, like those described in Sec.~\ref{models}, or can be some more general parameterization of the intrinsic alignment signal. The most popular physical model is currently the linear alignment model of \cite{HirataSeljak2004,HirataSeljak2010} (see Sec.~\ref{la}), which relates the intrinsic alignment signal to the underlying tidal field, but recent work has attempted to improve and build on limitations of the linear alignment model on small scales (see Secs. \ref{nla}-\ref{sam}). In more generalized models, the signal may be parameterized, for example, as a function of properties like redshift, physical separation, or galaxy type, and can be expanded around some fiducial physical model. In both cases, the parameters which define an intrinsic alignment model are constrained along with other cosmological or nuisance parameters.
As an early example, \cite{KingSchneider2003} demonstrated that generic, parameterized template functions could be employed to simultaneously fit both lensing ($\xi^{L}$) and intrinsic alignment ($\xi^I$) components of the observed ellipticity correlation $\xi(\theta,z_i,z_j)=\xi^{L}(\theta,z_i,z_j)+\xi^{I}(\theta,z_i,z_j)$ with photometric redshift information. The signals are assumed to be composed of some template functions
\begin{align}
\xi^L(\theta,z_i,z_j)=&\sum_{n=1}^{N_L}a_n A_n(\theta,z_i,z_j)\\
\xi^I(\theta,z_i,z_j)=&\sum_{n=1}^{N_I}b_n B_n(\theta,z_i,z_j),
\end{align}
with amplitude $a_n$ and $b_n$ of the $n$th lensing and intrinsic alignment template function, respectively. They used $N_L=3$ lensing functions $A_n$ built from various lensing correlation functions from CDM cosmologies and $N_I=9$ intrinsic alignment functions $B_n$ with an assumed spatial intrinsic alignment correlation function parameterized as
\begin{align}
\eta(r,z)=(1+\bar{z})^{\alpha}\exp(-r/R),
\end{align}
where $r$ is the comoving separation in units of $h^{-1}$ Mpc, $R$ is a correlation length, and $\bar{z}$ is the mean redshift of the galaxy pair. Three values each of $\alpha$ and $R$ are chosen as template functions, which are fitted against the assumed intrinsic alignment models of \cite{HeavensRefregierHeymans2000}, given in Eq.~(\ref{eq:hrh}), and \cite{Jing2002}, given in Eq.~(\ref{eq:jing}) for some specific halo mass choice. These models assume only an $II$ component to the intrinsic alignment signal, but \cite{KingSchneider2003} showed that by fitting the observed signal using the template functions described above with information about photometric redshifts, the degeneracy between $\Omega_m$ and $\sigma_8$ could be relieved through tomography despite the presence of an intrinsic alignment contamination in the ellipticity correlation. This template fitting process was expanded by \cite{King2005} to include the $GI$ contribution, with similar results.
A major limitation to the use of parameterized intrinsic alignment models or templates for addressing cosmological bias in weak lensing surveys is the resulting degradation in figures of merit as the number of parameters increase. Current physical models of intrinsic alignment that possess fewer parameters, however, suffer from an inability to accurately describe the intrinsic alignment correlations on small, nonlinear scales. While some improvements to this have been attempted (Secs. \ref{nla}-\ref{sam}), there remains no consensus physical model that describes well the intrinsic alignment signal on all scales from basic principles. The creation of such a model remains challenging, as the connection between galaxy formation and evolution and the intrinsic alignment signal is not sufficiently understood to present an accurate physical model on nonlinear scales.
However, such a direct model-fitting approach remains viable so long as the assumed systematic residuals do not strongly impact survey constraints, such as for a small or shallow weak lensing survey. \cite{HuffEtAl2014}, for example, utilized the linear alignment model with a scaling matched to previous measurements of the $GI$ correlation (see Sec.~\ref{detections}) in the Sloan Digital Sky Survey to unbias shear measurements. Using the central model of \cite{HirataEtAl2007}, \cite{HuffEtAl2014} reduced the magnitude of the shear-shear correlation by 8\% to account for a negative $GI$ contribution, with an error of 50\% on this determination propagated through to parameter constraints.
It has since been shown, though, that the linear alignment model typically used to describe intrinsic alignment, may not perform well in a minimal parameter marginalization process, as employed for the recent CFHT Lensing Survey (CFHTLenS) by \cite{heymans}. They employed a single parameter scaling of the intrinsic alignment signal in the linear alignment model, such that $P^{II}\propto A^2$ and $P^{GI}\propto A$. Including the extra parameter $A$ led to a reduction in the constraining power on $\sigma_8 (\Omega_m/0.27)^{\alpha}$ of about 30\% \cite{heymans}. Best-fit values of $A$ for the full galaxy sample were shown to be negative at 1.4$\sigma$, which would indicate a positive correlation for $GI$, though not at strong statistical significance, despite separate fits for early- and late-type galaxies both indicating a positive or near-zero value for $A$. This conflict, if confirmed by future observations, could indicate that a single-parameter linear alignment model assumption is too simple to capture the intrinsic alignment signal in a large weak lensing survey with galaxy types that may have different driving mechanisms for their alignments. These concerns will become important for future survey shear measurements, where systematic uncertainties become larger than statistical errors.
\begin{figure}
\center
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{fig3_review.eps
\caption{
The effects of including an intrinsic alignment model in the data and either assuming the wrong model (described in Sec.~\ref{nla}) or marginalizing over a parameterization grid of intrinsic alignment models, like the processes described in Secs. \ref{margin} \& \ref{sc2} \protect\citep{BridleKing2007,JoachimiBridle2010}, for seven bins of both $k$ and $z$. Left panels include only shear-shear correlations. Right panels include shear--shear, shear--density, and density--density correlations. Top panels assume a wrong intrinsic alignment model. Bottom panels show the results of marginalization over the intrinsic alignment parameterization. Including position information as described in Sec.~\ref{sc2} nearly makes up for information loss due to the additional nuisance parameters. Source: Reproduced with permission from \protect\cite{KirkRassatHostBridle2011}, Oxford University Press on behalf of the Royal Astronomical Society.}\label{fig:mitig}
\end{figure}
A more general approach is that of \cite{BridleKing2007}, where a parameterized set of models is constructed which vary from a base physical model, in this case the ad hoc nonlinear alignment model, through a reasonable set of the parameter space. They choose a base parameterized model with arbitrary amplitude and redshift dependence, given for $X\in\{II,GI\}$ by
\begin{align}
P^{X}_{base}(k,\chi)=A_X\left(\frac{1+z}{1+z_0}\right)^{\gamma_X}P_{nl}^X(k,\chi),
\end{align}
where $P_{nl}^X$ is the nonlinear linear alignment model intrinsic alignment power spectra described in Sec.~\ref{nla}. This parameterization is generalized to include a scale-dependent function $Q^X(k;\chi)$
\begin{align}
P^{X}_{free}(k;\chi)=Q_X(k;\chi)P^{X}_{base}(k;\chi).
\end{align}
$Q^X$ is parameterized over $n$ bins of $k$ and $m$ bins of $z$ such that
\begin{align}
\ln{Q^X(k;\chi)}=&K Z B^X_{ij}+(1-K)ZB^X_{(i+1)j}+K(1-Z)B^X_{i(j+1)}\\
&+(1-K)(1-Z)B^X_{(i+1)(j+1)}\nonumber\\
K=&\frac{\ln{k}-\ln{k_i}}{\ln{k_{i+1}}-\ln{k_i}}\quad (k_i<k<k_{i+1})\\
Z=&\frac{\ln{1+z}-\ln{1+z_j}}{\ln{1+z_{j+1}}-\ln{1+z_j}}\quad (z_j<z<z_{j+1}).
\end{align}
$B^X_{ij}$ is a set of free parameters, and setting $B^X_{ij}=0$ is equivalent to $Q^X$ being unity.
Using this parameterization, \cite{BridleKing2007} demonstrated the impact of the level of freedom in such parameterizations of the intrinsic alignment signal, as well as requirements on photometric redshift quality and the number of tomographic redshift bins. Parameterized models with more freedom necessarily require a larger number of parameters to capture the intrinsic alignment signal across a range of redshifts and scales, and thus degrade the figure of merit for constraints more strongly. Including galaxy position information as described below in Sec.~\ref{sc2} can maintain some of the original shear-shear constraining power, which is demonstrated in Fig.~\ref{fig:mitig}. This approach remains the most direct method for the mitigation of biases due to the intrinsic alignment signal, though determining the best strategy in terms of the competing benefit of using more sophisticated models with a larger number of free parameters versus the actual improvements gained by constraining the intrinsic alignment signal for removal is survey dependent. See also \cite{Bernstein2009,KitchingTaylor2011} for other discussions of marginalization over bias parameters, including intrinsic alignment.
Both approaches to employing intrinsic alignment models can be informed by ongoing measurements of the intrinsic alignment signal across galaxy samples (Sec.~\ref{detections}), by improvements in the methodology of studying galaxy alignment in simulations and its connection to galaxy properties (Sec.~\ref{sims}), and finally, by the inclusion of additional complementary survey measurements, either in the same survey or through overlapping probes, which we will discuss in the following sections.
\subsection{Redshift tomography, separation weighting, and sample limiting}\label{tomography}
In order to avoid the necessity of modeling the intrinsic alignment signal and thus including additional parameters to constrain, one can employ certain physical properties of the intrinsic alignment signal to reduce its impact on weak lensing measurements. One such property is the strong separation dependence of the intrinsic ellipticity correlations. The separation dependence of the intrinsic alignment correlations are shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:dzp} for the power spectrum and in Fig.~\ref{fig:dzp2} for the bispectrum. The exclusion or down weighting of spatially close galaxies in the observed ellipticity correlation, proposed by \cite{CatelanKamionkowskiBlandford2001}, thus greatly reduces the magnitude of the intrinsic ellipticity correlation ($II$), but at the cost of reducing the available statistical power of the measured signal (increasing shape noise and cosmic variance). The $GI$ correlation is also unaffected, as it can occur over large redshift separations. The methodology of utilizing redshift information, particularly photometric redshifts, as a means to discriminate between physically close galaxies was explored by \cite{KingSchneider2002,Heavens2003,HeymansHeavens2003}. \cite{HeymansEtAl2004} applied this technique to results from the COMBO-17, Red-sequence Cluster, and VIRMOS-DESCART surveys, placing some early constraints on the magnitude of the intrinsic alignment signal. \cite{TakadaWhite2004} showed that employing a tomographic study of weak lensing using only cross-correlations between large redshift bins would increase errors on parameter constraints by about 10\% for five or more source redshift bins, while the $II$ contamination is typically rendered negligible. Tomography using photometric redshift bins does require accurate color information on galaxies, and some limitations of this are discussed by \cite{JainConnolyTakada2007} in light of intrinsic alignment contamination.
\begin{figure}
\center
\includegraphics[width=.6\columnwidth]{Fig4_review.eps}%
\caption{The redshift separation dependencies of the $GI$, $II$, and $GG$ spectra are shown, relative to the appropriate galaxy density cross-spectra. The $II$ correlation is diminished by about 75\% at $\Delta z^p=0.2$, while $GI$ grows by a similar fraction. The lensing signal $GG$ is relatively unaffected across this separation range. Both the halo intrinsic alignment model described in Sec.~\ref{haloia} and a toy model described in \protect\cite{Zhang2010b} are shown. Source: Reproduced with permission from \protect\cite{Zhang2010b}, Oxford University Press on behalf of the Royal Astronomical Society.}\label{fig:dzp}
\end{figure}
Another way to lower the impact of intrinsic alignment on shear measurements is to use complementary information on the intrinsic alignment signals (see Sec.~\ref{detections}) to limit the included galaxy sample by type, excluding those galaxies that contribute most strongly to the intrinsic alignment correlations. \cite{MandelbaumEtAl2006,HirataEtAl2007} first identified that Luminous Red Galaxies (LRGs) contribute most of the power of the $GI$ signal, and this has been confirmed by more recent studies. This would indicate that the exclusion of early type galaxies is one direct method to mitigate the impact of the $GI$ correlation on shear measurements. This was employed, for example, by the COSMOS tomographic study of shear in COSMOS by \cite{SchrabbackEtAl2010} along with exclusion of the redshift bin auto-correlations to decrease the impact of both $II$ and $GI$ effects. Most recently, CFHTLenS has confirmed this distinction between early- and late-type galaxies in a much larger galaxy sample, demonstrating that the intrinsic alignment signal from late-type galaxies is consistent with zero on large scales, while detecting a nonzero $GI$ signal from early type galaxies \citep{heymans}. \cite{JoachimiEtAl2013b} also demonstrated that removing 20\% of red foreground galaxies can suppress the intrinsic alignment contamination by up to a factor of two in a deep survey.
\begin{figure}
\center
\includegraphics[height=\textwidth,angle=270]{ratio3.eps}%
\caption{The galaxy separation dependencies of the $GGI$, $GII$, $III$, and $GGG$ bispectra are shown, relative to the appropriate galaxy density cross-bispectra. The $III$ correlation is diminished by about 75\% at $\Delta z^p=0.2$, which is similar to the impact on $II$, while $GGI$ is diminished by about 50\%. The $GGI$ correlation instead grows by about 75\%, similar to $GI$. The lensing signal $GGG$ is relatively unaffected across this separation range. Both the halo intrinsic alignment model described in Sec.~\ref{haloia} and a toy model described in \protect\cite{Zhang2010b} are shown. Source: Reproduced from \protect\cite{TroxelIshak2012b}.}\label{fig:dzp2}
\end{figure}
Whether using redshift tomography, an optimized down weighting of nearby galaxy pairs through redshift information, or sample limiting measurements to exclude galaxies which most strongly contribute to the intrinsic alignment signal, these mitigation schemes have become in some ways more feasible as a method of reducing the intrinsic ellipticity correlation component to the observed weak lensing signal, due to the very large number of galaxies and relative depth of recent and planned surveys. The loss of redshift auto-correlations or a subset of galaxy types, for example, is less catastrophic for a survey as the number of available photo-z bins increases due to better photo-z measurements, increased galaxy counts, and survey depths. The optimal methodology, however, remains survey dependent and requires careful analysis to balance information loss to the mitigation of intrinsic alignment bias with the improvement in accuracy of parameter determinations. Care must also be taken not to introduce additional biases due to galaxy sample cuts. With the identification of a long-range correlation between the intrinsic ellipticity and lensing of background galaxies by \cite{HirataSeljak2004}, redshift weighting can also only form part of a mitigation strategy for the intrinsic alignment signal, as correlations like $GI$ are unaffected. In fact, for deep lensing surveys the $GI$ signal grows to dominate the intrinsic ellipticity correlation ($II$), and one must employ different strategies for isolating its impact on the cosmic shear signal, like sample limiting, or others which we discuss further below.
\subsection{Nulling techniques}\label{nulling}
Since any galaxy can contribute to the $GI$ signal with multiple source galaxies at different redshifts, there is no direct method for excluding galaxy pairs that contribute to the total statistical $GI$ signal. However, one can construct more complicated procedures for weighting the cosmic shear signal by redshift to reduce the $GI$ contamination. This is possible because the intrinsic ellipticity-gravitational shear correlation has a unique geometry and redshift separation dependence compared to the cosmic shear signal. The nulling approach was discussed by \cite{HutererWhite2004} in the context of removing biases from small-scale physics, and developed by \cite{JoachimiSchneider2008,JoachimiSchneider2009} as a method for addressing the $GI$ intrinsic alignment contamination. It is referred to as nulling, since it nulls some component (e.g., $GI$) of the statistical signal. This is accomplished by constructing a new cosmic shear measure with a reweighted redshift distribution. This down weights the contribution by the $GI$ effect, and thus reduces its impact on cosmological constraints, though with some loss of statistical power associated with nulling a portion of the signal through downweighting.
\begin{figure}
\center
\includegraphics[height=\textwidth,angle=270]{nullingB.eps}%
\caption{The weight functions $B_i(\chi)$, determined through three methods by \protect\cite{JoachimiSchneider2008}, for different initial bins $i$ and a total photo-z bin number $N_z=40$. Solid lines show a simplified analytical construction, dashed curves show a Chebyshev series construction, and dotted lines show a piecewise linear construction of the weight function. Source: Reproduced with permission from \protect\cite{JoachimiSchneider2008}. \copyright 2008 ESO.}\label{fig:nulling1}
\end{figure}
The nulling process assumes that a galaxy sample can be split into narrow redshift bins, such that the comoving galaxy distribution in bin $i$ can be written as
\begin{equation}
n_i(\chi)\approx \delta^D(\chi-\chi(z_i)).
\end{equation}
The source of the $GI$ contamination to the shear spectrum comes from a correlation between the lensing of background galaxies in some redshift bin $j$ due to some matter distribution in a foreground redshift bin $i$ and the intrinsic ellipticity caused by the matter distribution's tidal field in bin $i$. Thus one can remove this component to the shear signal by not allowing a contribution to the convergence (or shear) due to matter in bin $i$. The standard projection for the convergence due to some distribution of galaxies was given in Eq.~(\ref{eq:keff2}), where in a spatially flat universe with comoving distance in units of $c/H_0$, it can be related to the density contrast by
\begin{align}
\kappa_i(\bm{\theta})=&\frac{3}{2}\Omega_m\int_0^{\chi_l} d\chi g_i(\chi)\frac{\chi}{a(\chi)}\delta(\chi\bm{\theta};\chi),
\end{align}
where
\begin{align}
g_i(\chi)=&\int_{\chi}^{\chi_l} d\chi' n_i(\chi')\left(1-\frac{\chi}{\chi'}\right).
\end{align}
Instead of the galaxy distribution, one can choose some arbitrary function $\hat{B}(\chi)$, such that
\begin{equation}
\hat{g}_i(\chi)=\int_{\chi}^{\chi_l}d\chi'\hat{B}_i(\chi')\left(1-\frac{\chi}{\chi'}\right).\label{eq:weight2}
\end{equation}
Then, in order to `null' the impact of some mass at comoving distance $\hat{\chi}$, one must simply choose some $\hat{B}(\chi)$ such that
\begin{equation}
\hat{g}_i(\chi)=\int_{\hat{\chi}}^{\chi_l}d\chi'\hat{B}_i(\chi')\left(1-\frac{\hat{\chi}}{\chi'}\right)=0,\label{eq:weight3}
\end{equation}
which renders the convergence due to such a mass zero. For the power spectrum, this weighting can be written
\begin{align}
\hat{P}_i(\ell)\approx&\sum_{j=1}^{N_z}\hat{B}_i(\chi(z_j))P_{ij}(\ell)\chi'(z_j)\Delta z,
\end{align}
where $P_{ij}(\ell)$ is the 2D tomographic convergence power spectrum of Eq.~(\ref{eq:pstomo}) and $N_z$ is the total number of redshift bins.
\cite{JoachimiSchneider2008,JoachimiSchneider2009} describes the choice of $\hat{B}_i$ in order to remove the contribution of $GI$ to the cosmic shear information via the constraint in Eq.~(\ref{eq:weight3}) for some redshift bin $i$, while simultaneously maximizing the information content available to constrain cosmological parameters. This information optimization is designed to maximize the trace of the Fisher matrix for $N_{\ell}$ angular frequency bins of width $\Delta\ell_l$, $N_p$ parameters to be constrained, and survey area $A$. The power spectra in the trace of the Fisher matrix are evaluated for some fiducial parameters in the cosmological model. This trace is independent of the weighting amplitude, and thus a normalization of $\hat{B}$ can be pursued independently of this condition. In practice, the only non-zero $\hat{B}_j$ are for bins $i+1<j<N_z$. The redshift at which each bin is defined (e.g., central, median, or boundary values) is free to be chosen, with some choices producing improved reductions in the bias \citep{JoachimiSchneider2009}. The evaluation of $\hat{B}_i$ is discussed in detail in \cite{JoachimiSchneider2008,JoachimiSchneider2009}, and example functions are shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:nulling1}.
\begin{figure}
\center
\includegraphics[width=5.0in,height=5.0in]{nulling23.eps}%
\caption{Resulting 1$\sigma$ parameter estimates for the given survey parameters after the nulling process using only the power spectrum, only the bispectrum, and a combination of both. This is compared to the original constraint from combining power spectrum and bispectrum. The nulling removes nearly all biases from the parameter estimates due to intrinsic alignment, at the cost of decreased statistical power. Source: Reproduced with permission from \protect\cite{ShiJoachimiSchneider2010}. \copyright 2010 ESO.}\label{fig:nulling2}
\end{figure}
With perfect redshift information, the nulling technique can totally remove the $GI$ portion of the lensing signal, removing the intrinsic alignment systematic error in parameter determinations. It simultaneously creates a moderate increase in the size of the associated confidence contours due to loss of statistical power. For 20 redshift bins, the increase in the 2D confidence region size is between 20\%-50\% \citep{JoachimiSchneider2008}. Most surveys, however, utilize uncertain photometric redshift information for galaxies, which conservatively limits the reduction in $GI$ by nulling to about a factor of 10 for 10 or more redshift bins, with a similar increase of up to 50\% in the size of confidence regions due to loss of statistical power \citep{JoachimiSchneider2009}.
The nulling technique has been expanded to the bispectrum for $GGI$ and $GII$ with similar results as for $GI$ by \cite{ShiJoachimiSchneider2010}. The nulling condition for the bispectrum of some mass at comoving distance $\chi_i$, for some weighting function $\hat{T}_{ij}(\chi_k)$, is now
\begin{align}
\int_{\hat{\chi}}^{\chi_1}d\chi_k T_{ij}(\chi_k)\left(1-\frac{\chi_i}{\chi_k}\right)\chi_k'\Delta z_k=0.
\end{align}
The bispectrum estimator with this weighting function is then written
\begin{align}
\hat{B}_{ij}(\ell_1,\ell_2,\ell_3)\approx\sum_{k=i+1}^{N_z}\hat{T}_{ij}(\chi(z_k))B_{ijk}(\ell_1,\ell_2,\ell_3)\chi'(z_k)\Delta z_k.
\end{align}
The process for choosing the nulling weights $T_{ij}$ is described in detail by \cite{ShiJoachimiSchneider2010}. The 3-point nulling process is able to reduce the intrinsic alignment contamination by about factor of 10 for 10 redshift bins, with similar information loss as the 2-point nulling. The effect of nulling and combining the power spectrum and bispectrum on parameter constraints is shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:nulling2}.
The nulling technique is one option for mitigating the impact of the gravitational shear--intrinsic ellipticity correlation for surveys with the capability of utilizing many redshift bins with good photometric redshift information. It has no dependence on uncertain modeling of the intrinsic alignment signal, and uses purely geometric information obtained from a single survey to disentangle the impact of the $GI$ signal from cosmic shear. The technique was also proposed as a means to `boost' instead of null the intrinsic alignment signal \citep{JoachimiSchneider2010}, offering an alternative method of measuring the $GI$ correlation. It has also been proposed to null \citep{HeavensJoachimi2011} and boost \citep{Schneider2014} effects like magnification, which like intrinsic alignment can also bias the cosmic shear signal and provide alternative cosmological information.
\subsection{Self-calibration techniques}\label{sc}
Another alternative for the reduction and indirect measurement of the intrinsic alignment signal is the so-called `self-calibration' techniques, named because they calibrate the lensing signal by using a rescaling of complementary cross-correlations between various observables within a single survey. The self-calibration of systematic effects using the additional information gained from the gravitational shear-galaxy density cross-correlation and galaxy density-density correlation, in addition to the gravitational shear-shear correlation, has been discussed by several authors (e.g., \cite{BernsteinJain2004,HuJain2004,Zhan2006,Bernstein2009}), and was specifically examined as a means to self-calibrate the $GI$ signal by \cite{Zhang2010a,Zhang2010b}. The available information in a weak lensing survey relevant to the self-calibration, including the shear, density and intrinsic alignment components, can be written for $i<j$ as the following power spectra
\begin{align}
C^{(1)}_{ij}(\ell) =& C^{GG}_{ij}(\ell)+C^{IG}_{ij}(\ell)+C^{II}_{ij}(\ell),\nonumber\\
C^{(2)}_{ii}(\ell) =& C^{gG}_{ii}(\ell)+C^{gI}_{ii}(\ell),\nonumber\\
C^{(3)}_{ii}(\ell) =& C^{gg}_{ii}(\ell).\label{eq:2obs}
\end{align}
Unlike nulling, which uses a purely geometric approach to minimize the impact of $GI$, the self-calibration uses the relationship between the observed ellipticity correlations and cross-correlations of ellipticity and galaxy density to isolate the magnitude of the intrinsic alignment correlations. The self-calibration falls into two categories: the first of which self-calibrates the correlations between gravitational shear and intrinsic ellipticity from cross-correlations of photometric redshift bins, while the second self-calibrates the full set of intrinsic alignment correlations (or alternately their sum) within a single photometric redshift bin.
\subsubsection{Self-calibration between photometric redshift bins}\label{selfcalibration1}
\begin{figure}
\center
\includegraphics[height=\textwidth,angle=270]{GIerror.eps}%
\caption{The accuracy of the scaling relationship in Eq.~(\ref{eq:2scale}) is shown for a variety of redshift bin combinations in a Stage IV survey. Equation (\ref{eq:2scale}) is accurate to within about 10\% for all redshift bin combinations, leading to a suppression of the $GI$ intrinsic alignment contamination to the power spectrum by a factor of 10 or more. Source: Reproduced from \protect\cite{TroxelIshak2012a}.}\label{fig:GIerror}
\end{figure}
The self-calibration of $GI$ in cross-correlations of different photometric redshift bins, $i<j$, where the $II$ signal is assumed to be negligible (e.g., Sec.~\ref{tomography}), requires no assumptions about any underlying intrinsic alignment model. It instead utilizes the ansatz of some deterministic galaxy bias $b_{i}$ relating the galaxy and matter densities in real space \citep{FryGaztanaga1993,Fry1994}, such that
\begin{align}
\delta_g(\bm{x})=b_{1}(\chi)\delta_m(\bm{x};\chi)+\frac{b_{2}(\chi)}{2}\delta_m(\bm{x};\chi)^2
\end{align}
to connect the galaxy density-intrinsic alignment ($gI$) and gravitational shear-intrinsic ellipticity ($GI$) correlations through some approximate scaling relationship. For the $GI$ self-calibration, the nonlinear bias is neglected. The redshift bins are assumed to be sufficiently narrow, like the nulling technique, so that one can safely make the approximation that the $GI$ and $gI$ spectra obey a simple scaling relation
\begin{align}
C^{IG}_{ij}(\ell)\approx \frac{W^G_{ij}}{b_{1}^i\Pi_{ii}}C^{Ig}_{ii}(\ell),\label{eq:2scale}
\end{align}
where $C^{IG}$ and $C^{Ig}$ are the 2D projected gravitational shear-intrinsic alignment and galaxy density-intrinsic alignment power spectra, respectively, and $b_{1}^i$ is the average galaxy bias within the $i$-th redshift bin. Finally,
\begin{align}
W^G_{ij}&=\int_0^{\chi_1}W_i(\chi)d\chi\\
\Pi_{ii}&=\int_0^{\chi'} n_i^2(\chi)d\chi.
\end{align}
This allows one to measure the intrinsic alignment in the galaxy shear--density cross-correlation ($C^{Ig}$) and infer the contamination $C^{IG}$ to the lensing signal using quantities measured from the survey. The inaccuracy of Eq. (\ref{eq:2scale}) is shown in Fig. \ref{fig:GIerror}, where the self-calibration is typically inaccurate by less than 10\%.
The $gI$ correlation is then isolated from the gravitational shear-galaxy density ($Gg$) correlation in the observed shear--density correlation, $C^{(2)}$, through an estimator that takes advantage of the different geometry dependence of the two correlations
\begin{equation}
\hat{C}^{Ig}_{ii}(\ell)=\frac{C^{(2)}_{ii}|_S(\ell)-Q^{GI}(\ell)C^{(2)}_{ii}(\ell)}{1-Q^{GI}(\ell)}.\label{eq:2cig}
\end{equation}
The suppression quotient $Q^{GI}(\ell)\equiv C^{gG}_{ii}|_S(\ell)/C^{gG}_{ii}(\ell)$ measures the relative suppression of the spectrum due to the geometry of the lensing kernel, where subscript `S' denotes a spectrum which measures only pairs such that the photometric redshifts $z^p_G<z^p_g$. $Q^{GI}$ is approximately equal to a factor $\bar{\eta}^{GI}_i=\eta^{GI}(\bar{z}_i)$, for mean bin redshift $\bar{z}_i$,
\begin{equation}
\eta^{GI}(z_L,z_g=z_L)=2\frac{\int_{i}dz^p_G\int_{i}dz^p_g\int_0^{\infty}dz_G W_L(z_L,z_G)p(z_G|z_G^p)p(z_g|z_g^p)S(z_G^p,z_g^p)n_i^p(z_G^p)n_i^p(z_g^p)}{\int_{i}dz^p_G\int_{i}dz^p_g\int_0^{\infty}dz_G W_L(z_L,z_G)p(z_G|z_G^p)p(z_g|z_g^p)n_i^p(z_G^p)n_i^p(z_g^p)},\label{eq:eta}
\end{equation}
where $\int_i\equiv\int_{\bar{z}_i-\Delta z_i/2}^{\bar{z}_i+\Delta z_i/2}$, $S(z,z')=1$ for $z<z'$ and $S=0$ otherwise. The case where $\eta,Q\rightarrow 0$ corresponds to the use of spectroscopic redshift information, where the selection rule completely removes the lensing signal.
The scaling relation in Eq.~(\ref{eq:2scale}) has been shown to be accurate to within 10\% for all but the lowest, adjacent photo-z bin combinations for a typical Stage IV weak lensing survey, which corresponds to a reduction in the magnitude of the $GI$ contaminant of a factor of 10 or more for various redshift bin pairs \citep{Zhang2010a,TroxelIshak2012a}. This is competitive with the photometric estimates of the nulling approach, but with separate benefits and challenges. The self-calibration is capable of simultaneously estimating the $GI$ signal, preserving it for use in other studies, and does not throw away significant statistical weight, which preserves the statistical power in parameter estimates. It instead uses an estimator to separate the lensing and intrinsic alignment components of the galaxy shear--density cross-correlation, but also preserves both for use in joint probe analysis. This will introduce an additional propagated error that must be considered if using the lensing component of the galaxy shear--density cross-correlation due to the imperfect separation. It also requires an additional measurement of the galaxy bias, though it has been shown that realistic projections for galaxy bias measurements in a Stage IV weak lensing survey are sufficient to render errors due to uncertainty in the galaxy bias negligible in the self-calibration \citep{Zhang2010a}. In both self-calibration and nulling techniques, cosmological priors are necessary, but the quality of constraints from complementary probes like the cosmic microwave background are sufficient.
\begin{figure}
\center
\includegraphics[height=\textwidth,angle=270]{serror.eps}%
\caption{The accuracy of the scaling relationship in Eq.~(\ref{eq:3scale}) is shown for a variety of redshift bin combinations in a Stage IV survey. Equation (\ref{eq:3scale}) is accurate to within about 30\% for all redshift bin combinations, though most have an accuracy within 10\%, leading to a suppression of the $GGI$ intrinsic alignment contamination to the bispectrum by a factor of 3-10 or more. Source: Reproduced from \protect\cite{TroxelIshak2012a}.}\label{fig:GGIerror}
\end{figure}
The self-calibration technique for cross-correlations has recently been expanded to the bispectrum for the $GGI$ and $GII$ cross-correlations \citep{TroxelIshak2012c,TroxelIshak2012a}. In the case of the bispectrum, there are four observable (cross-)correlations between galaxy ellipticity and density for $i<j<k$
\begin{align}
B^{(1)}_{ijk}(\ell_1,\ell_2,\ell_3) =& B^{GGG}_{ijk}(\ell_1,\ell_2,\ell_3)+B^{IGG}_{ijk}(\ell_1,\ell_2,\ell_3)+B^{IIG}_{ijk}(\ell_1,\ell_2,\ell_3)+B^{III}_{ijk}(\ell_1,\ell_2,\ell_3),\nonumber\\
B^{(2)}_{iii}(\ell_1,\ell_2,\ell_3) =& B^{GGg}_{iii}(\ell_1,\ell_2,\ell_3)+B^{IGg}_{iii}(\ell_1,\ell_2,\ell_3)+B^{IIg}_{iii}(\ell_1,\ell_2,\ell_3),\nonumber\\
B^{(3)}_{iii}(\ell_1,\ell_2,\ell_3) =& B^{ggG}_{iii}(\ell_1,\ell_2,\ell_3)+B^{Igg}_{iii}(\ell_1,\ell_2,\ell_3),\nonumber\\
B^{(4)}_{iii}(\ell_1,\ell_2,\ell_3) =& B^{ggg}_{iii}(\ell_1,\ell_2,\ell_3).\label{eq:3obs}
\end{align}
$B^{III}_{ijk}$ is then negligible. The self-calibration then utilizes a scaling relationship between $B^{IGG}_{ijk}$ and $B^{Igg}_{ijk}$ in observables $B^{(1)}_{ijk}$ and $B^{(3)}_{iii}$ \citep{TroxelIshak2012a},
\begin{align}
B^{IGG}_{ijk}(\ell_1,\ell_2,\ell_3)\approx &\frac{W_{ijk}}{(b_{1}^i)^2\Pi_{iii}}B^{Igg}_{iii}(\ell_1,\ell_2,\ell_3)-\frac{b^i_2}{(b^i_1)^2}\frac{W_{ijk}}{\omega_{ii}\Pi_{ii}}\Big[C_{ii}^{Ig}(\ell_1)C_{ii}^{GG}(\ell_2)+C_{ii}^{GG}(\ell_2)C_{ii}^{Ig}(\ell_3)\label{eq:3scale}\\
&+\frac{\omega_{ii}}{b^i_1\Pi_{ii}}C^{II}_{ii}(\ell_1)C^{Ig}_{ii}(\ell_3)\Big]\nonumber
\end{align}
and between $B^{IIG}_{ijk}$ and $B^{IIg}_{ijk}$ in observables $B^{(1)}_{ijk}$ and $B^{(2)}_{iii}$ \citep{TroxelIshak2012c},
\begin{align}
B^{IIG}_{ijk}(\ell_1,\ell_2,\ell_3)\approx &\frac{W_{ijk}}{b_{1}^i\Pi_{iii}}B^{IIg}_{iii}(\ell_1,\ell_2,\ell_3)-\frac{b^i_2}{b^i_1}\frac{W_{ijk}}{\Pi^2_{ii}}\Big[C_{ii}^{II}(\ell_1)C_{ii}^{Ig}(\ell_2)+b^i_1C_{ii}^{Ig}(\ell_2)C_{ii}^{Ig}(\ell_3)\\
&+C^{II}_{ii}(\ell_1)C^{Ig}_{ii}(\ell_3)\Big].\nonumber
\end{align}
These use a similar process to the 2-point process described above for $GI$ to use the intrinsic alignment information in the galaxy shear--density--density and galaxy shear--shear--density spectra to infer the contamination to the lensing signal. These quantities depend on values for the spectrum extracted during the $GI$ self-calibration process. The inaccuracy of Eq. (\ref{eq:3scale}) is shown in Fig. \ref{fig:GGIerror}, where the self-calibration is typically inaccurate by less than 10\%, like the 2-point self-calibration, except for low redshift and spatially close tomographic bins, where the inaccuracy grows to less than about 30\%.
Similar estimators as for the $GI$ self-calibration can then be constructed for $B^{Igg}_{iii}$ and $B^{IIg}_{iii}$, respectively, as
\begin{align}
\hat{B}^{Igg}_{iii}(\ell_1,\ell_2,\ell_3)=&\frac{B^{(3)}_{ii}|_S(\ell_1,\ell_2,\ell_3)-Q^{GGI}(\ell_1,\ell_2,\ell_3)B^{(3)}_{ii}(\ell_1,\ell_2,\ell_3)}{1-Q^{GGI}(\ell_1,\ell_2,\ell_3)},\\
\hat{B}^{IIg}_{iii}(\ell_1,\ell_2,\ell_3)=&\frac{B^{(2)}_{ii}|_S(\ell_1,\ell_2,\ell_3)-Q^{GII}(\ell_1,\ell_2,\ell_3)B^{(2)}_{ii}(\ell_1,\ell_2,\ell_3)}{1-Q^{GII}(\ell_1,\ell_2,\ell_3)},
\end{align}
which again take advantage of the lensing geometry in the terms to isolate the signal of interest. The suppression quotients $Q_{GGI}$ and $Q_{GII}$ can again be approximated by some $\bar{\eta}^{GGI}_i$ and $\bar{\eta}^{GII}_i$, respectively, where
\begin{align}
\eta^{GGI}(z_L,z_g,z_{g'})=&3\frac{\int_{i}dz^p_G\int_{i}dz^p_g\int_{i}dz^p_{g'}\int_0^{\infty}dz_G W_L(z_L,z_G)S(z_G^p,z_g^p,z_{g'}^p)N^{p_{1}}_i}{\int_{\bar{z}_i-\Delta z_i/2}^{\bar{z}_i+\Delta z_i/2}dz^p_G\int_{i}dz^p_g\int_{i}dz^p_{g'}\int_0^{\infty}dz_G W_L(z_L,z_G)N^{p_{1}}_i},\\
\eta^{GII}(z_L,z_g)=&3\frac{\int_{i}dz^p_G\int_{i}dz^p_{G'}\int_{i}dz^p_{g}\int_0^{\infty}dz_G\int_0^{\infty}dz_{G'} W_L(z_L,z_G)W_L(z_L,z_{G'})S(z_G^p,z_{G'}^p,z_{g}^p)N^{p_{2}}_i}{\int_{\bar{z}_i-\Delta z_i/2}^{\bar{z}_i+\Delta z_i/2}dz^p_G\int_{i}dz^p_{G'}\int_{i}dz^p_{g}\int_0^{\infty}dz_G\int_0^{\infty}dz_{G'} W_L(z_L,z_G)W_L(z_L,z_{G'})N^{p_{2}}_i},
\end{align}
for $z_g=z_{g'}=z_L$ and
\begin{align}
N^{p_{1}}_i\equiv&p(z_G|z_G^p)p(z_g|z_g^p)p(z_{g'}|z_{g'}^p)n_i^p(z_G^p)n_i^p(z_g^p)n_i^p(z_{g'}^p)\\
N^{p_{2}}_i\equiv&p(z_G|z_G^p)p(z_{G'}|z_{G'}^p)p(z_{g}|z_{g}^p)n_i^p(z_G^p)n_i^p(z_{G'}^p)n_i^p(z_{g}^p).
\end{align}
The 3-point self-calibration techniques were shown to perform similarly to the $GI$ self-calibration, producing a reduction in $GGI$ and $GII$ by a factor of 3-10 or more, but with potentially non-negligible impact due to measurement errors in the nonlinear galaxy bias on some scales.
\subsubsection{Self-calibration within a photometric redshift bin}\label{sc2}
The intrinsic alignment correlations can also be self-calibrated within each of several photometric redshift bins, where the impact of $II$ is still non-negligible \citep{Zhang2010b}. Instead of a single scaling relationship between the shear--shear correlation and the shear--density cross-correlation that is known, one instead constructs a set of scaling relationships between the corresponding cross-correlations of intrinsic alignment and shear and cross-correlations of shear and galaxy density, which share nearly identical redshift separation dependencies that are very different from that of the cosmic shear signal. This separation dependence is shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:dzp}. These scaling relationships,
\begin{align}
\frac{C^{GG}(\Delta z^p)}{C^{GG}(\Delta z^p=0)}\approx&1-f_{GG}(\Delta z^p)^2\\
C^{GI}(\Delta z^p)+C^{IG}(\Delta z^p)\approx&A_{GI}(C^{Gg}(\Delta z^p)+C^{gG}(\Delta z^p))\\
C^{gI}(\Delta z^p)\approx&A_{gI}C^{gg}(\Delta z^p)\\
C^{II}(\Delta z^p)\approx&A_{II}C^{gg}(\Delta z^p),
\end{align}
are parameterized for some $\ell$ and mean redshift $\bar{z}^p$ by the set of unknown scaling parameters $\{f_{GG},A_{GI},A_{Ig},$ $A_{II}\}$. These parameters can be marginalized over for measurements of the various shear and density (cross-) correlations between micro-bins of width $0.01$ with separation $\Delta z^p$ at redshift $\bar{z}^p$ within each larger photometric redshift bin.
This approach to self-calibrating the various intrinsic alignment signals (e.g., $II$ and $GI$) was shown to be safe against conservative estimates of photometric redshift errors and catastrophic outliers in a Stage IV weak lensing survey, and the impact due to intrinsic alignment on the redshift separation dependence of the observed shear correlation to be identifiable outside of expected survey noise \citep{Zhang2010a}. The process can be modified to measure only the total intrinsic alignment contamination, if one is primarily interested in the cosmic shear signal, or to isolate individual intrinsic alignment components, but with increased measurement errors. A comprehensive strategy for employing the process will necessarily be survey dependent.
\begin{figure}
\center
\includegraphics[width=.6\columnwidth]{Fig2_review.eps}%
\caption{The total impact of the intrinsic alignment separation dependence relative to the pure $GG$ signal. The data points and error bars represent a fiducial intrinsic alignment contamination from the halo model discussed in Sec.~\ref{haloia} with error estimates for a Stage IV survey. Also shown is a $\pm50\%$ scaling of the intrinsic alignment signal for the fiducial (blue dotted lines) and a different toy intrinsic alignment model (red dashed lines), described in \protect\cite{Zhang2010b}. The deviation of the signal due to intrinsic alignment from the expected lensing result (black line) is larger than the survey error at separations greater than about $\Delta z^p=0.1$ for expected levels of intrinsic alignment contamination in the power spectrum. Source: Reproduced with permission from \protect\cite{Zhang2010b}, Oxford University Press on behalf of the Royal Astronomical Society.}\label{fig:dzpm}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\center
\includegraphics[height=\textwidth,angle=270]{main2.eps}%
\caption{The total impact of the intrinsic alignment separation dependence relative to the pure $GGG$ signal. Both the halo intrinsic alignment model (dashed red lines) described in Sec.~\ref{haloia} and a toy model (dotted blue lines) described in \cite{Zhang2010b} are shown for a total contamination relative to the $GGG$ bispectrum of 1\%, 5\%, 10\%, and 20\%. The data points and error bars represent the expected value with error estimates of the $GGG$ bispectrum for a Stage IV survey. The deviation of the signal due to intrinsic alignment from the expected lensing result is larger than the survey error at separations greater than $\Delta z^p=0.15$ for expected levels of intrinsic alignment contamination in the bispectrum. Source: Reproduced from \protect\cite{TroxelIshak2012b}.}\label{fig:dzpm2}
\end{figure}
This self-calibration approach was recently expanded for the 3-point intrinsic alignment signals ($III$, $GII$, $GGI$) by \cite{TroxelIshak2012b}, but with strong constraints likely only possible on the total magnitude of the intrinsic alignment signal within a single photometric redshift bin ($GGI+GII+III$). In the 3-point case, the set of scaling relationships between the various bispectra can be expressed as
\begin{align}
\frac{B^{GGG}(\Delta z^p)}{B^{GGG}(\Delta z^p=0)}\approx&1-f_{GGG}(\Delta z^p)^2\\
B^{GGI}(\Delta z^p)+B^{GIG}(\Delta z^p)+B^{IGG}(\Delta z^p)\approx&A_{GGI}(B^{GGg}(\Delta z^p)+B^{GgG}(\Delta z^p)+B^{gGG}(\Delta z^p))\\
B^{GII}(\Delta z^p)+B^{IGI}(\Delta z^p)+B^{IIG}(\Delta z^p)\approx&A_{GII}(B^{Ggg}(\Delta z^p)+B^{gGg}(\Delta z^p)+B^{ggG}(\Delta z^p))\\
B^{Igg}(\Delta z^p)\approx&A_{Igg}C^{ggg}(\Delta z^p)\\
B^{IIg}(\Delta z^p)\approx&A_{IIg}C^{ggg}(\Delta z^p)\\
B^{III}(\Delta z^p)\approx&A_{III}C^{ggg}(\Delta z^p),
\end{align}
again parameterized for some $\ell$ and mean redshift $\bar{z}^p$ by the set of unknown scaling parameters $\{f_{GGG}, A_{GGI},$ $A_{GII}, A_{Igg}, A_{IIg}, A_{III}\}$. For the bispectrum, the choice of redshift separation is indistinct, and \cite{TroxelIshak2012b} discussed the relative performance of several choices for the meaning of $\Delta z^p$ with respect to triangle shape and scale. As with the 2-point redshift separation dependencies of $GI$ and $II$, the total impact of the intrinsic alignment redshift separation dependence on the bispectrum was shown to be detectable outside of the expected survey measurement errors in the shear bispectrum. This is also true for expected levels of intrinsic alignment contamination, but with much lower expected signal-to-noise possible than for the spectrum. It is likely that only the total sum $B^{GGI}+B^{GII}+B^{III}$ will possibly be measurable in this way for the bispectrum.
The ability to isolate the intrinsic alignment component(s) of the signal depends at the very least on being able to measure the redshift separation dependence of the signal at a sufficient number of separations or micro-bins, as shown in Figs. \ref{fig:dzpm} \& \ref{fig:dzpm2}. For the spectrum, this requires more than four data points of the expected signal lie outside the survey error on a fiducial lensing-only curve. This is clearly the case for Fig. \ref{fig:dzpm}. For the bispectrum, more than six data points are required to lie outside the fiducial lensing signal and survey noise estimates.
A similar process that does not require direct measurement of the spectra specifically as a function of redshift separation, but employs a very similar strategy to constrain the intrinsic alignment components of the spectra, was also employed by \cite{JoachimiBridle2010,KirkBridleSchneider2010} as part of simultaneously marginalizing over the presence of both intrinsic alignment and magnification in the observed correlations to constrain cosmological parameters. \cite{JoachimiBridle2010}, for example, introduce instead a set of bias parameters to build the set of relationships with respect to the matter power spectrum:
\begin{align}
C_{ij}^{GG}(\ell)=&\int_0^{\chi}d\chi'\frac{W_i(\chi')W_j(\chi')}{\chi'^2}P_{\delta}(\frac{\ell}{\chi'},\chi')\\
C_{ij}^{IG}(\ell)=&\int_0^{\chi}d\chi'\frac{f_i(\chi')W_j(\chi')}{\chi'^2}b_I(\frac{\ell}{\chi'},\chi')r_I(\frac{\ell}{\chi'},\chi')P_{\delta}(\frac{\ell}{\chi'},\chi')\\
C_{ij}^{II}(\ell)=&\int_0^{\chi}d\chi'\frac{f_i(\chi')f_j(\chi')}{\chi'^2}b_I^2(\frac{\ell}{\chi'},\chi')P_{\delta}(\frac{\ell}{\chi'},\chi')\\
C_{ij}^{gG}(\ell)=&\int_0^{\chi}d\chi'\frac{f_i(\chi')W_j(\chi')}{\chi'^2}b_g(\frac{\ell}{\chi'},\chi')r_g(\frac{\ell}{\chi'},\chi')P_{\delta}(\frac{\ell}{\chi'},\chi')\\
C_{ij}^{gI}(\ell)=&\int_0^{\chi}d\chi'\frac{f_i(\chi')f_j(\chi')}{\chi'^2}b_g(\frac{\ell}{\chi'},\chi')r_g(\frac{\ell}{\chi'},\chi')b_I(\frac{\ell}{\chi'},\chi')r_I(\frac{\ell}{\chi'},\chi')P_{\delta}(\frac{\ell}{\chi'},\chi')\\
C_{ij}^{gg}(\ell)=&\int_0^{\chi}d\chi'\frac{f_i(\chi')f_j(\chi')}{\chi'^2}b_g^2(\frac{\ell}{\chi'},\chi')P_{\delta}(\frac{\ell}{\chi'},\chi')\\
C_{ij}^{mG}(\ell)=&2(\alpha_i-1)C_{ij}^{GG}(\ell)\\
C_{ij}^{mI}(\ell)=&2(\alpha_i-1)C_{ij}^{IG}(\ell)\\
C_{ij}^{gm}(\ell)=&2(\alpha_j-1)C_{ij}^{gG}(\ell)\\
C_{ij}^{mm}(\ell)=&4(\alpha_i-1)(\alpha_j-1)C_{ij}^{GG}(\ell),
\end{align}
where we have shown the flat ($k=0$) case for simplicity. The quantity $\alpha_i$ can be constrained separately in a survey, leaving a minimal set of bias parameters $b_x\in\{b_I,r_I,b_g,r_g\}$. Each of these terms were in turn given a general parameterization
\begin{align}
b_x=A_x Q_x(k,z(\chi))b_x^{fid}(k,\chi).
\end{align}
This kind of marginalization process was shown to be successful by \cite{JoachimiBridle2010,KirkBridleSchneider2010}, despite the necessary additional parameters, due to the inclusion of the additional information in the various correlations between galaxy ellipticity and density, which mitigates the loss of statistical information due to the extra parameters marginalized over.
One of the unresolved challenges to employing any of these self-calibration approaches is the tendency in recent years to propose the galaxy shear--density cross-correlation as a solution for the calibration of a range of systematics, including for example intrinsic alignment and photometric redshifts, while also using it to constrain cosmology. The degree to which the simultaneous implementations of these various self-calibration techniques will challenge the total information content in the shear--density cross-correlation is thus far unexplored, but may be mediated by the inclusion of additional complementary data sets.
\subsection{Calibration of the intrinsic alignment signal with complementary data sets}\label{cmb}
Gravitational lensing of the CMB and its cross-correlation with galaxy lensing \citep{cmb1,cmb2,cmb3,cmb4,cmb7,cmb5,cmb6,HuOkamoto2002,cmbl1,cmbl3,cmbl4,polarbear2013,cmbl2} have been suggested as a method for calibrating multiplicative biases in galaxy lensing \citep{Vallinotto2012,DasEtAl2013}, which are difficult to constrain and degenerate with the growth function (e.g., \cite{HutererEtAl2006,AmaraEtAl2008}). The CMB lensing signal is unaffected by galaxy intrinsic alignment, considered to be an additive bias to the lensing signal, and offers a separate measure of lensing by large-scale structure in the universe. The cross-correlation of CMB lensing and galaxy lensing was recently detected for the first time by \cite{hand}, and does include an intrinsic alignment correlation like $GI$, which was labeled $\phi I$ by \cite{TroxelIshak2014}. In the same way that the intrinsic ellipticity of a foreground galaxy is correlated with the lensing of a background galaxy to form the $GI$ cross-correlation, a foreground galaxy can also be correlated with the lensing deflection induced in the CMB temperature fluctuations or the polarization signal to form the $\phi I$ cross-correlation. This was first commented on by \cite{HirataSeljak2004}, and \cite{HallTaylor2014,TroxelIshak2014,KitchingEtAl2014} recently provided estimates of its impact on the lensing signal. This $\phi I$ cross-spectrum can be represented analytically as part of the observed signal, along with the CMB lensing--galaxy lensing cross-spectrum ($\phi G$)
\begin{align}
C^{(obs)}_{i}(\ell)=&C^{\phi G}_{i}(\ell)+C^{\phi I}_{i}(\ell).
\end{align}
Using variants of the linear alignment models that agree with low-z intrinsic alignment measurements (e.g., Sec \ref{nla}), \cite{HallTaylor2014,TroxelIshak2014} have separately determined that the magnitude of the $\phi I$ signal is about 15\% that of the $\phi G$ signal, shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:cmbia}, making its fractional impact about 50\% stronger than that of the $GI$ contaminant in galaxy lensing when calculated in the same way. \cite{KitchingEtAl2014} further investigated the impact on cosmological constraints using both galaxy lensing and CMB lensing in a full 3D analysis, finding also that constraints on the amplitude of intrinsic alignment models can be improved by a factor of 2 by including CMB lensing in the analysis with complementary improvements in constraints on cosmological parameters.
\begin{figure}
\center
\includegraphics[width=.8\columnwidth]{compia2.eps}%
\caption{The $\phi I$ and $\phi G$ power spectra, compared to the total observed CMB lensing--galaxy lensing signal. The magnitude of the $\phi I$ signal is about 15\% that of the $\phi G$ signal and negative. This is compared to a contamination in galaxy lensing ($GG$) by $GI$ of about 10\%. Source: Reproduced from \protect\cite{TroxelIshak2014}.}\label{fig:cmbia}
\end{figure}
It was shown by \cite{TroxelIshak2014} that this $\phi I$ cross-correlation can be connected to the $GI$ and $gI$ cross-correlations in various redshift bins from a galaxy lensing survey through scaling relationships, which are constructed similarly to those in Sec.~\ref{selfcalibration1}. This gives
\begin{align}
C^{I\phi}_i(\ell)\approx &\frac{W^{\phi}_i}{W^G_{ij}}C^{IG}_{ij}(\ell) \label{eq:scalegiphii}\\
C^{I\phi}_i(\ell)\approx &\frac{W^{\phi}_i}{b_i \Pi_{ii}}C^{Ig}_{ii}(\ell),\label{eq:scaleigphii}
\end{align}
where $b_{1}^i$, $W^G_{ij}$, and $\Pi_{ii}$ were described in Sec.~\ref{selfcalibration1}, and
\begin{align}
W^{\phi}_i=&\int_0^{\chi}d\chi'W^{\phi}(\chi')n_{i}(\chi')\\
W^{\phi}(\chi)=&\frac{3}{2}\Omega_m(1+z)\chi(1-\frac{\chi}{\chi^{1}}).
\end{align}
Unlike the self-calibration process for $GI$, the scaling factor $W^{\phi}_i/W^G_{ij}$ does not require explicit cosmological priors to evaluate or a measurement of the galaxy bias, while the accuracy of the scaling relationship in Eq.~(\ref{eq:scaleigphii}) is more accurate than Eqs. (\ref{eq:2scale}) \& (\ref{eq:scalegiphii}), typically to within 5\% in all redshift bins for a Stage IV lensing survey.
Using the additional information in the cross-correlation between CMB lensing and galaxy lensing, though it requires overlapping measurements of lensing in both galaxy and CMB surveys, provides an additional means to isolate information on the intrinsic alignment signal to ellipticity-ellipticity and ellipticity-density measurements, and is particularly suited for higher redshift intrinsic alignment information compared to the lensing signal, which has a peak efficiency at lower redshift. Combining these approaches to simultaneously utilize both the $gI$ and $\phi I$ cross-correlations to successfully calibrate the $GI$ cross-correlation, either as presented in Eqs. (\ref{eq:scalegiphii}) \& (\ref{eq:scaleigphii}) or as part of an approach like \cite{JoachimiBridle2010,KirkBridleSchneider2010}, will be one focus in comprehensive approaches to mitigating the effects of intrinsic alignment on weak lensing survey science.
\subsection{Other paths toward mitigating intrinsic alignment}\label{otherm}
\subsubsection{E- and B-mode decomposition}\label{ebmode}
A basic test for the presence of intrinsic alignment in the observed shear signal (or other systematic effects in the data) is a non-zero B-mode component of the ellipticity correlation (e.g., \cite{PenLeeSeljak2000,CrittendenNatarajanPenTheuns2001,CrittendenNatarajanPenTheuns2002}). The observed correlation can be decomposed into E- and B-mode components, where the E-mode component of the signal is curl-free. The true lensing signal is necessarily curl-free, since the shear is related to the gradient of the potential
\begin{align}
\gamma_{ij}(x)=(\partial_i\partial_j-\frac{1}{2}\delta_{ij}\nabla^2)\psi(x),
\end{align}
except on small scales where source redshift clustering has an impact \citep{SchneiderEtAl2002}. The intrinsic alignment signal, by contrast, possesses both E- and B-mode components, and thus the non-zero detection of a B-mode signal could be used to place constraints on the contamination of the observed lensing signal by intrinsic alignment (e.g., \cite{HeymansHeavens2003}), or as a diagnostic to test the removal of intrinsic alignment contributions to the observed ellipticity correlation through some of the methods discussed above. This is limited in usefulness to considerations of the $II$ correlation in most cases, however, since the B-mode component of the intrinsic alignment signal should not correlate with the E-mode lensing signal in the $GI$ correlation. Leading order terms from linear alignment models also predict a zero B-mode contribution, however, and so the E/B-mode decomposition may have limited use as a diagnostic for the presence of intrinsic alignment. Other works that discuss the decomposition of the lensing signal into E- and B-mode components, and its impact on constraints of systematics like intrinsic alignment include, for example, \cite{HoekstraEtAl2002,SchneiderKilbinger2007,SchneiderEiflerKrause2010,Becker2013}.
\subsubsection{Measurements of intrinsic alignment that are insensitive to gravitational lensing}
There have also been recent suggestions for utilizing novel approaches for distinguishing the intrinsic shape of a galaxy, which would in principle allow for a weak lensing detection without either intrinsic alignment bias or significant shape noise. One of these approaches by \cite{BrownBattye2011} seeks to utilize radio weak lensing measurements to identify the orientation of a galaxy's polarized emission, which is both related to the intrinsic alignment of the galaxy and unaffected by gravitational lensing. Combining polarization measurements with shape determinations then allows one to disentangle intrinsic alignment from cosmic shear. This can also be extended to optical polarization \citep{AuditSimmons1999}. Both, however, would require better knowledge of the polarization emission properties of source galaxies, and the effects, for example, of intervening magnetic fields in rotating the polarization plane \citep{BrownBattye2011} in a process which would inject an additional position-dependent systematic similar to intrinsic alignment.
A similar approach by \cite{HuffEtAl2013} promotes a smaller, purely spectroscopic survey with overlap of larger photometric surveys that will enable the measurement of the resolved rotation velocity of disk galaxies. Combined with a Tully--Fisher relationship that connects the circular rotation velocity with luminosity \citep{TullyFisher1977}, the inclination of the disks could be identified, and thus the intrinsic shape of the galaxy prior to gravitational lensing. Like using polarization orientation, this could significantly increase statistical power in surveys by limiting random shape noise. It would also minimize potential bias from intrinsic alignment on weak lensing measurements. \cite{HuffEtAl2013} claimed that such a `Stage III' spectroscopic survey can be competitive with best-case estimates of planned Stage IV photometric surveys.
\section{Summary and future outlook}\label{summary}
The potential and importance of the weak gravitational lensing of galaxies, in particular by large-scale structure (cosmic shear), and its cross-correlations with galaxy positions and other probes of structure to constrain parameters and models of cosmology has become clear in the past decades. This includes the mapping of the distribution and evolution of structure (composed both of baryonic and dark matter), the study of the nature and evolution of cosmic acceleration (`dark energy'), and testing theories of gravity at cosmological scales. We have reviewed the theory and formalisms related to applying measurements of weak lensing shear or convergence to the study of cosmology and discussed some of the challenges involved in realizing the potential of this powerful cosmic probe in Secs. \ref{intro}-\ref{formalisms}. One of the most serious physical systematics of the weak lensing of galaxies, which can introduce large biases in cosmological information and is in some ways considered a barrier to the full use of weak lensing, is the intrinsic alignment of the galaxies (i.e., their shapes and orientations before being lensed).
We have explored the intrinsic alignment of galaxies in Secs.~\ref{backIA}-\ref{mitigation} and reviewed in Sec.~\ref{backIA} a great deal of work that has gone into characterizing and modeling how they can be correlated with each other ($II$ or $III$ correlations) and with the large-scale tidal field due to linear density perturbations ($GI$, $GGI$, or $GII$ correlations). These correlations of intrinsic alignment can heavily contaminate the cosmic shear signal, even across the large volumes of planned Stage IV surveys, due to the (anti-)correlation of the intrinsic alignment with the lensing of background galaxies. It is vital for the success of large weak lensing survey science that we successfully isolate the effects of intrinsic alignment from weak gravitational lensing.
We provided a summary of strategies to characterize and model the intrinsic alignment signal on both large and small scales in Sec.~\ref{models}. Recent attempts to incorporate intrinsic alignment into a halo model formalism (Sec.~\ref{haloia}) or to compile a semi-analytical description of the intrinsic alignment signals from measurements in large N-body dark matter simulations and smaller hydrodynamical simulations (Sec.~\ref{sam}) have met with some success in describing the properties of the intrinsic alignment signal on smaller scales to match with simulation and survey detections. The resulting impact of intrinsic alignment on cosmological information due to various models of the intrinsic alignment correlations were briefly discussed in Sec.~\ref{impacts}.
In the past decade, as the size and capability of our surveys have improved, the correlated intrinsic alignment of galaxies has been directly measured in a variety of data sets. Strategies for making these measurements and results were reviewed in Sec.~\ref{detections}. These measurements have provided needed empirical constraints on the properties of the intrinsic alignment signal, including its magnitude, dependency on galaxy types and luminosities, and evolution in time. These constraints in turn inform better models of the intrinsic alignment signal (e.g., Sec.~\ref{haloia} \& \ref{sam}), and suggest methods to mitigate the impact of the intrinsic alignment signal on weak lensing science (Sec.~\ref{mitigation}).
A complementary approach to directly or indirectly measuring the intrinsic alignment of galaxies in surveys is to characterize the intrinsic alignment through studies of cosmological simulations. The use of simulations to study intrinsic alignment was discussed in Sec.~\ref{sims}, where we present a variety of results that help explain how galaxies are aligned on small and large scales. The use of simulations to study intrinsic alignment, however, is still limited by our computational ability to produce hydrodynamical simulations of large enough volume from which the true correlations of the shapes of galaxies can be directly measured. We have thus far been limited primarily to the use of dark matter halos as tracers of the galaxy shape in cosmological scale dark matter only N-body simulations (Sec.~\ref{dmonly}) for measuring intrinsic alignment correlations. These approaches are limited, however, by how well dark matter halos can be used as tracers of the baryonic galaxy shape (Sec.~\ref{misalignment}). Work is now being done to use smaller hydrodynamical simulations (Sec.~\ref{hydro}) to inform how this (mis-)alignment with dark matter halos can be characterized and incorporated into semi-analytical models (e.g. Sec.~\ref{sam}), which use simulations to inform model building.
While understanding the intrinsic alignment of galaxies through model fitting is ideal, in order to use the intrinsic alignment signal as a direct probe for structure formation in the universe, this is currently limited by our understanding of how galaxies become aligned or misaligned over time in large-scale structure and halos. We also yet lack the ability to produce large-scale hydrodynamical simulations of sufficient size to study intrinsic alignment correlations directly in our cosmological models. Another approach to the large impact of intrinsic alignment in weak lensing surveys is then to design techniques to simply mitigate the impact of intrinsic alignment on the weak lensing signal, without needing exact knowledge of intrinsic alignment modeling.
We reviewed the development of a series of mitigation strategies for weak lensing surveys in Sec.~\ref{mitigation}. These range from methods that simultaneously fit the intrinsic alignment signal to a parameterized model or template (Sec.~\ref{margin}), those that remove the intrinsic alignment-contaminated information in a survey (Secs. \ref{tomography}-\ref{nulling}), and others that indirectly isolate and preserve the intrinsic alignment signal based on complementary information in other cross-correlations with the cosmic shear signal (Secs. \ref{sc}-\ref{cmb}). Some new proposals even outline methods to measure the intrinsic alignment of galaxies independently of the lensing signal (Sec.~\ref{otherm}).
In sum, the intrinsic alignment of galaxies remains a difficult, and as yet unresolved challenge for the use of weak lensing in large surveys as a truly precise (and more importantly, accurate) cosmological probe. However, a great deal of progress has been made toward understanding and mitigating its influence on cosmological constraints. With the analysis of ongoing Stage III surveys and the development of pipelines for planned Stage IV surveys, it is a challenge that our field has met with enthusiasm. A clever combination of the methods and measurements presented thus far will provide a solid base upon which future models and analysis methods can successfully resolve the challenge that the intrinsic alignment of galaxies poses to weak gravitational lensing science.
\section*{Acknowledgments}
We thank Matthias Bartelmann, Jonathan Blazek, Sarah Bridle, Michael Brown, Rupert Croft, Catherine Heymans, Alina Kiessling, Martin Kilbinger, Lindsay King, Donnacha Kirk, Rachel Mandelbaum, Austin Peel, Michael Schneider, Tim Schrabback, Masahiro Takada, Ludovic Van Waerbeke, and Joseph Zuntz for reading or providing useful comments on early versions of the manuscript. We are also very grateful for the thorough and helpful comments of the referee, and also wish to thank Jonathan Blazek, Benjamin Joachimi, Donnacha Kirk, Rachel Mandelbaum, Michael Schneider, Xun Shi, and Pengjie Zhang for figures reproduced from previous works. MI acknowledges that this work was supported in part by the National Science Foundation under grant AST-1109667. MT acknowledges support by the NASA/TSGC graduate fellowship program, and is very grateful for the hospitality of the Center for Particle Cosmology at the University of Pennsylvania, where part of this work was written.
\newpage
\section*{References}
\bibliographystyle{model2-names}
|
\section{Introduction}
Free energy calculations are
a common objective of many molecular computer simulations of chemically and biologically interesting systems.
Experiments alone only capture details of
the thermodynamically stable end or intermediate states, which is often not sufficent for extracting detailed information about the transitions between states.
In contrast, the free energy provides quantitative information about the available conformations and the transitions between them.
Molecular dynamics (MD) is a valuable tool in mapping out the free energy landscape.
However, the time step in MD simulations is limited to a few femtoseconds, whereas
events of interest are often characterized by timescales of micro- or milliseconds.
Canonical MD simulations can reach microseconds, but even that is often not enough to obtain sufficient statistics of the relevant transitions. The underlying issue is that macromolecules are often characterized by high free energy barriers.
Since transition times scale exponentially with the barrier height, transitions across such barriers are difficult-to-sample, rare events.
One popular method for improving the sampling efficiency in free energy calculations is steered MD, in which the system is pushed forward along a reaction coordinate, followed by umbrella sampling \cite{Torrie:1977hs} along the obtained path. For systems with a narrow transition valley this may work well, provided a good reaction coordinate is chosen.
However, due to the non-equilibrium nature of the steering and the high forces involved, one risks pushing the system into improbable and non-representative states.
If the free energy landscape is rough,
the subsequent umbrella sampling will not be able to efficiently relax the system.
Furthermore, this procedure only samples a single pathway (unless run multiple times), whereas there could be multiple pathways available for the same transition.
A more flexible and general approach is called for.
Extended, or generalized, ensemble methods\cite{Iba:2001hy, Mitsutake:2001kf} is a collective name for a wide variety of sampling techniques
in which the original ensemble is modified in order to overcome the limitations of conventional sampling methods.
Because of the inherent flexibility of the idea, it has been used in many different applications of physics, including simulations of spin models\cite{Berg:1992uh, Lidmar:1375762}, nucleation \cite{Chen:2001vu} and protein folding \cite{Hansmann:1997hi}, just to name a few.
One extended ensemble approach is to promote a system parameter, e.g. temperature, to be a dynamical variable and
within a single simulation perform a biased random walk in parameter space while maintaining a canonical distribution at each fixed parameter value.
A well-known example is simulated tempering \cite{Marinari:236598,Lyubartsev:1992th}, in which the system is randomly heated up or cooled down according to the joint coordinate-temperature distribution, increasing the chance of crossing high energy barriers.
The biasing in parameter space is determined by assigning to each parameter value a probability weight factor such that the parameter space gets sampled according to a certain target distribution of choice, often simply chosen uniform.
The particular set of weights that give rise to the specified target distribution is related to the initially unknown free energy landscape of parameter space through a simple relation. Thus, finding the correct weights is a major challenge since it amounts to calculating the free energy.
A general strategy is to, starting from an initial guess, adaptively refine the weights using the simulation history.
Adaptive biasing procedures have been developed both for Monte-Carlo (MC) simulations \cite{Kumar:1996tk, Wang:2001eb,Belardinelli:2007ce}
in the multicanonical ensemble \cite{Berg:1992uh},
in which the
canonical weights are modified to obtain a uniform distribution of energies, as well as in the context of MD by modifying the potential energy (or force) along the system trajectory \cite{Bartels:1997wl,Huber:1994db,Grubmuller:1995in,Laio:576913,Barducci:2008ua,Darve:2001ce,Dickson:2010dh,Kim:2006ev}.
Many of these methods are closely related and in some cases functionally equivalent \cite{Junghans:2014tz}, but since their development has largely taken place in parallel, relatively little effort has been devoted to investigating their exact relations.
Nonetheless, it is often possible to adapt these methods to the extended ensemble formalism, making this an attractive platform for unifying knowledge and working on further developments.
In this paper we study in detail the
recently introduced accelerated weight histogram (AWH) method \cite{Lidmar:1375762}, an adaptively biasing, extended ensemble method equipped with several advantageous features, including:
(i) allowing for large transitions in parameter space by using a Gibbs sampler,
(ii) using a probability weight histogram
to efficiently adapt future bias based on the transition history and
which further makes the binning procedure simple,
(iii) being formulated within a very general extended ensemble framework which
makes the method highly customizable and applicable to a wide variety of problems.
Here, we propose two highly useful extensions to the AWH method.
First, we show how to calculate the potential of mean force (PMF), the free energy along a reaction coordinate.
Second, we explore non-uniform, free energy dependent target distributions in parameter space for which sampling of irrelevant regions of phase space is automatically avoided. Numerical results are presented for MD simulations of relatively simple chemical and biological molecular systems which will serve as benchmarks for future, more complex applications. Furthermore, we study the input parameters of the method in detail and provide guidelines for applying the method in practice.
The AWH method in its general form is described in section \ref{sec:basicalgorithm}.
In section \ref{sec:pmf}, we build on the basic algorithm by providing a procedure for calculating the PMF.
The choice of target distribution is discussed in
section \ref{sec:histdeptargetdistr}, where we also present a couple of concrete alternatives.
In section \ref{sec:n}, we investigate another important input parameter, namely the effective number of samples, which in the AWH method sets the bias update size. We propose how to initialize and update the simulation in order to obtain a robust and efficient method.
Finally, in section \ref{sec:applications} we discuss the practical aspects of setting up an AWH simulation and demonstrate the strengths of the method for two molecular test systems: solvated lithum acetate and chignolin, a 10-residue peptide. We conclude in section \ref{sec:conclusion}.
\section{The accelerated weight histogram method}
\begin{table}
\setlength{\tabcolsep}{8pt}
\footnotesize
\begin{tabular}{ l | l}
\hline
$x, \mathcal{X}$ & configuration, configuration space \\%& \ref{sec:basicalgorithm} \\
$\lambda, \Lambda$ & extended parameter, parameter space \\%& \ref{sec:basicalgorithm} \\
$\xi(x)$ & reaction coordinate \\
$f(\lambda)$ & estimate of the true free energy $F(\lambda)$ \\% & \ref{sec:basicalgorithm}\\
$\phi(\xi)$ & estimate of the true PMF $\Phi(\xi)$ \\% & \ref{sec:pmf}\\
$g(\lambda)$ & biasing function \\%& \ref{sec:basicalgorithm}\\
$\rho(\lambda)$ & target distribution along $\lambda$ \\%& \ref{sec:basicalgorithm}\\
$\omega(\lambda)$ & $\lambda$ transition probability distribution \\% & \ref{sec:basicalgorithm}\\
$N$ & effective number of $\lambda$ samples \\
$W(\lambda)$ & reference weight histogram \\%& \ref{sec:basicalgorithm}\\
$n_\Lambda$ & number of $\lambda$ samples per update \\
$ \Delta t_\Lambda$ & time between $\lambda$ samples \\
$S$ & number of collected $\lambda$ samples \\
$\kappa$ & umbrella potential force constant \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{Summary of the main AWH variables and their meaning.}\label{tab:notation}
\end{table}
\subsection{\label{sec:basicalgorithm} The basic algorithm}
We consider a system of particles described by configurations $x\in\mathcal{X}$ and
a system parameter $\lambda$, possibly $d$-dimensional (see table \ref{tab:notation} for a summarizing table of the notation we will be using). For instance,
$\lambda$ could be a thermodynamic state parameter such as temperature or pressure.
$\lambda$ may be of continuous nature but for all practical purposes it can be considered discrete.
We assume that the equilibrium probability distribution of the system is given by
$\pi(x;\lambda) = e^{-E(x;\lambda) + F(\lambda)}$, where
$F(\lambda)$ is the dimensionless free energy along $\lambda$
(i.e.\ the free energy scaled by $\beta = 1/k_B T$) and is defined by
$F(\lambda) = -\ln \int \! e^{-E(x;\lambda)}\, \mathrm{d} x$.
We now assume that our goal is to explore the free energy landscape $F(\lambda$).
In the extended ensemble, $\lambda$ is
promoted to be a dynamic variable alongside $x$, and is allowed to take on a range of values, $\lambda\in\Lambda$.
The extended ensemble
is thus described by the joint distribution
$P(x,\lambda) = \frac{1}{\mathcal{Z}} e^{-E(x,\lambda) + g(\lambda)}$,
where $g(\lambda)$ is a biasing function
that is tuned during the simulation to obtain a certain user-specified target distribution $\rho(\lambda)$.
The actually observed marginal distribution for $\lambda$, $P(\lambda)$, is related to the unknown free energy $F(\lambda)$ by
\begin{align*}
P(\lambda) &= \int \! P(x,\lambda)\, \mathrm{d} x
= \int \! \frac{1}{\mathcal{Z}} e^{-E(x,\lambda) + g(\lambda)} \, \mathrm{d} x \\
&=\frac{1}{\mathcal{Z}} \, e^{-F(\lambda) + g(\lambda)},
\addnumber{\label{eq:plambda}}
\end{align*}
which is generally \emph{not} equal to the target distribution $\rho(\lambda)$ unless $g(\lambda)$ has been tuned to balance out $F(\lambda)$ correctly.
To achieve this in the simulation, $g(\lambda)$ is chosen consistently with equation \eqref{eq:plambda} by substituting $P(\lambda)$ with $\rho(\lambda)$ and
$F(\lambda)$ with $f(\lambda)$, our best estimate of the free energy, yielding
\begin{equation}
g(\lambda) = f(\lambda) + \ln \rho(\lambda),\label{eq:gopt}
\end{equation}
where the omitted constant is not of importance for free energy differences. $f(\lambda)$ is initialized, e.g.\;by guessing, and is then iteratively refined based on the sampling history, as described below.
$P(x,\lambda)$ is sampled by
performing $n_{\mathcal{X}}$ updates of $x$ at fixed $\lambda$, using standard MD or MC, alternated by an update of $\lambda$ at fixed $x$.
In the AWH method, $\lambda$ is updated using a Gibbs sampler. That is, a new $\lambda$ is chosen according to the
probability distribution
\begin{equation}
\omega(\lambda|x)
= P(\lambda|x)
= \frac{1}{Z_\omega}e^{-E(x,\lambda) + g(\lambda)}.
\label{eq:omegalambdax}
\end{equation}
After having collected $n_\Lambda$ samples of $\lambda$, $f(\lambda)$ is updated.
Since $P(\lambda) = \int \! \omega(\lambda|x) P(x) \, \mathrm{d} x$,
the sum of transition probabilities
$\sum_{i=1}^{n_\Lambda} \omega^i(\lambda)
=:n_\Lambda \bar\omega(\lambda)$
can be used to estimate the current discrepancy between $P(\lambda)$ and the desired target distribution $\rho(\lambda)$.
In the AWH method, $n_\Lambda\bar{\omega}$ is seen as a fluctuation on top of a perfectly distributed reference weight histogram $W(\lambda)$ containing $N$ effective number of samples, i.e.
\begin{equation*}
W(\lambda) = N\rho(\lambda).
\end{equation*}
Equations \eqref{eq:plambda} and \eqref{eq:gopt} then imply an update
$f(\lambda)\leftarrow f(\lambda) + \Delta f(\lambda)$, where
\begin{align*}
\Delta f(\lambda)
&=
-\ln\left(\frac{W_{\text{fluct}}}{W_{\text{target}}}\right)
=
-\ln\left(\frac{N\rho(\lambda) + n_\Lambda\bar{\omega}(\lambda)}
{N\rho(\lambda) + n_\Lambda\rho(\lambda)}
\right)\\
&=-\ln
\left(
1 + \frac{n_\Lambda}{N}\frac{\bar{\omega}(\lambda)}{\rho(\lambda)}
\right) + \text{constant}.
\addnumber{\label{eq:df}}
\end{align*}
The constant is in principle not of importance but for numerical reasons it should be included in the implementation.
Next, the bias $g(\lambda)$ is updated in a consistent manner by applying equation \eqref{eq:gopt} for the newly updated $f(\lambda)$.
For $\rho$ uniform we recover, up to a constant, $f=g$ as in \cite{Lidmar:1375762}, where non-uniform $\rho$ was not explicitly treated.
Finally, the effective number of samples $N$ is updated by
$N \leftarrow N + \Delta N$, where $\Delta N = n_\Lambda$.
We note that this update
is the normal running condition of the algorithm. However, in principle, the updates of $N$ can be chosen more generally, e.g. in the initial stages of the algorithm or to improve a poorly converging run (section \ref{sec:updatingN}), or in more exotic method setups (section \ref{sec:effectivetempdistr}).
From equation \eqref{eq:df} we see that $\Delta f$ decreases as $\sim 1/N$ for large $N$, allowing for increasingly fine resolution of the free energy to be probed.
The AWH method continues iteratively in this way e.g. for a fixed number of steps.
The main distinguishing feature of the AWH method is the use of a Gibbs sampler in $\lambda$,
which enhances mixing of $\lambda$ relative to nearest neighbor sampling
\cite{Chodera:2011ia},
in combination with updates of $f$ that efficiently make use of all the available sampling history, including those transitions that had a probability to take place but did not.
With this choice of updates
discretizing $\lambda$ becomes trivial and non-critical for the efficiency of the method as long as the point spacing is dense enough to make transitions likely to occur.
This is a clear advantage over other methods for which the discretization or binning procedure can be not only tedious but also critical for the performance. For instance, in umbrella sampling one system has to be equilibrated and run in each umbrella.
Another major advantage of the AWH method is that it allows the system to explore multiple pathways $x(t)$ when traversing $\Lambda$ so that the results do not critically depend on the quality of the initial configuration.
In addition, being a histogram-based method, the AWH method is inherently straightforward to parallelize.
One particularly simple and implementation-friendly scheme is to simultaneously carry out multiple simulations, each generating samples along its own independent trajectory but sharing the same biasing weights.
An alternative approach is to run multiple non-communicating simulations in parallel and combine them to a final estimate $\bar{F}$ in the end
as described in \cite{Lidmar:1375762}.
Although letting the replicas communicate may speed up convergence, at least initially, the advantage of this approach is that the statistical error of $\bar{F}$ can be calculated using standard jackknife statistics \cite{Berg:2004vc}.
\subsection{\label{sec:pmf}Free energy along a reaction coordinate}
In many real-world applications we are not interested in the free energy as a function of a system \emph{parameter} $\lambda$.
In systems with many degrees of freedom it might for instance not help to heat up the system since the accessible part of phase space would increase drastically, potentially hampering sampling of important (low energy) states.
In such cases it may be favorable to be more selective and incorporate prior knowledge into a, possibly multidimensional, reaction coordinate $\xi(x)$.
As a simple example, $\xi$ could be a distance or an angle that is known to be involved in the transition of interest.
The corresponding free energy $\Phi(\xi)$, or the potential of mean force (PMF), is defined by
\begin{equation}
\Phi(\xi) = -\ln{\int \! \pi_0(x)\delta(\xi-\xi(x)) \, \mathrm{d} x},
\end{equation}
where $\pi_0(x)$ is the equilibrium distribution of the system.
In the reaction coordinate case, it is not possible to move $\xi(x)$ independently of $x$ or vice-versa. Nonetheless, we can calculate $\Phi(\xi)$ with the AWH method by coupling the system to a set of harmonic potentials, or umbrellas,
\begin{equation}
Q_\kappa(\xi,\lambda) = \frac{\kappa}{2}(\xi-\lambda)^2,
\label{eq:qkappa}
\end{equation}
with centers at $\lambda\in\Lambda$.
We can make jumps between the umbrella centers $\lambda$ independently of $x$.
The dynamics of $\xi$ effectively follows that of $\lambda$ if the force constant $\kappa$ is chosen large enough. This setup corresponds to pulling $\xi$ towards the umbrella center $\lambda$ using a harmonic spring.
The algorithm will however not estimate $\Phi(\xi)$ directly but rather the free energy $F(\lambda)$ of
the original ensemble modified by the umbrellas,
\begin{align*}
e^{-F(\lambda)}
&= \int \! e^{-E(x;\lambda)} \, \mathrm{d} x
= \int \! e^{-Q_\kappa(\xi(x),\lambda)} \pi_0(x) \, \mathrm{d} x\\
&= \int \! e^{-Q_\kappa(\xi,\lambda)} e^{-\Phi(\xi)} \, \mathrm{d}\xi. \addnumber{\label{eq:convolution}}
\end{align*}
For large $\kappa$, $F\approx\Phi$, while for smaller $\kappa$, $F$ will appear increasingly smeared relative to $\Phi$.
\begin{figure}[tbp!]
\includegraphics[width=0.38\textwidth]{figs/doublewell-deconv/doublewell-deconv.pdf}
\caption{\label{fig:deconv} Extracting the estimated PMF $\phi(\xi)$ from the convoluted free energy estimate $f(\lambda)$ using equation \eqref{eq:deconvavg} for a Brownian particle in the potential $\Phi(\xi) = 80 (2(\xi-1)^4-(\xi-1)^2) + \sin(100\xi)$. The PMF is seen to be recovered with full resolution.}
\end{figure}
Although $\Phi$ can, in principle, be recovered by directly solving eq.\,\eqref{eq:convolution}, this is
unfortunately a rather ill-conditioned problem which may give rise to numerical inaccuracies.
Here, we propose instead to deconvolute equation \eqref{eq:convolution} on the fly by making use of the collected samples of $\xi$.
Using the fact that the marginal distribution is
\begin{align*}
P(\xi)
&= \sum_\lambda \int \! P(x,\lambda) \delta(\xi - \xi(x))\, \mathrm{d} x\\
&= \sum_\lambda \frac{1}{\mathcal{Z}} \, e^{
-Q_\kappa(\xi,\lambda) - \Phi(\xi) + g(\lambda)},
\end{align*}
$\Phi$ can be solved for as
\begin{equation}
e^{-\Phi(\xi)} =
\mathcal{Z} e^{\gamma(\xi)} P(\xi),
\label{eq:deconv}
\end{equation}
where $e^{-\gamma(\xi)} =
\sum_\lambda e^{g(\lambda) - Q_\kappa(\xi,\lambda)}$.
Direct application of equation \eqref{eq:deconv} is complicated by the fact that the bias $g$, and hence the entire ensemble is being updated at each iteration.
First of all, the unknown normalization constant
$\mathcal{Z} = \sum_\lambda e^{-F(\lambda) + g(\lambda)}$
changes with each update, which seemingly makes the averaging of eq.\,\eqref{eq:deconv} over different iterations problematic. Nonetheless, $\mathcal{Z}$ tends to an irrelevant constant in the later stages of the algorithm and can in our experience safely be ignored.
Second, in order to ensure that $\phi$, the estimate of $\Phi$, is updated consistently with $f$, the histogram $e^{-\phi(\xi)}$ should be rescaled with a factor $a=(N+\Delta N)/(N+n_\Lambda)$ after each update such that it grows at the same rate as $W(\lambda)$ (which determines the size of $\Delta f$).
For the standard update $\Delta N = n_\Lambda$ this reduces to a trivial scaling of 1. However, in the initial stages of the algorithm often a more heuristic update of $N$ will be applied (see section \ref{sec:updatingN}).
For instance, if $N$ is temporarily kept constant, $\Delta N=0$, the downscaling $N/(N+n_\Lambda)$ will ensure that fluctuations in both $f$ and $\phi$ are
kept at a constant overall magnitude $\sim 1/N$.
To summarize, we propose calculating the PMF estimate $\phi$ using the time average
\begin{equation}
e^{-\phi(\xi)} =
\frac{\langle a(t) e^{\gamma(\xi,t)}\delta(\xi-\xi(t)\rangle_t}
{\langle a(t) e^{\gamma(\xi,t)} \rangle_t},
\label{eq:deconvavg}
\end{equation}
where $\delta$ is a binning function.
Figure \ref{fig:deconv} demonstrates how the PMF $\phi(\xi)$ can be extracted from the free energy $f(\lambda)$ using the deconvolution procedure of equation \eqref{eq:deconvavg}.
Our simple test system is a Brownian particle at $k_BT=1$ moving in a "rugged" double-well potential $\Phi(\xi) = 80 (2(\xi-1)^4-(\xi-1)^2) + \sin(100\xi)$. We use umbrellas of curvature $\kappa=1024$, evenly spaced in $\lambda\in (1\pm {1}/{\sqrt{2}})$. In the figure, we see that the fine-structure of the potential is smeared out in $f(\lambda)$, but is fully recovered in $\phi(\xi)$.
The high resolution is made possible by the extra information added by the sampling in $\xi$.
We were not able to recover this fine structure of the potential using the standard Richardson-Lucy deconvolution algorithm\cite{Richardson:1972vb,Lucy:1974uy}, which in addition is known to be sensitive to the number of performed iterations. Another advantage to our scheme is that no post-processing is needed.
\subsection{\label{sec:histdeptargetdistr} Choosing the target distribution $\rho$}
The target distribution $\rho(\lambda)$ is often simply chosen to be uniform since this increases the probability of crossing high free energy barriers. In addition, $\rho$ can of course take on any explicit dependence on $\lambda$,
e.g if there is prior knowledge available about which regions of $\Lambda$ should be explored more or less.
For one-dimensional reaction coordinates there has also been promising developments \cite{Singh:2011jj, Tian:2014ec} in diffusion-optimized biasing methods where the target distribution becomes a function of the position-dependent diffusion coefficient in order to minimize the passage time across $\Lambda$.
Still, for some complex systems,
especially in the multidimensional case,
it is often difficult to \emph{a priori} define the sampling region $\Lambda$ such that all important states are accessible
but the improbable, high free energy regions excluded.
Inclusion of irrelevant regions may lead to poor convergence and even irreversible damage, such as breaking of important bonds.
We address this issue by adding a simple extension to the basic AWH
algorithm; namely, we let the target distribution $\rho(\lambda)$ be a
decreasing function of the free energy $F(\lambda)$ such that regions with too high free energy are avoided.
Seeing that $F$ is unknown however, we have to resort to using our best estimate, $f$.
Furthermore, since $f$ is constantly being updated we must, after updating $f$ and before updating the bias function $g$, update $\rho$.
Below, we present two target distributions that both deal with this $\Lambda$ boundary problem.
\subsubsection{\label{sec:targetdistrcutoff} Target distribution with free energy cutoff}
One way of specifying $\rho(\lambda,t)$ without risking to push the system into irrelevant regions
is to set it to a fixed function $\rho_0(\lambda)$ for $\lambda$ points with $f(\lambda)$ below a given cutoff $C$, and let it decay exponentially with $f$ otherwise. Specifically, at each update time we set $\rho$ according to
\begin{equation}
\rho(\lambda) =
\begin{cases}
\frac{1}{Z} \rho_0(\lambda) &\mbox{if } f(\lambda) \leq f_C \\
\frac{1}{Z} \rho_0(\lambda) e^{-(f(\lambda)-f_C)} &\mbox{if } f(\lambda) > f_C
\end{cases},\label{eq:pic}
\end{equation}
where the free energy cutoff $f_C$ is measured relative to the global minimum, i.e. $f_C = \min_{\lambda}f(\lambda) + C$.
\subsubsection{\label{sec:effectivetempdistr} Target distribution with effective temperature}
A more continuous fashion of focusing sampling to low free energy regions
would be to let $\rho$ be a Boltzmann distribution with an effectively raised temperature, $T+\Delta T$.
The most straightforward way to achieve this in the AWH framework is to set $\rho\propto e^{-\frac{T}{T+\Delta T}f}$ and update the target distribution as
$-\Delta \ln \rho = T/(T+\Delta T)\cdot \Delta f$.
We can also take inspiration from well-tempered metadynamics \cite{Barducci:2008ua}, a popular adaptive biasing method
in which the distribution along the reaction coordinate $\xi$ converges exactly to a tempered Boltzmann distribution,
$P_{\infty}(\xi) \propto e^{-\frac{T}{T+\Delta T}\Phi(\xi)}$.
In well-tempered metadynamics, repulsive potentials, usually Gaussian, of a certain height are dropped along the reaction coordinate trajectory $\xi(t)$, which forces the system to explore new regions of phase space.
The deposit height is set to decrease as $\sim e^{-\frac{V(\xi,t)}{\Delta T}}$
(i.e.\, is dependent on $\xi$), where $V(\xi,t)$ is the total biasing potential.
We can recover a setup very similar to well-tempered metadynamics as a special case of the AWH method
by defining the target distribution $\rho$ as an explicit function of the sampling history. We leave the details of this variant to the appendix \ref{app:efftempdistr}. The main difference of the AWH formulation is the use of the extended ensemble: $\xi$ is not directly biased, but indirectly via $\lambda$. Furthermore, the shape of $\Delta f$ is not constant, but determined dynamically by equation \eqref{eq:df}.
It is unclear if this type of setup would actually offer any advantages to using a fixed target distribution (possibly combined with a free energy cutoff). There may even be a downside to letting $\rho$ be completely determined by the sampling history; validating the simulation status by comparing the empirical distribution with the ideal one, $\rho$, becomes meaningless.
\subsection{\label{sec:n} The effective number of samples, $N$}
The effective number of samples $N$ is an important parameter in the AWH method since it determines the overall size of the update, $\Delta f \sim 1/N$ (equation \eqref{eq:df}).
Small $N$ values (large $\Delta f$) are associated with high transition rates and large fluctuations in $f$,
while larger $N$ values (small $\Delta f$) yield slower dynamics and allow for a more accurate free energy estimate.
Because of its relation to the free energy error, the initializing and updating of $N$ deserves some extra attention.
Nonetheless, as we will see further on in this section, with our proposed $N(t)$ protocol, the performance of the method becomes fairly insensitive to the initial setting of $N$.
\subsubsection{The error and the saturated error, $\varepsilon(t)$ and $\varepsilon_{\text{sat}}$}
In this paper we use the error measure
\begin{equation}
\varepsilon^2(t) =
\frac{1}{|\Lambda|}
\sum_\lambda
\left\langle
\left(f(\lambda,t) - F(\lambda)\right)^2\right\rangle \label{eq:epsdef},
\end{equation}
where $|\Lambda|$ is the number of points in $\Lambda$ and $\langle\cdot\rangle$ denotes statistical averaging
over independent simulations.
When $F$ is unknown, we use $\langle f\rangle$ instead (decreasing the statistical degrees of freedom by 1).
When averaging over several simulations, we first align each free energy profile such that
$\frac{1}{|\Lambda|}\sum_\lambda f(\lambda) - F(\lambda) = 0$.
For the PMF error we simply make the replacements $f\mapsto\phi$, $F\mapsto\Phi$, and $|\Lambda|\mapsto|\mathcal{X}|$, the number of $\xi$ bins.
Since our free energy variables are defined as dimensionless, their errors are also dimensionless. Units of energy are obtained by scaling with $k_BT$.
Consider now a simulation where $N$ is kept constant. Then
$f$ will only be refined up to a certain level before the error $\varepsilon(t)$ saturates, $\varepsilon(t) \to \varepsilon_{\text{sat}}$,
$t\to \infty$, where
$\varepsilon_\text{sat} = \varepsilon_\text{sat}(N)$.
When letting $N$ increase with time however, $N=N(t)$,
$\varepsilon_{\text{sat}}(N(t))$ will decrease with time and
the actual error
$\varepsilon(t)$
will only stay close to saturation if $N(t)$ grows at a slow enough rate.
For convenience we introduce
\begin{equation}
\eta(t) = \frac{\varepsilon(t)}{\varepsilon_{\text{sat}}(N(t))},
\label{eq:eta}
\end{equation}
which is a measure of how far the error is from saturation. Holding $N$ constant, $\eta(t)\to 1$.
If $N$ increases too rapidly, $\varepsilon(t)$ cannot follow $\varepsilon_{\text{sat}}(N(t))$ and $\eta(t)$ grows.
\subsubsection{\label{sec:initializingn} Initializing $N$}
The initial effective number of samples, $N^0$, should ideally
reflect the quality of the initial guess of the free energy, $f(\lambda)$, which
typically will be quite inaccurate. Thus, given a rough estimate of the initial error
in $f$, $\varepsilon_0=\varepsilon(0)$, we would like to estimate an appropriate $N^0$.
Obviously, $\varepsilon_0$ is not known initially but can e.g. be estimated based on a guess of typical barrier heights.
We further assume for the time being that also $\varepsilon_\text{sat}$ can roughly be estimated.
Based on equation \eqref{eq:eta}, it is natural to
aim for an $N^0$ for which $\eta(0)=\eta^0\gtrsim 1$, such that the initial error is close to the saturated one ($\eta \approx 1$) but still tends to decrease ($\eta > 1$).
In our experience however (see section \ref{sec:langevin}), there are benefits to choosing $N^0$ on the smaller rather than the bigger side, meaning
\begin{equation}
\eta^0
= \frac{\varepsilon_0}{\varepsilon_{\text{sat}}(N^0)}
\lesssim 1.
\label{eq:eps0epssatN0}
\end{equation}
Since
$\eta(t)$ tends to 1,
$\varepsilon(t)$ might increase initially.
Still, as long as one takes care to not drive the system out of equilibrium by choosing $N^0$ extremely small, it is more useful to see one transition than none at all, which one risks by setting $N^0$ too large.
\subsubsection{\label{sec:updatingN} Updating $N$}
As was assumed in the description of the basic algorithm (section \ref{sec:basicalgorithm}), the effective number of samples $N$ most naturally grows with the collected number of $\lambda$ samples
$S\propto t$, where $t$ is the simulation time.
That is,
$N(t) = N_{\text{ref}}(t) = N^0 + S(t) \sim t$.
In addition, both theoretical and numerical studies of adaptive biasing methods support that possibly optimal convergence, $\varepsilon^2(t) \sim 1/t$,
is obtained by asymptotically letting the bias update size decay as $\sim 1/t$ \ \cite{Barducci:2008ua, Belardinelli:2007gs,Zhou:2008cm,Belardinelli:2014ur}.
This is consistent with $\Delta f\sim 1/N \sim 1/S \propto 1/t$.
On the other hand, a more conservative scheme, where $N$ increases slower than $t$, will increase the robustness of the method and is useful in the early stages, before the available phase space has been sufficiently explored.
The initial stages of the algorithm are often characterized by large errors and filling up of deep free energy wells, and samples tend to be highly correlated.
The basic assumption that the collected samples follow eq.\,\eqref{eq:plambda} is then inaccurate.
In this transient regime, experience suggests that initially one should let $N(t)$ follow a more heuristic updating protocol rather than $N(t)\sim S(t)$.
In approaching this issue, there are two questions to address: what evolution should $N(t)$ follow initially, and at what $N=N_{\text{exit}}$ should $N(t)\sim S(t)$ start?
The well-known Wang-Landau updating scheme \cite{Wang:2001eb} suggests an answer for the first question.
In Wang-Landau, the update size is kept constant until the histogram of visits is sufficiently flat at which point the update size is halved. This process is repeated, e.g. until the update size is smaller than some tolerance value. This strategy has proven robust and efficient at reducing the initially large errors, but is also known to fail to
converge asymptotically, since the errors saturate at a finite value, $\varepsilon(t)\to\varepsilon_{\infty}>0$.
The second question is dealt with in
the Wang-Landau-based method proposed in \cite{Belardinelli:2007ce}, which accommodates for
both the desired transient and the asymptotic behavior by dividing the algorithm into two stages: an initial Wang-Landau stage, followed by a final $1/t$ stage.
The method interpolates between the two stages by exiting from the initial stage as soon as the update size has decreased to $\leq 1/t$, after which the update size is kept at $1/t$ for the rest of the simulation.
An attractive feature of this scheme is that it picks the exit time in a dynamic and automatic manner.
\begin{figure}[tbp!]
\includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth]{figs/doublewell-Nt/both.pdf}
\caption{\label{fig:nt} Typical evolution of the effective number of samples $N$ as a function of the number of collected samples $S\propto t$, for a range of $N^0$ values. Solid lines: exit criterion $N \geq N_{\text{ref}}$. Dashed: $\, \mathrm{d} N/\, \mathrm{d} S \geq \, \mathrm{d} N_{\text{ref}}/\, \mathrm{d} S$. Each curve is obtained by averaging over 32 runs of a Brownian particle in a double well potential.}
\end{figure}
We can naturally adapt the WL $1/t$ approach to the AWH language. In the initial stage, $N$ is kept constant ($\Delta N = 0$) until a certain covering criterion (e.g.\, visit all of $\Lambda$) is met, triggering a doubling of $N$ ($\Delta N = N$), which leads to exponential growth initially.
The exit occurs when
$N(t) \geq N_{\text{ref}}(t) = N^0 +S(t)$.
After exiting, $N$ grows linearly with time, $N(t)=N_{\text{ref}}(t) \sim t$.
We obtain an alternative, but in practice similar,
slope-based interpolation method by going from the initial to the final stage when the exponential growth of $N$ exceeds the linear one of $N_{\text{ref}}$, $\, \mathrm{d} N/\, \mathrm{d} S \geq \, \mathrm{d} N_{\text{ref}}/\, \mathrm{d} S$.
This implies that the exit occurs when $N$ grows larger than
the number of samples collected during the most recent covering of $\Lambda$.
This can be interpreted as effectively having diffused across $\Lambda$ at least once.
Figure \ref{fig:nt} shows typical behavior of $N$ as a function of $S$ for both the $N$-based and the $\, \mathrm{d} N/\, \mathrm{d} S$-based types of exit criteria for a range of initial $N^0$ values in a simple test case: a Brownian particle at $k_BT=1$ moving in a one-dimensional double-well potential,
$\Phi(\xi) = 80 (2(\xi-1)^4-(\xi-1)^2)$.
We see that the two exit criteria in practice yield very similar evolution of $N$ and that in each case the lower values of $N^0$ on average exit to the linear stage roughly around one value $N=N_{\text{exit}}$.
The only exception occurs for the curve with a value of $N^0 \gtrsim N_{\text{exit}}$ which displays different behavior.
We note that doubling $N$, as we have proposed here, is in principle a dangerous operation since it corresponds to scaling up the data by a factor of 2. However, because of the form of the presented exit conditions, the average growth of $N$ will never exceed that of the "natural" sampling rate of $N_{\text{ref}}$.
In addition to the "artificial" control of $N$ initially, for certain runs it may later be advantageous to suddenly decrease $N$, i.e.\ increase the update size $\Delta f$, in order to help push the system out of potential sampling traps\cite{Poulain:2006ka}.
To detect such situations we suggest to keep a record of the
accumulated and normalized histogram of transition weights, $\bar{\omega}_\text{tot}(\lambda)$, since its fluctuations should decay as $\sim 1/N$ asymptotically \cite{Zhou:2008cm, Swetnam:2010dz}.
If a dramatic change of the fluctuations is observed the effective number of samples $N$ should be decreased, e.g.\ using
$N\leftarrow N\sum_\lambda \min\left(\bar{\omega}_\text{tot}(\lambda),\rho(\lambda)\right)$.
However, if the accumulated weight histogram repeatedly displays anomalous behavior, this may actually be an indication of a poorly chosen reaction coordinate.
\subsubsection{\label{sec:langevin} Test case: Langevin dynamics}
We now test the performance of our proposed initialization and update protocol for $N$ in the special, but illustrative, case of Langevin dynamics.
First, to validate choosing $N^0$ based on equation \eqref{eq:eps0epssatN0}, we need an explicit formula for the saturated error.
In the context of constant update size metadynamics, this has previously been derived \cite{Bussi:2006gg}:
\begin{equation}
\varepsilon^2_\text{sat} =
\frac{L_\xi^2 \beta w}{\tau_G D_\xi}
\left(\frac{\sigma_\xi\sqrt{2\pi}}{L_\xi}\right)^d
\zeta(\sigma_\xi/L_\xi),
\label{eq:eps2satmtd}
\end{equation}
where $\varepsilon^2_{\text{sat}}$ is dimensionless, $L_\xi$ is the side of the $d$-dimensional cubic domain,
$D_\xi$ is the diffusion coefficent (when $d>1$ a trace over the diffusion tensor is implied), and
$w$ and $\sigma_\xi$ are the Gaussian height and width, which are deposited at time intervals of $\tau_G$.
The geometric factor $\zeta(\sigma_\xi/L_\xi)
=\sum_{k \neq 0} e^{-\frac{1}{2} \pi^2 k^2 \sigma_\xi^2/L_\xi^2}/\pi^2 k^2$, where $k\in \mathbb{N}^d$, increases with the number of dimensions and decreases with $\sigma_\xi/L_\xi$ as can be seen from its definition.
\begin{figure}[tbp!]
\includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth]{figs/doublewell-dFt/doublewell-dFt.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth]{figs/doublewell-dFN/doublewell-dFN.pdf}
\caption{\label{fig:dfnt} Convergence behaviour for different initial effective number of samples $N$ for one-dimensional Brownian dynamics in a double-well potential (averaged over 32 runs). The curves are labeled by their $\eta^0$ value (equation \eqref{eq:eta}). Top: error $\varepsilon$ as a function of the collected number of samples $S= t/\Delta t_\Lambda$.
Bottom: $\varepsilon$ as a function of $N=N(t)$ compared with $\varepsilon_{\text{sat}}(N)$, obtained both empirically through simulation and theoretically using equation \eqref{eq:eps2satalln}.}
\end{figure}
We expect an analogous relation to be applicable for the error in $f(\lambda)$ in the reaction coordinate formulation of AWH and we obtain it by finding the approximate correspondences between a special case of the AWH method and metadynamics.
From equations \eqref{eq:omegalambdax}, \eqref{eq:df} and \eqref{eq:qkappa} we see that assuming that $n_\Lambda=1$, $\rho$ uniform and further
that the bias $g(\lambda)$ and equilibrium distribution $\pi_0(x)$ are approximately constant within an umbrella width, the AWH $f$ update has the shape of a Gaussian function centered at $\xi$ of width
$\sigma_\kappa = 1/\sqrt{\beta \kappa}$
and height $1/N\rho Z_\omega$:
\begin{align*}
|\Delta f(\lambda)|
&\approx \ln\left(
1 + \frac{1}{N\rho Z_\omega}
e^{-\frac{1}{2\sigma_\kappa^2}
\left(\xi-\lambda\right)^2}
\right)\addnumber{\label{eq:df0allN}}\\
&\approx \frac{1}{N\rho Z_\omega}
e^{-\frac{1}{2\sigma_\kappa^2}
\left(\xi-\lambda\right)^2},
\end{align*}
where the second equation is obtained in the limit of large $N$.
We identify $\max_\lambda|\Delta f(\lambda)|$ in equation \eqref{eq:df0allN}
with the dimensionless Gaussian height $\beta w$. By assuming $\rho$ uniform and further applying a Gaussian integral approximation, we obtain:
$\rho Z_\omega \approx \upsilon := ({\sqrt{2\pi}\sigma_\kappa}/{L})^d$,
where $\upsilon$ is the fraction of the Gaussian volume to the volume of $\Lambda$.
After making the obvious changes of variable names the approximate AWH version of equation \eqref{eq:eps2satmtd} becomes,
\begin{align*}
\varepsilon^2_\text{sat}
&= \frac{L^2\upsilon}{\Delta t_\Lambda D}
\ln\left(1 + \frac{1}{N}
\frac{1}{\upsilon}\right)
\zeta(\sigma_\kappa/L)
\addnumber{\label{eq:eps2satalln}}\\
&\approx
\frac{L^2}{N \Delta t_\Lambda D}
\zeta(\sigma_\kappa/L),
\addnumber{\label{eq:eps2sat}}
\end{align*}
where $\Delta t_\Lambda$ is the time in between $\lambda$ samples
and equation \eqref{eq:eps2sat} is valid for large $N$.
The factor $N\Delta t_\Lambda$ represents the effective sampling time. For a fixed sampling time, decreasing $\Delta t_\Lambda$ yields proportionally more samples $N$, but does not decrease the error, since inter-sample correlations increase as well.
We note that, as is the case for equation \eqref{eq:eps2satmtd}, the above equations are strictly only valid in the limit of continuous (frequent) updates.
Solving
equation \eqref{eq:eps0epssatN0} for $N^0$ with the help of equation \eqref{eq:eps2sat} now yields
\begin{equation}
N^0 \lesssim \frac{L^2}{\varepsilon_0^{2} \Delta t_\Lambda D}
\zeta(\sigma_\kappa/L).
\label{eq:n0}
\end{equation}
In principle, this is a recipe for choosing $N^0$ given $\varepsilon_0^2$. In practice however, $D$ can be challenging to estimate \cite{Tian:2014ec} and furthermore $D$ might vary as a function of $\lambda$.
Nonetheless, assuming $D$ is roughly known so that equation \eqref{eq:n0} can be applied, $N^0$ can be estimated to an order of magnitude.
This is often enough since the initial exponential bootstrapping of $N$ is quite effective in desensitizing the method to variations in $N^0$.
We demonstrate the validity of our proposed method setup
by studying the convergence rate of the error $\varepsilon$ for
$N^0=2^{1+3i}$, $i=0, 1, \ldots, 4$
(as in figure \ref{fig:nt}).
In figure \ref{fig:dfnt}, we plot $\varepsilon$ both as a function of the number of collected samples $S = t/\Delta t_\Lambda$ (top) and as a function of the effective number of samples $N$ (bottom), We again use the simple double-well test case.
To connect the results to equation \eqref{eq:eps0epssatN0} we label each curve by its
$\eta^0$
value (which increases with $N^0$).
For $\varepsilon(S)$, we see that
lower values of $\eta^0$ yield slightly increased error for short times, but
indistinguishable convergence rates for longer times,
for which $\varepsilon(t)\sim S^{-1/2} \propto t^{-1/2}$, as expected.
The curve with the largest $\eta^0$ "separates" from the rest and displays an increased error even for long times.
This shows that
$\eta^0\lesssim 1$ is a good guideline for choosing $N^0$, while
$\eta^0 \gtrsim 10$ risks suboptimal convergence.
We now wish to find out
how closely $\varepsilon(N)$ follows $\varepsilon_{\text{sat}}(N)$ for different values of $\eta^0$
and how this relates to the observed convergence in $\varepsilon(S)$.
We have plotted both an empirical $\varepsilon_{\text{sat}}$, obtained simply by setting $N\equiv N^0$ and waiting for the error to saturate, as well as the theoretical $\varepsilon_{\text{sat}}$ obtained using equation \eqref{eq:eps2satalln}.
We see that all curves starting close to or below the saturated error curve relax to more or less the same $\eta(t)\gtrsim 1$, while the deviating, largest $\eta^0$ curve clearly lags behind.
Obviously, the longer the simulation time, the less critical the choice of $N^0$ will become. For complex systems that are difficult to fully converge however, $N^0$ can substantially influence the final accuracy.
\section{\label{sec:applications} Applications}
Here we demonstrate the setup and illustrate the advantages of the AWH method for atomistic MD simulations. We calculate the PMF for two test cases: lithium acetate (LiAc) (section \ref{sec:liac}) and the 10-residue $\beta$-hairpin chignolin \cite{Honda:2004ca} (section \ref{sec:chig}).
All simulations were performed using a modified version of GROMACS 4.6\, \cite{Pronk:2013ef}. The reaction coordinate case of the AWH method was implemented as a module of the non-equilibrium pull code.
Using the already existing replica exchange framework in GROMACS, parallelization (see section \ref{sec:basicalgorithm}) was straightforward. We do not present results from multireplica simulations in this paper, however.
\subsection{\label{sec:awhsetup} Accelerated weight histogram setup}
Below we provide general guidelines for setting the input for an AWH simulation in PMF calculations. As we will see, many method parameters can take on default values.
For instance,
the target distribution $\rho$ would most often be chosen uniform in the (estimated) region of interest $\Lambda$, possibly with a free energy cutoff of, say, $15$ $k_BT$.
In addition, we update $f$ with every collected $\lambda$ sample, $n_\Lambda=1$. Single-sample updates which do not allow for any relaxation time
might seem inconsistent with the fundamental assumption of the method that samples are generated from the current equilibrium distribution.
In practice however, because of the adaptive biasing, the system will in any case initially be far from relaxed.
Moreover, as $N$ grows and $\Delta f$ shrinks, it is clear that the value of $n_\Lambda$ should matter less and less, since for large $N$ the logarithmic update in equation \eqref{eq:df} linearizes. More importantly, we have not been able to observe any measurable advantages to $n_\Lambda>1$ in our simulations (for which the computational effort of the AWH update step is negligible in comparison with the MD steps).
We also use a generic initial phase covering criterion (discussed in section \ref{sec:updatingN}).
To minimize any dependence on the point spacing, we use a temporary weight histogram $\Omega_N(\lambda)$ containing all the transition weights $\omega(\lambda)$ sampled at the current constant $N$ stage.
In the one-dimensional case, we double $N$ after both endpoints of $\Lambda$ have collected
the weight corresponding to the peak of a Gaussian distribution of width $\sigma_\kappa$, i.e.
$\Omega_N(\lambda_{\text{end}}) \geq \omega_{\text{peak}} = {\Delta \lambda}/{\sqrt{2\pi}\sigma_{\kappa}}$.
If a target distribution with free energy cutoff is used (equation \eqref{eq:pic}), we simply ignore the points falling outside of the cutoff when checking if the criterion is fulfilled.
We straightforwardly generalize this to the multidimensional case, $d>1$, by projecting the weight histogram onto each dimension,
and requiring analogously to the $d=1$ case that both endpoints of each one-dimensional interval have gathered the weight of the $d$-dimensional Gaussian peak,
$\omega_{\text{peak}} = \prod_i^d{\Delta \lambda_i}/{\sqrt{2\pi}\sigma_{\kappa_i}}$.
Obviously, in the multidimensional case this criterion does not guarantee that all relevant regions of $\Lambda$ have actually been covered. Still, it does ensure that \emph{some} extended path in $\Lambda$ has been explored.
As for the exit criterion of the initial phase, we use
$N\geq N_{\text{ref}}$, one of the two similar criteria we proposed in section \ref{sec:updatingN}.
There are only three parameters that require more system specific attention: the force constant $\kappa$, the time interval between $\lambda$ updates $\Delta t_\Lambda$, and the initial effective number of samples $N^0$.
\begin{enumerate}
\item
$\kappa$, which couples $\xi$ to $\lambda$, is not particularly critical as long as the umbrella potential dominates that of the underlying free energy landscape.
We give numerical examples in sections \ref{sec:liac} and \ref{sec:chig}.
Once $\kappa$ is set, the $\lambda$ point density is automatically determined as a function of the umbrella width
$\sigma_\kappa = 1/\sqrt{\beta\kappa}$ in order to make transitions between points probable.
In our simulations we fix it to $\sim3\text{ points}/\sigma_\kappa$ per dimension.
We simply set the number of $\xi$ bins used for the deconvolution equal to the number of $\lambda$ points.
\item
$\Delta t_{\Lambda}$, should be set as small as possible to minimize discontinuities, but still at least an order of magnitude larger than the MD time step to avoid introducing integration errors. For many biomolecules $\Delta t_{\Lambda} = 1$ ps could be used as a default value. See sections \ref{sec:liac} and \ref{sec:chig} for examples.
In addition, $\Delta t_{\lambda}$ should be smaller than the diffusion time across an umbrella width in order to ensure that the dynamics of $\lambda$ does not slow down diffusion in $\xi$.
Since diffusion anyhow is often slow along reaction coordinates, this is not a major constraint.
\item
$N^0$ has already been thoroughly discussed in section \ref{sec:n}. If (an upper bound to) the diffusion coefficient $D$ can be estimated or there is previous experience from simulating similar systems, equation \eqref{eq:n0} can be used to estimate $N^0$. Alternatively, $N^0$ can by trial-and-error be set small enough to observe transitions in a shorter test run, but still large enough so that the observed variations in $f$ are of comparable magnitude to the expected barrier heights. Because of the initial exponential growth of $N$, the method is quite robust with respect to $N^0$ as long as it is not chosen too large.
\end{enumerate}
\subsection{\label{sec:mdsetup} Details of molecular dynamics setup}
Molecular dynamics simulations were performed with GROMACS 4.6.
The temperature was maintained at 298 K for LiAc and 300 K for chignolin using the v-rescale thermostat \cite{Bussi:2008cs}. Pressure was kept at 1 bar using Berendsen pressure coupling \cite{Berendsen:1984us}. Long-range electrostatics were calculated using Particle-Mesh Ewald \cite{Essmann:1995vj}. All bonds were constrained using the LINCS algorithm \cite{Hess:2008fl}. The time step was 2 fs for LiAc and 4 fs for chignolin (using virtual sites).
The force field used for LiAc was OPLS united atom \cite{Jorgensen:1996bs} with a modification using Kirkwood-Buff integrals to reproduce the activity \cite{Hess:2009du}.
For chignolin the AMBER99SB all-atom forcefield \cite{Hornak:2006gx} was used. Both systems were solvated in SPC/E water \cite{Berendsen:1987uu}; 1000 water molecules were added to LiAc and 2000 molecules to chignolin. Two Na$^+$ ions were added to the solution of chignolin to neutralize the system.
\subsection{\label{sec:liac} Lithium acetate}
As a first atomistic application we study lithium acetate (LiAc) in water
and determine the PMF along the distance between a lithium ion and the carbonyl carbon of acetate, $\xi = d_{LiC}$. Ion pairing is a good test case,
as for a contact ion pair to form, the solvation shells need to be rearranged,
which requires conformational changes.
Especially for small cations that bind water strongly, this leads to a high free energy barrier.
Furthermore, there is a narrow, small minimum at a very small distance (which does not appear if the distance to an oxygen is chosen as reaction coordinate). This narrow minimum is a test for the resolution and deconvolution of the method.
\begin{figure}[tbp!]
\includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth]{figs/liac-pmf/N01024/liac-pmfs.pdf}
\caption{\label{fig:liacpmf} PMF for LiAc for 4 independent, 50 ns long AWH runs and for the reference constraint calculation, based on 245 ns of simulation time.}
\end{figure}
We use a flat target distribution $\rho(\lambda)$ for $\lambda \in \Lambda =[0.2,0.7]$ nm.
We expect the LiAc system to be quite fast, so we set $\Delta t_\Lambda=$ 0.1 ps (50 time steps).
We empirically picked $N^0=2^{10}$ by setting it large enough to have reasonable fluctuations in $f$ after one $\Lambda$ covering.
The force constant was initially set to $\kappa= 16\cdot 10^3$ kJ$\,$mol$^{-1}$nm$^{-2}$ ($\sigma_\kappa \approx 1\cdot 10^{-3}$ nm). After running a simulation for a short time we
inspected the $\xi$ and $\lambda$ distributions and noticed that,
while the $\lambda$ distribution was relatively flat, $\xi\approx 0.35$ nm was only getting 0.16 of the mean number of samples, suggesting highly (negatively) curved free energy in that region. We therefore set $\kappa= 32\cdot 10^3$ kJ$\,$mol$^{-1}$nm$^{-2}$ ($\sigma_\kappa \approx 9\cdot 10^{-4}$ nm). This increased the sampling fraction to 0.56.
As a reference, we also calculated the PMF by constraining the distance $\xi$ and integrating the average constraint force. To resolve the steep barriers around the first minimum, we used 48 non-uniformly spaced distances and a total sampling time of 245 ns.
We could also have used umbrella sampling which would have required not only non-uniform point spacing but also non-uniform umbrella widths. This demonstrates one of the main advantages of the AWH method:
we can globally make our umbrellas very narrow without increasing the computational cost, as opposed to umbrella sampling, where relaxation along the coordinates perpendicular to $\lambda$ is required for each $\lambda$ point individually.
In figure \ref{fig:liacpmf} we show the estimated PMFs at $t=50$ ns for 4 independent runs, together with the calculated reference curve.
We have subtracted the entropic term $-\ln(4\pi\xi^2)$ from the AWH profiles in order to exclude the effect of the available phase space increasing with $\xi$.
The standard deviation of the free energy difference between $\xi=0.3$ nm and at $\xi=0.7$ nm is 0.16 $k_BT$ for these AWH runs. For the constraint PMF, the estimated error is 0.27 $k_BT$ after 50 ns of simulation time, showing that the AWH method is at least as accurate as the method of constraints.
The dynamics during the final $1/t$ stage was compared to that of
a regular MD simulation which had been biased with the PMF to obtain a flat free energy profile. In both cases the rate of the slowest process, the crossing of the barrier at 0.35 nm, was 4 times per ns. This shows that the AWH method does not slow down the kinetics, provided that $\Delta t_\Lambda$ is chosen sufficiently small.
We estimate the diffusion constant to
$D\approx1.5\cdot10^{-4}$ $\text{nm}^2\text{ps}^{-1}$ for nearly the whole interval by looking at the mean square displacement of $\lambda$ over 5 to 50 ps for the later, diffusion-like, stages of an AWH run.
This allows us to estimate $\varepsilon_{\text{sat}}$ from equation \eqref{eq:eps2satalln}, or,
using equation \eqref{eq:n0}, a reasonable value for $N^0$.
We obtain, using the estimated $\varepsilon^0 \approx 1.5$,
$N^0 \approx 1200 \approx 2^{10} $. That is, our $N^0 =2^{10}=1024$ corresponds to $\eta^0$ close to 1.
To further study the influence of $N^0$ on the convergence we extended our simulations to a range of $N^0$ values,
$N^0=2^{4+3i}$, where $i=0, 1, \ldots, 4$. These correspond, respectively, to
$\eta^0 \approx$ 0.1, 0.3, 0.9, 2.7, and 7.5.
We observed that all simulations displayed very similar convergence behavior, except those for which $\eta^0\approx 7.5$ which was initially exploring slowly and displayed larger average error also for long times.
\subsection{\label{sec:chig} Chignolin}
We next explored a two-dimensional free energy landscape for the 10-residue $\beta$-hairpin chignolin\cite{Honda:2004ca}, in explicit water.
This is a more complex application than LiAc and is interesting to study because it contains features that also appear in conformational changes in larger proteins. In particular the formation of native hydrogen bonds can be difficult to sample, since a state with a large number of conformations needs to transition to the single, correctly hydrogen bonded conformation.
Previous simulations of chignolin have shown \cite{Satoh:2006im} that, besides the native fold, there is a highly populated misfolded state. In this misfolded state, the outer Asp3N-Thr8O hydrogen bond in the native fold has been swapped to
a Asp3N-Gly7O hydrogen bond leading to a more tightly turning structure, see figure \ref{fig:chigconf}.
In order to map out the free-energy landscape between folded, misfolded and unfolded states, we define a two-dimensional reaction coordinate
$\xi=(\xi_0,\xi_1)$,
where $\xi_0$ and $\xi_1$ are the
Asp3N-Gly7O and Asp3N-Thr8O distances, respectively.
To avoid sampling unphysical states, we use a target distribution $\rho$ with free energy cutoff $C=15$ (see equation \eqref{eq:pic}). We use uniform $\rho_0(\lambda)$, although an alternative could have been $\rho_0(\lambda)\sim1/|\lambda|^p$, for some $p>0$ to sample less of the unfolded configurations.
In this case using the covering criterion described in section \ref{sec:awhsetup}
seems reasonable since the effective number of samples $N$ will likely not get doubled until both bonds have separately gone from opened to closed, or vice versa.
Next, we set $\Lambda =[0.25,1]\times[0.25,1]\text{ nm}^2$ based on the fact that in the initial configuration, $\xi_1 \approx 0.3$ nm (closed) and $\xi_0\approx 0.6$ nm (open).
Further, $\kappa = 4\cdot 10^3$ kJ/mol$\cdot\text{nm}^2$ ($\sigma_\kappa = 0.02$ nm) for each dimension.
We estimated $\Delta t_\Lambda$ = 1 ps (250 time steps), which is roughly the velocity decorrelation time for biomolecular systems, to be sufficiently small.
We choose $N^0=2^{11}$ based on observations that this gives fast transitions without extreme free energy estimate fluctuations (alternatively, one could apply equation \eqref{eq:n0} using e.g.\ a rough square double well model of the landscape and an estimated upper bound for the diffusion coefficient).
\begin{figure}[tbp!]
\includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth]{figs/chig-configs/chig-configs.pdf}
\caption{\label{fig:chigconf} Folded conformations of chignolin and the two-dimensional reaction coordinate $(\xi_0,\xi_1)$,
the
Asp3N-Gly7O and Asp3N-Thr8O distances, respectively.
Left: native fold. Right: misfolded state.}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[tbp!]
\includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth]{figs/chig-avg/chig-Favg.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth]{figs/chig-avg/chig-pmfavg.pdf}
\caption{\label{fig:chigfs} The free energy estimates for chignolin at $t=1.2\,\mu$, averaged over 8 independent runs. The target distribution is uniform with a free energy cutoff of 15 $k_BT$. Top: $f(\lambda)$, the estimated convoluted free energy. Bottom: the PMF $\phi(\xi)$, the deconvolution of $f(\lambda)$.}
\end{figure}
Figure \ref{fig:chigfs} shows the final, $t=$ 1.2 $\mu$s, free energy $f(\lambda)$ (top) and PMF $\phi(\xi)$ (bottom) averaged over 8 independent replicas.
The figure further illustrates a major advantage of using a target distribution with a cutoff on the free energy: the otherwise critical choice of $\Lambda$ is eliminated.
Without such a cutoff one would have to carefully set up boundaries
that include all important states, but fence off uninteresting ones.
Including improbable states does not only risk inefficient sampling but can also lead to instabilities due to large biasing forces.
We find that the minimas corresponding to the two folded states are comparably populated, with a preference for the misfolded state. Within the current accuracy on the order of $\sim 1$ $k_BT$ (figure \ref{fig:chigsdfs}), our results are consistent with previous work\cite{Kuhrova:2012wt} where the native and misfolded state were found to be approximately equally populated.
We note that a different water model was used in \cite{Kuhrova:2012wt}.
The error in the convoluted free energy $f(\lambda)$ and the PMF $\phi(\xi)$ follow each other closely, as can be seen in figure \ref{fig:chigsdfs}.
Obviously, because of the sampling-based deconvolution, the PMF error can only be calculated in a domain which has already been explored by all simulations. The exclusion of yet to be explored regions generally leads to an initial underestimation of the error.
To separate this effect, we have included the dashed curve in figure \ref{fig:chigsdfs}, for which the error in $\phi$ has been divided by the fraction of included space at time $t$, relative to the final time.
In the initial stage, $t<t_{\text{exit}}$, where $t_{\text{exit}}$ is the mean exit time, $\varepsilon(t)$ is characterized by a relatively flat plateau in which exploration of new areas is taking place simultaneously as the error is being reduced in already visited regions.
In the final stage, the two $\phi$ curves are basically the same and $\varepsilon\sim t^{-1/2}$ convergence is recovered.
Our choice of a flat target distribution targets uniform accuracy in the entire explored reaction coordinate space, including relatively high free energy regions where the peptide is unfolded.
If one is willing to accept significantly increased errors outside of the folded regions, a parameter extension in temperature space (i.e. $\lambda=T$) could be an alternative.
Using temperature replica exchange\cite{Sugita:1999cl} would also be possible since chignolin is a relatively small system.
For larger systems however, the applicability of replica exchange methods are severely limited by the large number of replicas needed\cite{Fukunishi:2002hb}.
We post-validated our choice of $N^0$ by estimating the diffusion constant. Using the mean square displacement method we obtained $D\approx 5\cdot 10^{-5}$ $\text{nm}^2\text{ps}^{-1}$ in the two minimas and $D\approx 1\mbox{--}2 \cdot 10^{-6}$ $\text{nm}^2\text{ps}^{-1}$ in the unfolded region, for starting times $t\geq 300$ ns and time intervals 100 to 500 ps. Together with our estimation $\varepsilon^0 \approx 3$, equation \eqref{eq:eps2satalln} implies $\eta^0 \approx 0.7$ for the simulations. This shows that our trial-and error choice of $N^0$ is consistent with $\eta^0\lesssim 1$.
\begin{figure}[tbp!]
\includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth]{figs/chig-dfs/chig-dfs.pdf}
\caption{\label{fig:chigsdfs} Convergence of the error in $f(\lambda)$, the convoluted free energy, and $\phi(\xi)$, the PMF, for chignolin. The corresponding dashed curve for $\phi$ is the error divided by the fraction of explored space at time t relative to the final time.
The average exit time $t_{\text{exit}}$, together with its one standard deviation error bars, are given by
vertical lines.}
\end{figure}
\section{\label{sec:conclusion} Conclusion}
The AWH method is a flexible and efficient adaptive biasing method for free energy calculations.
Its very general extended ensemble formulation opens up for numerous practical extensions, of which we have demonstrated two: a full resolution calculation procedure of the potential of mean force, and the use of a free energy dependent target distribution, which can be extremely helpful in avoiding sampling of improbable states.
Furthermore, the AWH method is straightforward to implement, both in its serial and parallel version. We intend to include it in version 6.0 of the GROMACS molecular simulation package.
A core feature of the AWH method is the use of a weight histogram. This allows for efficient utilization of the transition history in order parameter space, both in the free energy updates and as a means of monitoring the simulation.
Moreover, as a result of using a weight histogram
there is no tedious discretization or binning procedure involved in setting up an AWH simulation, and the method efficiency does not depend critically on the point density.
An additional major advantage of the AWH method is that repeated passes are made over the reaction coordinate, which allows for multiple pathways.
The quality of the initial starting structure is thus not critical, since the system will have time to relax during the course of the simulation. For the same reason, initially choosing a large update size is not a problem even though this may initially push the system into strained configurations.
The most important factor in PMF calculations remains the, often difficult, choice of reaction coordinate. Nonetheless, for a good reaction coordinate, the AWH method makes the calculation of PMFs straightforward.
The AWH method is furthermore helpful as an aid for detecting a bad choice of reaction coordinate, since the weight histogram will deviate significantly from the target distribution if there are issues. The early exploration of reaction coordinate space is usually fast and can be used to assess the current choice of reaction coordinate.
From a practical point of view, we have provided concrete guidelines and numerically illustrated how to customize and initialize AWH simulations for PMF calculations of molecular systems. This knowledge will be of great help in our future simulations of more complex systems.
\section*{Acknowledgments}
This work was supported by the European Research Council
(grant nr. 258980) and the Swedish e-Science Research Center.
Computer resources were provided through the Swedish
National Infrastructure for Computing (SNIC 001/12-280).
|
\section{Quantum quench dynamics in 1D Bose gases}
To set the scene, we first describe the quantum quench in a 1D Bose gas as
described by the Lieb-Liniger model \cite{ll}. The Lieb-Liniger model is believed to provide an excellent description of a 1D Bose gas \cite{review}.
In the absence of external (trapping) one-body terms, it is integrable with an infinite number of conserved operators, $\{\hat Q_i\}$.
It's Hamiltonian with the addition of a one body potential, $V(x)$, is given by
\begin{equation}
H = -\frac{\hbar^2}{2m}\sum^N_{j=1}\frac{\partial^2}{\partial x_j^2}+2c\sum_{\langle i,j\rangle}\delta(x_i-x_j) + \sum_i V(x_i).
\end{equation}
The type of quantum quench we will study is found in preparing the gas
on a ring of length $L$ in the ground state of a parabolic trap \cite{NRG4,tg_quench1,tg_quench2}, i.e.
$V(x)=\frac{1}{2}m\omega^2x^2$, then at time $t=0$, releasing the gas from the parabolic trap into
a one-body cosine potential, $V(x)=A\cos(2\pi {n_{\rm cos}} x/L)$, and observing the subsequent dynamics of the gas.
This quench protocol is illustrated in Fig. 1.
This form of the Hamiltonian, an integrable model together with an integrability breaking perturbation, allows
us to determine the ground and excited states of the model pre- and post-quench through a numerical renormalization group (NRG)
designed precisely to attack such problems \cite{NRG,NRG2,NRG3,NRG4} together with a set of routines known as ABACUS that
allow {\it numerically exact} computation of matrix elements of operators in the Lieb-Liniger model \cite{caux_abacus}. In turn,
this gives us access to the post-quench dynamics of the gas.
In particular we employ an NRG able
to study perturbations of integrable and conformal continuum field theories. This
approach, as it is an extension of a methodology known as the truncated conformal spectrum
approach \cite{YZ,YZ1}, has been primarily used to study perturbations of relativistic field theories \cite{NRG,NRG2,NRG3}, but
has recently been applied to the Lieb-Liniger model perturbed by a one-body potential \cite{NRG4}, the problem
at hand. The NRG uses the eigenstates of the Lieb-Liniger model as a computational basis. Because this
basis accounts for the interactions of the Bose gas particles with one another, this numerical method builds
in the strong correlations present in the problem right at the start. We discuss details of this method
in Appendix A1.
In Fig. 2 we show the time evolution of the gas after the quench. At time $t=0$ we see the density profile of the gas
in the ground state of the parabolic potential. After quenching the potential to a cosine, the gas moves away from the center,
oscillates a number of times before settling into the minima of the cosine. This occurs at times of the order of $t=50t_F$ -
we are able to run the simulation out to times of $t=80t_F$ (here
$t_F=1/E_F$ where $E_F=k_F^2/(2m)$ and $k_F=\pi(N-1)/L$).
While we are able to compute the dynamics of such observables as the density and the momentum distribution function, the
key to the work in this paper will be our ability to compute the dynamics of the (formerly) conserved Lieb-Liniger charges, $\hat Q_i$.
Our numerical approach makes this extremely simple because of our use of the eigenstates of the integrable Lieb-Liniger model
as a basis.
Each Lieb-Liniger state of an $N$-particle gas $|\psi\rangle_{LL}$ is characterized by $N$-rapidities, $\lambda_i,~i=1,\ldots,N$, which
should be thought of as, more or less, the momenta of the gas's particles.
These rapidities determine the action of the conserved operators on the Lieb-Liniger states. For
example both the energy, $E=\hat Q_2$ and momentum, $P=\hat Q_1$, operators act on $|\psi\rangle_{LL}$
via,
\begin{equation}
E|\psi\rangle_{LL} = \sum^N_{i=1} \lambda_{i}^2|\psi\rangle_{LL}; ~~~ P|\psi\rangle_{LL} = \sum^N_{i=1} \lambda_{i}|\psi\rangle_{LL}.
\end{equation}
The action of all of the higher non-trivial charges, $\hat Q_n$, $n=3,4,5,\cdots$ in the Lieb-Liniger model
are simply higher power sums of the same rapidities:
\begin{equation}
\hat Q_n|\psi\rangle_{LL} = \sum^N_{i=1} \lambda_{i}^n|\psi\rangle_{LL}.
\end{equation}
While the actual expression of the charges in terms of the Bose field operators is complicated and unwieldy \cite{korepin},
the action of the charges on the Lieb-Liniger eigenstates turns out to be extremely simple. This will be crucial in facilitating
our construction of effective ${\pmb{\mathscr{Q}}}$'s.
\section{Construction of conserved quantities in the Bose gas post-quench}
\begin{figure*}[t]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=1\textwidth]{Fig2revised_cropped.pdf}
\end{center}
\caption{\label{fig:timeev}a) The post-quench time evolution of the Lieb-Liniger charges normalized by their mean value
as described in the text. Here the time
dependence is computed after releasing a $N=L=8$, $c=10$ gas prepared in a parabolic potential of strength $m\omega_0^2L^2/2E_F=3.24$
into a cosine potential $\cos(\frac{4\pi}{L}x)$. We show this behavior at late times (for details of how long we
can run the simulation, see Appendix A1).
b) The post-quench time evolution of a sequence of
effective charges, ${\pmb{\mathscr{Q}}}(N_Q) = \sum_{m=1}^{N_Q}a_{2m}\hat Q_{2m}$, for $N_Q=2,4,$ and $8$.
c) Top: The standard deviation of the fluctuations of two sequences of effective charges ${\pmb{\mathscr{Q}}}$. We build the first sequence (in black)
using linear combinations of the charges $\{\hat Q_{2m}\}_{m=1}^{m=8}$, while the second sequence (in red) is formed with
the next eight Lieb-Liniger charges, i.e. $\{\hat Q_{2m}\}_{m=9}^{m=16}$. Bottom: We show the fluctuations of the two effective charges
built following the quench of a $c=1$ gas prepared in a parabolic trap of strength, $m\omega_0^2L^2/2E_F=0.13$, and released into the same cosine
potential, $\cos(\frac{4\pi}{L}x)$.}
\end{figure*}
We now turn to the core of the paper. We have shown in the previous section that we can
describe the temporal dynamics of various quantities post-quench. In that section we specifically considered the density profile
of the gas after release into the cosine potential. We now consider the time evolution of the Lieb-Liniger charges. They
are of course not conserved and so their evolution will be non-trivial. We however show that one can construct linear combinations
of the Lieb-Liniger charges whose expectation values are nearly time invariant under unitary evolution by the post-quench Hamiltonian. The quality
of this time invariance can be controlled by allowing more charges in the linear combination. Moreover
we show that these linear combinations of charge are not merely time invariant with respect to the particular initial condition created
in the quench protocol, but as operators acting on the low energy Hilbert space.
\begin{figure}[b]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth]{Flucts_in_tv1_cropped.pdf}
\end{center}
\caption{\label{flucts_vs_NQ} We plot the fluctuations in time for ${\pmb{\mathscr{Q}}}$
as a function of $N_Q$ for $N=L=4,8,$ and $16$ for a quench
from a parabolic potential of strength $m\omega_0^2L^2/2E_F =2.33$ to a cosine of amplitude $V_{cos}(x)=0.26E_F\cos(2\pi x/L)$.
We do so using the charges as constructed at $c=\infty$ as discussed in Appendix B as a partial demonstration that
such charges work well at finite c.}
\end{figure}
We begin by first considering the time evolution of the individual Lieb-Liniger charges themselves. We plot this evolution for the first
four Lieb-Liniger charges in Fig. \ref{fig:timeev} for a gas with $N=L=8$ and $c=10$. In plotting the time evolution we have normalized each charge
to its mean value post-quench so that all of the charges fluctuate about 1.
The mean value of the unnormalized n-th charge, given by,
\begin{equation}
\langle \hat Q_n \rangle_{\rm av} = \frac{1}{T}\int^T_0 \langle \hat Q_n(t)\rangle,
\end{equation}
where $T$ is the time out to which we can track the evolution,
grows rapidly with n
as the charge's action on a Lieb-Liniger eigenstate $|s\rangle =|\lambda_1,\cdots,\lambda_N\rangle$ is a power sum of the rapidities
$\{\lambda_i\}_{i=1}^N$, i.e. $\langle s|\hat Q_n|s\rangle = \sum_i \lambda_i^n$.
We see from Fig. \ref{fig:timeev} that even after normalization, the size of the oscillations increases with $n$.
\begin{figure*}[t]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=1\textwidth]{Fig3_cropped.pdf}
\end{center}
\caption{\label{off-diag-mes}a) We plot the intensity of the off-diagonal matrix elements of $\hat Q_2$, comparing it to b)
the off diagonal m.e.'s of ${\pmb{\mathscr{Q}}} (8)$ for the quench of the $c=1$ gas discussed in Fig. 3c.
c) We plot the average size of the off-diagonal matrix elements of two sequences of effective charges ${\pmb{\mathscr{Q}}}(N_Q)$, in black is
the sequence constructed from $\hat Q_{2m}$, $m=1,\cdots, 8$, while in red is the sequence constructed from
$\hat Q_{2m}$, $m=9,\cdots, 16$. We show this for both the $c=1$ (same quench as in a) and b)) and the $c=10$ case (same quench as
described in Fig. 3a)-c). }
\end{figure*}
We now consider linear combinations of the Lieb-Liniger charges of the form:
\begin{equation}
{\pmb{\mathscr{Q}}} (N_Q) = a_0{\rm I} + \sum_{i=1}^{N_Q} \frac{a_i}{\langle \hat Q_{2i}\rangle_{\rm av}} \hat Q_{2i}; ~~~1=\sum_{i=1}^{N_Q} |a_i|^2 ,
\end{equation}
where we choose the constant $a_0$ such that the mean value of ${\pmb{\mathscr{Q}}} (N_Q)$ is about 0 and the remaining constants $a_i$\cite{coeff_fn} such
that the fluctuations in ${\pmb{\mathscr{Q}}} (N_Q)$ are minimized.
We plot the time evolution for a $c=10$ gas of these effective charges in panel b) of Fig. \ref{fig:timeev} for three
different values of $N_Q$, the number of charges in the linear combination.
In panel c) we plot the fluctuations of this charge as a function of $N_Q$.
We see that these fluctuations drop exponential with $N_Q$. (On the basis of an error analysis in our
numerics, we would put a numerically induced floor of $10^{-6}$ to $10^{-7}$ on the fluctuations in ${\pmb{\mathscr{Q}}}$ --
see end of Appendix A1a.)
In the bottom part of panel c) we do the same for a quench involving a $c=1$ gas.
In order to be sure that we
are not simply reconstructing the post-quench Hamiltonian as some linear combination of the Lieb-Liniger charges,
in both cases ($c=10,1$), we demonstrate we can construct
simultaneous multiple effective charges. In panel c) we show that the fluctuations of a second effective charge
built as a linear combination of charges drawn from $\{\hat Q_{2n}\}_{n=9}^{16}$ also die off exponentially.
This exponential dependence in $N_Q$ is possible to understand at large $c$. To do so, we write the initial condition of the gas in
terms of post-quench cosine eigenstates:
$|\psi_{GS}\rangle = \sum_\alpha c_\alpha |\psi_{\alpha,{\rm cos}}\rangle$.
With the initial condition as above, the time dependence of the charge takes the form:
\begin{eqnarray}
{\pmb{\mathscr{Q}}} (t) &=& \sum_{\alpha\beta} c^*_\alpha c_\beta \langle \psi_{\alpha,{\rm cos}}|{\pmb{\mathscr{Q}}} (t)|\psi_{\beta,{\rm cos}}\rangle\cr\cr
&=& \sum_{\alpha\beta} c^*_\alpha c_\beta e^{-i(E_\beta-E_\alpha)t}\langle \psi_{\alpha,{\rm cos}}|{\pmb{\mathscr{Q}}} |\psi_{\beta,{\rm cos}}\rangle.
\end{eqnarray}
We demonstrate in Appendix B1 that each Lieb-Liniger charge forming ${\pmb{\mathscr{Q}}}$
zeroes a shell of matrix elements $\langle \psi_{\alpha,cos}|{\pmb{\mathscr{Q}}} |\psi_{\beta,cos}\rangle$, $\alpha \neq \beta$, in the above sum.
As $N_Q$ increases, more and more of these
matrix elements are zeroed out. For relatively weak cosine potentials, the total weight, $W_{elim}$ of the $|c_\beta c_{\alpha}|^2$'s
whose matrix elements are zeroed out is
\begin{equation}\label{weakA}
W_{elim} \approx 1 - 2\frac{e^{-\Lambda(N_Q)^2}}{\sqrt{\pi}}\sum^{N-1}_{n=0}\frac{2^n\Lambda(N_Q)^{2n-1}}{n!}
\end{equation}
with $\Lambda(N_Q) = (2\pi (N_Q-2)/(L\sqrt{m\omega_0})$.
We then see the weight that is not zeroed out and so can contribute to ${\pmb{\mathscr{Q}}}$'s temporal fluctuations goes as $e^{-(\Lambda(N_Q)/m\omega_0)^2}$.
We see from this that it becomes harder to construct quasi-stationary, ${\pmb{\mathscr{Q}}}$'s, as the system size, $L$, is increased. This
is confirmed in Fig. \ref{flucts_vs_NQ}, where we compare ${\pmb{\mathscr{Q}}}$'s constructed at different $N=L$. We see that the point
where the fluctuations become exponentially small goes as $N_Q=L$.
For large amplitude $A$ cosine potentials, the temporal fluctuations die off much more slowly with $N_Q$:
\begin{equation}\label{strongA}
W_{elim} \sim \bigg(\frac{N_Q}{N_A}\bigg)^N, ~~ N_A = \frac{\sqrt{2mA}L}{2\pi}.
\end{equation}
In this latter case, essentially the number of non-zero matrix elements of ${\pmb{\mathscr{Q}}}(t)$ proliferate, making a construction
where it is nearly time invariant much more difficult.
So far we have only demonstrated that we can construct charges ${\pmb{\mathscr{Q}}}$ as linear
combinations of the original Lieb-Liniger charges, $\hat Q_n$,
whose time fluctuations can be made arbitrarily small supposing we start the system in a
specific initial condition, $|\psi_{GS,para}\rangle$.
However we now demonstrate that these charges are quasi-conserved not just relative to a
specific initial state, but as operators,
at least when projected onto the low energy post-quench Hilbert space.
To do so we compute the off-diagonal matrix elements in Fig. \ref{off-diag-mes} of one of the two ${\pmb{\mathscr{Q}}}$'s we have
constructed (the one constructed with Lieb-Liniger charges, $\hat Q_2,\cdots,\hat Q_{16}$)
relative to the basis of the low-lying energy eigenstates of the post-quench Hamiltonian.
These matrix elements are plotted in Fig. \ref{off-diag-mes}. In the rightmost panel
we display the off-diagonal matrix elements of $\hat Q_2$ (normalized as described previously) to set the scale of how large these
matrix elements are for the individual Lieb-Liniger charges. In the middle panel we then plot the matrix elements of ${\pmb{\mathscr{Q}}} (8)$.
We see that most of the previous non-zero matrix elements of $\hat Q_2$ are now dramatically
reduced. We quantify this disappearance in panel c) of Fig. \ref{off-diag-mes}.
There we present
the average magnitude of the off-diagonal matrix elements as a function of $N_Q$. We present data for both effective charges
considered in Fig. \ref{fig:timeev} for both values of $c=1,10$. We see in all cases the size of these matrix elements drops exponentially
in $N_Q$. Roughly speaking, if the average energy per particle of two
distinct states, $|s\rangle, |s'\rangle$, is less than $\Lambda (N_Q)$, then $\langle s|{\pmb{\mathscr{Q}}} | s'\rangle$ will be exponentially small.
We conclude that the ${\pmb{\mathscr{Q}}}$'s are then nearly conserved as operators. This conclusion is supported by an analytic
construction of the ${\pmb{\mathscr{Q}}}$'s that we present in Appendix B.
\section{Discussion}
In this paper we have found a construction of quasi-conserved operators
as linear combinations of the Lieb-Liniger conserved charges. In this
construction, the linear combinations are chosen to minimize the temporal fluctuations of the charge
upon quenching the gas from a one-body parabolic potential to a cosine potential. Despite this
minimization being done for a particular quench protocol, the conservation of the charge occurs
at the operator level. Specifically, off-diagonal matrix elements of the charges are small.
We demonstrated that both post-quench temporal fluctuations and the off-diagonal matrix elements
can be made exponentially small in the number of charges, $N_Q$, in the linear combination.
We have supported this construction by demonstrating an equivalent analytic construction of these
charges (Appendix B).
In this analytic construction of effective charges we demonstrate why certain linear combinations
of the original Lieb-Liniger charges act as effective conserved quantities at low energies. This construction
works by finding linear combinations that zero out off-diagonal matrix elements at a given order in the
effective charge ${\pmb{\mathscr{Q}}}(t)$ written as a power series in time $t$. We show in particular that a matrix element zeroed out
at a given order in $t$ remains zero to a much higher order in general, thus providing an explanation why our construction
appears so robust. We stress that this construction uses in no fashion the fact that there does exist a set of exact
conserved charges at $c=\infty$ (namely the occupation numbers belonging to the single particle
states of a cosine potential). However to reassure the reader that our $c=\infty$ construction is not accidentally in fact
constructing these occupation numbers, we demonstrate that the charges we analytically construct at $c=\infty$ work
at finite $c$ as well. In Fig. 6 we plot the temporal fluctuations of the effective charges as
a function of $N_Q$ so analytically constructed
but for the $c=1$ and $c=10$ quenches described in Fig. 3. While we see the temporal fluctuations of these analytical $c=\infty$ charges
are larger than those numerically constructed at a given $c$ (compare Fig. 3c), we nonetheless see that the fluctuations in the $c=\infty$
charges die off exponentially with $N_Q$. A similar conclusion can be seen in our study of the temporal fluctuations
of ${\pmb{\mathscr{Q}}}$ as a function of $N$ and $N_Q$ in Fig. 4 where we again have used the $c=\infty$ ${\pmb{\mathscr{Q}}}$ -- although here, for
the $N=4$ data, one can see that the fluctuations for the analytic ${\pmb{\mathscr{Q}}}$ have a comparatively large floor.
All together this gives us confidence that our $c=\infty$ construction is accurately capturing
the essence of the numerical construction of ${\pmb{\mathscr{Q}}}$ at finite c.
\begin{figure}[t]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth]{fluct_hc_charges_cropped.pdf}
\end{center}
\caption{\label{fluct_hc} We demonstrate that the effective charges constructed analytically at $c=\infty$
as described in detail in Appendix B have suppressed temporal fluctuations for quenches with finite $c=1,10$.}
\end{figure}
We are able to in fact extend the analytic computation described in Appendix B to the finite $c$ case. The primary difference between
the construction of ${\pmb{\mathscr{Q}}}$ at $c=\infty$ and $c$ finite is the need to take into account that the density operator can connect
states differing by more than one particle-hole pair. However these higher particle-hole process are suppressed in powers of $1/c$,
with $c$ the interaction strength. This means that we have a control parameter in our finite $c$ analytic computation of ${\pmb{\mathscr{Q}}}$
where if we ignore processes involving $n-$particle-hole pairs, the error we make is only $c^{-n}$. This in part explains why our
$c=\infty$ construction of ${\pmb{\mathscr{Q}}}$ still is conserved at $c=10$. It is however somewhat surprising that our $c=\infty$
construction of ${\pmb{\mathscr{Q}}}$ works as well as it does (as evidenced in Fig. \ref{fluct_hc}) for $c=1$. This suggests that higher particle-hole
processes, at least for quenches whose dynamics are restricted to the low energy post-quench Hilbert space, are unimportant.
In the introduction to this paper, we have billed these constructions as being quantum equivalents
to the quantum KAM theorem and its counterparts such as the Nekhoreshev estimates.
There are some similarities in the consequences of our constructions as well
as some dissimilarities. Nekhoreshev estimates tell us
that the values of the classical action variables in the face of a small non-integrable perturbation change only very slowly in time,
as controlled by both the size of the perturbation and the number of degrees of freedom (see Eqns. \ref{Nek1}
and \ref{Nek2}).
For the quantum case, we see something analogous but with certain differences. These differences arise both
because we are forming linear combinations of the originally conserved charges, and because of how in our
construction we segregate portions of the quantum phase (Hilbert) space. Nekhoreshev estimates apply to the entire
phase space of the weakly perturbed model (i.e. Eqn. \ref{Nek1} is good for any $p_i(t=0)$). In contrast, in our constructions,
the approximate time invariance of the charge is restricted to a portion of the low energy Hilbert space as marked
by the integer $N_{max}$ (this low energy Hilbert space is defined by states where none of the particles in the state
have momenta greater than $k_{max}=2\pi N_{max}/L$).
While we can make $N_{max}$ as large as we want (provided we are willing to make $N_Q$ correspondingly
large), we cannot take it to be infinite.
Another difference between the two constructions is the role played by the strength of the integrability breaking
perturbation. Here the Nekhoreshev estimates provide a bound on the temporal variation of
the original action variable going as a fractional power (a function of the system's degrees of freedom)
of the strength of the perturbation. We, in contrast, can construct effective charges, ${\pmb{\mathscr{Q}}}$, whose temporal variation is controlled
not directly by $A$, but $N_Q$ the number of Lieb-Liniger charges forming ${\pmb{\mathscr{Q}}}$.
To be sure if $A$ is large, $N_Q$ will need to be correspondingly larger in order to produce
the same minimum of temporal variation (see Eqn. \ref{strongA}).
\begin{figure}[b]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth]{fluct_para_to_para_cropped.pdf}
\end{center}
\caption{\label{fluct_ptop} We show that the fluctuations in the effective charges ${\pmb{\mathscr{Q}}}$ constructed from a quench from
a stronger to a weaker parabolic potential, like their parabola to cosine counterparts,
die out rapidly with $N_Q$. We consider two quenches of this type, one with
the gas at $c=7200$ and one with $c=10$. For the $c=7200$ case, we quench from a parabolic potential
with strength, $\omega_{0,init}$ given
by $m\omega_{0,init}^2L^2/2E_F = 6.48$ into a parabolic potential with strength $\omega_{0,fin}$
given by $m\omega_{0,fin}^2L^2/2E_F = 2.11$.
And for the $c=10$ case, we quench from a parabola described by $m\omega_{0,init}^2L^2/2E_F = 3.24$ into
one given by $m\omega_{0,fin}^2L^2/2E_F = 1.06$.}
\end{figure}
In constructing these charges the nature of the potential here is important. Our potential mixes the momenta of
different (unperturbed) eigenstates solely through the wavevector of the cosine potential. This is then considerably
different than the integrability breaking considered in Refs. \cite{yur_ols,olshanii} where they considered integrability that
respected no selection rules and correspondingly saw an extremely rapid crossover from quantum integrable to quantum chaoticity.
However this does not mean our construction of ${\pmb{\mathscr{Q}}}$ does not work if the potential
induces non-trivial mixing between wavevectors. To this end we considered preparing the system as normal in the ground
state of a parabolic potential but then instead of releasing the gas into a cosine potential, we released it into a weaker parabola.
In Fig. \ref{fluct_ptop} we show the fluctuations in ${\pmb{\mathscr{Q}}} (N_Q)$ as a function of the number, $N_Q$, of Lieb-Liniger charges
used to construct ${\pmb{\mathscr{Q}}}$. As with the release into the cosine
potential, we are able to construct a sequence of ${\pmb{\mathscr{Q}}} (N_Q)$ whose temporal fluctuations
die off rapidly with increasing $N_Q$. And although we do not show it, the off-diagonal matrix elements of these
charges fall off as rapidly as their cosine counterparts in Fig. \ref{off-diag-mes}.
\section{Experimental consequences}
\begin{figure}[t]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth]{Fig5_cropped.pdf}
\end{center}
\caption{\label{diag-mes}We plot the values of the diagonal matrix elements of
${\pmb{\mathscr{Q}}} (8)$ in the post-quench eigenbasis as derived for the $c=1$ quench discussed previously in
Figs. 3 and 4.}
\end{figure}
Having constructed these charges, we can ask what are the consequences of their existence. That they take non-zero values
on the eigenstates means that the long time dynamics of the gas post-quench is going to be constrained.
In this light, we have one way to understand the ``quantum Newton's cradle'' experiment presented in Ref. \cite{weiss}. As we
discussed in the introduction, it was argued there that the post-quench
dynamics of a gas were very slow to achieve equilibration and that this slowness was indicative of
the underlying integrability of the Lieb-Liniger model. However, strictly speaking, the gas in this experiment
was not integrable. The gas was confined in a one-body parabolic potential, a potential that breaks integrability \cite{note}.
Our construction of effective quasi-conserved charges in the presence of an integrability breaking one-body potential thus provides
a means to understand the slow thermalization of the gas post-quench in this experiment despite the presence of
integrability breaking. More generally, our construction helps explain the finding of \cite{rigol_fs,rigol_fs1} where weak
integrability breaking does not lead to immediate thermalization in finite systems.
In constructing these operators, it should be stressed that the operators we construct are local
(in the sense that they are spatial integrals over operators that are defined at a single point
in space).
This follows as the effective charges, ${\pmb{\mathscr{Q}}}$, are constructed as linear combinations of the Lieb-Liniger charges,
which are all local quantities. Thus we are not constructing, in effect, projection operators corresponding to eigenstates
of the post-quench gas. Such projection operators are necessarily always present in a model regardless of its
integrability. To demonstrate this we plot the diagonal matrix elements of the charges, ${\pmb{\mathscr{Q}}}$, which are linear
combinations of eight Lieb-Liniger charges and whose average
off-diagonal matrix elements are presented in Fig. \ref{diag-mes}. We see that these matrix elements are all ${\cal O}(1)$.
If the nearly conserved quantities are governing the long time dynamics of 1D Bose gases as in Ref. \cite{weiss}, a second question that
must be asked is whether this influence is merely confined to a pre-thermalization plateau or whether it influences
the dynamics of the gas at all times. There have been at least two constructions \cite{kollar,ess_rob} of quasi-conserved quantities
that are thought to govern pre-thermalization plateaus. Our construction is fundamentally different inasmuch as
the quasi-conserved operators are such for all times. This, in particular, implies that a modified form of Mazur's inequality \cite{mazur} holds.
This inequality relates the long time average of a correlation function $\lim_{t\rightarrow \infty}\langle {\cal O}(t){\cal O}(0)\rangle$
with the projection $\langle {\cal O}Q\rangle$ of the operators ${\cal O}$ onto conserved charges, $Q$. This inequality continues
to hold with quasi-conserved charges ${\pmb{\mathscr{Q}}}$ but with the addition of an error term that is proportional to the size of ${\pmb{\mathscr{Q}}}$'s off-diagonal
matrix elements (which, in our construction, can be made arbitrarily small), something immediately clear from the proof of Mazur's inequality found
in Ref. \cite{suzuki}. This implies that ${\pmb{\mathscr{Q}}}$ will control the long time limit of a host experimental observables in systems with
weak integrability breaking. We consider this further in the next subsection.
\begin{figure*}[t]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=1\textwidth]{mazur_cropped.pdf}
\end{center}
\caption{\label{Mazur}
The lower bounds on $\chi_k$ due to the effective charge ${\pmb{\mathscr{Q}}}$ for correlators involving the MDF and the density operators.
Lefthand panel: We plot the lower bound on MDF correlations for two different quenches. In the first (the left set of bars), we quench
into a cosine potential $V_{cos}\cos(2\pi x/L)$ of amplitude $V_{cos}=0.26E_F$. In the second (the right set of bars) we quench into a flat potential,
i.e. $V_{cos}=0$ with the post-quench Hamiltonian then integrable. We present $\chi_k$ for three different system sizes $N=L=4,8,$ and $16$
and three different values of $k$, $k_n = 2\pi n/L$, $n=0,1,$ and $2$. The initial state of the quench is given by the
ground state of a gas in a parabolic potential of strength $\omega = 2.4/N$. Righthand panel: We similarly plot the lower bound on
density correlations. Here we only consider the case of quenching into $V_{cos}=2$ as $\chi_k$ for the density operator is identically
zero in the absence of the breaking of translational invariance. We again compute the lower bound at three different system sizes and
three different wavevectors $k_1,k_2,$ and $k_3$. In both cases we see no obvious dependence on system size. We believe that the fluctuations seen between different system sizes results from the particular construction of ${\pmb{\mathscr{Q}}}$ at any given system size. We construct
${\pmb{\mathscr{Q}}}$ to minimize time fluctuations of a particular initial condition rather than construct it to maximize its overlap with a particular
observable as was done in Ref. \cite{olshaniiprl}.}
\end{figure*}
\subsection{${\pmb{\mathscr{Q}}}$ and Mazur's inequality}
To understand Mazur's inequality \cite{prosen_mazur} in the context of our effective charges, we adapt the argument
presented in Ref. \cite{suzuki} establishing this inequality in the context of thermal correlation functions.
To this end, we consider the following connected correlation function:
\begin{eqnarray}
\chi_k &=& \lim_{T\rightarrow \infty}\frac{1}{\langle M_k\rangle_{DE}}\bigg[\frac{1}{T^2} \int^T_0 dt dt_0\cr\cr
&& \hskip 0in \big(\langle M_k(t+t_0) M_k(t_0)\rangle -\langle M_k\rangle_{DE}^2\big)\bigg]^{1/2};\cr\cr
\langle M_k \rangle_{DE} &=& \lim_{T\rightarrow\infty}\frac{1}{T}\int^T_0 dt \langle M_k(t)\rangle.
\end{eqnarray}
For the case at hand, the most relevant operator, $M_k$, to consider
will be either the k-th Fourier component of the momentum distribution
function (MDF) operator, i.e.,
$$
M_k(t) = \psi^\dagger_k\psi_k ,
$$
or the density operator:
$$
M_k(t) = \frac{1}{L}\sum_q \psi^\dagger_{k+q}\psi_k ,
$$
where $\psi^\dagger_k$ is the k-th Fourier component of the Bose field.
Here we are averaging over both $t$ and $t_0$ in order to remove any dependence on the waiting time, $t_0$.
We have defined $\chi_k$ so that correlations are measured in units of $M_k$ computed in the long time limit, i.e.
in the diagonal ensemble.
We evaluate these correlation functions $\langle \cdots \rangle$ with respect to the initial condition of
the gas in the ground state of a parabolic trap, $|i\rangle =|\psi_{GS,para}\rangle$.
$\chi_k$ is non-zero only if there are correlations present in $M_k$ that survive the $t \rightarrow \infty$ limit, i.e.
\begin{eqnarray}
\lim_{t\rightarrow \infty}\langle i|M_k(t+t_0) M_k(t_0)|i\rangle \neq &&\cr\cr
&& \hskip -1.5in \lim_{t\rightarrow \infty}\langle i| M_k(t+t_0)|i\rangle\langle i|M_k(t_0)|i\rangle.
\end{eqnarray}
The presence of similar long time correlations are precisely what guarantees a finite Drude weight in transport in integrable
systems \cite{zotos}.
We demonstrate in Appendix C that a lower bound can be put on $\chi_k$ involving our effective charge ${\pmb{\mathscr{Q}}}$ of the form
\begin{eqnarray}
\chi_k \ge \frac{\langle i| M_k {\pmb{\mathscr{Q}}}_{diag}|i\rangle^2}{\langle i|{\pmb{\mathscr{Q}}}_{diag}^2|i\rangle} ,
\end{eqnarray}
where ${\pmb{\mathscr{Q}}}_{diag}$ is the diagonal part of the effective charge ${\pmb{\mathscr{Q}}}$. If our initial condition state
$|i\rangle =|\psi_{GS,para\rangle}$ is confined to the low energy Hilbert space where
${\pmb{\mathscr{Q}}}_{diag}$ and ${\pmb{\mathscr{Q}}}$ differ by off-diagonal matrix elements of size ${\cal O}(\delta)$, we can rewrite this inequality as
\begin{eqnarray}
\chi_k \ge \frac{\langle i| M_k {\pmb{\mathscr{Q}}} |i\rangle^2}{\langle i| {\pmb{\mathscr{Q}}}^2 |i\rangle} + {\cal O}(\delta),
\end{eqnarray}
as claimed at the end of the last subsection.
We now show that this lower bound arising from ${\pmb{\mathscr{Q}}}$ on $\chi_k$ is in fact finite. In Fig. \ref{Mazur} we plot this lower bound for
both correlations involving the MDF operator and the density operator. We study this lower bound at three different system sizes
and three different wavevectors. We see in all cases this lower bound is appreciable. For the MDF, the lower bound on $\chi_k$ is such
that the correlations in this quantity are at least roughly at the $10\%$ level. To determine whether this is significant, we compute a similar
lower bound for a quench where we release the gas into a flat potential (i.e. a quench for which ${\pmb{\mathscr{Q}}}$ is an exact conserved quantity). We
find values for the lower bound that are comparable to the quench into the cosine potential.
For the density operator, the lower bound for the long time correlations
is considerably larger than that for the MDF, being bounded by values of up to ${\cal O}(1)$. We thus see that our construction of ${\pmb{\mathscr{Q}}}$ acts to ensure that the system retains memory of its initial condition even at infinite time.
\section{Acknowledgements}
\begin{acknowledgements}
We would like to warmly thank both Marcos Rigol and Neil Robinson for
helpful discussions surrounding this work.
The research herein was supported by the
CMPMS Department, Brookhaven National Laboratory, in turn funded
by the U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Basic Energy Sciences,
under Contract No. DE-AC02-98CH10886 (RMK), by the National Science
Foundation under grant no. PHY 1208521 (RMK),
and by the Netherlands Organization for Scientific Research (NWO) and the Foundation for Fundamental Research on Matter (FOM) (JSC and GPB).
\end{acknowledgements}
|
\section{Introduction}
\label{Introduction}
The first run of the {\sc Lhc} ended without any direct evidence for New Physics (NP).
Analogously, precision measurements of flavour, electroweak and Higgs observables have all shown a remarkable agreement with the Standard Model (SM) predictions.
This situation casts doubts on naturalness of the Fermi scale, at least in its stricter sense~\cite{'tHooft:1979bh}, as \textit{the} guiding principle to build NP models and, ultimately, to provide a guidance for future experimental searches.
Other solutions to the hierarchy problem exist, that are not weakened by the absence of physics beyond the Standard Model (BSM) at current experiments, nor eventually at future ones.
One amounts to loose the requirement of naturalness, by assuming that gravity does not give large radiative corrections to the Higgs mass~\cite{Yoon:2002nt,Shaposhnikov:2007nj}.
While the viability of such an assumption is still a matter of inquiry~\footnote{See e.g.~\cite{Dubovsky:2013ira} for a two dimensional example and~\cite{Giudice:2013yca} for a more detailed discussion of this possibility.}, it opens interesting new avenues in model building: to be allowed, any NP has at least not to give large contributions to the Higgs mass~\cite{Farina:2013mla}.
Another solution consists in letting the parameters of the theory scan, in some sense, over an ensemble (a ``Multiverse'') of values, on which the measured ones are selected by a criterion, like the anthropic one (see \cite{Wilczek:2013lra} for a recent discussion).
Both these possibilities, at present, do not give by themselves any indication of where to expect NP to show up.
Such an indication may be provided, at the price of losing generality, by specific solutions to other problems of the Standard Model, like for example the nature of Dark Matter (DM). In this paper we will explore such a case, motivating an {\em electroweak fermion triplet} as a minimal candidate for weakly interacting massive particle (WIMP) Dark Matter. A mass in the multi-TeV range naturally arises in this scenario, which poses a challenge to detection. We will review the status of Direct and Indirect Detection searches, and explore in detail the phenomenology at future colliders.
With this last respect, the analysis we present constitutes a useful benchmark case. In fact, till now {\sc Atlas} and {\sc Cms} have mainly cast their searches for Dark Matter using an effective field theory language, also to allow for a simple comparison with the limits from Direct Detection experiments. Given the high center-of-mass energies, such a choice is at least questionable for the 8 TeV run of the {\sc Lhc}, and its domain of validity will further shrink at higher energies~\cite{Busoni:2013lha,Busoni:2014sya,Busoni:2014haa,Buchmueller:2013dya}. New ways of running the searches and
expressing the bounds will be a necessity, the main options being simplified and, indeed, benchmark models (see e.g.~\cite{Shoemaker:2011vi,Dreiner:2013vla,Chang:2013oia,An:2013xka,Bai:2013iqa,DiFranzo:2013vra,Papucci:2014iwa,deSimone:2014pda} for previous examples).
In particular, we will compute the exclusion reaches of the {\sc Lhc-14} with an integrated luminosity L~=~3 ab$^{-1}$, and of a 100 TeV $pp$ collider, for L~=~3 and 30 ab$^{-1}$. The project of such a high energy machine is under thorough discussion in the community, and we believe this study adds to the physics motivations for its realisation.
\medskip
The rest of the paper is organized as follows.
In Section~\ref{sec:motivations} we introduce explicitly the model and illustrate the reasons why it is interesting, as a DM candidate and beyond.
Section~\ref{sec:collider} contains our main results for the monojet, monophoton, vector boson fusion and disappearing tracks channels. We present in detail the analyses we have performed, as well as the link with previous literature on the subject.
In Section~\ref{sec:DDIDpheno} we briefly address the phenomenology of such a candidate concerning Direct and Indirect DM searches.
In Section~\ref{sec:conclusions} we summarize and conclude.
\section{The model: construction and motivations}
\label{sec:motivations}
We add to the Standard Model particle content a fermion $\chi$, triplet under the $SU(2)_L$ group and singlet under color and hypercharge ($Y=0$). We insist that all the possible interactions of $\chi$ with Standard Model particles have to preserve the gauge and accidental symmetries of the Standard Model, i.e. most notably lepton number or $B-L$\footnote{or even a discrete subgroup, like matter parity.}, under which $\chi$ is assumed to be neutral. This last requirement is crucial since it
forbids the presence of higher dimensional operator that could lead to a decay of $\chi$.
Hence, the phenomenologically relevant Lagrangian is very simple and reads
\begin{align}
\label{eq:Lagrangian}
\mathcal{L}_\chi &= \frac{1}{2}\,\bar{\chi}(i \slashed{D} - M_\chi) \chi \nonumber \\
& = \frac{1}{2}\,\bar{\chi_0}(i \slashed{\partial} - M_{\chi_0}) \chi_0 +\bar{\chi^+}(i \slashed{\partial} - M_{\chi^\pm}) \chi^+ \\
&+ g \left( \bar{\chi^+}\gamma_\mu \chi^+ (s_w A_\mu +c_w Z_\mu) + \bar{\chi^+}\gamma_\mu \chi_0 W_{\mu}^- + \bar{\chi_0}\gamma_\mu \chi^+ W_{\mu}^+
\right) \nonumber
\end{align}
where $g$ is the $SU(2)$ gauge coupling, and $s_w$ and $c_w$ are the sine and cosine of the Weinberg angle. The difference $M_{\chi^\pm}-M_{\chi_0}$ at the two-loop level is $164\div165$ MeV (stable to the level of 1 MeV for $M_{\chi_0} \gtrsim 1 $ TeV)~\cite{Ibe:2012sx}.
\bigskip
This minimalistic picture is directly inspired by the Minimal Dark Matter model~\cite{Cirelli:2005uq,Cirelli:2009uv}, which had already considered the phenomenology of EW multiplet as DM candidates. In that construction, however, the main focus had been dedicated to the 5-plet particle, which does not require the enforcement of $B-L$ for stability.
The triplet under examination here, on the other hand, possesses several virtues that make it very interesting, even beyond the DM motivation.
Let us schematize the main different reasons, both phenomenological and theoretical:
\begin{itemize}
\item[$\diamond$] With the enforcement of $B-L$, $\chi$ is automatically stable, making it a potential candidate to constitute part or all of the Dark Matter. \\
More precisely, if one requires that $\chi$ is thermally produced, via the standard freeze-out mechanism, and that it constitutes the whole of DM, then its mass $M$ is univocally determined to be $M \simeq 3.0 \div 3.2$ TeV (we adopt here the value from~\cite{Hryczuk:2014hpa}, which takes into account all higher order corrections, including the Sommerfeld enhancement).\\
Other ranges of masses, however, are also interesting. For $M \lesssim 3$ TeV, $\chi$ is a subdominant DM component if thermally produced, or it can still be the whole of DM if a non-thermal production history is assumed. For this region of mass, as we will see, collider searches are possible. For $M \gtrsim 3.2$ TeV non-thermal production has to be assumed to avoid the over closure of the universe. \\
In the following we will leave $M$ as a free parameter.
\item[$\diamond$] The presence of an EW multiplet changes the running of the Higgs quartic coupling ~\cite{Chao:2012mx}, increasing its value at higher energies. This helps to push the Higgs potential towards the stability regime, making it less uncomfortable. Moreover, the recent {\sc Bicep2} discovery~\cite{Ade:2014xna}, if confirmed, suggests that the EW vacuum in which we live in would have already decayed~\cite{Espinosa:2007qp,Kobakhidze:2013tn,Fairbairn:2014zia,Enqvist:2014bua,Kobakhidze:2014xda,Hook:2014uia} in a universe where the SM holds up to the instability scale $\Lambda = 10^{9\div11}$ GeV.
In this case, unless Planck suppressed corrections stabilise the vacuum during inflation~\cite{Hook:2014uia}, some new physics making the quartic Higgs coupling larger than zero would be needed. The introduction of an EW fermion triplet is one of the simplest possibilities (see e.g.~\cite{EliasMiro:2012ay,Chao:2012mx}) that address this issue.
\item[$\diamond$] The same EW triplet changes also the running of the gauge couplings, making $g_1$ and $g_2$ unify, at one loop, at a scale of $\simeq 10^{15}$ GeV (see e.g.~\cite{Giudice:2004tc, Frigerio:2009wf}). It is remarkable that the triplet is the only $SU(2)_L$ fermion multiplet that allows, if alone, such scale to lie between M$_{\rm GUT}$ and M$_{\rm Planck}$~\cite{Frigerio:2009wf}. Concerning two loops, the multiplet which suffers from the most severe one-loop cancellations is the quintuplet, and the two-loop corrections are expected to worsen its situation~\footnote{M.~Nardecchia et al., private communication, paper to appear.}. For the triplet they are expected to raise by a factor of $\sim$ 2 the scale of unification of $g_1$ and $g_2$~\cite{Frigerio:2009wf}. In any case, such a value for the scale of a grand unified theory, in its simplest realisations, would be already excluded by the severe bounds on proton decay (again, see e.g.~\cite{Giudice:2004tc}). However it is not difficult to imagine theoretical constructions that avoid this problem (see e.g.~\cite{Frigerio:2009wf} or~\cite{Mahbubani:2005pt}).
\item[$\diamond$] This minimal model has some interest also in relation to the hierarchy problem of the Fermi scale,
if one assumes that gravity does not influence its radiative stability, like proposed in~\cite{Shaposhnikov:2007nj,Yoon:2002nt} and recently reelaborated upon in~\cite{Farina:2013mla,Dubovsky:2013ira}. In fact values of $M_\chi \leq 3$ TeV would imply a fine-tuning in the Higgs mass value at a level of 10\% or better~\cite{Farina:2013mla}, more precisely $M_{\chi} < 1.0$ TeV$\times \sqrt{\Delta}$, with $\Delta$ the amount of fine-tuning. Notice that, to achieve the same small amount of fine-tuning, larger EW multiplets (like a quintuplet) would have to be much lighter.
This adds to the motivation for a `light' $\chi$.
\item[$\diamond$] Last but not least, this minimal model can be seen as a benchmark of the typical thermal-relic WIMP Dark Matter candidate, as we already mentioned. It is a prototype of more complicated models, and it can reproduce their low energy phenomenology to a remarkable accuracy. For example it effectively reproduces more complete unified models like~\cite{Frigerio:2009wf}, as well as a Supersymmetric spectrum in which a pure Wino is the lightest EW superpartner, a possibility that recently attracted lot of attention in different models of SUSY at higher scales~\cite{Wells:2003tf,ArkaniHamed:2004fb,Giudice:2004tc,Arvanitaki:2012ps,Hall:2011jd,Hall:2012zp,Hall:2013eko,Hall:2014vga}.
Here it is important to stress that the value of the mass splitting $M_{\chi^\pm}-M_{\chi_0}$, which is crucial for the phenomenology we will discuss, is robust against corrections from possible UV models. In fact, as remarked in~\cite{Ibe:2012sx}, the first operator that can induce a further splitting arises at dimension~7.
\end{itemize}
\section{Detection at 14 and 100 TeV $pp$ colliders}
\label{sec:collider}
In this Section we analyze the prospects for detection of the Wino-like Dark Matter candidate at proton-proton colliders.
We present an overview in Section \ref{sec:overview}, and describe the tools we use and our general strategy in Section \ref{sec:strategy}.
Finally, in Section \ref{sec:results} we present a detailed description of the analyses performed, and a discussion of their results.
\subsection{Overview}
\label{sec:overview}
Pair produced Dark Matter particles can be searched for in events with large missing transverse energy (\ensuremath{{\not\mathrel{E}}_T }) in association with hard SM radiation.
The channels typically considered are the so called ``mono-X'' ones, where X can be a highly energetic jet or photon, but also a W boson, a Z boson, a Higgs etc. Within this category, we will focus on the monojet and monophoton channels.
An additional strategy to look for Dark Matter in association with large \ensuremath{{\not\mathrel{E}}_T }\;is via vector boson fusion (VBF) processes. They are characterized by two forward jets with large invariant mass: these peculiar kinematical properties can be exploited to reduce the SM background and increase the sensitivity to Dark Matter particles with electroweak couplings.
We will include this channel in our analysis.
In the searches mentioned so far, the signal receives contribution not only from the neutral component of the electroweak multiplet, i.e. the Dark Matter candidate, but also from the electrically charged partner. Indeed, for the small mass splitting under consideration ($164\div165$ MeV), the charged component $\chi^{\pm}$ decays into $\chi_0$ and low-momentum charged pions $\pi^{\pm}$, which are not reconstructed at the {\sc Lhc}. Moreover its lifetime, $\tau \simeq 0.2$ ns, corresponds to a decay length at rest $d_0 = c \tau \simeq 6$ cm. Current detectors typically do not reconstruct charged tracks shorter than $\mathcal{O} (30)$ cm, therefore the bulk of the $\chi^{\pm}$ produced in partonic collisions contributes to the missing transverse momentum and energy of the events, in the same way as $\chi_0$.
Still, a small but non-negligible fraction of the $\chi^{\pm}$s, corresponding to the tail of the decay distribution, can travel enough to leave a track in the detector. These events would appear as high $p_T$ charged tracks ending inside the detector, once the $\chi^{\pm}$ decays into $\chi_0$ and soft undetected pions. At {\sc Lhc} with $\sqrt{s}=8$ TeV, searches of ``disappearing tracks'' provide the most sensitive probe of the scenario under consideration. The analysis presented by {\sc Atlas} in~\cite{Aad:2013yna} excludes $M_{\chi^{\pm}} <270$ GeV (95$\%$ CL) with $L=20.3$ fb$^{-1}$.
In this work we will study the expected sensitivity for disappearing tracks searches at future $pp$ colliders.
\medskip
Summarizing, we consider four possible channels to search for a stable fermion electroweak triplet:
monojet, monophotons, vector boson fusion and disappearing tracks. We compute the exclusion sensitivies for
\begin{itemize}
\item the {\sc Lhc} with a center of mass energy of $\sqrt{s}=14$ TeV and an integrated luminosity of $L=3$ ab$^{-1}$, which is expected to be delivered in the High Luminosity (HL) run,
\item a futuristic $pp$ collider operating at $\sqrt{s}=$100 TeV, for $L=3$ ab$^{-1}$ and $L=30$ ab$^{-1}$.
The latter benchmark of integrated luminosity has for instance already been considered in \cite{Cohen:2014hxa} for stop searches.
\end{itemize}
\subsection{Strategy}
\label{sec:strategy}
To perform our analysis we implement the model described by Eq.\eqref{eq:Lagrangian} in FeynRules 2.0~\cite{Alloul:2013bka}.
The events are simulated using MadGraph5~\cite{Alwall:2011uj} at the matrix element level and Pythia 6.4~\cite{Sjostrand:2006za}\footnote{We remark that Pythia does not (yet) include the effects of EW radiation, which might be important for a collider operating at $\sqrt{s} = 100$ TeV, as recently pointed out in\cite{Hook:2014rka}.}, included in the default MadGraph package, for showering and hadronization. We use the `cteq6l1' pdf set. We adopt Delphes 3 as a detector simulator~\cite{deFavereau:2013fsa}, using for definiteness the default $\mbox{delphes}\_\mbox{Cms}$ card \footnote{Some of the analyses have been repeated using the PGS detector simulator~\cite{pgs}. We find similar results.}.
\medskip
For each channel we simulate the most relevant SM backgrounds and the signal. Then, we investigate the most appropriate selection cuts on the kinematical variables in order to maximize the significance, which is computed as follows:
\begin{equation}
\mbox{Significance}= \frac{S}{\sqrt{B + \alpha^2 B^2 + \beta^2 S^2}}\,,
\label{eq:significance}
\end{equation}
where $S$ and $B$ are respectively the expected number of signal and background events passing the cuts.
In Eq.\eqref{eq:significance} we sum in quadrature the statistic and systematic uncertainties. We denote the latter ones as $\alpha$ for the background and $\beta$ for the signal. We then consider two possible scenarios: an optimistic one, corresponding to $\alpha = 1\%$, and a more conservative one, where we fix $\alpha = 5\%$. For the monojet and monophoton analyses, this second value is in line with the systematics quoted by current experimental searches, see~\cite{CMS-PAS-EXO-12-048,ATLAS-CONF-2012-147} and~\cite{CMS-PAS-EXO-12-047,Aad:2012fw} respectively. For the VBF analysis it instead corresponds to a moderate improvement with respect to the present situation, which we infer from invisible Higgs decay searches~\cite{Chatrchyan:2014tja}, given that analogous DM searches in VBF have not yet been published. For simplicity of exposition, we stick to the same value of 5\% also for this last analysis.
The disappearing tracks channel deserves special scrutiny, and we refer to Sect. \ref{Disappearing} for a discussion of the systematic uncertainties associated with the backgrounds.
Concerning the signals, we assume $\beta=10 \%$ for all the analyses under consideration, and this has only a marginal impact on our results.
\subsection{Analyses and results}
\label{sec:results}
\subsubsection{Monojet}
\label{Monojet}
Monojet searches require a hard central jet and large \ensuremath{{\not\mathrel{E}}_T }, and they have been performed at the 8 TeV {\sc Lhc} by the {\sc Atlas} and {\sc Cms} collaborations~\cite{CMS-PAS-EXO-12-048,ATLAS-CONF-2012-147}.
\smallskip
The signal is produced by processes like those in Fig.~\ref{Fig:diagrams_monoj}.
The dominant backgrounds are Z+jets with the Z boson decaying into neutrinos, and W+jets with the W decaying leptonically and the lepton is either undetected (too soft or close to the beam axis) or mistagged. Further background processes, which in~\cite{CMS-PAS-EXO-12-048,ATLAS-CONF-2012-147} account for less than $2 \%$ of the total event rate, are: $\mbox{t}\bar{\mbox{t}},$ Z($\ell \ell)$+jets, single t and QCD multijets. We discard these subdominant backgrounds from our analysis.
\smallskip
We first validate our simulation, matching one and two jets samples, against the analysis of Ref.~\cite{CMS-PAS-EXO-12-048} performed at 8 TeV with $L = 19.6$ fb$^{-1}.$ We find a good agreement in the expected number of Z($\nu\bar{\nu}$)+jets and W($\ell \nu$)+jets background events, after applying the analysis cuts.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.327\textwidth]{fig4a.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.327\textwidth]{fig4c.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.327\textwidth]{fig4b.pdf}
\caption{Illustration of some Feynman diagrams for monojet processes.}
\label{Fig:diagrams_monoj}
\end{figure}
\begin{table}[!t]
\vspace{.5 cm}
\centering
\renewcommand{\arraystretch}{1.2}
\renewcommand\tabcolsep{5pt}
\begin{tabular}
|r|ccc|} \hline
Cuts& 14 TeV & 100 TeV 3 ab$^{-1}$ & 100 TeV 30 ab$^{-1}$ \\ \hline
\ensuremath{{\not\mathrel{E}}_T } [TeV]& $0.8 -1.6$ & $3 - 7$ & $3 - 7$\\
$p_T(j_1)$ [TeV] &0.4 & 1.4 & 1.5 \\
$p_T(j_2)$ [GeV] & $50 - 250$ & $100 - 500$ & $100 - 500$ \\
$\eta_1$ & 2.2 & 2.2 & 2.2 \\
$\Delta \phi$ & 2.2 & 2.2 & 2.2 \\
$p_T(\ell)$ [GeV] & 20 & 20 & 20\\
$p_T(\tau)$ [GeV] & 30 & 40 & 40 \\ \hline
\end{tabular}\vspace{0.3cm}
\caption{\label{tab:monojet} Analysis cuts for the monojet search at 14 TeV and 100 TeV colliders.}
\end{table}
We simulate the backgrounds and the signal at 14 TeV and 100 TeV and, following the available experimental searches, we impose the following cuts:
\begin{itemize}
\item[$\circ$] we require missing transverse energy $>$ \ensuremath{{\not\mathrel{E}}_T } ,
\item[$\circ$] we require the jet to be hard, i.e. with transverse momentum $p_T>p_T(j_1),$ and central, i.e. with pseudorapidity $\eta< \eta_1$,
\item[$\circ$] a second jet with $p_T>p_T(j_2)$, $|\eta | < 4.5$, and azimuthal separation from the leading jet $< \Delta \phi$ is allowed, while additional jets are vetoed,
\item[$\circ$] events with leptons are vetoed if the lepton has $\eta < 2.5$ and $p_T > p_T(\ell)$ (electrons and muons), $p_T > p_T(\tau)$ (taus).
\end{itemize}
The analysis cuts are summarized in Table~\ref{tab:monojet}. Two of them, \ensuremath{{\not\mathrel{E}}_T } \;and $p_{T}(j_2)$, are left free to vary over the ranges specified in the table, while the others are fixed. For each mass $M_{\chi_0}$, we compute the sensitivities over the 2-D grid of \ensuremath{{\not\mathrel{E}}_T } \;-$pt(j_2)$ cuts, and then we select the largest one. We note that the best choice of the analysis cuts depends on the assumption for the systematic uncertainties of the background (i.e. 1\% or 5\%). In particular larger systematics typically demand tighter cuts, as expectable from the way the significance scale with the number of events \eqref{eq:significance}, different in the two cases of systematics- and statistics- domination.
The values of cuts which are kept fixed have been previously determined in a more complete scan, where they have all been left varying. A priori, the precise choice of those cuts that maximizes the sensitivity depends on the mass $M_{\chi_0}$ of the simulated signal. However we find that fixing those cuts, for all the masses, to the values reported in Table~\ref{tab:monojet} has a small impact on the final sensitivity. Therefore, for simplicity we fix their values for all the signal masses.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=10 cm]{Monojet.pdf}
\caption{Reach of monojet searches.}
\label{Fig:monojet}
\end{figure}
\medskip
The results are shown in Fig.~\ref{Fig:monojet}. The 95 \% CL reach of {\sc Lhc-14} with L~=~3~ab$^{-1}$ is at the level of $M_{\chi}\sim$ 350 or 150 GeV, depending on the choice of systematic uncertainty of the background (as previously discussed, we fix either 1\% or 5\%). We find that a 100 TeV collider can improve the reach of a factor 3-4 with respect to {\sc Lhc-14}. Systematic uncertainties play an important role in the determination of the sensitivity, especially at a 100 TeV collider. In particular raising the luminosity to L~=~30~ab$^{-1}$ would produce only a modest improvement of the sensitivity, for a systematic uncertainty of $\alpha=5$\%. However, it is not implausible that for such a high luminosity a better control of systematic uncertainties will be achieved.\\
Our findings are in good agreement with those of Ref.~\cite{Low:2014cba}, where the monojet reach has been quantified for 14 and 100 TeV $pp$ colliders with L~=~3~ab$^{-1}$.
\subsubsection{Monophoton}
\label{monophoton}
Monophoton searches at the {\sc Lhc} have been performed by the {\sc Atlas} and {\sc Cms} collaborations~\cite{CMS-PAS-EXO-12-047,Aad:2012fw}.
These analyses require a high $p_T$ photon in addition to large \ensuremath{{\not\mathrel{E}}_T }. Quality criteria and isolation requirements are imposed to the photon candidate.
The largest background comes from $\gamma Z(\bar{\nu} \nu)$ processes. Additional backgrounds include $\gamma W(\ell \nu)$, $W(\ell \nu)$, $\gamma$+jets, multijet, $\gamma Z(\ell \ell)$ and diphoton.
Signal processes are for instance those shown in Fig.~\ref{Fig:diagrams_monophoton}. Notice that a photon can also be radiated from the final state, as opposite to the cases where the hard SM radiation on which one tags is constituted of jets, and also to other DM candidates where charged states do not contribute to the signal.
\smallskip
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.327\textwidth]{fig5a.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.327\textwidth]{fig5b.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.327\textwidth]{fig5c.pdf}
\caption{Illustration of some Feynman diagrams for monophoton processes.}
\label{Fig:diagrams_monophoton}
\end{figure}
\begin{table}[!t]
\vspace{.5 cm}
\centering
\renewcommand{\arraystretch}{1.2}
\renewcommand\tabcolsep{5pt}
\begin{tabular}
|r|ccc|} \hline
Cuts& 14 TeV & 100 TeV 3 ab$^{-1}$ & 100 TeV 30 ab$^{-1}$ \\ \hline
\ensuremath{{\not\mathrel{E}}_T } [TeV]& $0.3 -1$ & $1 - 3$ & $1 - 3.5$\\
$p_T(\gamma)$ [GeV] & $200 - 500$ & $500 - 700$ & $500 - 700$ \\
$\eta_{\gamma}$ & 1.45 & 1.45 & 1.45 \\
$\Delta \phi$ & 2 & 2 & 2 \\
$p_T(j)$ [GeV] & 30 & 100 & 100 \\
$p_T(\ell)$ [GeV] & 20 & 20 & 20\\
$p_T(\tau)$ [GeV] & 30 & 40 & 40 \\ \hline
\end{tabular}\vspace{0.3cm}
\caption{\label{tab:monophoton} Analysis cuts for the monophoton search at 14 TeV and 100 TeV colliders.}
\end{table}
We first compare our procedure, which includes matching with the case of one extra jet, with the {\sc Cms} analysis at 8 TeV with $L =~19.6$ fb$^{-1}$~\cite{CMS-PAS-EXO-12-047}. The cuts that we implement are listed below (the precise values that we choose are those of~\cite{CMS-PAS-EXO-12-047}).
While we find good agreement for the background $\gamma W(\ell \nu)$, our estimate for the $\gamma Z(\bar{\nu} \nu)$ one is a factor 1.35 larger than that in~\cite{CMS-PAS-EXO-12-047}. This could be due to the fact
that we are missing some selection cuts on the photon that are particularly difficult to implement in our analysis. Similar results have been found in the phenomenological studies~\cite{Fox:2011pm,Hagiwara:2012we}.
For the projections at 14 TeV and 100 TeV colliders, we compute the background events including only $\gamma Z(\bar{\nu} \nu)$ and $\gamma W(\ell \nu)$ processes (which in the {\sc Cms} analysis at 8 TeV account for $\sim 75 \%$ of the total background events~\cite{CMS-PAS-EXO-12-047}). We therefore caution that some degree of uncertainty in the background estimation is present in our analysis. Still our computations should be a reasonable estimate of the potential reach of future hadron colliders with the monophoton search.
\smallskip
The analysis cuts that we impose are:
\begin{itemize}
\item[$\circ$] we require missing transverse energy $>$ \ensuremath{{\not\mathrel{E}}_T },
\item[$\circ$] we identify the leading photon as the one with the highest $p_T$ among those that have $p_T>p_T(\gamma)$ and pseudorapidity $|\eta|<\eta_{\gamma}$,
\item[$\circ$] the angular separation between the photon and \ensuremath{{\not\mathrel{E}}_T } \;should be larger than $\Delta \phi$,
\item[$\circ$] we discard events with more than one jet that has: i) $p_T>p_T(j)$, ii) $\eta<4.5$, iii) angular distance from the photon $\Delta R > 0.5$,
\item[$\circ$] events with leptons are vetoed if the lepton is $\Delta R>$0.5 away from the photon, and if it has $\eta < 2.5$ and $p_T > p_T(\ell)$ (electrons and muons), $p_T > p_T(\tau)$ (taus).
\end{itemize}
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=10 cm]{Monophoton.pdf}
\caption{Reach of monophoton searches.}
\label{Fig:monophoton}
\end{figure}
Table~\ref{tab:monophoton} summarizes the values of the cuts chosen. The $p_T$ of the photon and \ensuremath{{\not\mathrel{E}}_T } \;are scanned over the ranges specified in Table~\ref{tab:monophoton}. For each Dark Matter mass we compute the sensitivity for the points of the 2-D grid of cuts, and we select the maximal value. As for the monojet case, the values we kept fixed were preliminary determined scanning on a higher dimensional grid, which included $\eta_\gamma$, $\Delta \phi$ and $p_T(j)$.
\smallskip
Fig.~\ref{Fig:monophoton} shows our results. A 14 TeV collider will reach a 95 \% CL sensitivity for Dark Matter masses at the level of 200 or 100 GeV, depending on the choice of the systematic uncertainties (we recall that for the background systematics we choose either 1 or 5 \%).
We find that the reach at 100 TeV with L~=~3 ab$^{-1}$ will extend by a factor of 3-4 in mass, and that again a control of systematic uncertainties will play a crucial role in exploiting the potential of possible higher integrated luminosities. Among the searches that we analyse, the monophoton one turns out to be that with the lowest mass reach.
\subsubsection{Vector boson fusion}
\label{VBF}
Vector boson fusion processes have been investigated by the {\sc Cms} collaboration at {\sc Lhc-8} in order to search for invisible decay channels of the Higgs boson~\cite{Chatrchyan:2014tja}.
This channel can be exploited also to look for Dark Matter particles with electroweak interactions, like the candidate we are considering.
VBF processes are characterized by two forward jets in opposite hemispheres (i.e. well separated in pseudorapidity), and with a large invariant mass. Cuts on these variables as well as the requirement of large \ensuremath{{\not\mathrel{E}}_T }\;are used in order to reduce the SM background.
Examples of diagrams relevant for this search\footnote{Notice that, despite the conventional name of the channel, also diagrams not properly originating from two vector bosons contribute to the signal (and also background) events.} are shown in Fig.~\ref{Fig:diagrams_VBF}.
The dominant backgrounds result from Z($\nu\bar{\nu}$)+jets and W($\ell \nu$)+jets (where the lepton is lost) events. For example in the search of {\sc Cms} at 8 TeV~\cite{Chatrchyan:2014tja} they constitute $\sim$ 85\% of the total.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.327\textwidth]{fig6a.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.327\textwidth]{fig6b.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.327\textwidth]{fig6c.pdf}\\ [5 mm]
\includegraphics[width=0.327\textwidth]{fig6d.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.42\textwidth]{fig6e.pdf}
\caption{Illustration of some Feynman diagrams for VBF processes.}
\label{Fig:diagrams_VBF}
\end{figure}
\begin{table}[!t]
\vspace{.5 cm}
\centering
\renewcommand{\arraystretch}{1.2}
\renewcommand\tabcolsep{5pt}
\begin{tabular}{|r|ccc|} \hline
Cuts& 14 TeV & 100 TeV 3 ab$^{-1}$ & 100 TeV 30 ab$^{-1}$ \\ \hline
\ensuremath{{\not\mathrel{E}}_T } [TeV]& $0.4-0.7$ & $1.5 - 5.5$ & $1.5 - 5.5$ \\
$p_T(j_{12})$ [GeV] & 40 (1\%),\, 60 (5\%) & 150 & 200\\
$M_{jj}$ [TeV] & 1.5 (1\%),\, 1.6 (5\%) & 6 (1\%),\, 7 (5\%) & 7\\
$\Delta \eta_{12}$ & 3.6 & 3.6 & 3.6 (1\%),\, 4 (5\%)\\
$\Delta \phi$ & $1.5 - 3$ & $1.5 - 3$ & $1.5 - 3$\\
$p_T(j_3)$ [GeV] & 25 & 60 & 60\\
$p_T(\ell)$ [GeV] & 20 & 20 & 20\\
$p_T(\tau)$ [GeV] & 30 & 40 & 40 \\ \hline
\end{tabular}\vspace{0.3cm}
\caption{\label{tab:VBF} Analysis cuts for the VBF search at 14 TeV and 100 TeV colliders.}
\end{table}
\smallskip
We simulate the Z($\nu\bar{\nu}$)+jets and W($\ell \nu$)+jets backgrounds as well the signal for different Dark Matter masses at 14 and 100 TeV. As a check, we verify that we reproduce with good agreement the background counts of~\cite{Chatrchyan:2014tja}.
Like for the case of the monojet analysys, we first scan over several cuts on the kinematical variables, in order to optimize the sensitivity to the DM signal. We then identify the cuts which are more relevant to determine the sensitivity for different Dark Matter masses (which we find to be \ensuremath{{\not\mathrel{E}}_T } \;and, to a lower extent, tha azimuthal separation of the leading jets $\Delta \phi$), and for simplicity we fix the remaining ones.
The final analysis cuts are the following:
\begin{itemize}
\item[$\circ$] we require missing transverse energy $>$ \ensuremath{{\not\mathrel{E}}_T },
\item[$\circ$] we require two leading jet, defined as those with the largest $p_T$, each of them satisfying $p_T>p_T(j_{12})$ and $|\eta|<4.5$ .
\item[$\circ$] the two leading jets should also be well separated in pseudorapidity, $| \Delta \eta |>\Delta \eta_{12}$ and $\eta_1 \cdot \eta_2<$0
\item[$\circ$] they should have a high invariant mass $M_{j_1 j_2}> M_{jj}$,
\item[$\circ$] and their azimuthal separation should not exceed $\Delta \phi$,
\item[$\circ$] we reject events with additional jets satisfing $p_T>p_T(j_3)$, $|\eta|< 4.5$ and pseudorapidity between the two tagged jets,
\item[$\circ$] events with leptons are vetoed if the lepton has $\eta < 2.5$ and $p_T > p_T(\ell)$ (electrons and muons), $p_T > p_T(\tau)$ (taus).
\end{itemize}
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=10 cm]{VBF.pdf}
\caption{Reach of VBF searches.}
\label{Fig:VBF}
\end{figure}
The analysis cuts are shown in Table~\ref{tab:VBF}. For each value of the Dark Matter mass we scan over the ranges of values of $\ensuremath{{\not\mathrel{E}}_T }$ \;and $\Delta\phi$ in Table~\ref{tab:VBF} and we identify the maximal sensitivity.
The results are shown in Fig.~\ref{Fig:VBF}. The 95 \% CL reach at a 14 TeV collider is at the level of 250 and 100 GeV, respectively for 1\% and 5\% systematics. For the same range of the systematics, the reach of a 100 TeV collider is found to lie between 500 and 900 GeV (L~=~3 ab$^{-1}$), and 800 and 1300 GeV (L~=~30 ab$^{-1}$)
The VBF search appears somehow less promising than the monojet one. Still, over a wide range of masses, a possible discovery in the monojet channel would also be confirmed with VBF processes. This will be a precious piece of information in order to constrain the properties of a possible future Dark Matter signal.
We finally note that our expected sensitivities are significantly lower than those found in~\cite{Delannoy:2013ata}, where the reach of the VBF channel for Winos has been analysed at the {\sc Lhc-14}. While we have not been able to ultimately trace back the origin of this discrepancy, it can be useful to mention two of the several checks we performed: i) this difference is not simply ascribable to the fact that, in~\cite{Delannoy:2013ata}, systematics effects have been neglected, ii) we obtain a higher background count at high \ensuremath{{\not\mathrel{E}}_T }\;cuts.
\subsubsection{Disappearing Tracks}
\label{Disappearing}
Disappearing tracks signatures have received significant attention in the context of SUSY Winos~\cite{Feng:1994mq,Feng:1999fu,Gunion:1999jr,Gunion:2001fu,Barr:2002ex,Ibe:2006de,Buckley:2009kv,Kane:2012aa,Low:2014cba}.
As mentioned in Section~\ref{sec:collider}, searches at {\sc Lhc-8} exclude $M_{\chi^{\pm}} <270$ GeV at 95$\%$ CL.
The analysis has been performed by the {\sc Atlas} collaboration using 20.3 fb$^{-1}$ of data~\cite{Aad:2013yna}.
This search requires large \ensuremath{{\not\mathrel{E}}_T }, a jet with large $p_T$ to trigger the signal event, and at least a track with high $p_T.$
The candidate track should satisfy additional criteria, for instance to ensure well reconstruction and isolation.
The background originates from charged hadrons interacting with the inner detector, unidentified leptons (lepton tracks) and charged particles with highly mismeasured $p_T$. In the {\sc Atlas} analysis, the latter background is largely the dominant one for $p_T$ of the track ($x=p_T^{track}$) higher than 100 GeV, and it is found to be fitted by a power law $d\sigma/dx \propto x^{-a},$ with $a=1.78\pm 0.05.$
The expected background events are not estimated, in the experimental analysis, by means of MC simulations. Rather the $p_T$ shape for the different sources of background is identified using data in appropriate control regions. Then, to determine the reach of this search, the observed $p_T$ distribution of the tracks is fitted with the signal and background templates.
\smallskip
For these reasons, a precise determination of the sensitivity of this channel at future colliders looks particularly complicated.
Following~\cite{Low:2014cba} we adopt instead a simple prescription. We assume the background will still be dominated by charged particles with highly mismeasured $p_T$, and we take the power law behaviour of the $p_T^{track}$ distribution previously mentioned. We fix the normalization by matching with the number of observed events in~\cite{Aad:2013yna}. Then, we assume that the bulk of the background is originated by $Z(\nu\bar{\nu})$+jets processes. We extrapolate the 8 TeV background at other center of mass energies in the following way: we extract the background cross section at 8 TeV, and we rescale it at higher energies with the ratio of the $Z(\nu\bar{\nu})$+jets cross-sections at those energies, computed with the appropriate analysis cuts (see below the cuts considered for 14 TeV and 100 TeV colliders and~\cite{Aad:2013yna} for those at 8 TeV).
In order to account for the large uncertainties introduced with this procedure, the sensitivity is estimated also for two extreme cases, corresponding to a further multiplication of the background events by a factor of 5 and 1/5.
One could also estimate the uncertainty on the background events varying the index $a$ of the $p_T^{track}$ distribution. We checked that changing $a$ around $\pm 5 \sigma$ from its central value, produces a smaller uncertainty band than the method that we have adopted.
\smallskip
For the signal we perform our analysis simulating events with $\chi^{\pm}$ and a jet with MadGraph and Pythia, including matching with the case of one extra jet. For the sake of illustration, we show some channels for signal production in Fig.\ref{Fig:diagrams_monoj}. These processes are common also to monojet searches. However, we remind that in this analysis the $\chi^{\pm}$ is required to decay well inside the detector.
In our analysis, the $\chi^{\pm}$ decays are simulated with an exponential decay law, with the lifetime $\tau$ computed in~\cite{Ibe:2012sx}. The radial distance travelled by the track in the laboratory frame, $d$, is then $d=\beta \gamma c \tau.$
Finally, we apply the following cuts, which follow those in~\cite{Aad:2013yna}:
\begin{table}[!t]
\centering
\renewcommand{\arraystretch}{1.2}
\renewcommand\tabcolsep{5pt}
\begin{tabular}{|r|ccc|} \hline
Cuts& 14 TeV & 100 TeV 3 ab$^{-1}$ & 100 TeV 30 ab$^{-1}$ \\ \hline
\ensuremath{{\not\mathrel{E}}_T } \;[TeV]& 0.22 & 1.4 & 1.4 \\
$p_T(j_{1})$ [TeV] & 0.22 & 1.0 & 1.0 \\
$\eta(j_{1})$ & 2.8 & 2.8 & 2.8\\
$p_T(j_2)$ [GeV] & 70 & 500 & 500\\
$p_T^{track}$ [TeV] & 0.32 & 2.1 & 2.1\\ \hline
\end{tabular}\vspace{0.3cm}
\caption{\label{tab:disappearing} Analysis cuts for the disappearing track search at 14 TeV and 100 TeV colliders.}
\end{table}
\begin{itemize}
\item[$\circ$] we require missing transverse energy $>$ \ensuremath{{\not\mathrel{E}}_T },
\item[$\circ$] we require at least one jet with $p_T>p_T(j_{1})$ and $|\eta|<\eta(j_{1})$,
\item[$\circ$] we compute the azimuthal separation between the leading jet and \ensuremath{{\not\mathrel{E}}_T }, $\Delta \phi^{j-\ensuremath{{\not\mathrel{E}}_T }}$.
If the event contains multiple jets with $p_T>p_T(j_2)$, we consider also $\Delta \phi^{j-\ensuremath{{\not\mathrel{E}}_T }}$ of the second jet. The smallest $\Delta \phi^{j-\ensuremath{{\not\mathrel{E}}_T }}$ is then used. The event is required to have $\Delta \phi^{j-\ensuremath{{\not\mathrel{E}}_T }}>1.5$.
\item[$\circ$] The event is required to contain at least one track with $p_T>p_T^{track}$ and $0.1<|\eta|<1.9$,
\item[$\circ$] the track should be isolated, therefore we reject events with jets residing in a cone of $\Delta R<0.4$ around the track and with $p_T>p_T(j_2),$
\item[$\circ$] the track should have a radial length $30<d<80$ cm in order to be properly reconstructed by the tracker,
\item[$\circ$] events with reconstructed electrons and muons are vetoed.
\end{itemize}
We first simulate the signal at 8 TeV with $L = 20.3$ fb$^{-1}$, and we apply the cuts of~\cite{Aad:2013yna}. The number of signal events is then matched to the value in~\cite{Aad:2013yna} multiplying for an efficiency $\epsilon,$ that we find to be $\epsilon=0.51$.
We use this efficiency also for the analysis at 14 and 100 TeV colliders. The analysis cuts we use are shown in Table~\ref{tab:disappearing}. We have determined them by scanning on a 3-D grid in \ensuremath{{\not\mathrel{E}}_T }\,, $p_T^{track}$ and $p_T(j_{1})$, and choosing those that gave a high sensitivity without reducing the event counts below the level of a few. The sensitivity is computed fixing $\alpha=20 \%$ and $\beta=10 \%$ in eq.~\ref{eq:significance}.
The results are shown in Fig.~\ref{Fig:DisTracks} , with the band referring to the two choices of background estimation (i.e. the expected number of background events is multiplied or divided by a factor 5). In each band, we also show a dashed line corresponding to the central value for the background, i.e. in the absence of factors of 5. Among the searches we have considered, disappearing tracks are the most promising. At a 100 TeV collider they have a good chance to probe the thermal Dark Matter scenario, i.e. $M_{ \chi_{0}}\sim 3$ TeV. We checked that we obtain good agreement with~\cite{Low:2014cba}, which performed the same analysis at 14 and 100 $pp$ colliders for L~=~3 ab$^{-1}$. Our sensitivities in Fig.~\ref{Fig:DisTracks} are higher because of the use of more stringent cuts.
We finally remark that, at future colliders, the reach of this channel will likely benefit by extending tracks reconstruction below the current $\sim 30$ cm value. Due to our method for estimating the background, it was not possible here to address more quantitatively this expectation.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=10 cm]{DisappearingTracks.pdf}
\caption{Reach of disappearing tracks searches}
\label{Fig:DisTracks}
\end{figure}
\newpage
\section{Direct and Indirect Detection}
\label{sec:DDIDpheno}
In this Section we briefly review the constraints and perspectives for Direct and Indirect searches. We do not aim, however, at a comprehensive analysis, that we leave for upcoming work.
We remind that the constraints considered here depend on the assumption that $\chi$ makes the whole of the DM in the Universe. If that is not the case, the bounds can be relaxed.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.327\textwidth]{fig1a}
\includegraphics[width=0.327\textwidth]{fig1b}
\includegraphics[width=0.327\textwidth]{fig1c} \\
\includegraphics[width=0.327\textwidth]{fig2a}
\includegraphics[width=0.327\textwidth]{fig2b}
\includegraphics[width=0.327\textwidth]{fig2c}
\caption{\label{fig:DD}Illustration of the main 1-loop and 2-loops diagrams relevant for the computation of the scattering cross section on nuclei in Direct Detection.}
\end{figure}
\paragraph{Direct Detection.} The scattering on nuclei, relevant for Direct Detection (DD), proceeds at higher loops for this candidate, since the lack of coupling with the $Z$ boson and the Higgs forbids tree level t-channel diagrams~\cite{Cirelli:2005uq}. At one loop the process proceeds via the exchange of a box of $W$ bosons or a $W$ and a Higgs. At 2-loops, the scattering with the gluons in the nucleons becomes possible via a quark loop. See fig.~\ref{fig:DD} for an illustration.
The computation is rather involved, due to subtle cancellations which occur between different operators (notably contributing to the 1-loop diagrams, which makes the inclusion of 2-loops necessary). It has been discussed over the years in~\cite{Cirelli:2005uq,Essig:2007az,Hisano:2010ct,Hisano:2011cs,Hill:2011be,Hisano:2012wm,Farina:2013mla,DelNobile:2013sia,Hill:2013hoa,Hill:2014yka}.
The most recent explicit computation, reported in~\cite{Hill:2013hoa} and based on~\cite{Hill:2014yka}, is performed in the framework of the `heavy WIMP effective theory' and therefore assumes $m_W,m_h \ll M_\chi$. It yields
\begin{equation}
\label{Sigma_ID}
\sigma_{\rm SI} = 1.3^{+1.3}_{-0.6} \cdot 10^{-47} {\rm cm}^2 .
\end{equation}
This value is unfortunately below the sensitivity of the current DD experiment and, for $M_\chi \gtrsim 1~{\rm TeV}$, also below the reach of the next generation~\cite{Cushman:2013zza}. For multi-TeV mass it is also dangerously close to the `WIMP discovery limit' imposed by the neutrino background. The prospects for detection via DD are therefore dim.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.327\textwidth]{fig3a}
\includegraphics[width=0.327\textwidth]{fig3b}
\includegraphics[width=0.327\textwidth]{fig3c}
\caption{\label{fig:ID}Illustration of the main tree-level and 1-loop diagrams relevant for annihilation signals in Direct Detection.}
\end{figure}
\paragraph{Indirect Detection.} The DM triplet annihilates at tree level into $W^+W^-$ and into three-body states with an internally irradiated photon. At 1-loop annihilations into $\gamma\gamma$ arise (see fig.~\ref{fig:ID} for an illustration). These processes give origin to fluxes of secondary particles which would constitute exotic contributions on top of the ordinary astrophysical fluxes, and which are therefore constrained by current observations.
Detailed analyses have been performed in~\cite{Cohen:2013ama}, \cite{Fan:2013faa} and \cite{Hryczuk:2014hpa}. According to the latter, the most relevant bounds come from antiproton and gamma-ray line measurements. Antiprotons are abundantly produced in the $WW$ DM annihilation channel and the measurements by the {\sc Pamela} satellite~\cite{Adriani:2010rc,Adriani:2012paa} significantly constrain any exotic component. However, the DM predictions are highly sensitive to the propagation model adopted for charged particles in the Galaxy, in particular to the thickness of the containment halo inside which cosmic rays diffuse. Ref.~\cite{Hryczuk:2014hpa} finds that antiprotons exclude the range $M_\chi \lesssim 1$ TeV and $1.9\ {\rm TeV} \lesssim M_\chi \lesssim 2.65$ TeV if a very thick (20 kpc) diffusive halo is assumed, while only the portions $M_\chi \lesssim 400$ GeV and 2.21 TeV $< M_\chi <$ 2.46 TeV are ruled out if the halo is as thin as 1 kpc. Both choices are probably rather unrealistic but they generously bracket the current uncertainty.
A similar situation occurs for lines (or sharp features) in the gamma-ray spectrum, originated by the rightmost two diagrams in fig.~\ref{fig:ID}. These limits are very sensitive to the choice of DM distribution profile in the Galactic Center (GC) region. Ref.~\cite{Hryczuk:2014hpa} finds that the exclusion contours from the {\sc Hess} search for lines in the GC~\cite{Abramowski:2013ax} rule out the whole range $M_\chi \lesssim 500$ GeV and $1.7\ {\rm TeV} \lesssim M_\chi \lesssim 3.5$ TeV if a benchmark Einasto profile is chosen\footnote{Both antiproton- and gamma lines- searches probe the relatively low mass region and the range around a resonance in the annihilation cross section, which is due to the Sommerfeld enhancement.}. However, if a (rather implausible) Burkert profile with a very large core is adopted, only the portion $2.25\ {\rm TeV} \lesssim M_\chi \lesssim 2.45$ TeV can be excluded.
\medskip
In the near future, {\sc Cta} should be able to significantly improve on line searches for the GC region~\cite{Doro:2012xx,Wood:2013taa}, by probing annihilation cross sections smaller than $10^{-26} {\rm cm}^3/{\rm s}$ on most of the mass range.\footnote{However, it has been claimed that a proper accounting of systematic uncertainties and of diffuse emission might make the task more difficult than foreseen~\cite{Silverwood:2014yza}.}
Concerning antiprotons, some improvement should come from upcoming {\sc Ams-02} data~\cite{Cirelli:2013hv}. Increased sensitivity could also come from {\sc Fermi-LAT} and {\sc Gamma-400} observation of dwarf galaxies~\cite{Bhattacherjee:2014dya}.
\section{Conclusions and outlook}
\label{sec:conclusions}
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{summary}
\caption{\label{fig:summary} Indication of the current bounds and future prospects for the electroweak triplet Dark Matter candidate. Solid contours show the current bounds. Dashed contours refer to the reach of future experiments. For the collider analysis we have considered the 95 \% CL sensitivity. For definiteness, at a 100 TeV collider we show the reach for L~=~3~ab$^{-1}$ and 1\% of background systematics. As discussed in the text, for disappearing tracks the estimate of the background at future colliders is particularly challenging. In this case, the reach refers to a moderate choice of the background uncertainty (the dashed line in Fig.~\ref{Fig:DisTracks}).}
\end{figure}
Searches of New Physics at {\sc Lhc} have been unfruitful so far. The lack of evidence of new particles and interactions at the TeV scale puts tension to {\textit{natural}} extensions of the SM, i.e. scenarios conceived to address the hierarchy problem of the electroweak scale. It is certainly premature to abandon naturalness as a criterion to approach NP. Still, it is worth considering different attitudes, for instance focussing on other open questions and investigate possible solutions in the context of NP models.
\smallskip
In particular understanding the nature of Dark Matter is one of the most pressing challenges of modern astroparticle physics.
Here we investigate a simple solution to this problem, inspired by the Minimal Dark Matter approach \cite{Cirelli:2005uq,Cirelli:2009uv}. We consider an electroweak fermion triplet as a Dark Matter candidate. Its stability is automatic if the accidental $B-L$ symmetry of the SM, or a discrete subgroup of it, is respected by NP interactions. This particle is a prototype of a WIMP candidate and it achieves the correct relic abundance for $M_{\chi}\sim 3.0-3.2$ TeV. Different masses are also viable in presence of non-thermal production mechanisms, in non-standard cosmological scenarios or simply
if the candidate accounts only for a fraction of the Dark Matter abundance.
\smallskip
As exposed in Section \ref{sec:motivations}, this minimal extention of the SM has additional attractive features. An electroweak triplet at the TeV scale can influence the running of the quartic coupling of the Higgs, stabilizing the Higgs vacuum. Moreover, it does not introduce large radiative corrections to the Higgs mass, and it helps to achieve the unification of the gauge couplings. This particle emerges also in more general scenarios, like SUSY models~\cite{Wells:2003tf,ArkaniHamed:2004fb,Giudice:2004tc,Arvanitaki:2012ps,Hall:2011jd,Hall:2012zp,Hall:2013eko,Hall:2014vga}, GUT constructions~\cite{Frigerio:2009wf}, and also in other contexts~\cite{Ma:2008cu,Hirsch:2013ola}.
\smallskip
Searches of this Dark Matter candidate with Direct Detection experiments are challenging, since the loop-induced scattering cross-section off nuclei is very small, well below the sensitivity of current experiments.
Indirect Detection strategies are more promising. Gamma-rays and anti-protons observations exclude the range $M_{\chi} \lesssim 1$ TeV and $1.7\ {\rm TeV} \lesssim M_{\chi} \lesssim 3.5$ TeV, although we remind that these limits are subject to large astrophysical uncertainties. Moreover they hold under the assumption that the electroweak fermion triplet accounts for all of the observed Dark Matter abundance.
Likely, new astrophysical observations will improve current Indirect Detection bounds in the near future.
\smallskip
In this work we have studied the reach of future proton colliders for the electroweak fermion triplet. We have focussed on two scenarios: {\sc Lhc} at $\sqrt{s}=$14 TeV with L~=~3~ab$^{-1}$ and a futuristic $\sqrt{s}=$ 100 TeV collider. For the latter case we have considered two benchmark luminosities, L~=~3~ab$^{-1}$ and L~=~30~ab$^{-1}$.
We have studied four channels: monojet, monophoton, VBF processes and disappearing tracks.
Disappearing tracks are the most promising probe of this scenario. At the HL {\sc Lhc-14} they will be able to test masses $M_{\chi}\lesssim 500$ GeV.
In agreement with~\cite{Low:2014cba}, we have found that a 100 TeV collider can potentially cover a range of mass up to the thermal Dark Matter one.
Among the other searches, monojet are the most powerful. The potential reach (we refer to 95 \% CL) at a 100 TeV collider is around $M_{\chi} \sim 1.3$ TeV with L~=~3~ab$^{-1}$ and $M_{\chi} \sim 1.7$ TeV with L~=~30~ab$^{-1}.$ This estimate is based on an optimistic assumption on the systematic uncertainties on the background, i.e. 1\%. We have found that for a more conservative choice, i.e. 5\%, the reach reduces significantly (around $M_{\chi} \sim 500$ GeV). Similar conclusions have been obtained for VBF and monophoton searches, with however slightly smaller reaches.
Other potential channels that could be interesting include mono-$Z$ and mono-$W$. They will be a valuable avenue for future searches, even if, for this scenario, they are not expected to have a reach better than the one of monojet \cite{Anandakrishnan:2014exa}.
\bigskip
We conclude summarizing our results in Fig.~\ref{fig:summary}. In this plot we compare the sensitivities of direct, indirect and collider searches. The reach of direct searches is quite modest (the future LZ experiment could possibly cover the region $M_{\chi}\lesssim600$ GeV~\cite{Cushman:2013zza}). Indirect searches constrain either the low mass or the high mass region (the latter thanks to the presence of the Sommerfeld enhancement).
We have found that collider searches have the potential to fill the gap, especially with disappearing tracks. Monojet, VBF and monophoton searches will provide complementary information.
\footnotesize{
\paragraph{Acknowledgements}
We thank Chiara Arina, Brando Bellazzini, Marc Besan\c con, Claude Guyot and Valerio Rossetti for useful discussions. We acknowledge the hospitality of the Institut d'Astrophysique de Paris, where part of this work was done.
Funding and research infrastructure acknowledgements:
\begin{itemize}
\item[$\ast$] European Research Council ({\sc Erc}) under the EU Seventh Framework Programme (FP7 2007-2013)/{\sc Erc} Starting Grant (agreement n.\ 278234 --- `{\sc NewDark}' project) [work of MC, GG and MT],
\item[$\ast$] French national research agency {\sc Anr} under contract {\sc Anr} 2010 {\sc Blanc} 041301.
\end{itemize}
}
\bibliographystyle{My}
\small
|
\section{Introduction}
Modifications and extensions of General Relativity (GR) can be traced back to the early times of GR \cite{Weyl:1918,Pauli:1919,Weyl:1921,Bach:1921,Eddington:1924,Lanczos:1931}. The first extensions were aimed to unify gravity with Electromagnetism while recent interest in such modifications arises from cosmology, astrophysics and quantum gravity \cite{Schmidt:2004,OdiRev,GRGrew,report}. In particular, cosmological observations lead to the introduction of additional ad-hoc concepts like Dark Energy and Dark Matter, if one restricts the dynamics to the standard Einstein theory. On the other hand, the emergence of such new ingredients of cosmic fluids could be interpreted as a first signal of a breakdown of GR on large, infrared scales \cite{JCAP,MNRAS}. In such a way, modifications and extensions of GR become a natural alternative if such ``dark'' elements are not found out. In particular, several recent works focussed on the cosmological implications of alternative gravity since such models may lead to the explanation of the acceleration effect observed in cosmology \cite{Capozziello:2002,Nojiri,Vollick:2003,Carroll:2005,Harko:2011nh, Harko:2012ar} and to the explanation of the missing matter puzzle observed at astrophysical scales \cite{annalen,Cap2,Borowiec:2006qr,Mar1,Boehmer:2007kx,Bohmer:2007fh,Bertolami:2007gv,
Capozziello:2013yha,Capozziello:2012}.
While it is very natural to extend Einstein's gravity to theories with additional geometric degrees of freedom \cite{Hehl:1976,Hehl:1995,Trautman:2006}, recent attempts focussed on the idea of modifying the gravitational Lagrangian leading to higher-order field equations. Due to the increased complexity of the field equations, a huge amount of works considered some formally equivalent theories, in which a reduction of the order of the field equations can be achieved by considering the metric and the connection as independent objects \cite{francaviglia,olmo}.
However, a concern which arises with generic extended and modified gravity theories is linked to the initial value problem and the definition of the energy conditions. It is unclear if standard methods can be used in order to tackle these problems in any theory. Hence it is doubtful that the full Cauchy problem can be properly addressed, if one takes into account the results already obtained in GR.
On the other hand, being alternative gravities, like GR, gauge theories, the initial value formulation and the energy conditions depend on suitable constraints and gauge choices \cite{Teyssandier:Tourrenc:1983,Noakes}.
A different approach is possible showing that the Cauchy problem for alternative gravities can be well-formulated and well-posed in vacuo, while it can be, at least, well-formulated for various form of matter fields like perfect-fluids, Klein-Gordon and Yang-Mills fields \cite{vignolo}. A similar situation also holds for the energy conditions which can strictly depend on the kind of fluids adopted as sources in the field equations.
In fact, there are serious problems of deep and fundamental principle at the semi-classical level and certain classical systems exhibit seriously pathological behaviour, in particular, the classical energy conditions are typically violated by semiclassical quantum effects \cite{Barcelo:2002bv}.
In this context, some effort has gone into finding possible semiclassical replacements for the classical energy conditions \cite{Ford:1990id}. Recently, classical and quantum versions of a ``flux energy condition'' (FEC and QFEC) were developed based on the notion of constraining the possible fluxes measured by timelike observers \cite{Martin-Moruno:2013sfa}. It was shown that the naive classical FEC was satisfied in some situations, and even for some quantum vacuum states, while its quantum analogue (the QFEC) was satisfied under a rather wide range of conditions. Furthermore, several nonlinear energy conditions suitable for use in the semiclassical regime were developed, and it was shown that these nonlinear energy conditions behave much better than the classical linear energy conditions in the presence of semiclassical quantum effects \cite{Martin-Moruno:2013wfa}.
However, in the context of alternative theories of gravity that in a wide sense {\it extend} GR, the issue of the energy conditions is extremely delicate. Note that the further degrees of freedom carried by these Extended Theories of Gravity (ETGs) can be recast as generalized
{\it effective fluids}
that differ in nature with respect to the standard matter fluids generally adopted as sources of the field equations \cite{report}. This approach has been extensively explored in the literature, namely, the energy conditions have been used to constrain $f(R)$ theories of gravity \cite{PerezBergliaffa:2006ni, Santos:2007bs, Atazadeh:2008mh} and extensions involving nonminimal curvature-matter couplings \cite{Bertolami:2009cd, Wang:2010zzr,Garcia:2010xb, MontelongoGarcia:2010xd, Wang:2012rw, Wang:2012mws, Wu:2014yya}; bounds on modified Gauss-Bonnet $f(G)$ gravity from the energy conditions have also been analysed \cite{Wu:2010zzm, Garcia:2010xz, MontelongoGarcia:2010ip}, and with a nonminimal coupling to matter \cite{Banijamali:2011up}; the recently proposed $f(R,T)$ gravity models \cite{Harko:2011kv}, where $T$ is the trace of the energy-momentum tensor and $R$ is the curvature scalar, have also been tested using the energy conditions \cite{Alvarenga:2012bt, Sharif:2012gz, Sharif:2012ce}; and constraints have also been placed \cite{Sharif:2013kga} on the $f(R, T, R_{\mu\nu} T^{\mu\nu})$ extension \cite{Haghani:2013oma, Odintsov:2013iba}; bounds have been placed on modified teleparralel gravity \cite{Liu:2012fk, Bohmer:2011si, Jamil:2012ck}; and the null energy condition violations have been studied in bimetric gravity \cite{Baccetti:2012re}.
However, one should add a cautionary note of the results obtained in the literature, such as the majority of those considered above have recast the further degrees of freedom carried by these ETGs as generalized {\it effective fluids} that differ in nature with respect to the standard matter fluids generally adopted as sources of the field equations \cite{report}.
Note that while standard fluids (e.g., perfect matter fluids), generally obey standard equations of state (and then one can define every thermodynamic quantity such as the adiabatic index, temperature, etc), these ``fictitious'' fluids can be related to scalar fields or further gravitational degrees of freedom. In these cases, the physical properties can result ill-defined and the energy conditions could rigorously work as in GR. The consequences of such a situation can be dramatic since the causal and geodesic structures of the theory could present serious shortcomings as well as the energy-momentum tensor could not be consistent with the Bianchi identities and the conservation laws.
This paper is outlined in the following manner. In Section \ref{secII}, we briefly review the energy conditions in GR and discuss the geometrical implications of such conditions. Section \ref{secIII} is devoted to set the energy conditions in ETGs by considering, in particular, the contracted Bianchi identities, the non-conservation of the energy-momentum tensor, the propagation equations and the role of conformal transformations. In Section \ref{secIV}, we take into account some particular theories, i.e., scalar-tensor theories and $f(R)$ gravity, where $R$ is the Ricci scalar. Finally, we discuss our results and draw some conclusions in Sec. \ref{sec:concl}.
\section{The energy conditions in General Relativity}
\label{secII}
In GR, the Einstein field equation govern the interplay between the geometry of the spacetime and the matter content. More specifically, the field equation is given by
\begin{equation}
G_{ab} = 8\pi G\, T_{ab} \, ,
\end{equation}
where the energy-momentum tensor of the matter fields, $T_{ab}$ is related to the Einstein tensor $G_{ab}\equiv R_{ab}-\frac{1}{2}\,g_{ab}R$, with $R_{ab}$ the Ricci tensor, which is defined as the trace of the Riemann curvature tensor ${R^d}{}_{adb}=R_{ab}$, and $R={R^a}_a$. Thus, the imposition of specific conditions on $T_{ab}$ are translated into corresponding conditions on the Einstein tensor $G_{ab}$.
Note that the Einstein equations can also be cast as conditions on the Ricci tensor, that is
\begin{equation}
R_{ab}= 8\pi G\, \left( T_{ab}-\frac{1}{2}\,Tg_{ab}\right)\,.
\end{equation}
In this form, the role of energy-matter is more relevant.
In general, in considering the energy conditions, we take into account a congruence of timelike curves whose tangent 4-vector is, for instance, $W^a$. The latter represents the velocity vector of a family of observers. One may also consider a field of null vectors, $k^a$, so that $g_{ab}\, k^ak^b=0$ implies that $G_{ab}k^a k^b =R_ {ab}k^ak^b$.
These choices enable us to identify the physical quantities measured by the observers related to the timelike vector $W^a$. Indeed, with respect to the latter vector field $W^a$, the energy-momentum tensor can then be decomposed as
\begin{equation}
T^{ab} = \rho\, W^a W^b + p \, (g^{ab}+W^aW^b) + \Pi^{ab} + 2q^{(a} W^{b)} \; , \label{EMT_decomposition}
\end{equation}
where $\rho$ and $p$ are the energy-density and the (isotropic) pressure measured by the observers moving with velocity $W^a$, $\Pi^{ab}$ is the anisotropic stress tensor, and $q^a$ is the current vector of the heat/energy flow. These quantities are given by the following relations
\begin{eqnarray}
\rho &=& T_{cd}\,W^cW^d \,, \\
3p&=&T_{cd}\,h^{cd} \,, \\
\Pi^{ab} &=& \left(h^{ac}h^{bd}-\frac{1}{3}h^{ab}h^{cd}\right)T_{cd} \,,
\label{defPI} \\
q^a &=& W^c T_{cd}h^{ad} \,,
\end{eqnarray}
respectively, where $h^{ab} = g^{ab}+W^aW^b$ is the metric induced on the spatial hypersurfaces orthogonal to $W^a$. Throughout this work, we adopt the $(-+++)$ signature convention and the speed of light is $c=1$.
\subsection{The classification of energy conditions}
The energy conditions are defined by considering contractions of timelike and null vectors with respect to the Ricci, Einstein and energy-momentum tensors \cite{Hawking:1973uf}. They can be classified as follows.
\begin{itemize}
\item The {\em weak energy condition} is defined as
\begin{equation}
T_{ab}\, W^a W^b \ge 0\; , \label{en_cond_weak}
\end{equation}
where $W^a$ is a timelike vector, i.e., $ W^a W_a =-1$. From Eq. (\ref{EMT_decomposition}), we verify that this entails that $\rho \ge 0$. As presented by Hawking and Ellis \cite{Hawking:1973uf}, such a condition is equivalent to establishing that the energy density measured by any observer is non-negative. It is straightforward to demonstrate that any standard matter fluid is consistent with such a condition.
Through the Einstein field equations where the curvature of space-time is considered, condition (\ref{en_cond_weak}) translates into
\begin{equation}
G_{ab}\, W^a W^b \ge 0
\end{equation}
which is equivalent to
\begin{equation}
R_{ab} \, W^a W^b \ge - \frac{R}{2} \; .
\end{equation}
and also to
\begin{equation}
R_{ab} \, W^a W^b \ge -4\pi G\, (\rho-3p) \; .
\end{equation}
Here we have used the fact that, from Eq. (\ref{EMT_decomposition}), we can recast the Einstein equations as
\begin{eqnarray}
R^{ab} = 8\pi G\, \Big[ \frac{\rho+3p}{2}\, W^a W^b
+ \Pi^{ab} + 2q^{(a} W^{b)}
\nonumber \\
+ \frac{\rho-p}{2}\, (g^{ab}+W^aW^b)
\Big] \;. \label{EFE_decomposition2}
\end{eqnarray}
\item The {\em dominant energy condition} states that, in addition to the condition (\ref{en_cond_weak}), one also has that $T^{ab}W_b$ is a non-spacelike vector, where as before $ W^a$ is a timelike vector, so that $W^a W_a =-1$. This corresponds to having a local energy flow vector which is non-spacelike in addition to the non-negativity of the energy density. In this sense, the causal structure of the space-time is determined.
\item The {\em null energy condition} states that
\begin{equation}
T_{ab}\, k^a k^b \ge 0\; , \label{en_cond_null}
\end{equation}
where $k^a$ is a null vector, i.e., $ k^a k_a =0$. This implies $R_{ab}k^a k^b\ge 0$, through the Einstein field equation.
A very useful meaning of this condition is that it's violation implies that
the Hamiltonian of the corresponding system is necessarily unbounded
from below (we refer the reader to \cite{Sawicki:2012pz} for more details).
\item The {\em strong energy condition} is given by
\begin{equation}
T_{ab}\, W^a W^b \ge \frac{1}{2}T\,W^aW_a\; , \label{en_cond_strong}
\end{equation}
where $W^a$ is a timelike vector. Alternatively, in GR and through the Einstein field equations, the above inequality takes the form
\begin{equation}
R_ {ab} \, W^a W^b \ge 0
\end{equation}
which, as we will see in what follows through the Raychaudhuri equation, states that gravity must be attractive.
\end{itemize}
Summarizing, such conditions define the causal structure, the geodesic structure and the nature of the gravitational field in a space-time filled by a standard fluid matter endowed with a regular equation of state.
\subsection{Geometrical implications of the energy conditions }
The geometrical implications of the energy conditions can be put in evidence as soon as we consider the decomposition \cite{Ellis}
\begin{equation}
\nabla_b W_a = \sigma_{ab} +\frac{\theta}{3}h_ {ab}+\omega_{ab} -\dot{u}_a W_b \,,
\label{3+1_decomp}
\end{equation}
with the following definitions
\begin{eqnarray}
h_{ab} &=& g_{ab}+W_a\,W_b \,, \\
\sigma_{ab} &=& h_{(a}^c\nabla_c W_d h_{b)}^d - \frac{h_{ab}}{3}\,h_a^c\nabla_c W_d h^{ad} \,, \\
\theta &=& h_a^c\nabla_c W_d h^{ad} \,, \\
\omega_ {ab} &=& h_{[a}^c\nabla_c W_d h_{b]}^d \,, \\
\dot W^a &=& W^b \nabla_b W^a \; ,
\end{eqnarray}
respectively, where we have considered all possible combinations of the metric tensor and timelike vectors. Here $h_{ab}$ is the {\it projection tensor}, $\sigma_{ab}$ is the {\it shear tensor}, $\theta$ is the {\it expansion scalar}, $\omega_{ab}$ is the vorticity tensor. Note that $h_{ab}$ is orthogonal to $W^a$, $W^a\,h_{ab} =0$, and hence it is the metric induced on the 3-hypersurfaces orthogonal to $W^a$, as mentioned before.
Equipped with the latter kinematical quantities whose contractions give rise to the so-called {\it optical scalars} \cite{falco}, we derive, from the Ricci identities\footnote{The Ricci identities prescribe that $\nabla_c\nabla_d u^a-\nabla_d\nabla_c u^a = {R^a}_{bcd}\,u^b$, for any vector field $u^a$.}, the following relations
\begin{equation}
\dot \theta + \frac{\theta^2}{3}+2\,(\sigma^2-\omega^2) - \dot{u}^a{}_{;a}=- R_ {ab} \, W^a W^b \;, \label{Ray_1}
\end{equation}
and
\begin{eqnarray}
{h_a}^f \,{h_b}^g\,\left[(\sigma_{fg})\dot{}\, - \dot{W}_{(f;g)}\right] = \dot{W}_a\, \dot{W}_b - \omega_a\,\omega_b -\sigma_{af}{\sigma^f}_b
\nonumber \\
- \frac{2}{3}\,\theta\,\sigma_{ab}
-h_{ab}\left(-\frac{1}{3}\,\omega^2 - \frac{2}{3}\,\sigma^2 - \frac{1}{3}\,{\dot{W}^c}_c\right)
\nonumber \\
+ \frac{1}{2}\left(h^{ac}h^{bd}-\frac{1}{3}h^{ab}h^{cd}\right)\, \left( R_ {cd}-\frac{1}{2}g_{cd}R\right) \label{Shear_propag_1}
\end{eqnarray}
\begin{eqnarray}
{h^a}_b\left[ \exp{\left(\frac{2}{3}\int\,\theta\,dt \right)}\,\omega^b\right]{\dot{}} = {\sigma^a}_b \left[ \exp{\left(\frac{2}{3}\int\,\theta\,dt \right)}\,\omega^b\right]
\nonumber \\
+\frac{1}{2}\left[ \exp{\left(\frac{2}{3}\int\,\theta\,dt \right)} \right]\,\eta^{abcd}\,W_b\,\dot{W}_{(c;d)} \; , \label{Vortice_propag_1}
\end{eqnarray}
where Eq. (\ref{Ray_1}) is the so-called {\it Raychaudhuri Equation}.
It is important to emphasize that Eqs. (\ref{Ray_1})--(\ref{Vortice_propag_1}) only carry a geometrical meaning, as they are directly derived from the Ricci identities. It is only when we choose a particular theory that we establish a relation between quantities that appear in their right-hand sides, such as $R_ {ab} \, W^a W^b $ in Eq. (\ref{Ray_1}), and the energy-momentum tensor describing matter fields.
For instance, let us consider a null congruence $k^a$ and a vanishing vorticity $\omega_{ab}=0$. The Raychaudhuri Eq. (\ref{Ray_1}) reduces to
\begin{equation}
\frac{{\rm d} \theta}{{\rm d}v} = - \left[\frac{\theta^2}{3}+2\sigma^2 +R_{ab}k^ak^b\right]\; ,
\end{equation}
where $v$ is an affine parameter along the null geodesics. This means that, in GR, it is possible to associate the null energy condition with the focusing (attracting) characteristic of the spacetime geometry. Gravitational lensing is a very important application of this feature as widely discussed in \cite{falco}.
\section{The problem of energy conditions in Extended Theories of Gravity}
\label{secIII}
In the context of ETGs, consider the following generalized gravitational field equations, which encapsulates a large class of interesting cases
\begin{equation}
g_1(\Psi^i)\, \left( G_{ab} +H_ {ab}\right)= 8\pi G\, g_2(\Psi^j) \, T_{ab} \, , \label{ETG_EFEcoup}
\end{equation}
where the factors $g_1(\Psi^i)$ modifies the coupling with the matter fields in $T^{ab}$ and $g_2(\Psi^i)$ incorporates explicit curvature-matter couplings of the gravitational theory considered \cite{Harko:2012ar,Bertolami:2007gv}; $\Psi^j$ generically represents either curvature invariants or other gravitational fields, such as scalar fields, contributing to the dynamics of the theory. The additional tensor $H_{ab}$ represents an additional geometric term with regard to GR that encapsulates the geometrical modifications introduced by the extended theory under consideration.
Note, that GR is immediately recovered by imposing $H_{ab}=0$, $g_1(\Psi^i)=g_2(\Psi^i)=1$. In this sense we are dealing with Extended Theories of Gravity, in that the underlying hypothesis is that GR (and its positive results) can be recovered as a particular case in any ``extended'' theory of gravitation~\cite{ETG_2_GR}.
\subsection{Contracted Bianchi identities and diffeomorphism invariance}
Consider the specific case of $g_1(\Psi^i)=g(\Psi^i)$ and $g_2(\Psi^i)=1$, so that the field equation (\ref{ETG_EFEcoup}) reduces to
\begin{equation}
g(\Psi^i)\, \left( G_{ab} +H_ {ab}\right)= 8\pi G\, T_{ab} \; .\label{ETG_EFE1}
\end{equation}
Taking into account the contracted Bianchi identities and the diffeomorphism invariance of the matter action, which implies the covariant conservation of the energy-momentum tensor, $\nabla_b T^{ab}=0$, one deduces the following conservation law
\begin{equation}
\nabla_b H^{ab} = - \frac{8\pi G}{g^2} T^{ab}\, \nabla_b g\; .
\end{equation}
Note that from Eq. (\ref{ETG_EFE1}) in order to have an extended Bianchi identity $\nabla_b H^{ab} =0$, for a non diverging value of the coupling $g$, we must have vacuum and therefore $G_{ab}=-H_{ab}$.
Now, an imposition of specific energy conditions on the energy-momentum tensor $T^{ab}$ carries over the conditions to the combination of $G_ {ab}$ and $H_ {ab}$ and not just for the Einstein tensor. Thus, in the context of ETGs, it is not possible to obtain a simple geometrical implication from the conditions imposed. For instance, in GR, suppose that the strong energy condition holds. This would mean that $R_ {ab} \, W^a W^b \ge 0$, and consequently through the Einstein field equation we would have $\rho+3P\ge 0$. On the other hand, this entails gravity with an attractive character, since given Eq. (\ref{Ray_1}), one verifies that the geodesics are focusing \cite{Hawking:1973uf}.
However, in the ETG case under consideration, this condition just states that
\begin{equation}
g(\Psi^i)\,(R_{ab}+H_ {ab}-\frac{1}{2}g_{ab} H)\,W^aW^b \ge 0\; , \label{en_cond_strong_2}
\end{equation}
which does not necessarily entail $R_ {ab} \, W^a W^b \ge 0$, so that one cannot conclude that the attractive nature of gravity is equivalent to the satisfaction of the strong energy condition, in the particular ETG under consideration \cite{Capozziello:2013vna}.
However, in the literature, it is common practise to transport the term $H^{ab}$ to the right-hand-side of the gravitational field equation, and write the latter as a modified Einstein field equation, namely,
\begin{equation}
G_{ab}= 8\pi G \;T_{ab}^{\rm eff} \;, \label{mod_EFE}
\end{equation}
where $T_{ab}^{\rm eff}$ is considered as an effective energy-momentum tensor, defined by $T_{ab}^{\rm eff}=T_{ab}/g-8\pi G \, H_{ab}$. Thus, the meaning which is attributed to the energy conditions is the satisfaction of some inequality by the combined quantity $T^{ab}/g-H^{ab}$. It is therefore somewhat misleading to call these impositions as energy conditions since they do not emerge only from $T^{ab}$ but from a combined quantity where we are dealing with a geometrical $H^{ab}$ as an additional stress-energy tensor.
Indeed, we emphasize that $H^{ab}$ is a geometrical quantity, in the sense that it can be given by geometrical invariants as $R$ or scalar fields different from ordinary matter fields.
However, if the ETG under consideration allows an equivalent description upon an appropriate conformal transformation, it then becomes justified to associate the transformed $H^{ab}$ to the redefined $T^{ab}$ in the conformally transformed Einstein frame. This is, for instance, the case for scalar-tensor gravity theories, and for instance in $f(R)$ gravity \cite{report}. Indeed, conformal transformations play an extremely relevant role in the discussion of the energy conditions. In particular, they allow to put in evidence the further degrees of freedom coming from ETGs under the form of curvature invariants and scalar fields. More specifically, several generalized theories of gravity can be redefined as GR plus a number of appropriate fields coupled to matter by means of a conformal transformation in the so-called Einstein frame.
In fact, in scalar-tensor gravity, in the so-called Jordan frame one has a separation between the geometrical terms and the standard matter terms that can be cast as in Eq. (\ref{ETG_EFE1}), where $H_{ab}$ involves a mixture of both the scalar and tensor gravitational fields.
A main role in this analysis is played by recasting the theory, by conformal transformations, in the Einstein frame where matter and geometrical quantities can be formally dealt exactly such as in GR. However, the energy conditions can assume a completely different meaning going back to the Jordan frame and then they could play a crucial role in identifying the physical frame as firstly pointed out in \cite{magnano}.
Although, it is completely clear that different ``frames'' just correspond to field redefinitions all of which are equally physical.
Now, under a suitable conformal transformation the field equations can be recast as
\begin{equation}
\tilde{G}_ {ab}= \tilde{T}^M_{ab}+\tilde{T}^\varphi_{ab} \,, \label{STT_EF}
\end{equation}
where $\tilde{T}^M_{ab}$ is the transformed energy-momentum of matter, and $\tilde{T}^\varphi_{ab}$ is an energy-momentum tensor for the redefined scalar field $\varphi$ which is coupled to the matter. It thus makes sense to consider the whole right-hand side of (\ref{STT_EF}) as an effective energy-momentum tensor.
Then one finds results where one draws conclusions about the properties of $G_ {ab}$ such whether it focuses geodesics directly from those conditions holding on $T_{ab}^{\rm eff}$, where $T_{ab}^{\rm eff}=\tilde{T}^M_{ab}+\tilde{T}^\varphi_{ab}$. This ignores the fact that $H_{ab}$ originally possesses a geometrical character, and thus the conclusions may be too hasty if not supported by the physical analysis of sources. We refer the reader to \cite{Capozziello:2013vna} for a detailed analysis on this issue.
\subsection{Non-conservation of the energy-momentum tensor}
A main role in the formulation of the correct energy conditions for ETGs is played by the contracted Bianchi identities that guarantee specific conservation laws. In fact, being $\nabla_b G^{ab}=0$, the physical features of $H^{ab}$ can be derived. On the other hand, the Bianchi identities guarantee the self-consistency of the theory. However, an interesting class of extended theories of gravity that exhibit an explicit curvature-matter coupling have recently been proposed in the literature \cite{Harko:2012ar,Bertolami:2007gv}. The latter coupling imply a general non-conservation of the energy-momentum tensor, and consequently a trademark of these specific ETGs is non-geodesic motion \cite{Harko:2012ar,Bertolami:2007gv}.
We will briefly analyse these theories in the formalism outlined above. In order to incorporate the explicit curvature-matter coupling, consider the field equation given by Eq. (\ref{ETG_EFEcoup}). Note that in ETGs of the form (\ref{ETG_EFEcoup}) in the presence of the non-conservation of the
energy-momentum tensor, the contracted Bianchi identities yield
\begin{equation}
\nabla_b H^{ab} = \nabla_b \left(\frac{T^{ab}}{\bar{g}}\right) \,,
\label{conserv_coupl}
\end{equation}
where the factor $\bar{g}=g_1/g_2$ is defined, and we have considered that $8\pi G=1$ for notational simplicity.
Now, Eq. (\ref{conserv_coupl}) implies the following relationship
\begin{eqnarray}
\nabla_b T^{ab} &=& \bar{g}\,\nabla_b H^{ab}+\left(\frac{\nabla_b \bar{g}}{\bar{g}}\right) T^{ab} \nonumber \\
&=& \nabla_b( \bar{g}\,H^{ab}) +\left(\frac{\nabla_b \bar{g}}{\bar{g}}\right) \,\left[ T^{ab} -(\bar{g}\,H^{ab}) \right].
\end{eqnarray}
Thus a trademark of these specific class of ETGs is that the matter fields do not, in general, follow the geodesics of space-time \cite{Harko:2012ve}.
Let us we introduce the following useful definitions
\begin{eqnarray}
\tilde\rho &=& (\bar{g}\,H_{cd})\,W^cW^d \,, \label{redef_tilderho} \\
3\tilde p&=&(\bar{g}\,H_{cd})\,h^{cd} \,, \label{redef_tilderho-b} \\
\tilde\Pi^{ab} &=& \left(h^{ac}h^{bd}-\frac{1}{3}h^{ab}h^{cd}\right)(\bar{g}\,H_{cd}) \,, \label{redef_tilderho-c} \\
\tilde q^a &=& W^c \,(\bar{g}\,H_{cd})\,h^{ad} \,. \label{redef_tilderho-d}
\end{eqnarray}
We derive
\begin{equation}
\dot \rho + (\rho+p) \nabla_b W^b + W_a \,\nabla_b \Pi^{ab}= W_a \,\nabla_b \bar{g}\,H^{ab} \,,
\end{equation}
so that the departure from the usual conservation equations depends on the term
\begin{equation}
W_a \,\nabla_b \left(\bar{g} H^{ab}-\Pi^{ab}\right) \; .
\end{equation}
Therefore in what regards this balance equation, the term $\bar{g} H_ {ab}$ plays a role which is analogous to that of the anistropic stress tensor $\Pi_{ab}$, given by Eq. (\ref{defPI}). We can recast the latter equations as
\begin{eqnarray}
\dot \rho + (\rho+p) \theta + \Pi^{ab}\, \sigma^{ab}+\nabla_b q^b + \dot W_a\,q^a =
\nonumber \\
= \left[\dot {\tilde\rho} + (\tilde\rho+\tilde p) \theta
+ \tilde\Pi^{ab}\, \sigma^{ab}+\nabla_b \tilde q^b + \dot W_a\,\tilde q^a \right]
\nonumber \\
+ \left(\frac{\dot{\bar{g}}}{\bar{g}}\right) \,\left( \tilde\rho-\rho \right) +\left(\frac{\nabla_b \bar{g}}{\bar{g}}\right) \,\left( \tilde q^b -q^b\right) ,
\end{eqnarray}
or as
\begin{eqnarray}
\dot \rho- \dot {\tilde\rho} + \left[(\rho-\tilde\rho )+(p-\tilde p)\right] \theta = -
\left(\Pi^{ab}-\tilde\Pi^{ab} \right)\, \sigma^{ab}
\nonumber \\
- \nabla_b \left(q^b -{\tilde q}^b \right)
-\dot W_a\,\left(q^a-{\tilde q}^b\right)
+ \left(\frac{\dot{\bar{g}}}{\bar{g}}\right) \,\left( \tilde\rho-\rho \right)
\nonumber \\
+\left(\frac{\nabla_b \bar{g}}{\bar{g}}\right) \,\left( \tilde q^b -q^b\right) \,.
\end{eqnarray}
Analogously, we derive an equation for the acceleration $\dot W^a$. We obtain the following relationships
\begin{eqnarray}
&&\left[(\rho-\tilde\rho)+(p-\tilde p)\right] \,\dot W^a +h_a^b
\left[\nabla_b(p-\tilde p)\right]
\nonumber \\
&& = -
h_a^c\nabla_b(\Pi^b_c-\tilde{\Pi}^b_c) - h_a^c\, (\dot q_c
-\dot{\tilde{q}}_c) + \left(\frac{\nabla_b \bar{g}}{\bar{g}}\right) \times
\nonumber \\
&& \times \left\{ \left( p-\tilde p
\right) h_a^b + \,\left[\left(\Pi_a^b -\tilde\Pi_a^b \right)-\left(\tilde q_a -
q_a\right)W^b\right] \right\}.
\end{eqnarray}
These equations show how the $\bar{g}H^{ab}$ term modifies the standard energy density conservation equation and the generalized Navier-Stokes equation for the acceleration, both derived from the contracted Bianchi identies. It is important to emphasize that, although the contracted Bianchi identities are geometrical relations in their essence, and hence do not depend on the specific gravitational theory under consideration, when we translate them into equations governing the behavior of the matter fields, the choice of the theory intervenes. This happens in association with the $\bar{g}H^{ab}$ terms, that is with the tilded quantities that we have defined in the Einstein frame. In summary, the validity of the contracted Bianchi identities selects suitable theories and may allow the definition of self-consistent energy conditions.
\subsection{Propagation equations and Extended Theories of Gravity}
In the present subsection, we consider the specific case of $\bar{g}=g$, i.e., $g_2=1$, and consequently the covariant conservation of the energy-momentum tensor.
The role of propagation equations deserve a particular discussion in this context.
We have already written the propagation equations for the expansion $\theta$, for the shear $\sigma_{ab}$ and for the vorticity $\omega_{ab}$, that is Eqs. ~(\ref{Ray_1})-(\ref{Vortice_propag_1}), and have pointed out that these equations do not reflect the particular gravitational theory under consideration since they are derived directly from the 3+1 decomposition of the Ricci identities that come from the Riemann tensor.
The prescription for a given gravitational theory enters into play when we replace quantities such as $R_ {ab} \, W^a W^b $
into the Raychaudhuri Eq. (\ref{Ray_1}). For the theories under consideration here, the latter geometrical quantity is replaced by the inequality (\ref{en_cond_strong_2}), which, according to the definition (\ref{redef_tilderho}) (recall that in the present context we have $\bar{g}=g$, i.e., $g_2=1$, and the covariant conservation of the energy-momentum tensor), only involves the energy density of matter and that given by the latter equation. However, when we consider the shear propagation equation, the role of the particular ETG comes out by replacing $\frac{1}{2}\left(h^{ac}h^{bd}-\frac{1}{3}h^{ab}h^{cd}\right)\, \left( R_ {cd}-\frac{1}{2}g_{cd}R\right)$. We thus have
\begin{eqnarray}
\frac{1}{2}\left(h^{ac}h^{bd}-\frac{1}{3}h^{ab}h^{cd}\right)\, \left( R_ {cd}-\frac{1}{2}g_{cd}R\right) =
\nonumber \\
= \frac{1}{2}\left(h^{ac}h^{bd}-\frac{1}{3}h^{ab}h^{cd}\right)\,\left(-H_{ab}+\frac{T_{ab}}{g}\right)
\nonumber \\
= \frac{1}{g}\, \left(-\tilde\Pi^{ab}+ \Pi^{ab}\right) \; .
\end{eqnarray}
In general, the discussion of the energy conditions in ETGs is made in relation to the spatially homogeneous and isotropic FLRW universes, which implies that $\sigma_{ab}=0$ and $\omega_{ab}=0$\footnote{One also has the vanishing of the electric and magnetic parts of the Weyl tensor $C_{abcd} $, $E_{ab}=C_{acbd}\,W^cW^d$ and $H^\ast_{ab}=\frac{1}{2}\,{\eta_{ac}}^{gh}\,C_{ghbd}\,W^cW^d$, respectively, where ${\eta}^{abcd}$ is the totally-skew symmetric pseudotensor.}. One question which is then of interest is to assess the possible role of the ETG theories in perturbing the universe away from its Friedmann state. Clearly this depends on the term $\tilde\Pi^{ab}$ being non-vanishing.
The interesting result that we want to put forward is that in theories like $f(R)$ gravity and scalar-tensor gravity, the quantity
$\tilde\Pi^{ab}$ is vanishing and so they do not introduce any modification with respect to GR in the shear propagation equation. If the shear starts vanishing, it remains so. Indeed, theories where $\tilde\Pi^{ab}\neq 0$ exist (e.g. inhomogeneous cosmologies \cite{krasinski}) but we do not consider them in the present context.
\section{Examples of Extended Theories of Gravity}\label{secIV}
Taking into account the above discussion, the correct identification of the function $g_i(\Psi^j)$ ($i=1,2)$, and the tensor $H_{ab}$ defined in Sec. \ref{secIII} enables one to formulate the energy conditions for any ETG. Recall that the functions $g_i(\Psi^j)$ are related to the gravitational coupling that can be non-minimal, and the tensor $H_{ab}$ is the contribution to the effective energy-momentum tensor containing the further degrees of freedom of the ETG. Below, we give some specific examples of theories that fit well in the context of the above discussion.
\subsection{Scalar-Tensor gravity}
In this subsection, we extend and complement the analysis outlined in \cite{Capozziello:2013vna}. The scalar-tensor gravity~\cite{ST}, to which Brans-Dicke is the archetype, can be based on the action
\begin{equation}
S=\frac{1}{16\pi} \int \sqrt{-g} d^4x\, \left[\phi R - \frac{\omega(\phi)}{\phi}
\phi_{,\mu} \phi^{,\mu} + 2 \phi \lambda(\phi)\right] + S_M \,,
\end{equation}
where the gravitational coupling is assumed variable and a self-interaction potential is present; $S_M$ is the standard matter part. Varying this action with respect to the metric $g_{ab}$ and the scalar field $\phi$ yields the field equations
\begin{eqnarray}
R_{ab}-\frac{1}{2}g_{ab}\, R -\lambda(\phi)\,
g_{ab}=\frac{\omega(\phi)}{\phi^2}\;
\left[\phi_{;a}\phi_{;b} - \frac{1}{2} \, g_{ab}\,
\phi_{;c}\phi^{;c}\right]
\nonumber \\
+ \frac{1}{\phi}\; \left[\phi_{;ab}-g_{ab}
{\phi_{;c}}^{;c}\right]+8\pi G \;
\frac{T_{ab}}{\phi} \,,
\end{eqnarray}
and
\begin{eqnarray}
\Box{\phi}+\frac{{2\phi^2\lambda'(\phi)-2\phi\lambda(\phi)}}
{{2\omega(\phi)+3}}
= \frac{1}{2\omega(\phi)+3} \times
\nonumber \\
\times \left[ 8\pi G\, T-\omega'(\phi)
\phi_{;c}\phi^{;c}
\right] \,,
\end{eqnarray}
where $T\equiv T^{a}{}_{a}$ is the trace of the matter energy-momentum tensor and $G \equiv (2\omega+4)/(2\omega+3)$ is the gravitational constant normalized to the Newton value.
Additional to these equations, one also requires diffeomorphism invariance and consequently the conservation of the matter content $\nabla^b T_{ab}=0$. The latter also preserves the equivalence principle.
Brans-Dicke theory is characterized by the restriction of $\omega(\phi)\,$
being a constant, and of $\lambda=\lambda'=0\,$.
According to the discussion in the previous section, for the general class of scalar-tensor theories, the tensor term $H_{ab}$ is defined by
\begin{eqnarray}
H_{ab}=-\frac{\omega(\phi)}{\phi^2}\;
\left[\phi_{;a}\phi_{;b} - \frac{1}{2} \, g_{ab}\,
\phi_{;c}\phi^{;c}\right]
\nonumber \\
- \frac{1}{\phi} \left[\phi_{;ab}-g_{ab}
{\phi_{;c}}^{;c}\right]-\lambda(\phi)g_{ab} \,, \label{H-ab_ST}
\end{eqnarray}
and the coupling functions are given by $g_1(\Psi^i)=\phi$, which we shall assume positive, and $g_2(\Psi^i)=1$. The above considerations on the energy conditions straightforwardly apply. In particular
Eq. (\ref{en_cond_strong_2}) is easily recovered like the other energy conditions.
Taking into account the assumption $\phi>0$, the condition $R_{ab}\,W^a\,W^b\ge 0 $, that yields the focusing of the time-like congruence becomes
\begin{eqnarray}
( T_{ab} - \frac{1}{2}\,g_{ab}\,T)\,W^aW^b \ge \phi\,( H_{ab} - \frac{1}{2}\,g_{ab}\,H)\,W^aW^b \; . \label{en_cond_strong_ST1}
\end{eqnarray}
Notice that even in the presence of a mild violation of the energy condition, the satisfaction of the above condition allows for the focusing of the time-like paths. This is an interesting result since matter may exhibit unusual thermodynamical features, for instance, the presence of negative pressures, and yet gravity retains its attractive character. Alternatively, we see that repulsive gravity may occur for common matter, i.e., for matter that satisfies all the energy conditions. This happens when $H_{ab}$ has the reverse sign in (\ref{en_cond_strong_ST1}).
The energy conditions in the Jordan frame was considered in \cite{Chatterjee:2012zh}, where the null energy condition, in its usual form, can appear to be violated by transformations in the conformal frame of the metric.
The decomposition (\ref{redef_tilderho})--(\ref{redef_tilderho-d}) of the tensor $H_{ab}$ into components parallel to the time-like vector flow $W^a$ and orthogonal to it, is given by the following relationship
\begin{eqnarray}
H^{ab} &=& H_{||} W^aW^b + H_{\bot} h^{ab} + 2\,H_{\bot}^{(a}\, W^{b)} + H_{\bot}^{<ab>}
\nonumber \\
&=& \frac{1}{\phi}\,\left[ \tilde\rho W^aW^b + \tilde p h^{ab} + 2\,\tilde q^{(a}\, W^{b)} + \tilde\pi^{ab}\right]
\end{eqnarray}
where
$H_{||}$ and $H_{\bot}$ are scalars, $H_{\bot}^{a} $ is a vector and $H_{\bot}^{<ab>}$ is a projected trace-free symmetric tensor (PSTF). This decomposition permits to translate the condition (\ref{en_cond_strong_ST1}) into
\begin{equation}
\frac{1}{\phi}\,(\rho+3p)-(H_{||}+3H_{\bot}) \ge 0 \; .
\end{equation}
In the latter expression we have used
\begin{eqnarray}
H_{||} &= & - \frac{\omega(\phi)}{2\phi^2}\,\left(3\dot\phi^2-h^{cd}\,\nabla_c\phi\, \nabla_c\phi\right)
\nonumber \\
&& -\frac{1}{\phi}\,h^{cd}\nabla_c\nabla_d\phi +\lambda(\phi) \,, \\
H_{\bot} &=&- \frac{\omega(\phi)}{3\phi^2}\,\left( \frac{\dot\phi^2}{2}-\frac{1}{2}h^{cd}\,\nabla_c\phi\, \nabla_c\phi\right)
\nonumber \\
&&
- \frac{1}{2\phi}\,\left(W^aW^b \, \nabla_c\nabla_d\phi -\frac{1}{3}\,h^{cd}\nabla_c\nabla_d\phi\right) - \lambda(\phi) \,.
\end{eqnarray}
Clearly, gravity is repulsive or attractive depending on the functions $\omega(\phi)$ and $\lambda(\phi)$. Indeed, Eq. (\ref{en_cond_strong_2}) reads
\begin{eqnarray}
W^aW^b\,R_{ab}-\frac{\omega(\phi)}{\phi^2}\;
\left(\phi_{;a}\phi_{;b} - \frac{1}{2} \, g_{ab}\,
\phi_{;c}\phi^{;c} \right)
\nonumber \\
- \frac{1}{\phi} \left(\phi_{;ab}-g_{ab}{\phi_{;c}}^{;c}\right)
- \lambda(\phi)g_{ab} =
\nonumber \\
W^aW^b\,\frac{8\pi}{\phi}\,\left( T_{ab}-\frac{1}{2}\,g_{ab}\,T\right) \ge 0
\; , \label{en_cond_strong_ST0}
\end{eqnarray}
which amounts to
\begin{eqnarray}
W^aW^b \Bigg[ \frac{8\pi}{\phi}\,\left(T_{ab}-\frac{\omega+1}{2\omega+3}\,g_{ab}\,T\right)
+\frac{\omega}{\phi^2}\nabla_a\phi\nabla_b \phi
\nonumber \\
+\frac{\nabla_a\nabla_b \phi}{\phi} -\frac{1}{2\phi}\frac{\omega'}{2\omega+3}\,g_{ab}\nabla_c\nabla^c \phi
\nonumber \\
+ g_{ab}\,\frac{\phi\lambda'-(\omega+1)\lambda}{2\omega+3}\Bigg] \ge 0 \; . \label{en_cond_strong_ST4}
\end{eqnarray}
Considering a Friedmann-Lema\^{\i}tre-Robertson-Walker (FLRW) universe, we derive the following inequality
\begin{equation}
\frac{8\pi G}{\phi}\,\frac{(\omega+3)\rho+3\omega p}{2\omega+3} +\frac{\lambda}{3} + \frac{\omega}{3}\,\frac{\dot\phi^2}{\phi^2}+ \frac{\dot\omega}{2(2\omega+3)}\,\frac{\dot\phi}{\phi} +H\frac{\dot\phi}{\phi}\ge 0 \; .
\end{equation}
This result shows how the functions $\omega(\phi)$ and $\lambda(\phi)$ define whether gravity is attractive or repulsive in the scalar-tensor cosmological models.
Furthermore, upon a conformal transformation of the theory into the so-called Einstein frame, using $g_{ab}\to \bar g_{ab} = (\phi/\phi_\ast)\, g_{ab}$, the condition for gravity to be attractive with the redefined Ricci tensor becomes
\begin{equation}
\tilde R_{ab} u^a u^b= \frac{4\pi}{\phi_\ast} \, (\bar\rho+3\bar p) + \frac{8\pi}{\phi_\ast}\, \left[\dot{\varphi}^2-\tilde{V}(\varphi)\right]\ge 0\;.
\label{ineqSTT}
\end{equation}
Here $\varphi= \int \sqrt{(2\omega+3)/2}\, {\rm d}\ln\phi$ is the redefined scalar field, $V(\varphi)= \lambda(\phi(\varphi))/\phi(\varphi)$ is the rescaled potential, $\bar\rho = \rho/\phi^2$, $\bar{p}=p/\phi^2$, and $\phi_\ast$ is an arbitrary value of $\phi$ that guarantees, on the one hand, that the conformal factor is dimensionless, and, on the other hand, that it might be related to Newton's gravitational constant $G_N$ by setting $\phi_\ast =G_N^{-1}$. Despite the fact that the inequality (\ref{ineqSTT}) adopts the familiar form found in general relativistic models endowed with a combination of matter and a scalar field, the role of the functions $\omega(\phi)$ and $\lambda(\phi)$ underlies the result because the definitions of $\varphi$ and $V(\varphi)$ depend on them. Another interesting feature, in the Einstein frame, is that the matter and the scalar field are interacting with each other as revealed by the scalar field equation
\begin{equation}
\ddot\varphi+\bar{\theta}\dot\varphi= -\frac{\partial V(\varphi)}{\partial \varphi}- \frac{\partial \bar\rho(\varphi,\bar{a})}{\partial \varphi}\; .
\end{equation}
So the dependence on the parameters that underlie, on the one, the shape of the self-interacting potential $V(\varphi)$, and on the other hand, the coupling $\partial_\varphi \bar{\rho}\propto \alpha(\varphi) a^{-3\gamma}$, where $\alpha=(\sqrt{2\omega+3})$, when considering a perfect fluid with $\bar p=(\gamma-1)\bar\rho$.
In a cosmological setting, gravity may exhibit a transition from being attractive into becoming repulsive when the interplay between the intervening components is such that those which violate the strong energy condition become dominating. The typical case is provided when $V(\varphi)$ has a non-vanishing minimum \cite{ETG_2_GR}.
\subsection{$f(R)$ gravity}
The action in this case is
\begin{equation}
S=\frac{1}{16\pi} \int \sqrt{-g} f(R) d^4x + S_M \; ,
\end{equation}
where $R$ is the Ricci scalar (we refer the reader to \cite{Sotiriou:2008rp} for further details).
The $H_ {ab}$ term includes non-linear combinations of the curvature invariants built from the Riemann and Ricci tensors as well as from derivatives of these tensors, and the couplings $g_1(\Psi^i)= F(R) = f'(R)$ and $g_2(\Psi^i)=1$, where the prime is the derivative with respect to $R$. In fact, the gravitational field equation is given by
\begin{eqnarray}
F(R) \, G_{ab} + \frac{1}{2}\,\left[R F(R)-f(R) \right]\, g_ {ab}
- \nabla_a\nabla_b F(R)
\nonumber \\
+g_ {ab}\, \Box F(R) = 8\pi G \, T_ {ab} \,,
\end{eqnarray}
which can be recast as
\begin{eqnarray}
G_{ab} = 8\pi G \,\left(\frac{ T_ {ab}}{F(R)}\right)- \frac{1}{F(R)}\,\Bigg[\frac{1}{2}\,\left(R F(R)-f(R) \right)\, g_ {ab}
\nonumber \\
- \nabla_a\nabla_b F(R) +g_ {ab}\, \Box F(R) \Big] \, ,
\label{FRfieldeq}
\end{eqnarray}
so that we identify
\begin{eqnarray}
H_ {ab} =\frac{1}{F(R)}\, \Bigg \{\frac{1}{2}\,\left[R F(R)-f(R) \right]\, g_ {ab}
- \nabla_a\nabla_b F(R)
\nonumber \\
+g_ {ab}\, \Box F(R) \Big\} \,.
\end{eqnarray}
Note that as before ${\nabla}_{a}$ is the covariant derivative operator associated with $g_{ab}$, $\Box \equiv g^{ab} {\nabla}_{a} {\nabla}_{b}$ is the covariant d'Alembertian, and $T^{M}_{ab}$ is the contribution to the stress energy tensor from ordinary matter.
Clearly the above considerations hold completely and gravity is attractive or repulsive depending on the form of $f(R)$.
In the present case we have
\begin{eqnarray}
H_{||} &=& - \frac{1}{F}\, \left[\frac{1}{2}\,( RF-f) - h^{cd}\,\nabla_c\nabla_d F \right] \,, \\
H_{\bot} &=&\frac{1}{F}\,\left[ \frac{1}{2}(RF-f)-\frac{1}{3}h^{cd}\,\nabla_c \nabla_c F +\Box F \right] \, ,
\end{eqnarray}
so that gravity is attractive when
\begin{eqnarray}
8\pi G(\rho+3p) \ge \left[ ( RF-f) - 2 h^{cd}\nabla_c\nabla_d F + 3\Box F\right] \,.
\end{eqnarray}
Note, however, that this latter condition is still not a condition on any initial data or on matter $T_{\mu\nu}$. Indeed, the higher derivatives may still be eliminated using
the equations of motion; thus it is not an energy condition.
This condition reduces to the usual $(\rho+3p) \ge0$ when $f\propto R$ and hence GR is recovered. More importantly it reveals how the non-linear terms in the action induce attractive or repulsive effects. If there were no matter, i.e., in a vacuum setting gravity becomes repulsive if
\begin{equation}
( RF-f) - 2 h^{cd}\nabla_c\nabla_d F + 3\Box F\le 0\;.
\end{equation}
We refer the reader to \cite{Albareti:2012va, Albareti:2014dxa} for considerations on the non-attractive character of gravity in $f(R)$ theories.
If instead of the strong energy condition we evaluate the null energy condition $R_{ab}k^ak^b\ge 0$, there is once again a considerable simplification of the equations, and we obtain focusing of light bundles when
\begin{eqnarray}
T_{ab} \,k^ak^b + k^ak^b\frac{\nabla_a\nabla_b F}{F(R)} \ge 0 \; .
\end{eqnarray}
This is a kind of Poisson-like inequality which effectively yields the lensing effect.
We emphasize that in a cosmological setting, the above considerations are particularly important, as in GR the presence of dark energy implies the violation of specific energy conditions. However, in the generalized approach outlined above, there is no violation but just a reinterpretation of the further degrees of freedom emerging from dynamics.
For instance, consider a flat FRW metric given by $ds^2=-dt^2+a^2(t)\left[dr^2+r^2(d\theta^2+\sin^2\theta \,d\phi^2)\right] $, so that Eq. (\ref{FRfieldeq}) immediately yields the following the field equations
\begin{eqnarray}
\left(\frac{\dot{a}}{a}\right)^2-\frac{1}{3F(R)}\Big\{\frac{1}{2}
\left[f(R)-RF(R)\right]
\\ \nonumber
-3\left(\frac{\dot{a}}{a}\right)\dot{R}
F'(R)\Big\} =\frac{\kappa}{3}\rho \,,
\end{eqnarray}
\begin{eqnarray}
\left(\frac{\ddot{a}}{a}\right)+\frac{1}{2F(R)}\Big\{\frac{\dot{a}}{a}\dot{R}
F'(R)+\ddot{R}F'(R)+\dot{R}^2F''(R)
\nonumber \\
-\frac{1}{3}\left[f(R)-RF(R)\right]\Big\}
=-\frac{\kappa}{6}(\rho+3p) \,.
\end{eqnarray}
Indeed, in the literature, these field equations are usually written as effective Friedman equations, in the following form
\begin{eqnarray}
\left(\frac{\dot{a}}{a}\right)^2&=&\frac{\kappa}{3}\rho_{\rm tot} \,, \\
\left(\frac{\ddot{a}}{a}\right)&=&-\frac{\kappa}{6}(\rho_{\rm
tot}+3p_{\rm tot}) \,,
\label{rho+3p}
\end{eqnarray}
where $\rho_{\rm tot}=\rho+\rho_{(c)}$ and $p_{\rm tot}=p+p_{(c)}$, and the quantities
$\rho_{(c)}$ and $p_{(c)}$, are defined as
\begin{eqnarray}
\rho_{(c)}=\frac{1}{\kappa F(R)}\left\{\frac{1}{2}
\left[f(R)-RF(R)\right]-3\left(\frac{\dot{a}}{a}\right)\dot{R}
F'(R)\right\} \,, \nonumber \\
p_{(c)}=\frac{1}{\kappa
F(R)}\Bigg\{2\left(\frac{\dot{a}}{a}\right)\dot{R}
F'(R)+\ddot{R}F'(R)+\dot{R}^2F''(R)
\nonumber \\
-\frac{1}{2}\left[f(R)-RF(R)\right]\Big\}
\,, \nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
respectively. However, one should always bear in mind that these quantities have a geometrical origin, and should not be interpreted as a fluid.
Now, from Eq. (\ref{rho+3p}), it is transparent that an accelerated expansion can be obtained by imposing the condition $\rho_{\rm tot}+3p_{\rm tot}<0$. Note that, in principle, one may impose that normal matter obeys all of the energy conditions, and the acceleration $\ddot{a} \geq 0$ is attained by considering an appropriate functional form for $f(R)$. For simplicity, consider vacuum, $\rho=p=0$, so that the energy conditions are border-line satisfied. Now appropriately defining a parameter $\omega_{\rm eff}=p_{(c)}/\rho_{(c)}$, one may impose a function $f(R)$. For instance, consider the model $f(R)=R-\mu^{2(n+1)}/R^n$ analysed in \cite{Carroll:2003wy}. By choosing a generic power law for the scale factor, the parameter can be written as
\begin{equation}
\omega_{\rm eff}=-1+\frac{2(n+2)}{3(2n+1)(n+1)} \,,
\end{equation}
and the desired value of $\omega_{\rm eff}<-1/3$ may be attained, by appropriately choosing the value of the parameter $n$.
We emphasize that the message that one obtains from this analysis is precisely that in the generalized approach outlined in this work, there are no violation of the GR energy conditions, but just a reinterpretation of the further degrees of freedom emerging from the dynamics.
\section{Summary and Discussion}\label{sec:concl}
In this work, we have considered the further degrees of freedom related to curvature invariants and scalar fields in Extended Theories of Gravity (ETG). These new degrees of freedom can be recast as {\it effective fluids} that carry different meanings with respect to the standard matter fluids generally adopted as sources of the field equations. It is thus somewhat misleading to apply the standard general relativistic energy conditions to this effective energy-momentum, as the latter contains the matter content and geometrical quantities, which arise from the particular ETG considered. It can be shown, as done in Sec. \ref{secIII}, that the further dynamical content of ETG can be summed up into two coupling functions $g_{1}$ and $g_{2}$ and an additional tensor $H_{ab}$ where all the geometrical modifications are present. Clearly GR is immediately recovered as soon as $g_1=g_2=1$ and $H_{ab}=0$. Here, we explored these features to cases with the contracted Bianchi identities with diffeomorphism invariance and to cases with generalized explicit curvature-matter couplings, which imply the non-conservation of the energy-momentum tensor. Furthermore, we applied the analysis to specific ETGs, such as scalar-tensor gravity and $f(R)$ gravity. The main outcomes are that matter can exhibit further thermodynamical features and gravity can retain its attractive character in presence of large negative pressures. On the other hand, repulsive gravity may occur for standard matter.
As a general result, the fact that further degrees of freedom, related to ETG, can be dealt under the standard of effective
fluids allows, in principle, to set consistent energy conditions for large classes of theories. In this sense, the well formulation of the Cauchy problem can be considered a standard feature for several theories of gravity.
From a cosmological point of view, these considerations are crucial. For example, the presence of dark energy can be considered a straightforward violation of energy conditions in the standard sense of GR. In our generalized approach, there is no violation but just a reinterpretation of the further degrees of freedom emerging from dynamics.
Furthermore, a few considerations in the context of scalar-tensor theories are in order. Note that in the Einstein frame one verifies that the energy conditions are satisfied, but may be violated in the Jordan frame \cite{magnano,Deser:1983rq,Faraoni:2004pi}. This fact does not eliminate the presence of singularities when both frames are considered equivalent (see below for a discussion on the latter issue) \cite{Tsamparlis:2013aza}. Thus, in order to avoid these ambiguities, one may wonder that due to the fact that the energy conditions essentially hold in relativity, why not restrict oneself to the Einstein frame formulation (31) and not bother about the geometrical or matter nature of the appropriate quantities?
However, it is important to mention that in some specific situations it is also possible that the weak energy condition is satisfied in the Jordan frame \cite{Faraoni:2004pi}, and thus evades the problems mentioned above. In addition to this, there are situations, where it is useful to work in the Jordan frame. For instance, if one uses the Equivalence Principle (EP) as a guide in constructing one's theory, then it is useful to work in the Jordan frame, as here the EP is satisfied, and the latter is violated in the Einstein due to the fifth force arising as a result of the anomalous coupling of the scalar field to matter. Nevertheless, one may argue that this may be misleading as the EP could indeed be violated in nature, provided that the violations are extremely small in order to evade detection from current measurements, and thus serve to place stringent constraints on theories that imply the non-conservation of the energy-momentum tensor, and that consequently manifest non-geodesic motion. One may also mention that if one only restricts attention to the Einstein frame, one may also lose sight of the original motivations and modifications of gravity in the geometrical sector. Indeed, the conformal transformation mixes the geometric and matters degrees of freedom, which results in many interpretational ambiguities \cite{Capozziello:1996xg}.
Furthermore, note that Dicke's argument is purely classical, and in this respect, at the quantum level the equivalence of both frames is not proven. In fact, when the metric is quantized, one can find inequivalent quantum theories \cite{Grumiller:2003mc}. In addition to this, considering the semi-classical regime, in which gravity is classical and the matter fields are quantized, one would also expect that the conformal frames are inequivalent, and we refer the reader to \cite{Tsamparlis:2013aza} (and references therein) for more details.
The viewpoint that the Einstein and Jordan frames are physically equivalent is correct and consistent, and can be traced back to Dicke's original paper \cite{Dicke:1961gz}, where the conformal transformation technique was introduced. Indeed, in the spirit of Dicke's paper, both conformal frames are equivalent provided that in the Einstein frame the units of mass, time and space scale as appropriate powers of the scalar field, and are thus varying. More specifically, physics must be conformally invariant and the symmetry group of gravity should be enlarged to incorporate conformal conformations, in addition to the group of diffeomorphisms \cite{Faraoni:2004pi}. However, it is common practise in the literature to consider that in the Einstein frame, measurements are referred to in a rigid system of units, instead of units varying with the conformal factor, and consequently resulting in the non-equivalence of the Jordan and the Einstein frames \cite{Faraoni:2004pi}. Although this approach is perfectly legitimate from a mathematical point of view, one should keep in mind that both theories are physically inequivalent, for instance, when one considers cosmological or black hole solutions. The issue then becomes which of the two conformal frames is physical? In the context of the energy conditions, these are satisfied in the Einstein frame, and violated in the Jordan frame.
For instance, in this context, the violations of the weak energy condition in the Jordan frame is also responsible for the violation of the second law of black hole thermodynamics \cite{Faraoni:2004pi} (and references therein). In fact, if the weak energy condition is violated, the Hawking-Penrose singularity theorems \cite{Hawking:1973uf} also do not apply in the original Jordan frame.
In order to circumvent this difficulty, one may consider the approach outlined in \cite{Chatterjee:2012zh}, in that the second law of black hole thermodynamics is taken as fundamental, and then one modifies the null energy condition in a given theory of gravity to ensure that the classical black hole solution has an entropy that increases with time. This approach seems appealing as the null energy condition does not seem to rest on any fundamental principle of physics, unlike the second law of black hole thermodynamics.
\section*{Acknowledgements}
SC acknowledges the INFN (iniziative specifiche TEONGRAV and QGSKY). FSNL is supported by a Funda\c{c}\~{a}o para a Ci\^{e}ncia e Tecnologia Investigador FCT Research contract, with reference IF/00859/2012, funded by FCT/MCTES (Portugal). FSNL and JPM acknowledge financial support of the Funda\c{c}\~{a}o para a Ci\^{e}ncia e Tecnologia through the grants CERN/FP/123618/2011 and EXPL/FIS-AST/1608/2013.
|
\section{Significance Statement}
Words, wealth, city size, firm size, mutual fund size, amino acid sequences, and neural activity all have a seemingly unusual property, known as Zipf's law: when observations (e.g., words, amino acid sequences, etc.) are ranked from most to least frequent, the frequency of an observation is inversely proportional to its rank.
Many different domain-specific models have been shown to give rise to Zipf's law, but no general principles have emerged.
Here we suggest a general principle: we show that models in which there is a latent, or hidden, variable controlling the observations can, and sometimes must, give rise to Zipf's law.
We illustrate this for words, amino acid sequences, and neural activity.
\keywords{Zipf's law | Criticality | High-dimensional data}
\dropcap{B}oth natural and artificial systems often exhibit a surprising degree of statistical regularity.
One such regularity is Zipf's law.
Originally formulated for word frequency \cite{zipf_selected_1932}, Zipf's law has since been observed in a broad range of domains, including city size \cite{gabaix_zipfs_1999}, firm size \cite{axtell_zipf_2001}, mutual fund size \cite{gabaix_theory_2003}, amino acid sequences \cite{mora_maximum_2010}, and neural activity \cite{mora_are_2011,tyrcha_effect_2013}.
Zipf's law is a relation between rank order and frequency of occurrence: if observations (e.g., words) are ranked by their frequency, then Zipf's law states that the frequency of a particular observation is inversely proportional to its rank,
\begin{align}
\label{zipf-freq}
\text{Frequency} &\propto \frac{1}{\text{Rank}} \, .
\end{align}
Partly because it is so unexpected, a great deal of effort has gone into explaining Zipf's law.
So far, almost all explanations are either domain specific or require fine-tuning.
For language, there are a variety of domain-specific models, beginning with the suggestion that Zipf's law could be explained by imposing a balance between the effort of the listener and speaker \cite{zipf_human_1949,cancho_least_2003,corominas-murtra_emergence_2010}.
Other explanations include minimizing the number of letters (or phonemes) necessary to communicate a message \cite{mandelbrot_informational_1953}, or by considering the generation of random words \cite{li_random_1992}.
There are also domain-specific models for the distribution of city and firm sizes.
These models propose a process in which cities or firms grow by random amounts \cite{gabaix_zipfs_1999,axtell_zipf_2001,ioannides_zipfs_2003}, with a fixed total population or wealth and a fixed minimum size.
Other explanations of Zipf's law require fine tuning.
For instance, there are many mechanisms that can generate power laws \cite{newman_power_2005}, and these can be fine tuned to give an exponent of $-1$.
Possibly the most important fine-tuned proposal is the notion that some systems sit at a highly unusual thermodynamic state --- a critical point \cite{mora_are_2011,saremi_hierarchical_2013,saremi_criticality_2014}.
While growth-process explanations of city size and wealth are widely accepted, the proposed explanations for language and biological data are more controversial \cite{frigg_self-organised_2003,beggs_being_2012}.
Here we propose an alternative explanation, which exploits the fact that most real-world datasets, including words, and most biological data can be understood as being generated from a latent variable model.
In a latent variable model, an unobserved latent variable, $z$ is drawn from a distribution, $\P{z}$, and the observation, $x$, is drawn from a conditional distribution, $\P{x| z}$.
The distribution over $x$ is therefore given by
\begin{align}
\label{latent}
\P{x} &= \int dz \, \P{x| z} \P{z}.
\end{align}
For example, for words the latent variable could be part of speech (e.g., noun or verb), in which case the integral would turn into a sum, and for neural data the latent variable could be either the time since stimulus onset or the total number of spikes in a small time window.
Here we demonstrate that data generated from latent variable models usually exhibit Zipf's law, and that high dimensional latent variable models must display Zipf's law under very mild, intuitively understandable, conditions.
We thus extend recent work by Schwab et al.~\cite{schwab_zipfs_2013,schwab_zipfs_????}, who showed, using methods from statistical physics, that a specific class of latent variable models exhibits Zipf's law.
Furthermore, we show explicitly that linguistic and neural data displays Zipf's law because the data has an underlying latent variable, and we identify implicit latent variables in previously studied models that give Zipf's law.
\section{Results}
To demonstrate that high-dimensional latent variable models typically lead to Zipf's law, we proceed in two steps.
First, we recast Zipf's law into a form more suitable for analysis: we show that Zipf's law implies that the ``energy'' of an observation has a broad, flat distribution, where the energy is related to the probability, and thus the frequency, of an observation by
\begin{align}
\label{edef}
\L(x) &= - \log \P{x} = -\log \text{Frequency}\b{x} + \text{const}
\, .
\end{align}
Second we show that if data is high dimensional, and is described by a latent variable model, then the distribution over energy is flat under very mild conditions.
In combination, these two results imply that high-dimensional latent variable models typically obey Zipf's law.
A flat distribution over energy is a relatively unusual property.
For instance, for words, a flat distribution implies that a random word taken from a large corpus of text is equally likely to be very common (low energy, and thus high probability), like ``and'' as it is to be very rare (high energy, and thus low probability), like ``ephemeral''.
Of course, individually, ``and'' is more likely than ``ephemeral'', but there are many words as rare as ``ephemeral'', and only a few words as common as ``and''.
For a flat distribution, and thus for Zipf's law, these factors --- that there are few common words but many rare words --- almost exactly balance.
Moreover, this balance extends to words of intermediate rarity, leading to a nearly flat distribution over word energy.
This balance is detectable in even a small sample of words, as can be seen from the following example,
\noindent
\begin{tabular}{|c|cccccccc|}
\hline
$x$ & Zipf's & law & implies & that & you & see & rare & and\\
$\L$ & 15.7 & 8.3 & 10.6 & 4.8 & 5.8 & 7.2 & 10.3 & 3.8\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\noindent
In contrast, standard parametric distributions do not obey Zipf's law, and realize only a narrow range of energies.
For instance, if $x$ is the number of heads when a fair coin is flipped $100$ times ($x \sim \text{Binomial}\b{100, 0.5}$), the range of energies is relatively narrow,
\noindent
\begin{tabular}{|c|cccccccc|}
\hline
$x$ & 45 & 56 & 49 & 49 & 52 & 49 & 52 & 55\\
$\L$ & 3.0 & 3.2 & 2.6 & 2.6 & 2.6 & 1.6 & 2.6 & 3.0\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\noindent
The same is true if $x$ is drawn from a zero mean, unit variance Gaussian distribution ($x \sim \N{0, 1}$),
\noindent
\begin{tabular}{|c|cccccccc|}
\hline
$x$ & 0.83 & 0.45 & -0.78 & -1.71 & 0.59 & -0.46 & 0.37 & 0.09\\
$\L$ & 1.3 & 1.0 & 1.2 & 2.4 & 1.1 & 1.0 & 1.0 & 0.9\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
For the above sample of words, energy varies over a broad range --- about five orders of magnitude in probability.
Although there's not enough data to determine whether or not the distribution is flat, the range of energies is certainly consistent with a broad, flat distribution.
This is in sharp contrast to the more standard parametric distributions,
in which almost all the probability mass is focused around regions of high probability --- so almost all the samples have close to the maximum possible probability.
Such a narrow range of probabilities is typical not only for these low dimensional distributions, but also for high dimensional distributions \cite{goldenfeld_lectures_1992,amit_field_2005}.
\subsection{Zipf's law reformulated}
We quantify these observations by showing that Zipf's law holds if and only if the distribution over energy is flat.
To find the distribution over energy, denoted $\P{\L}$, we multiply the probability of an individual state, which by definition is $e^{-\L}$ (see Eq.~\eqref{edef}), by the number of states in a small energy range, $\L$ to $\L+d\L$, which is the difference in ranks, $r \b{\L + d \L} - r \b{\L}$.
This gives
\begin{align}
\label{p_e_vs_r}
\P{\L} d \L & = \big( r \b{\L + d \L} - r \b{\L} \big) e^{-\L}
\end{align}
where $d\L$ is taken to be infinitesimally small.
(See Methods for the relationship between $P(\L)$ and
$P(\vec{x})$.)
When Zipf's law (Eq.~\eqref{zipf-freq}) is written in terms of energy (Eq.~\eqref{edef}) rather than frequency, it has the form
\begin{align}
\label{zipf-energy}
r(\L) = r_0 e^\L
\, .
\end{align}
Inserting this expression into Eq.~\eqref{p_e_vs_r} and simplifying, we have
\begin{align}
\P{\L} & = r_0 \, .
\end{align}
Thus if Zipf's law holds, $\P{\L}$ is constant.
Showing the converse is also straightforward: if $\P{\L}$ is constant and $d \L$ is small, then Equation \eqref{p_e_vs_r} implies that $r(\L) \propto e^\L$, which is just a restatement of Zipf's law, Equation \eqref{zipf-energy}.
This analysis tells us that if $\P{\L}$ is perfectly flat, then Zipf's law is perfectly obeyed.
In the real world, however, $\P{\L}$ is never perfectly flat --- which is consistent with the fact that Zipf's law is never perfectly obeyed.
It is, therefore, important to know how robust Zipf's law is to deviations from a perfectly flat distribution over energy.
To determine this, we use the above analysis to derive an exact expression that relates rank to $\P{\L}$. Equation ~\eqref{p_e_vs_r} implies that
\begin{align}
\frac{dr(\L)}{d \L} = \P{\L} e^{\L} \, .
\end{align}
By analogy with Mora and Bialek's approximate derivation \cite{mora_are_2011}, we integrate both sides with respect to $\L$, take the logarithm, and substitute $e^{\L'} = e^{\L} e^{\L' -\L}$. This gives
\begin{align}
\label{zipf-pred}
\log r(\L) &= \L + \log \P[S]{\L}
\end{align}
where $\P[S]{\L}$ is $\P{\L}$ smoothed with an exponential kernel,
\begin{align}
\label{PsL}
\P[S]{\L} &\equiv \int_{-\infty}^\L d\L' \P{\L'} e^{\L' - \L} \, .
\end{align}
Comparing Eq.~\eqref{zipf-pred} to Zipf's law, $\log r(\L) = \L + \text{const}$ (the logarithm of Equation \eqref{zipf-energy}), we see that the degree to which Zipf's law is obeyed depends on the degree to which $\log \P[S]{\L}$ is constant (see, for example, Fig.~\ref{fig:hole}).
\subsection{Latent variables}
In this section, we show that latent variable models broaden and flatten the distribution over energy, $\P{\L}$, pushing the distribution towards one that might obey Zipf's law.
In the next section we provide sufficient conditions under which the latent variable induced broadening is strong enough to give Zipf's law.
For a latent variable model, the distribution over $x$ is given by averaging $\P{x|z}$ with respect to $z$ (Equation~\eqref{latent}).
Likewise, the distribution over energy is given by averaging $\P{\L| z}$ with respect to $z$,
\begin{align}
\P{\L} &= \int dz \P{\L| z} \P{z}
\, ,
\end{align}
where $\P{\L| z}$ is defined explicitly in Methods.
The key observation is that even if $\P{\L| z}$ has a narrow distribution over energy, $\P{\L}$ can have a broad distribution.
This is true even in the extreme case in which $\P{\L| z}$ is infinitely narrow, $\P{\L| z} = \delta(\L - \L(z))$.
In this case, assuming $z$ is one dimensional,
\begin{align}
\label{pe_delta}
\P{\L} &= P \big(z(\L) \big) \left| \frac{d\L(z)}{dz} \right|^{-1} \, .
\end{align}
Thus, the width of $\P{\L}$ is given by the width of $P(z)$ and the shape of the function $\L(z)$, and so can be arbitrarily wide.
For a latent variable model to broaden the distribution over energy for general $\P{\L| z}$, the mean energy conditioned on $z$ must depend on $z$; otherwise, the latent variable model simply stacks one narrow distribution on top of another.
This broadening is, in fact, exactly what happens for words. We can think of words as being generated by a model in which the latent variable is the part of speech (e.g. noun or verb; see Figure~\ref{word}).
Individual parts of speech have relatively narrow energy distributions (Figure~\ref{word}A), so individual parts of speech do not display Zipf's law (Figure~\ref{word}B).
However, each part of speech has a very different characteristic energy.
For instance, there are many nouns, each of which is relatively rare, so nouns tend to have high energy.
In contrast, there are only a few determiners (like ``the'' and ``this''), each of which is relatively common, so determiners tend to have low energy.
Mixing parts of speech with different characteristic energies, (e.g. high-energy nouns and low-energy determiners) gives a broad distribution over energies (solid black line in Figure~\ref{word}A).
Of course, having different energies for different parts of speech does not guarantee that words obey Zipf's law --- the distribution over energy must be sufficiently flat.
For words, the mean energies are indeed sufficiently broadly and evenly spaced to give a flat distribution over energy, and hence Zipf's law (solid black lines in Figures~\ref{word}A and B).
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width = 0.4 \textwidth]{fig.pdf}
\caption{
Zipf's law for word frequencies, split by part of speech.
The data come from \cite{leech_word_2001}.
The narrow colored lines are for individual parts of speech, the thicker, black line is for the combined data.
{\bf A}. The distribution of energies is broad for words in general, but the distribution of energies for individual parts of speech is much narrower.
{\bf B}. Therefore, words in general obey Zipf's law, but individual parts of speech do not.
The red line has a slope of -1, and closely matches the combined data.
\label{word}
}
\end{figure}
The key insight is that latent variable models can have a broad distribution over energy, and so display Zipf's law, by combining many narrow distributions over energy, each with a different mean, to give a broad distribution.
However, if Zipf's law is observed and one has identified a candidate latent variable model, that candidate model is not necessarily the main explanation for Zipf's law.
It could be that the conditional distributions, $\P{\L|z}$, themselves are broad.
Determining whether this is the case is important if we want to know why a particular system obeys Zipf's law.
For instance, in the case of words, we might ask whether the observation of Zipf's law is mainly due to the fact that text contains many different parts of speech, all with a different characteristic energies, or mainly due to the fact that there is a sometimes a relatively broad distribution of energy within a part of speech.
To determine how much the latent variable contributes to the total width of the energy distribution, we use the law of total variance to write
\begin{align}
\label{total-variance}
\Var[x]{\L(x)} &= \Var[z]{\E[x|z]{\L(x)}} +
\E[z]{\Var[x|z]{\L(x)}},
\end{align}
where $\text{E}_z$ and $\text{Var}_z$ are the expectation and variance with respect to $\P{z}$, and $\text{E}_{x|z}$ and $\text{Var}_{x|z}$ are the expectation and variance with respect to $P(x|z)$.
The total variance is just the variance of the mean energies, $\Var[z]{\E[x|z]{\L(x)}}$, plus the average variance of the energy, conditioned on a latent variable, $\E[z]{\Var[x|z]{\L(x)}}$.
The first term can be thought of as the variance contributed by the latent variable, and is known in statistics as the explained variance.
We can therefore define the proportion of explained energy variance (PEEV),
\begin{align}
\label{peev}
\text{PEEV} &\equiv \frac{\Var[z]{\E[x|z]{\L(x)}}}{\Var{\L(x)}} \, ,
\end{align}
which ranges from $0$, indicating that $z$ explains none of the variance, to $1$, indicating that $z$ explains all of the variance.
Of course, PEEV may be close to $1$ whether or not Zipf's law is obeyed.
PEEV is therefore useful only if Zipf's law is indeed observed.
For words, PEEV is relatively high, $0.58$, as we might expect given Figure~\ref{word}.
\subsection{High-dimensional latent variable models}
Thus far, we have shown only that latent variables could potentially induce a broad, flat distribution over energy.
In this section, we demonstrate that when the observations are high-dimensional, and some extremely mild conditions are satisfied, latent variable models necessarily induce a broad, flat distribution over energy, and so necessarily exhibit Zipf's law.
By high-dimensional, we mean that an observation is a vector with $n$ elements, where $n$ is large.
We thus use $\vec{x}$ instead of $x$, where $\vec{x} \equiv \b{x_1 \, x_2 \, ... \, x_n}$.
We start by showing that the variance of the energy is typically large for high-dimensional latent variable models, which is necessary for Zipf's law.
We then show that under only mild conditions, the distribution over energy not only has a high variance but is also flat.
As discussed above, latent variable models can broaden the distribution over energy by combining many narrow distributions with different means.
Thus, the extent of broadening is determined largely by the variance of the mean energy, which is the first term in Equation~\eqref{total-variance}.
Although it is possible to work with the mean energy, it is more intuitive to approximate the mean energy by the entropy of $\P{\vec{x}| z}$,
\begin{align}
\label{eq:bayes-deviation}
\E[\vec{x}|z]{\L(\vec{x})} \approx \E[\vec{x}|z]{\L(\vec{x}|z)}
\end{align}
where $\L(\vec{x}|z) \equiv - \log \P{\vec{x}|z}$.
As we show in Methods, this approximation relies primarily on the fact that when we condition on $z$, the relevant values of $\vec{x}$ are the ones for which $\P{\vec{x}|z}$ is large.
The variance of the entropy, $\E[\vec{x}| z]{\L\b{\vec{x}|z}}$, is given by
\begin{align}
\Var[z]{\E[\vec{x}| z]{\L\b{\vec{x}|z}}} = \sum_{ij}^n \Cov[z]{e_i(z), e_j(z)}
\label{sum_xs}
\end{align}
where
\begin{align}
e_i(z) = \E[\vec{x}| z]{-\log \P{x_i| z, x_{i-1} \hdots x_1}}
\, .
\end{align}
Because there are $n^2$ terms on the right hand side of Eq.~\eqref{sum_xs}, if the average covariance between $e_i(z)$ and $e_j(z)$ is ${\cal O}(1)$, then the variance of the entropy of $\P{\vec{x}| z}$ --- and, therefore, the variance of the energy --- is ${\cal O}(n^2)$. This leads to an extremely broad distribution over energy.
To gain intuition into the ${\cal O}(n^2)$ scaling, we look at the simple, and common, case in which the $x_i$ are independently and identically distributed conditioned on $z$. For such a model, $e(z) = \E[x_i| z]{-\log \P{x_i|z}}$, where $e(z)$ is now independent of $i$. We thus have
\begin{align}
\label{energy_var-iid}
\Var[z]{\E[\vec{x}| z]{\L\b{\vec{x}|z}}} = n^2 \Var[z]{e(z)}
\, .
\end{align}
All that we require for ${\cal O}(n^2)$ scaling is that $e(z)$, the entropy of $\P{x_i| z}$, changes with $z$ for values of $z$ with non-zero probability.
This is a common feature of many distributions.
For instance, if the $x_i$ are binary and $z$ controls the probability that $x_i=1$,
\begin{subequations}
\begin{align}
\P{x_i=1| z} &= z,\\
\P{x_i=0| z} &= 1-z
\, ,
\end{align}
\end{subequations}
then the entropy of $\P{x_i| z}$ is the entropy of a Bernoulli random variable,
$e(z) = - z \log z - (1-z) \log (1-z)$.
Figures \ref{fig:hole}A and B show $\P[S]{\L}$ and Zipf plots for a slightly modified version of this model.
Alternatively, if the $x_i$ are Gaussian and independent conditioned on $z$, and $z$ controls the variance,
\begin{align}
\P{x_i| z} &= \N{0, z^2}
\, ,
\end{align}
then the entropy of $\P{x_i| z}$ is $e(z) = \log z + \text{const}$.
In both cases, the entropy of $\P{x_i| z}$ depends on $z$.
Consequently, as indicated by Eq.~\eqref{energy_var-iid}, the variance of the energy is ${\cal O}(n^2)$.
Possibly more illuminating are cases where we do not see ${\cal O}(n^2)$ scaling.
For instance, if the previous $x_1, ..., x_{i-1}$ pin down the exact value of $x_i$ for $i$ greater than some fixed $i_0$, the number of nonzero terms on the right hand side of Eq.~\eqref{sum_xs} is constant in the large $n$ limit.
Alternatively, if the $x_i$ each have their own latent variable, and those latent variables are independent, then $\Cov[z]{e_i(z), e_j(z)} = 0$ for $i \ne j$, and the number of nonzero terms on the right hand side of Eq.~\eqref{sum_xs} is ${\cal O}(n)$ --- not ${\cal O}(n^2)$ as is required for Zipf's law.
We have shown that under a latent variable model, the variance of the distribution over energy is ${\cal O}(n^2)$.
We now investigate what this implies for the smoothness of $\P[S]{\L}$, since the degree of smoothness determines the extent to which Zipf's law is obeyed (see Eq.~\eqref{zipf-pred}).
For that it is convenient to change variables
\begin{align}
\L = n \epsilon \, .
\end{align}
When the log-rank (Eq.~\eqref{zipf-pred}) is rewritten in terms of $\epsilon$, it becomes
\begin{align}
\label{zipfO1} \frac{1}{n} \log r(\epsilon) &= \epsilon + \frac{1}{n} \log \P[S]{\epsilon} + \text{const}.
\end{align}
As the variance of $\L$ is ${\cal O}(n^2)$, the variance of $\epsilon$ is ${\cal O}(1)$, so it is plausible that $\P{\epsilon}$, and thus $\P[S]{\epsilon}$, converges to a constant distribution as $n$ increases.
In fact, so long as $\P[S]{\L}$ depends weakly on $n$ in the large $n$ limit, the second term scales, to leading order, as $1/n$, and so vanishes in the large $n$ limit, giving Zipf's law.
Thus, high dimensional latent variable models generally give rise to Zipf's law.
There is, though, one caveat.
As discussed by Schwab et al.~\cite{schwab_zipfs_????}, even if $\P{\epsilon}$ is independent of $n$, it could still exhibit ``holes'' --- regions of zero probability between regions of non-zero probability.
Such holes would cause $\log \P[S]{\epsilon}$ to scale as $-n \epsilon$ (see Eq.~\eqref{PsL}), and so disrupt Zipf's law.
It is relatively straightforward to see how holes affect Zipf plots: for a region in which $\P{\epsilon}$ is low, the energy decreases rapidly without the rank changing (Fig.~\ref{fig:hole}C and D).
Between holes, however, we expect Zipf's law to be obeyed, as illustrated in Fig.~\ref{fig:hole}D.
Although holes can cause departures from Zipf's law, it turns out that narrow peaks in the distribution over energy cannot.
To see this explicitly, assume that $\P{\epsilon}$ is composed of a delta function at $\epsilon = \epsilon_0$, weighted by $\alpha$, combined with a smooth component, $f(\epsilon)$, that integrates to $1-\alpha$.
Using Equation~\eqref{PsL}, we have
\begin{align}
\label{spike}
\frac{1}{n} \log \P[S]{\epsilon}
&= \frac{1}{n} \log
\left[ \alpha n e^{-n\b{\epsilon - \epsilon_0}}\Theta\b{\epsilon - \epsilon_0} + f_S\b{\epsilon} \right]
\end{align}
where $f_S$ is $f$ smoothed by an exponential kernel, and $\Theta$ is
the Heaviside step function.
As the first term in the logarithm ranges from $0$ to $\alpha n$, the whole term can be bounded above and below,
\begin{align}
\frac{1}{n} \log f_s(\epsilon) \leq \frac{1}{n} \log \P[S]{\epsilon} \leq \frac{1}{n} \log\b{\alpha n + f_s(\epsilon)}
\ .
\end{align}
The upper and lower bound both approach $0$ as $n$ increases.
Thus, even delta-function singularities do not prevent convergence to Zipf's law, so long as they occur on top of a finite baseline.
We illustrate this in Fig.~\ref{fig:hole}E and F, for which $P(\epsilon) = \text{Uniform}(\epsilon; 0, 1)/2 + \delta(\epsilon-1/2)/2$.
In conclusion, high dimensional latent variable models lead to Zipf's law under two relatively mild conditions.
First, the average covariance between individual entropy terms, $e_i(z)$, must be ${\cal O}(1)$; if the $x_i$ are independently and identically distributed conditioned on $z$, this is satisfied whenever the entropy of $\P{x_i| z}$ depends on $z$ for values of z with non-zero probability.
Second, $\P{\epsilon}$ cannot have holes; that is it cannot have regions where the probability approaches zero between regions of non-zero probability.
\begin{figure}[t!!!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width = 0.4 \textwidth]{simulated.pdf}
\caption{
The relationship between $\P[S]{\L}$ (left panel) and Zipf plots ($\L$ versus rank, right panel). Note that in the right panel, $\L$ increases downward on the $y$-axis.
We used $n=30$ for all plots.
{\bf A} and {\bf B}. Data was simulated using binary $x_i$, with $\P{z} = \text{Uniform}(z; 0, 0.5)$, and $\P{x_i| z}$ given in Methods.
{\bf C} and {\bf D}. We bypassed an explicit latent variable model, and set $\P{\epsilon} = \text{Uniform}(\epsilon; 0, 0.5)/2 + \text{Uniform}(\epsilon; 1, 1.5)/2$.
The resulting hole, from $\epsilon = 0.5$ to $\epsilon = 1$ causes large deviations from Zipf's law.
{\bf E} and {\bf F}. We again bypassed an explicit latent variable model, and set $\P{\epsilon} = \text{Uniform}(\epsilon; 0, 1)/2 + \delta(\epsilon-0.5)/2$.
\label{fig:hole}
}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Neural data}
Neural data has been shown, in some cases, to obey Zipf's law \cite{mora_are_2011,tyrcha_effect_2013}.
It's relatively easy to see why: Figure \ref{retina}A shows spike trains recorded from retinal ganglion cells in response to a full field flicker (see Methods for details).
Because of the external stimulus, the instantaneous firing rate varies over a large range, and thus so does the entropy --- exactly the condition we need for Zipf's law.
And, indeed, this data does obey Zipf's law, as can be seen from the black line in Figures \ref{retina}C and E.
Figure \ref{retina}A suggests that Zipf's law emerges because there is an underlying latent variable controlling firing rate.
We checked this for two latent variables: time since stimulus onset, and the spike count in a small time window.
In the first case, when the latent variable, $z$, is the time since stimulus onset, we have
\begin{subequations}
\label{eq:neural-model}
\begin{align}
\P{x_i = 1| z} & = p_i(z)
\\
\P{x_i = 0| z} & = 1-p_i(z)
\end{align}
\end{subequations}
where $x_i=1|z$ indicates that neuron $i$ fired one or more spikes in a time window from $z$ to $z+20$~ms.
Tyrcha \textit{et al.\ }\cite{tyrcha_effect_2013} showed that this is a remarkably effective model of real-world neural data, and like us they observed Zipf's law.
Figure \ref{retina}B shows $\P[S]{\L}$ for different settings of the latent variable --- specifically, samples that occur within a $100$ ms time window (colored lines).
These distributions are relatively narrow (colored lines in Figure \ref{retina}B), and so do not display Zipf's law (colored lines in Figure \ref{retina}C).
In contrast, when we plot $\P[S]{\L}$ for all the data (black line in Figure \ref{retina}B), the distribution is very broad; consistent with the observation of Zipf's law in Figure \ref{retina}C.
As we might, therefore, expect, $PEEV$ was relatively high for this latent variable model: $0.67$.
For the second model, the latent variable, $z$, is the number of neurons that fired in a $20$~ms time window, $z = \sum_i x_i$.
Because we have $30$ neurons, $z$ is an integer that ranges from $0$ to $30$.
While this model may seem unusual (in the sense that the latent variable is a deterministic function of the data), a similar model has been shown to provide a good fit to neural data \cite{tkacik_searching_2014}.
The distribution over energy for a particular setting of $z$ is found be collecting all patterns of activity that have exactly $z$ spikes.
The resulting smoothed distributions, $\P[S]{\L|z}$, are plotted as colored lines in Fig.~\ref{retina}D.
All of them are relatively narrow, and so deviate strongly from Zipf's law: the corresponding colored lines in Fig.~\ref{retina}E do not have a slope of -1.
However, the combined distribution, $\P[S]{\L}$, is relatively flat (black line in Fig.~\ref{retina}D), and so does display Zipf's law (black line in Fig.~\ref{retina}E).
As we might expect from these plots, PEEV is very high: $0.95$.
\begin{figure}[t!!!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width = 0.5 \textwidth]{retina.pdf}
\caption{
Neural data recorded from $30$ cells in the retina, stimulated by a full-field flash.
See Methods for details.
{\bf A}. Spike trains. Note that the firing rates are strongly correlated across time.
{\bf B}. $\P[S]{\L|z}$ (colored lines) when time is the latent variable (see text and Methods). The thick black line is $\P[S]{\L}$.
{\bf C}. Zipf plots for the data conditioned on the latent variable (colored lines) and for all the data (black line). The red lines have slope $-1$.
{\bf D} and {\bf E}. Same as panels B and C, except the latent variables is the spike count.
\label{retina}
}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Other models}
Macke \textit{et al.\ }\cite{macke_common_2011} showed that models in which the latent variable is common input, similar to the model in Eq.~\eqref{eq:neural-model}, exhibit critical behaviour, although they did not explore the connection to Zipf's law.
Schwab et al.\ \cite{schwab_zipfs_2013,schwab_zipfs_????} are the first ones we know of to notice that a generalized version of a superstatistical latent variable model \cite{beck_superstatistics_2003},
\begin{align}
\label{schwab}
\P{\vec{x}| \vec{z}} &\propto e^{-\sum_{i=1}^N z_i H_i(\vec{x})} \, ,
\end{align}
can give rise to Zipf's law.
Our analysis extends their results in two ways: we show that Zipf's law arises for essentially arbitrary conditional distributions $\P{\vec{x}|z}$, with far more complex interactions between $z$ and $\vec{x}$ than are allowed in their model, and we provide intuitive, easily understandable, and quantitative conditions under which we expect Zipf's law to emerge.
Finally, Marselli et al.\ \cite{marsili_sampling_2013} took a very different approach: they postulated that variables are often chosen by scientists to have a broad distribution over energy, and that in the undersampled regime those variable exhibit Zipf's law. This is complementary to our approach, for which Zipf's law emerges in the well sampled regime.
There have also been several reports of Zipf's law in models for which a latent variable is relatively easy to identify.
Here we examine two such models.
First, Mora et al.\ \cite{mora_maximum_2010} found that amino acid sequences in the D region of Zebrafish IgM obey Zipf's law.
Here the authors identified the latent variable, which was the length of the amino acid sequence.
They found that, conditioned on length, the data was well fit by an Ising model with translation-invariant coupling,
\begin{align}
\P{\vec{x}| z} &\propto \exp\b{\sum_{i=1}^z h\b{x_i} + \sum_{|i-j| < z} J_{i-j}\b{x_i, x_j} } \end{align}
where $x_i$ represents a single amino acid (of which there were 21) and $z$, the latent variable, is the length of the amino acid sequence.
As we have seen, such a model will produce Zipf's law if, first, the entropy of $\P{\vec{x}| z}$ depends strongly on $z$ and, second, $P(z)$ is reasonable broad.
The first is typically the case, as the longer the sequence, the more sequences are possible; thus --- all else being equal --- longer sequences have higher entropy.
The second was indeed observed in their data.
Consequently, under this model, we would expect to see a mix of shorter sequences, with lower entropy, and longer sequences, with higher entropy.
Because the entropy is approximately equal to the mean energy (Eq.~\eqref{eq:bayes-deviation}), this mix of sequences gives a mix of mean energies, and hence Zipf's law.
Importantly, this predicts that Zipf's law arises, at least in part, from the fact that $z$ has a broad distribution, and not solely from the Ising part of the model.
In fact, we would predict that sequences of fixed length, like words taken from only one part of speech, do not obey Zipf's law.
This, however, remains to be tested.
Second, Li \cite{li_random_1992} noted that randomly generated words obey Zipf's law.
Here ``randomly generated'' means the following: a word is generated by randomly selecting a symbol that can be either one of $M$ letters or a space, all with equal probability; the symbols are concatenated; and the word is terminated when a space is encountered.
Such a model is not consistent with linguistic data, as it predicts that individual parts of speech should also obey Zipf's law, which, as we have seen, they do not.
Nevertheless, given that this model leads to Zipf's law, we expect that there is an underlying latent variable.
Indeed, there is: word length.
As for amino-acid sequences above, there are more long words than short ones, and so the entropy depends on word length, and the distribution of word lengths is rather broad.
More quantitatively, if we let the latent variable, $z$, be word length, then the entropy of $\vec{x}$ (a word) conditioned on $z$ is $\E[\vec{x}|z]{\L\b{\vec{x}|z}} = z \log M$.
Moreover, $z$ has a broad distribution: as is straightforward to show,
\begin{align}
P(z) = \frac{1}{M} \left( 1 - \frac{1}{M+1} \right)^z \, .
\end{align}
Thus, if $z$ is allowed to vary over a broad enough range, we expect Zipf's law to emerge, as Li showed.
\section{Discussion}
Does the observation of Zipf’s law imply that there must be an underlying latent variable model? The answer is clearly no.
For instance, one could produce Zipf's law by listing $\vec{x}$'s in random order, and then assigning each $\vec{x}$ a probability that is inversely proportional to its position on the list.
That said, when Zipf’s law is observed, a latent variable model seems likely:
we have shown that latent variable models can give rise to Zipf's law in a broad range of situations, and that latent variable models in which the data is high-dimensional must display Zipf's law under mild conditions --- conditions that are satisfied for a large volume of real-world data, providing a simple explanation for the prevalence of Zipf's law.
These findings have important implications in fields as diverse as biology, linguistics, economics.
In biology, one explanation for observations of Zipf's law has been that biological systems sit at a special thermodynamic state, the critical point \cite{mora_are_2011,saremi_hierarchical_2013,saremi_criticality_2014}.
However, our findings indicate that Zipf's law might emerge from phenomena much more familiar to biologists: unobserved states that influence the observed data.
In fact, this does indeed appear to be the cause of Zipf's law in neural data, where the unobserved state is either the time since stimulus onset or the underlying population firing rate.
For words, we showed that individual parts of speech do not obey Zipf's law; it is only by mixing together different parts of speech with different characteristic frequencies that Zipf's law emerges.
This has two important consequences for Zipf's law in language.
First, the observation that different parts of speech do not obey Zipf's law is inconsistent with any explanation of Zipf's law that does not distinguish between parts of speech \cite{mandelbrot_informational_1953,price_general_1976,li_random_1992,gabaix_zipfs_1999,cancho_least_2003,corominas-murtra_emergence_2010}.
Second, and more important, our explanation for Zipf's law relies on the existence of multiple parts of speech with different characteristic frequencies, raising the question of why language is structured in this way.
We have not identified a latent variable that explains Zipf's law for wealth or for city, firm or mutual fund size. However, the ability of our framework to explain Zipf's law for words and neural activity suggests that there might be one.
One possibility, at least for city size, is individual preference:
if preference for city sizes was reasonably evenly spread over a log-scale (e.g.\ $30\%$ of people want to live in a village of size $\sim$$10^2$, $30\%$ want to live in a town of size $\sim$$10^4$, and $40\%$ want to live in a city of size $\sim$$10^6$), Zipf's law would emerge naturally.
Of course, there may not be a latent variable; the distribution of city size might, as has been suggested, arise from random growth processes \cite{gabaix_zipfs_1999,gabaix_theory_2003}.
However, if a latent variable model can be identified, it could offer a great deal of insight into fundamental processes that shape society.
In all of these domains, the observation of Zipf's law is important because it points, obliquely, to the existence of some latent variable structure.
It is that structure, not Zipf's law itself, that is likely to provide insight into statistical regularities in the world.
\begin{materials}
The distribution over energy, $\P{\L}$, is related to the distribution over observations, $\P{\vec{x}}$, via
\begin{align}
\P{\L} &= \int d\vec{x} \P{\vec{x}} \delta\b{\L - \L(\vec{x})}.
\end{align}
Likewise, the relationship between the conditional distributions over energy and observations is
\begin{align}
\P{\L| z} &= \int d\vec{x} \P{\vec{x}| z} \delta\b{\L - \L(\vec{x})}.
\end{align}
If $\vec{x}$ is discrete, then $\P{\vec{x}}$ and $\P{\vec{x}| z}$ are sums of delta-functions, and thus so are $\P{\L}$ and $\P{\L| z}$.
However, when $n$ is large, the delta-functions become exponentially small and dense, so $\P{\L}$ and $\P{\L| z}$ can be treated as a continuous distribution.
To demonstrate that $\E[\vec{x}| z]{\L\b{\vec{x}}} \approx \E[\vec{x}| z]{\L\b{\vec{x}|z}}$ (Eq.~\eqref{eq:bayes-deviation}), we start with
\begin{align}
\label{dkl}
\E[\vec{x}| z]{\L\b{\vec{x}}} - \E[\vec{x}| z]{\L\b{\vec{x}| z}} = \E[\vec{x}| z]
{ \log \frac{\P{z|\vec{x}}}{\P{z}} }
\, ,
\end{align}
where we used $\L\b{\vec{x}} \equiv - \log \P{\vec{x}}$, $\L\b{\vec{x}|z} \equiv - \log \P{\vec{x}|z}$, and Bayes' theorem, $\P{\vec{x}} = \P{\vec{x}|z} \P{z}/ \P{z|\vec{x}}$.
The average of the right hand side with respect to $\P{z}$ is the mutual information between $\vec{x}$ and $z$, denoted $I(\vec{x}; z)$.
When $z$ is discrete, the information is bounded by the entropy of $\P{z}$, which is ${\cal O}(1)$.
Thus, the right hand side of Eq.~\eqref{dkl}, which is non-negative, is ${\cal O}(1)$.
If $z$ is continuous, we make use of the fact that as $n$ increases, the distribution, $\P{z| \vec{x}}$ typically approaches a Gaussian, with a variance proportional to $1/n$,
\begin{align}
\P{z| \vec{x}} &\approx \frac{1}{\sqrt{2 \pi \frac{\sigma^2(\vec{x})}{n}}} e^{-n\b{z - \mu(\vec{x})}^2/(2 \sigma^2(\vec{x}))}.
\end{align}
In this case, we have, in the large $n$ limit,
\begin{align}
\E[\vec{x}, z] { \log \frac{\P{z|\vec{x}}}{\P{z}} } \rightarrow \frac{1}{2} \log n
+ \text{const}
\, .
\end{align}
In Fig.~\ref{fig:hole}A and B, $\P{x_i| z}$ was given by,
\begin{align}
\P{x_i=1} &= p_i(z)\\
\P{x_i=0} &= 1-p_i(z),
\intertext{where,}
p_i(z) &= \frac{z^{\beta_i}}{z^{\beta_i} + \b{1-z}^{\beta_i}}\\
\P{\beta_i} &= \N{0, 0.2^2}.
\end{align}
Here $\beta_i$ is constant across trials, and is therefore a parameter, not a latent variable.
Introducing $\beta_i$ is necessary, because without it, any setting of $\vec{x}$ with the same sum, $\sum_i x_i$, has the same probability and hence the same energy --- giving a Zipf plot composed of steps.
Introducing $\beta_i$ breaks this symmetry, giving a smoother and more realistic Zipf plot. $10^5$ draws were used to make Fig.~\ref{fig:hole}A and B.
Neural data in Fig.~\ref{retina} was acquired by electrophysiological recordings of 3 isolated mouse retinas, yielding 30 ganglion cells.
The recordings were performed on a multielectrode array using the procedure described in \cite{bomash_virtual_2013,nirenberg_retinal_2012}.
Full-field-flash were presented by a Sony LCD computer monitor, delivering intermittent flashes (2 s of light followed by 2 s of dark, repeated 30 times) of white light to the retina \cite{nirenberg_light_1997}.
All procedures were performed under the regulation of the Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee of Weill Cornell Medical College (protocol \#0807-769A) and in accordance with NIH guidelines.
To give us enough samples to plot Zipf's law, we estimated $p_i(z)$ from data using the model in Eq.~\eqref{eq:neural-model}, and drew $10^6$ samples from that model.
To construct the distributions of energy conditioned on the latent variable --- the colored lines in Figs.~\ref{retina}B and C --- we treated samples that occurred within $100$~ms as if they had the same latent variable (so, for example, $\P[S]{\L|z=0}$ is shorthand for $\P[S]{\L|z=0, 20, 40, 60, \text{or } 80}$).
Finally, to reduce clutter, we plotted lines only for $z=0$~ms, $z=300$~ms etc.
\end{materials}
\begin{acknowledgments}
The authors would like to thank Yasser Roudi and John Hertz for valuable comments.
This work was supported by the Gatsby Charitable Foundation.
\end{acknowledgments}
\bibliographystyle{unsrt}
|
\section{Introduction}
Spin-correlated orbital currents provide the source\cite{Bree2014} of the dramatic modification of the effective magnetic moment ${\boldsymbol \mu}$ of the electron in a semiconductor\cite{Roth1959,Yafet1963}. Confinement has been shown to quench this magnetic moment, even for nanostructures with spherical symmetry\cite{Pryor2006b,Pryor2007,Bree2012,Bree2014},
to a much greater degree than expected from confinement-induced shifts in semiconductor band gap, spin-orbit splitting, and masses. Confinement-induced effects on the magnetic moment ${\boldsymbol \mu}$ also directly modify the temporal evolution of a spin in a magnetic field\cite{Vrijen2000,Jiang2001,Xiao2004,Nakaoka2007,Pingenot2008,De2009,Andlauer2009,Pingenot2011,Roloff2010}, by slowing or speeding precession, or through forms of electrically-driven resonance such as $g$ tensor modulation resonance\cite{Kato2003}.
These modifications have been suggested as means to manipulate the spins for quantum computation\cite{Loss1998,Kane1998}. Recently the spatial structure of these orbital currents were calculated directly in spherical and cylindrical III-V semiconductor nanostructures\cite{Bree2014}
and the peak currents were identified to be midway from the center of the nanostructure to the edge of the nanostructure in the plane perpendicular to the magnetic moment's orientation. This suggests that removing the material in the center of the nanostructure, forming a shell or ring, might have minimal effect on the electron's magnetic moment. It also suggests where electrical gates might be positioned to have the greatest effect on the electron's magnetic moment.
Here we calculate the spin-correlated orbital currents for spheres, cylinders, spherical shells and rings, identifying the response of the spin-correlated orbital currents to changes in topology, to changes in disk and ring aspect ratio, and to the softness of the confining potential. The overall conclusions of Ref.~\onlinecite{Bree2014} regarding the source of the orbital current remain valid in these structures. That is, the dominant orbital contribution to the spin's magnetic moment originates from a ground-state, dissipationless current loop circulating within the dot. The calculations use semiconductor envelope-function theory for direct-gap semiconductor quantum dots\cite{Vahala1990,Sercel1990}. The contributions from spin-orbit-correlated circulating currents are fully identified and broken down into constituent contributions. Contributions largely neglected in Ref.~\onlinecite{Bree2014} because they are not the largest contributors to the magnetic moment include contributions from orbital currents within a unit cell and contributions associated with a single envelope function; both are discussed in detail here. The boundary conditions for these nanostructures are considered to be hard-wall, which are appropriate for many colloidal quantum dots and nanowires, or harmonic and soft, characteristic of electrostatic confinement. Although this approach can, in principle, be generalized to other electronic states, including excited electronic states and hole states, this generalization requires dealing with significant additional complexities associated with non-zero angular momentum in the conduction-band envelope functions. Thus here we focus on orbital contributions to the magnetic moment along a symmetry axis of a sphere, shell, disk or ring; in-plane electron magnetic moments will be the subject of future work.
The paper's structure is as follows. In Sec.~\ref{sec:frame} the theoretical formalism introduced in Ref.~\onlinecite{Bree2014} to calculate the orbital contributions to the spin's magnetic moment is summarized, as it is relied on for later sections. The formalism is then applied to spheres in Sec.~\ref{sec:spheres}, spherical shells in Sec.~\ref{sec:shells}, disks with hard-wall boundaries in Sec.~\ref{sec:harddisks}, disk with soft boundaries in Sec.~\ref{sec:softdisks}, and rings in Sec.~\ref{sec:rings}. We finally draw general conclusions on all these different geometries in Sec.~\ref{sec:con}.
\section{Theoretical framework}\label{sec:frame}
Throughout this article, we focus on the spin-oriented electron ground state $\Psi({\bf r})$ of a nanostructure. The magnetic moment ${\boldsymbol \mu}_{\text{tot}}$ contains contributions from both the spin and the orbital motion of the state:
\begin{eqnarray}
{\boldsymbol \mu}_{\text{tot}} = {\boldsymbol \mu}_{\text{spin}} + {\boldsymbol \mu}_{\text{orb}}
\end{eqnarray}
This moment can couple to an external applied magnetic field ${\bf B}$ via the Zeeman interaction:
\begin{eqnarray}
{\cal H}_{\text{Zeeman}} = -{\boldsymbol \mu}_{\text{tot}} \cdot {\bf B}
\end{eqnarray}
In absence of a magnetic field, the ground state will be degenerate due to time-reversal invariance\cite{Kramers1930}; two degenerate states are the time reversal of each other, and have an oppositely oriented magnetic moment. It therefore suffices to examine only one state of the Kramers doublet. In this article we fix the orientation of the magnetic moment along the symmetry axis of the nanostructure, which can be experimentally realized by either electrical spin injection or optical orientation.
The magnetic moment is related to the $g$-factor, which is often used in an experimental context and can be defined as\cite{Pryor2007}:
\begin{eqnarray}
g = \frac{E_{\uparrow}-E_{\downarrow}}{\mu_B B},
\end{eqnarray}
where $E_{\uparrow,\downarrow}$ are the energies associated with spin up/down, and $\mu_B={e\hbar}/{2 m_0}$ is the Bohr magneton. Using the Zeeman interaction and time-reversal symmetry, we can relate the $g$-factor to the magnetic moment in the limit of zero magnetic field:
\begin{eqnarray}
|g| &=& \lim_{B\rightarrow 0} \frac{(-{\boldsymbol \mu}_{\text{tot}}\cdot{\bf B})-({\boldsymbol \mu}_{\text{tot}}\cdot{\bf B})}{\mu_B B} \\
&=& 2 \frac{\mu_{\text{tot}}}{\mu_B} = 2\left(\frac{\mu_{\text{spin}}}{\mu_B} + \frac{\mu_{\text{orb}}}{\mu_B}\right)
\end{eqnarray}
where we assumed the magnetic field and the magnetic moment to be collinear. We would like to stress that the factor $2$ has no relation to the free electron $g$-factor, and stems solely from the Kramers degeneracy. The term $\mu_{\text{orb}}$ refers to the orbital contribution to the {\it spin}'s magnetic moment, not the spin-independent orbital moment of the electron. Subsequently in the text, however, we will refer to this simply as the orbital magnetic moment. Even though we will focus on the spin and orbital contributions to the spin's magnetic moment in the rest of this article, the above relation enables us to connect them to an experimentally measurable $g$-factor. In the next two sections we present the theoretical framework to calculate the orbital and spin moments.
\subsection{Orbital moment} \label{sec:orbmu}
The orbital magnetic moment ${\boldsymbol \mu}_{\text{orb}}$ is related\cite{Jackson1998b} to the orbital current density ${\bf j}\left({\bf r}\right)$ by
\begin{eqnarray}
{\boldsymbol \mu}_{\text{orb}} &=& \frac{1}{2}\int_V{\bf r}\times{\bf j}\left({\bf r}\right)~d^3r = \frac{1}{2} \sum_s \int_{V_s} {\bf r} \times {\bf j}({\bf r})~d^3r,
\end{eqnarray}
where we have considered the moment as a summation of moments arising from each of $s$ unit cells having volume $V_s$. We define the average current density $\langle {\bf j} \rangle_s$ in a unit cell as:
\begin{eqnarray}
\langle {\bf j} \rangle_s = \frac{1}{V_s} \int_{V_s} {\bf j}({\bf r})~d^3r.
\end{eqnarray}
Using $\langle{\bf j}\rangle_s$ we split the orbital current into an itinerant current (IC) that flows into and out of a unit cell, and a localized current (LC) whose average over the unit cell vanishes, given by ${\bf j}({\bf r}) - \langle{\bf j}\rangle_s$ (see also Fig.~\ref{fig:unit_cell}). The magnetic moment can then be expressed as\cite{Thonhauser2005}:
\begin{eqnarray}
{\boldsymbol \mu}_{\text{orb}} &=& \frac{1}{2}\sum_{s} \Big\{ \underbrace{V_s {\bf r}_s \times \langle {\bf j} \rangle_s}_{\text{Itinerant current (IC)}} \nonumber \\
&& \quad \quad \quad + \underbrace{\int_{V_s} ({\bf r} - {\bf r}_s) \times \left\{{\bf j}({\bf r}) - \langle {\bf j} \rangle_s\right\}~d^3r}_{\text{Localized (circulating) current (LC)}} \Big\}
\end{eqnarray}
where ${\bf r}_s$ is the vector pointing to unit cell $s$. The first term is the orbital moment due to itinerant currents, while the second term is the sum of orbital moments due to a (circulating) current localized within each unit cell. For an isolated atom, the first term is zero. The spatial extent of states in semiconductors can be substantial, leading to a much larger lever arm for the moments arising from itinerant currents than for the moments arising from localized currents (i.e. ${\bf r}_s \gg {\bf r} - {\bf r}_s$). These orbital currents follow from\cite{Messiah1961}:
\begin{eqnarray}
{\bf j}\left({\bf r}\right) = \frac{e\hbar}{m_0} \text{Im}\left\{\Psi^*\left({\bf r}\right)\nabla\Psi\left({\bf r}\right)\right\}
\end{eqnarray}
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.8\columnwidth]{unit_cell_ai_13.pdf}
\caption{The orbital current within a unit cell can be split into an itinerant contribution $\langle{\bf j}\rangle_s$, and a localized contribution ${\bf j}({\bf r})-\langle{\bf j}\rangle_s$. Vector ${\bf r}_s$ points to the center of unit cell $s$.}
\label{fig:unit_cell}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\noindent
One can conceptually think of the state $\Psi({\bf r})$ as being composed out of traveling and standing waves. The latter are formed by reflection from the boundaries of the nanostructure, whereas the former are contained inside the nanostructure. The current is therefore directed parallel to the surface of the nanostructure and is divergence-free, which is in compliance with the assertion of $\Psi({\bf r})$ being a stationary state. To understand the origin of the traveling waves, we need to describe the state $\Psi\left({\bf r}\right)$ in more detail. For nanostructures, the envelope function approximation (EFA) is an accurate way to do so\cite{Luttinger1955,Luttinger1956}:
\begin{eqnarray}
\Psi({\bf r}) = \sum_i F_i({\bf r}) u_i({\bf r}),
\end{eqnarray}
where the wave function is written as the product of a Bloch state $u_i({\bf r})$ of band $i$ with its corresponding spatially slowly varying envelope function $F_i({\bf r})$, assumed to be constant in a unit cell. This results in currents which are related to the Bloch velocity (BV) and envelope velocity (EV):
\begin{eqnarray}
{\bf j}({\bf r}) = \frac{e\hbar}{m_0} \sum_{i,j} &\text{Im}& \Big\{ \underbrace{u_i^*({\bf r}) u_j({\bf r}) \left[F_i^*({\bf r}) \nabla F_j({\bf r})\right]}_{\text{Envelope velocity related (EV)}} \nonumber \\
&&+ \underbrace{F_i^*({\bf r}) F_j({\bf r}) \left[u_i^*({\bf r}) \nabla u_j({\bf r})\right]}_{\text{Bloch velocity related (BV)}} \Big\}
\end{eqnarray}
The BV related current dominates over the EV related current by $\sim d/a_0$, where $d$ is the typical size of the envelope wave function and $a_0$ the size of the unit cell\cite{Bree2014}. This coincides with the condition for the validity of the envelope function approximation. For realistically sized nanostructures, the BV related current is $\geq5$ times the EV related current. For illustrative purposes consider the states labeled by $i$ as originating from the conduction band, whereas states labeled by $j$ are related to the valence band. It is then apparent that almost all of the more important BV related orbital current arises due to intermixing of valence states into the electron ground state of a nanostructure; the $F_j({\bf r})$ must be non-zero. The minimal model to accurately calculate the orbital current must therefore contain at least the eight bands describing the conduction and valence band. We will now separately work out the BV and EV related currents.
The unit cell averaged current density for the BV related current $\langle{\bf j}\rangle^{\text{BV}}$ becomes:
\begin{eqnarray}
\langle {\bf j} \rangle^{\text{BV}}({\bf r}_s) = \frac{1}{V_s} \frac{e\hbar}{m_0} \sum_{i,j} \text{Im}\left\{ F^*_i({\bf r}_s)F_j({\bf r}_s) \langle u_i | \nabla | u_j \rangle \right\} \hspace{6mm} \label{eq}
\end{eqnarray}
where $\langle u_i | \nabla | u_j \rangle$ are momentum matrix elements. These are only non-zero when $i$ labels a conduction band state and $j$ a valence band state. For the electron ground state in a nanostructure, $F_i({\bf r}_s)$ will be an $s$-like state and $F_j({\bf r}_s)$ a $p$-like state. The product of these envelope wave functions will therefore peak roughly midway between the center and edge of a nanostructure. Since we are examining a stationary state, the divergence of the current is zero. The current must therefore circulate within the nanostructure along a closed surface. This resembles a current loop extended throughout the nanostructure and arising completely from intermixing of valence band states in the ground state of the nanostructure. This BV related itinerant current leads to a magnetic moment
\begin{eqnarray}
{{\boldsymbol \mu}_{\text{IC-BV}}({\bf r}_s)} = \mu_B\sum_{i,j} \text{Im} \{ F^*_i({\bf r}_s)F_j({\bf r}_s) ({\bf r}_s \times \langle u_i | \nabla | u_j \rangle) \}. \hspace{7mm} \label{eq:mu_ICBV}
\end{eqnarray}
The BV related localized current leads to a magnetic moment
\begin{eqnarray}
{{\boldsymbol \mu}_{\text{LC-BV}}({\bf r}_s)} = {\mu_B}\sum_{i,j} \text{Im} \{ F^*_i({\bf r}_s)F_j({\bf r}_s) \langle u_i | {\bf L}_{\text{B}} | u_j \rangle \}, \hspace{3mm} \label{eq:mu_LCBV}
\end{eqnarray}
where ${\bf L}_{\text{B}}=({\bf r}-{\bf r}_s)\times\nabla$ is the angular momentum operator acting on the Bloch functions. The Bloch angular momentum does not exceed $1$, and therefore ${\boldsymbol \mu}_{\text{IC-BV}}\gg{\boldsymbol \mu}_{\text{LC-BV}}$. Whereas the spatial distribution of ${\boldsymbol \mu}_{\text{IC-BV}}$ follows that from the above-discussed $\langle{\bf j}\rangle_{\text{BV}}$, the spatial distribution of ${\boldsymbol \mu}_{\text{LC-BV}}$ is given by the the product of two $p$-like envelope states, since the Bloch angular momentum is only non-zero for valence states. The spatial distributions of both magnetic moments have therefore an odd spatial symmetry.
\begin{table*}
\caption{Material parameters of the different zinc-blende materials used throughout the article.}
\begin{ruledtabular}
\begin{tabular}{r|cccccccccc}
Material & $E_g$ [eV] & $\Delta$ [eV] & $P_0$ [eV\AA] & $\gamma_1^L$ & $\gamma_2^L$ & $\gamma_3^L$ & $|\chi|$ & $\mu_{\text{Roth}}$ [$\mu_B$] & $\mu_{\text{orb,exp}}$ [$\mu_B$]\cite{Madelung2004} & Deviation of $\mu$ [$\mu_B$]\\
\hline
HgTe\cite{Lawaetz1971} & -0.303 & 1.00 & 8.29 & -18.68 & -10.19 & -9.56 & 31.1 & $|28.4|$& $|21.5|$& 6.9 (+32\%) \\
InSb\cite{Vurgaftman2001} & 0.235 & 0.81 & 9.426 & 34.8 & 15.5 & 16.5 & 32.2 & -25.6 & -26.7 & 1.1 (-4\%) \\
InAs\cite{Vurgaftman2001} & 0.417 & 0.39 & 9.055 & 20 & 8.5 & 9.2 & 25.5 & -8.19 & -8.65 & 0.46 (-5\%) \\
Ga$_{0.47}$In$_{0.53}$As\cite{Vurgaftman2001} & 0.816 & 0.329 & 9.47 & 11.01 & 4.18 & 4.84 & 13.9 & -2.76 & -3.25 & 0.49 (-15\%) \\
GaAs\cite{Vurgaftman2001} & 1.519 & 0.341 & 9.764 & 6.98 & 2.06 & 2.93 & 5.9 & -1.00 & -1.22 & 0.22 (-18\%) \\
CdTe\cite{Lawaetz1971} & 1.60 & 0.91 & 8.88 & 5.29 & 1.89 & 2.46 & 7.8 & -1.56 & -1.83 & 0.27 (-15\%) \\
CdSe\cite{Kim1994} & 1.84 & 0.42 & 7.40 & 3.38 & 1.12 & 1.47 & 7.6 & -0.48 & & \\
ZnTe\cite{Lawaetz1971} & 2.39 & 0.92 & 8.53 & 3.74 & 1.07 & 1.64 & 5.0 & -0.74 & -1.21 & 0.47 (-38\%) \\
ZnSe\cite{Lawaetz1971} & 2.82 & 0.43 & 9.61 & 3.77 & 1.24 & 1.67 & 7.0 & -0.38 & -0.47 & 0.09 (-19\%) \\
ZnS\cite{Lawaetz1971} & 3.80 & 0.07 & 8.82 & 2.54 & 0.75 & 1.06 & 5.6 & -0.03 & -0.06 & 0.03 (-50\%) \\
\end{tabular}
\label{table:materials}
\end{ruledtabular}
\end{table*}
The unit cell averaged current density for the EV related current
\begin{eqnarray}
\langle {\bf j} \rangle^{\text{EV}}({\bf r}_s) = \frac{1}{V_s} \frac{e \hbar}{m_0} \sum_{i} \text{Im} \{ F^*_i({\bf r}_s) \nabla F_i({\bf r}_s)\}, \label{eq:mu_ICEV}
\end{eqnarray}
where we have used the orthonormality of the Bloch functions. The envelope wave function of the conduction band does not contribute to this current for the electron ground state, since it does not consist of a traveling wave. This current is therefore solely determined by the envelope wave functions associated with the valence band; the spatial distribution of $\langle {\bf j} \rangle_{\text{EV}}$ is the product of a $p$-like $F_i({\bf r}_s)$ and a $p$-like $\nabla F_i({\bf r}_s)$, and has therefore the same odd spatial symmetry as $\langle{\bf j}\rangle_{\text{BV}}$. The magnetic moment ${\boldsymbol \mu}_{\text{IC-EV}}$ originating from the EV related itinerant current becomes:
\begin{eqnarray}
{{\boldsymbol \mu}_{\text{IC-EV}}({\bf r}_s)} = {\mu_B}\sum_{i} \text{Im} \{ F^*_i({\bf r}_s) {\bf L}_{\text{E}} F_i({\bf r}_s)\} ,\label{eq:mu_LCEV}
\end{eqnarray}
where ${\bf L}_{\text{E}} = {\bf r}_s \times \nabla$ is the angular momentum operator acting on the envelope wave functions. The EV-related localized current leads to a magnetic moment
\begin{eqnarray}
{{\boldsymbol \mu}_{\text{LC-EV}}({\bf r}_s)} = {\mu_B}\sum_{i,j} \text{Im} \{ F^*_i({\bf r}_s) \langle u_i | {\bf r} - {\bf r}_s | u_j \rangle \times \nabla F_j({\bf r}_s) \} \nonumber \\
\label{eq:LCEV}
\end{eqnarray}
where $\langle u_i | {\bf r} - {\bf r}_s | u_j \rangle$ are dipole matrix elements. These are only non-zero when $i$ labels a conduction band state and $j$ a valence band state, because of the parity quantum numbers. This means that the spatial distribution will have an even spatial symmetry: both $F_i({\bf r}_s)$ and $\nabla F_j({\bf r}_s)$ are $s$-like. This is different from the other contributions to the orbital moment, which all have an odd spatial symmetry. We can relate the dipole matrix elements to the momentum matrix elements through the commutation relation\cite{Gu2013}:
\begin{eqnarray}
[{\cal H},{\bf r}] = \frac{\hbar}{i m_0}{\bf p}
\end{eqnarray}
by which
\begin{eqnarray}
\langle \phi_i | {\bf p} | \phi_j \rangle &=& \langle \phi_i | \frac{i m_0}{\hbar} [{\cal H},{\bf r}] | \phi_j \rangle\\
&=& \frac{i m_0}{\hbar} (E_i - E_j) \langle \phi_i | {\bf r} | \phi_j \rangle
\end{eqnarray}
and therefore
\begin{eqnarray}
\langle u_i | {\bf r} - {\bf r}_s | u_j \rangle = -\frac{\hbar^2}{m_0 (E_i - E_j)} \langle u_i | \nabla | u_j \rangle \label{eq:energy}
\end{eqnarray}
The total orbital moment ${\boldsymbol \mu}_{\text{orb}}$ is the sum of ${\boldsymbol \mu}_{\text{IC-BV}}$, ${\boldsymbol \mu}_{\text{LC-BV}}$, ${\boldsymbol \mu}_{\text{IC-EV}}$, and ${\boldsymbol \mu}_{\text{LC-EV}}$. We replace the summation over $s$ with an integral over the whole volume of the state, since the state $\Psi({\bf r})$ is extended over many unit cells.
\subsection{Spin moment}
Using the non-relativistic limit of the Dirac equation, we find the spin moment to be given by\cite{Messiah1961}:
\begin{eqnarray}
{\boldsymbol \mu}_{\text{spin}} = \frac{e\hbar}{2m_0} \sum_s \int_{V_s} \Psi^*({\bf r}){\boldsymbol \sigma}\Psi({\bf r})~d^3r
\end{eqnarray}
where ${\boldsymbol \sigma}=\left(\sigma_x,\sigma_y,\sigma_z\right)$ is the Pauli vector, with $\sigma_{x,y,z}$ the Pauli matrices. We have again split the integration over the whole state into a summation of integrations over the unit cell. We can then proceed and use the EFA for the wave function $\Psi({\bf r})$, by which the spin moment becomes
\begin{eqnarray}
{{\boldsymbol \mu}_{\text{spin}}({\bf r}_s)} = {\mu_B}\sum_{i,j} F_i^*({\bf r}_s)F_j({\bf r}_s) \langle u_i | {\boldsymbol \sigma} | u_j \rangle. \label{eq:muspin}
\end{eqnarray}
The spatial structure of the spin moment is therefore given by the product $F_i^*({\bf r}_s)F_j({\bf r}_s)$. If we assume that the electron ground state of the nanostructure is dominated by the conduction band state, the spatial distribution of the spin moment is approximately $|F_i({\bf r}_s)|^2$, where $F_i({\bf r}_s)$ is an $s$-like envelope wave function. This even spatial symmetry is markedly different from the odd spatial symmetry of the dominant orbital moment density ${\boldsymbol \mu}_{\text{IC-BV}}({\bf r}_s)$.
\subsection{Boundary conditions and ${\bf k}\cdot{\bf p}$-model}
As mentioned in Sec.~\ref{sec:orbmu}, any accurate calculation of the orbital current should include a minimum of eight bands. To keep the problems analytically tractable, we choose a standard eight-band ${\bf k}\cdot{\bf p}$-model\cite{Sercel1990} and hard-wall boundaries for most of the nanostructures. Within ${\bf k}\cdot{\bf p}$-theory, boundary conditions have been the subject of debate\cite{Bastard1988,Burt1992,Rodina2002}. Since we can assume that the electron ground state is dominated by conduction band states, we pragmatically opt for the approximate boundary condition that only the conduction band envelope wave function needs to vanish at the boundary. This approximation is exact for the bulk and has as much validity as hard-wall boundaries and the envelope function approximation itself.
To illustrate our analytical results, we show numerical calculations for nanostructures of different materials with a zinc-blende crystal structure. The corresponding material parameters are tabulated in Table~\ref{table:materials}, where $E_g$ is the band gap energy, $\Delta$ the spin orbit splitting, $P_0$ the momentum matrix element, and $\gamma_{1,2,3}^L$ are the Luttinger parameters. In an eight-band ${\bf k}\cdot{\bf p}$-calculation, the Luttinger parameters need to be modified for the explicit inclusion of the $\Gamma_6^c$-band\cite{Winkler2003}:
\begin{eqnarray}
\gamma_1 = \gamma_1^L - \frac{1}{3}\frac{2 m_0}{\hbar^2}\frac{P_0^2}{E_g}\\
\gamma_2 = \gamma_2^L - \frac{1}{6}\frac{2 m_0}{\hbar^2}\frac{P_0^2}{E_g}\\
\gamma_3 = \gamma_3^L - \frac{1}{6}\frac{2 m_0}{\hbar^2}\frac{P_0^2}{E_g}
\end{eqnarray}
For most materials there is a fairly large spread in the reported values of the $\gamma_{1,2,3}^L$-parameters and $P_0$, which reflects the degree of accuracy of the ${\bf k}\cdot{\bf p}$-model. Still, the bulk orbital moment $\mu_{\text{Roth}}$ is fairly well reproduced using an eight-band model (see Table~\ref{table:materials}): the agreement is for most materials within $0.5\mu_B$ or $15-20\%$. It can clearly be observed that the model becomes less accurate as $E_g$ increases, since the remote bands become of equal importance to the eight bands that are explicitly included. An improvement of the eight band model would involve inclusion of the $\Gamma_{7,8}^c$-bands~\cite{Hermann1977}. These bands would generate additional $p$-like envelope wave functions in the electron ground state, and therefore generate similar spin-orbit correlated currents as the $\Gamma_{7,8}^v$-bands. We therefore do not expect any additional features by including additional bands, except for improving the quantitative agreement.
\section{Spherical symmetry} \label{sec:spherical}
We will first examine nanostructures having spherical symmetry. The envelope functions of such nanostructures will exhibit spherical symmetry, if both the confinement potential and the crystal have spherical symmetry. Fortunately, the anisotropy of the valence band is rather small for most semiconductors. This can be formally analyzed by decomposing the Hamiltonian into spherically and cubically symmetric terms\cite{Baldereschi1973}. The ratio of the spherical over cubic terms can be expressed as:
\begin{eqnarray}
\chi=\frac{2}{5} \left(\frac{2\gamma_2+3\gamma_3}{\gamma_3-\gamma_2}\right)
\end{eqnarray}
From Table~\ref{table:materials} we see that the spherical terms are at least 5 times larger than the cubic terms, so we can safely assume that the crystal has spherical symmetry. In the spherical approximation, the Hamiltonian will be block diagonal in a basis of eigenstates of ${\bf F}$ and $F_z$, where the total angular momentum ${\bf F} = {\bf L}_{\text{E}} + {\bf J} = {\bf L}_{\text{E}} + {\bf L}_{\text{B}} + {\bf s}$ (${\bf J}$ the total Bloch momentum, ${\bf s}$ the spin moment)\cite{Vahala1990}:
\begin{eqnarray}
{\cal H} = \sum_{F,F_z} {\cal H}_{F,F_z}.
\end{eqnarray}
These basis states can be found by using the rules for adding angular momenta,
\begin{eqnarray}
&&|F,F_z;J,L_{\text{E}};k\rangle = \\
&&\sum_{J_z=-J}^J \sum_{L_{\text{E},z}=-L_{\text{E}}}^{L_{\text{E}}} \langle J,J_z;L_{\text{E}},L_{\text{E},z} | F,F_z \rangle |J,J_z\rangle |k,L_{\text{E}},L_{\text{E},z}\rangle,\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
where $\langle J,J_z;L_{\text{E}},L_{\text{E},z} | F,F_z \rangle$ are Clebsch-Gordan coefficients, $|J,J_z\rangle$ the Bloch functions, and $|k,L_{\text{E}},L_{\text{E},z}\rangle$ the envelope wave functions. This notation is slightly different from Sec.~\ref{sec:frame}, where Bloch functions are denoted as $u_i({\bf r})$, and envelope wave functions as $F_i({\bf r})$. The envelope wave function has the coordinate representation:
\begin{eqnarray}
&& \langle r,\theta,\phi |k,L_{\text{E}},L_{\text{E},z}\rangle = \nonumber \\
&& \quad \quad \sqrt{\frac{2}{\pi}} i^{L_{\text{E}}} \{j_{L_{\text{E}}}\left(kr\right)+ \xi y_{L_{\text{E}}}\left(kr\right) \} Y_{L_{\text{E}}}^{L_{\text{E},z}}(\theta,\phi)
\end{eqnarray}
where $j_l(r)$ is the $l$th-order spherical Bessel function of the first kind, $y_l(r)$ is the $l$th-order spherical Neumann function of the first kind, $Y_l^m\left(\theta,\phi\right)$ a spherical harmonic, and $\xi$ a dimensionless parameter determined by the boundary conditions.
For the electron ground state it suffices to examine the $|F,F_z\rangle=|\frac{1}{2},+\frac{1}{2}\rangle$ subspace, since this is the lowest possible $F$ and $|\tfrac{1}{2},-\tfrac{1}{2}\rangle$ is the time-reversed state of $|\tfrac{1}{2},+\tfrac{1}{2}\rangle$. Within an eight-band ${\bf k}\cdot{\bf p}$-model, the $|\tfrac{1}{2},+\tfrac{1}{2}\rangle$ subspace is spanned by three basis states: $|\tfrac{1}{2},+\tfrac{1}{2};\tfrac{1}{2},0;k\rangle$, $|\tfrac{1}{2},+\tfrac{1}{2};\tfrac{3}{2},1;k\rangle$, and $|\tfrac{1}{2},+\tfrac{1}{2};\tfrac{1}{2},1;k\rangle$. Following the transformation of Ref.~\onlinecite{Sercel1990}, we can represent the Hamiltonian in this basis:
\begin{eqnarray}
&&{\cal H}_{\frac{1}{2},+\frac{1}{2}} = \\
&& \left(
\begin{array}{ccc}
\frac{\hbar^2}{2 m_0}k^2 & -i\sqrt{\frac{2}{3}}P_0 k & -i\sqrt{\frac{1}{3}}P_0 k \\
i\sqrt{\frac{2}{3}}P_0k & -E_g-\frac{\hbar^2}{m_0}\frac{\gamma_1+2\gamma_{23}}{2}k^2 & -\sqrt{2}\frac{\hbar^2}{m_0}\gamma_{23}k^2 \\
i\sqrt{\frac{1}{3}}P_0k & -\sqrt{2}\frac{\hbar^2}{m_0}\gamma_{23}k^2 & -E_g-\Delta-\frac{\hbar^2}{m_0}\frac{\gamma_1}{2}k^2
\end{array}
\right)\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
where $k$ is the radial wave number, and $\gamma_{23}=\tfrac{2}{5}\gamma_2 + \tfrac{3}{5}\gamma_3$ the modified spherical Luttinger parameters. The electron ground state can be expressed as a linear combination of the three basis states:
\begin{eqnarray}
|\Psi\rangle = \frac{|\tfrac{1}{2},\tfrac{1}{2};\tfrac{1}{2},0;k\rangle + \alpha |\tfrac{1}{2},\tfrac{1}{2};\tfrac{3}{2},1;k\rangle + \beta |\tfrac{1}{2},\tfrac{1}{2};\tfrac{1}{2},1;k\rangle}{\sqrt{1+|\alpha|^2+|\beta|^2}}
\end{eqnarray}
where the intermixing coefficients $\alpha$ and $\beta$ determine the amount of intermixing of the $\Gamma_8^v$ ($J=\tfrac{3}{2}, L_{\text{B}}=1$) and $\Gamma_7^v$ ($J=\tfrac{1}{2}, L_{\text{B}}=1$) bands into electron ground state, which originates predominantly from the $\Gamma_6^c$ ($J=\tfrac{1}{2}, L_{\text{B}}=0$) band. After diagonalizing the Hamiltonian, we find the intermixing coefficients to be:
\begin{eqnarray*}
\alpha &=& i\sqrt{\frac{2}{3}} \frac{\lambda - \frac{\hbar^2 k^2}{2 m_0}}{k P_0} \frac{\left(\gamma_1-2\gamma_{23}\right)\frac{\hbar^2 k^2}{2 m_0} + \left(E_g+\Delta+\lambda\right)}{\left(\gamma_1-2\gamma_{23}\right)\frac{\hbar^2 k^2}{2 m_0} + \left(E_g+\frac{2}{3}\Delta+\lambda\right)} \\
\beta &=& i\sqrt{\frac{1}{3}} \frac{\lambda - \frac{\hbar^2 k^2}{2 m_0}}{k P_0} \frac{\left(\gamma_1-2\gamma_{23}\right)\frac{\hbar^2 k^2}{2 m_0} + \left(E_g+\lambda\right)}{\left(\gamma_1-2\gamma_{23}\right)\frac{\hbar^2 k^2}{2 m_0} + \left(E_g+\frac{2}{3}\Delta+\lambda\right)}
\end{eqnarray*}
where $\lambda=\lambda(k)$ is the confinement energy (i.e. the energy of the state above the conduction band edge), given by one of the roots of $|{\cal H}_{\frac{1}{2},+\frac{1}{2}}-\lambda I|=0$.
\subsection{Spheres} \label{sec:spheres}
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{figure_mix.pdf}
\caption{Radius dependence of the confinement energy $\lambda$ and composition of the electron ground state of an InAs sphere. The composition is given in terms of the conduction band $\Gamma_6^c$ (blue), and valence bands $\Gamma_8^v$ (red) and $\Gamma_7^v$ (green) contributions.}
\label{fig:mix_spheres}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
We start by examining solid spheres, for which the confining potential is
\begin{eqnarray}
V(r) = \left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
0 & r \leq R \\
\infty & r > R
\end{array}
\right.
\end{eqnarray}
where $R$ is the radius of the sphere. The wave function needs to be normalizable at the origin of the sphere, hence only spherical Bessel functions $j_l(kr)$ contribute to the envelope wave function ($\xi=0$). We assume that the electron ground state predominantly originates from conduction band states. We therefore choose the approximate boundary condition $\langle r,\theta,\phi|\tfrac{1}{2},+\tfrac{1}{2};\tfrac{1}{2},0;k\rangle |_{r=R}=0$, from which the relation $k=\tfrac{\pi}{R}$ follows.
In Fig.~\ref{fig:mix_spheres} we plot the radius dependence of the confinement energy and composition of the electron ground state for an InAs sphere. The intermixing of the valence bands is never very large ($<30$~\%), so that their influence can be regarded as a perturbation on the predominantly conduction band-like state. This perturbation is proportional to the ratio of the coupling of the bands and the energetic splitting between them. The former is constant in our problem ($\sim k P_0$), but the latter is not and leads to the maximum around $2$~nm. At large $R$ (small $k$) the energetic splitting is given mainly by the energy differences between the bands ($E_g$ for $\alpha$, $E_g+\Delta$ for $\beta$), resulting in a $1/R$ dependence of the intermixing. At small $R$ (large $k$) the energetic splitting is dominated by the free kinetic energy of the conduction and valence bands, which results in a $R$-dependence of the intermixing. The intermixing therefore peaks when the free kinetic energy is equal to $E_g$ for $\alpha$, or $E_g+\Delta$ for $\beta$. This condition can be expressed analytically in the limit of zero spin-orbit coupling, when the free kinetic energy of the valence band can be expressed in a simple manner:
\begin{eqnarray}
\frac{\hbar^2 k^2}{2 m_0} + (\gamma_1+4\gamma_{23})\frac{\hbar^2 k^2}{2 m_0} = E_g
\end{eqnarray}
From this condition we can extract the radius $R_{\text{min}}$ at which the conduction band has the smallest contribution:
\begin{eqnarray}
R_{\text{min}} = \pi\hbar\sqrt{\frac{1+\gamma_1+4\gamma_{23}}{2 m_0 E_g}} \label{eq:rmin}
\end{eqnarray}
The minimum radius depends therefore on the effective hole mass and band gap energy, which we exemplified by showing $R_{\text{min}}$ in Fig.~\ref{fig:mix_spheres_rmin} for various semiconductor materials. Alongside the actual $R_{\text{min}}$, we also plot the expected $R_{\text{min}}$ on basis of the above formula. It can be seen that the above formula is a good predictor for $R_{\text{min}}$, as long as $\Delta/E_g\ll1$ (hence not for InSb and InAs). We find that the contribution of the conduction band at $R_{\text{min}}$ can be expressed as:
\begin{eqnarray}
\text{Min. comp.} = \frac{1}{2+\delta-\sqrt{\delta(\delta+2)}} \approx \frac{1}{2} + \frac{1}{2\sqrt{2}}\sqrt{\delta}\nonumber\label{eq:mincomp}\\
\end{eqnarray}
where
\begin{eqnarray}
\delta = (1+\gamma_1+4\gamma_{23})\frac{\hbar^2 E_g}{m_0 P_0^2}
\end{eqnarray}
In Fig.~\ref{fig:mix_spheres_mincomp} we plot for various materials the actual minimum contribution and the expected contribution based on the above formula. Since we assumed $\Delta=0$, the formula is overestimating the intermixing of the valence band and can be regarded as an lower limit of the actual minimum contribution. It can be seen that the minimum contribution is always more than 50\%, and increases with $E_g$ and a smaller effective hole mass, which explains why In-compounds have a stronger valence band mixing than Zn-compounds.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{figure_mix_Rmin.pdf}
\caption{The actual and expected (see Eq.~\ref{eq:rmin}) radius $R_{\text{min}}$ where the electron ground state of spheres of different materials have the smallest conduction band contribution.}
\label{fig:mix_spheres_rmin}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{figure_mix_mincomp.pdf}
\caption{The minimum contribution of the conduction band of spheres of different materials as function of the parameter $\delta$, along with Eq.~\ref{eq:mincomp}.}
\label{fig:mix_spheres_mincomp}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
Now that the wave function of the ground state is known, we can proceed by calculating the itinerant BV related current density $\langle {\bf j}\rangle^{\text{BV}}$:
\begin{eqnarray}
\langle{\bf j}\rangle^{\text{BV}} = -\frac{e P_0}{2\sqrt{6} \pi \hbar}\frac{\text{Im}\big\{\alpha-\sqrt{2}\beta\big\}}{1+|\alpha|^2+|\beta|^2} j_0(kr)j_1(kr) \sin(\theta) {\bf e}_{\phi}\nonumber\\
\end{eqnarray}
As anticipated in Sec.~\ref{sec:orbmu}, the spatial distribution of this current is governed by the product of the envelope wave functions associated with the conduction band, $j_0(kr)$, and the valence band, $j_1(kr)$. It therefore resembles a current loop extended throughout the quantum dot and peaks at about $R/2$, see Fig.~\ref{fig:mu_spatial_spheres}(a). Note that this current is proportional to the factor $\text{Im}\big\{\alpha-\sqrt{2}\beta\big\}$, which can be expressed as:
\begin{eqnarray}
&& \text{Im}\big\{\alpha-\sqrt{2}\beta\big\} = \\
&& \hspace{6mm} \sqrt{\frac{2}{3}} \frac{\lambda - \frac{\hbar^2 k^2}{2 m_0}}{k P_0} \frac{\Delta}{\left(\gamma_1-2\gamma_{23}\right)\frac{\hbar^2 k^2}{2 m_0} + \left(E_g+\frac{2}{3}\Delta+\lambda\right)}\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
showing explicitly the spin-orbit correlated nature of this current: it directly depends on the spin-orbit coupling $\Delta$. It proves interesting to trace the exact origin of this current. The direction of $\langle{\bf j}\rangle^{\text{BV}}$ comes from the momentum matrix elements $\langle u_i | \nabla | u_j \rangle$, which are only non-zero if $i$ labels a conduction band state and $j$ a valence band state. Because the divergence of $\langle{\bf j}\rangle^{\text{BV}}$ must be zero and the spherical symmetry of the quantum dot, the current has to flow in the ${\bf e}_{\phi}$-direction. The matrix elements associated with this direction can be written as $\langle u_i | \tfrac{1}{r \sin \theta}\tfrac{i}{\hbar}L_{\text{B},z} | u_j\rangle {\bf e}_{\phi}$, hence only Bloch states with non-zero $L_{\text{B},z}$ will contribute to $\langle{\bf j}\rangle^{\text{BV}}$. Only three of such states are present in the $|F,F_z\rangle=|\tfrac{1}{2},+\tfrac{1}{2}\rangle$ electron ground state\cite{Sercel1990}: $|J,J_z;L_{\text{B}},L_{\text{B},z}\rangle=|\tfrac{3}{2},+\tfrac{3}{2};1,+1\rangle$, $|\tfrac{3}{2},-\tfrac{1}{2};1,-1\rangle$, and $|\tfrac{1}{2},-\tfrac{1}{2};1,-1\rangle$. The former will create a current opposite to the latter two due to the different orientation of $L_{\text{B}}$. The degree of cancellation depends on the strength of the spin-orbit coupling, as this will tune the presence of the $|\tfrac{1}{2},-\tfrac{1}{2};1,-1\rangle$ (split-off) state. This mechanism has also been identified to determine the bulk $g$-factor of semiconductors\cite{Yafet1963}.
\begin{figure}[t]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{figure_j.pdf}
\caption{The radius dependence of the peak current densities $\langle {\bf j} \rangle^{\text{BV}}$ (red) and $\langle {\bf j} \rangle^{\text{EV}}$ (green), and their ratio (black) of an InAs sphere. The Bloch velocity related current is $\geq 10$ times the envelope velocity related current for radii $R\geq1$~nm.}
\label{fig:j_spheres}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{mu_spatial.pdf}
\caption{(a) The spatial distribution of the normalized magnitude of the ${\bf e}_{y}$-component of $\langle {\bf j}\rangle^{\text{BV}}$ of a sphere. This current density peaks roughly at $R/2$ and resembles a current loop. (b-f) The magnetic moment density of the different components contributing to the orbital moment (c-f) and the spin moment (b) of a sphere. It can clearly be observed that ${\boldsymbol \mu}_{\text{spin}}$ and ${\boldsymbol \mu}_{\text{LC-EV}}$ have an even spatial symmetry, whereas the other orbital moments have an odd spatial symmetry. All figures are $xz$-cross-sections, the white/black circles mark the boundary of the sphere.}
\label{fig:mu_spatial_spheres}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
The itinerant EV related current density $\langle {\bf j}\rangle^{\text{EV}}$ can be more generally calculated using the general envelope state $|k,L_{\text{E}},L_{\text{E},z}\rangle$:
\begin{eqnarray}
\langle {\bf j} \rangle^{\text{EV}}_{|k,L_{\text{E}},L_{\text{E},z}\rangle} = \frac{2 e \hbar}{m_0} L_{\text{E},z} \frac{j_{L_{\text{E},z}}(kr)^2}{\pi r \sin \theta} |Y_{L_{\text{E}}}^{L_{\text{E},z}}(\theta,\phi)|^2 {\bf e}_{\phi}\nonumber\\
\end{eqnarray}
by which $\langle {\bf j}\rangle^{\text{EV}}$ of the electron ground state becomes:
\begin{eqnarray}
\langle {\bf j}\rangle^{\text{EV}} = - \frac{e \hbar}{8 \pi m_0} \frac{|\alpha|^2-2|\beta|^2}{1+|\alpha|^2+|\beta|^2} \frac{j_1(kr)^2}{r} \sin(\theta){\bf e}_{\phi}
\end{eqnarray}
The envelope wave function associated with the conduction band has $L_{\text{E}}=0$ and therefore does not contribute to $\langle {\bf j}\rangle^{\text{EV}}$; this current originates solely from the valence band. The spatial distribution is therefore governed by the square of the valence band envelope wave functions, i.e. $j_1(kr)^2$, though it has the same spatial symmetry as $\langle {\bf j}\rangle^{\text{BV}}$. We again emphasize that this current has as spin-orbit correlated nature: the factor $|\alpha|^2-2|\beta|^2$ is directly proportional to $\Delta$. We plot both the peak current densities $\langle {\bf j}\rangle^{\text{BV}}_{\text{max}}$ and $\langle {\bf j}\rangle^{\text{EV}}_{\text{max}}$ in Fig.~\ref{fig:j_spheres}, together with the ratio between them. It can be clearly observed that the Bloch velocity related current is $\geq 10$ times larger than the envelope velocity related current for realistic sizes, as was anticipated in Sec.~\ref{sec:orbmu}.
Using Eqs.~\ref{eq:mu_ICBV}~and~\ref{eq:mu_LCBV} we can plot the orbital moment densities related to the Bloch velocity, see Fig.~\ref{fig:mu_spatial_spheres}(c)~and~(d). As expected, their spatial distributions have the same (odd) spatial symmetry, though they differ slightly in the exact distribution. We can do the same for the envelope velocity related orbital momenta in Fig.~\ref{fig:mu_spatial_spheres}(e)~and(f), using Eqs.~\ref{eq:mu_ICEV}~and~\ref{eq:mu_LCEV}. As expected, the spatial distribution of ${\boldsymbol \mu}_{\text{IC-EV}}$ has an odd spatial symmetry, whereas ${\boldsymbol \mu}_{\text{LC-EV}}$ has an even spatial symmetry. The latter shares this symmetry with the spin moment density, which is plotted in Fig.~\ref{fig:mu_spatial_spheres}(b) using Eq.~\ref{eq:muspin}. As discussed in Ref.~\onlinecite{Bree2014}, these different symmetries can have substantial consequences, for example for the hyperfine coupling or interactions with nearby magnetic moments. Although the spin moment density seems to be parallel to the $z$-direction, there is in fact a very small $x$-component due to intermixing of the valence band states. This component has an odd spatial symmetry and is so small, $\leq 0.1\%$ of the $z$-component, that we have neglected it for the plot.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{figure_mu_I.pdf}
\caption{The radius dependence of the different integrated orbital and spin moments and current $I_{\text{IC-BV}}$ of an InAs sphere.}
\label{fig:mu_spheres}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
By integrating the moment densities over the whole state, we can compute the different contributions to the integrated orbital magnetic moment:
\begin{eqnarray}
{{\boldsymbol \mu}_{\text{IC-BV}}} &=& -{\mu_B}\sqrt{\frac{2}{3}}\frac{m_0 P_0 R}{\pi\hbar^2} \frac{\text{Im}\{\alpha - \sqrt{2}\beta\}}{1+|\alpha|^2+|\beta|^2} {\bf e}_z \\
{{\boldsymbol \mu}_{\text{LC-BV}}} &=& +{\mu_B}\left[ \frac{1}{3}\frac{|\alpha|^2 - 2 |\beta|^2}{1+|\alpha|^2+|\beta|^2} + \frac{2}{9}\frac{\text{Im}\{\alpha-\sqrt{2}\beta\}^2}{1+|\alpha|^2+|\beta|^2}\right] {\bf e}_z \nonumber \\
\\
{{\boldsymbol \mu}_{\text{IC-EV}}} &=& -{\mu_B} \frac{1}{3}\frac{|\alpha|^2-2|\beta|^2}{1+|\alpha|^2+|\beta|^2} {\bf e}_z \\
{{\boldsymbol \mu}_{\text{LC-EV}}} &=& -{\mu_B}\frac{2}{3}\sqrt{\frac{2}{3}} \frac{\pi P_0}{R} \frac{\text{Im}\{\frac{1}{E_g}\alpha-\frac{\sqrt{2}}{E_g+\Delta}\beta\}}{1+|\alpha|^2+|\beta|^2} {\bf e}_z
\end{eqnarray}
and likewise we can calculate the integrated spin moment:
\begin{eqnarray}
{{\boldsymbol \mu}_{\text{spin}}} = {\mu_B}\left[1-\left(\frac{2}{3}\right)^2\frac{\text{Im}\{\alpha-\sqrt{2}\beta\}^2}{1+|\alpha|^2+|\beta|^2}\right] {\bf e}_z
\end{eqnarray}
In Fig.~\ref{fig:mu_spheres} we plot these moments as function of radius $R$ for an InAs sphere. For a wide range of radii, the dominant contribution to the orbital moment is ${\boldsymbol \mu}_{\text{IC-BV}}$. This was to be expected: the largest moment is generated when both the lever arm (itinerant current) and momentum (Bloch velocity) are largest. We will therefore first concentrate on ${\boldsymbol \mu}_{\text{IC-BV}}$. In the limit of infinite radius $R$ (i.e. the bulk limit), ${\boldsymbol \mu}_{\text{IC-BV}}$ reduces to the Roth formula\cite{Roth1959}:
\begin{eqnarray}
\lim_{R\rightarrow\infty}{{\boldsymbol \mu}_{\text{IC-BV}}} = - {\mu_B}\frac{\Delta}{3E_g(E_g+\Delta)} \frac{2 m_0 P_0^2}{\hbar^2} {\bf e}_z = {{\boldsymbol \mu}_{\text{Roth}}}\nonumber\\
\end{eqnarray}
As the radius becomes smaller, ${\boldsymbol \mu}_{\text{IC-BV}}$ quenches since the orbital extend (the lever arm) of the envelope wave function becomes smaller. The current distribution associated with ${\boldsymbol \mu}_{\text{IC-BV}}$ resembles a current loop, as can be seen in Fig.~\ref{fig:mu_spatial_spheres}(a). It proves insightful to make an analogy with a simple current loop, carrying a current $I$ at radius $R$, generating a moment:
\begin{eqnarray}
\mu_{\text{loop}} = \pi I R^2
\end{eqnarray}
This immediately shows that there should be a $R^2$-dependence on the orbital moment. We can formally verify this dependency by calculating the current $I_{\text{IC-BV}}$ in the spheres:
\begin{eqnarray}
I_{\text{IC-BV}} &=& \int \langle {\bf j} \rangle^{\text{BV}} \cdot {\bf n}~da \\
&=& -\frac{e P_0}{\sqrt{6}\pi \hbar R} \frac{\text{Im}\left\{\alpha-\sqrt{2}\beta\right\}}{1+|\alpha|^2+|\beta|^2} \int_0^{2 \pi} \frac{\sin\chi}{\chi}~d\chi
\end{eqnarray}
which is also plotted in Fig.~\ref{fig:mu_spheres}. It can be immediately verified that the analogy with the classical current loop holds: the ratio between the current $I_{\text{IC-BV}}$ and orbital moment ${\boldsymbol \mu}_{\text{IC-BV}}$ has a $R^2$-dependence. The mechanism leading to quenching of ${\boldsymbol \mu}_{\text{IC-BV}}$ is therefore an interplay of two effects: quantum confinement limits the extension of the envelope wave function and reduces thereby the lever arm, while intermixing of the valence bands determines the amount of current that circulates in the sphere.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{figure_mu_mat.pdf}
\caption{The radius dependence of ${\boldsymbol \mu}_{\text{IC-BV}}/{\boldsymbol \mu}_{\text{Roth}}$ of spheres of various semiconducting materials (continuous lines). The same quantity is also plotted against the normalized radius $R/R^*$ (dotted lines).}
\label{fig:mu_spheres_materials}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
The other contributions to the orbital moment have a non-monotonic dependence on $R$. As expected, these contributions to the orbital moment are small compared to ${\boldsymbol \mu}_{\text{IC-BV}}$, since either the lever arm (localized currents), or the momentum (envelope velocity) is small. In particular, ${\boldsymbol \mu}_{\text{LC-BV}}$ is small since $\langle u_i | {\bf L}_{\text{B}} | u_j \rangle$ is only non-zero for Bloch functions not involving the conduction band. Therefore ${\boldsymbol \mu}_{\text{LC-BV}}$ is (more or less) proportional to the intermixing of valence bands and is always small, which can be verified by comparison of Figs.~\ref{fig:mix_spheres}~and~\ref{fig:mu_spheres}. A similar argument holds for ${\boldsymbol \mu}_{\text{IC-EV}}$, which originates from $\langle {\bf j} \rangle^{\text{EV}}$ and is therefore directly proportional to the amount of the intermixing of valence states, since the conduction band envelope has $L_{\text{E}}=0$. Note that ${\boldsymbol \mu}_{\text{LC-BV}}\approx-{\boldsymbol \mu}_{\text{IC-EV}}$, so these moments cancel each other when added to the total orbital moment. This (near) cancellation arises from the fact that $L_{\text{B},z} = -L_{\text{E},z}$ for most bands contributing to the electron ground state. A more detailed analysis of this effect will be performed for the disks with hard-wall boundaries at the end of Sec.~\ref{sec:harddisks}. Lastly, the behavior of ${\boldsymbol \mu}_{\text{LC-EV}}$ stands out: it gets larger for smaller $R$. As can be seen from Eq.~\ref{eq:LCEV}, ${\boldsymbol \mu}_{\text{LC-EV}}$ is proportional to $\nabla F_j({\bf r}_s)$ and will therefore become larger as the quantum dot becomes smaller. The envelope function approximation becomes less accurate as $R$ becomes smaller, and quantities involving the gradient of the envelope wave function will be affect first. We therefore plot the moments related to the envelope velocity dotted for $R\leq3$~nm.
The spin moment is almost constant at one $\mu_B$, dropping about 1\% at a radius of $7$~nm. Even though a sizable amount of valence states mix into the electron ground state, the effect on the spin moment is negligible due to the same cancellation mechanism discussed for $\langle{\bf j}\rangle^{\text{BV}}$. In fact, the deviation of the spin moment is proportional to (square of) the same factor $\text{Im}\{\alpha -\sqrt{2}\beta\}$. This means that these deviations vanish in absence of spin-orbit coupling.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{figure_mix_mu_HgTe.pdf}
\caption{The radius dependence of the composition and integrated orbital moment ${\boldsymbol \mu}_{\text{IC-BV}}$ of a HgTe sphere. The calculation is only valid for $R<2.7$~nm, hence the lines are dotted for $R>2.7$~nm.}
\label{fig:mu_spheres_HgTe}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
Up to now we have used InAs as the constituent material of the spheres, but it is also interesting to see how the orbital moment is quenched in other semiconductors. We therefore show in Fig.~\ref{fig:mu_spheres_materials} the dominant orbital moment ${\boldsymbol \mu}_{\text{IC-BV}}$ normalized to the Roth formula\cite{Roth1959} for spheres of various materials. Both the current distribution and the mechanism leading to quenching of the orbital moment are similar to what was found for InAs spheres. The onset of quenching of the orbital moment, however, depends on the material of the sphere. This observation can be made more explicit by analyzing ${\boldsymbol \mu}_{\text{IC-BV}}$ in the limit of small $R$:
\begin{eqnarray}
\lim_{R \rightarrow 0} \frac{{\boldsymbol \mu}_{\text{IC-BV}}}{{\boldsymbol \mu}_{\text{Roth}}} &=& \frac{E_g(E_g+\Delta)}{(1+\gamma_1-2\gamma_{23})(1+\gamma_1+4\gamma_{23})} \left[\frac{2m_0R^2}{\hbar^2\pi^2}\right]^2 \nonumber\\
&\equiv& \left(\frac{R}{R^*}\right)^4
\end{eqnarray}
where we have defined a material-dependent radius $R^*$, which renormalizes ${\boldsymbol \mu}_{\text{IC-BV}}$ at small $R$ (see dotted lines in Fig.~\ref{fig:mu_spheres_materials}). A large $R^*$ means that the quenching starts at relatively large $R$, and arises from either a small effective hole mass, a small band gap, or a small spin-orbit coupling. This explains why spheres from In-compounds start to quench at larger $R$ compared to spheres from Zn-compounds.
Besides semiconductors, it is also interesting to see the effects of spin-orbit correlated currents in semimetals. We focus here on zinc-blende HgTe, of which the synthesis of small colloidal quantum dots is well established\cite{Keuleyan2011}. Compared to the previously studied materials, the ordering of the bands at the $\Gamma$-point is different in HgTe: the $\Gamma_6^c$-band has a lower energy than the $\Gamma_{7,8}^v$-bands\cite{Groves1967}. However, the first empty band (i.e. the $\Gamma_8^v$-band) is connected to both the $X_6^c$-point and $L_6^c$-point, meaning that the character of the band changes at finite $k$ (see Ref.~\onlinecite{Madelung2004}). Consequently, for sufficiently small spheres (large $k$), the electron ground state must have predominantly a $\Gamma_6^c$ character, which can indeed be observed in Fig.~\ref{fig:mu_spheres_HgTe}. Our approach to calculate the electron state assumes that the state is mainly stemming from the $\Gamma_6^c$-band. This assumption is therefore only valid for $R<2.7$~nm, and hence we plot in Fig.~\ref{fig:mu_spheres_HgTe} the curves dotted for $R>2.7$~nm. For small $R$, the current distribution is the same as for the previously studied materials and the integrated orbital moment is quenched in a similar fashion. This demonstrates the general applicability of our approach to calculate spin-orbit correlated currents in nanostructures. For large $R$, the electron ground state is contained in the $F=\tfrac{3}{2}$ subspace, which falls outside the scope of this article. We emphasize that we therefore cannot correctly reproduce the bulk orbital moment (see Table~\ref{table:materials}).
\subsection{Spherical shells} \label{sec:shells}
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{mu_spatial_shell.pdf}
\caption{(a) The spatial distribution of the normalized magnitude of the ${\bf e}_{y}$-component of $\langle {\bf j}\rangle^{\text{BV}}$ of a spherical shell. Due to the inner surface, an additional current loop is created, circulating oppositely to the outer current loop. (b-c) The magnetic moment density of the most dominant orbital moment (c) and the spin moment (b) of a spherical shell. It can clearly be observed that ${\boldsymbol \mu}_{\text{spin}}$ has an even spatial symmetry, whereas ${\boldsymbol \mu}_{\text{IC-BV}}$ has an odd spatial symmetry. All figures are $xz$-cross-sections, the white/black circles mark the boundaries of the spherical shell, we choose $R_{\text{in}}/R_{\text{out}}=\tfrac{1}{2}$. Similar to the spheres, we have neglected the very small $x$-component of the spin moment density, see the discussion in Sec.~\ref{sec:spheres}.}
\label{fig:mu_spatial_shell}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
In the previous subsection we found that the dominant orbital current is zero at the center of the sphere and peaks at roughly at $R/2$. This suggests that removing material from the center of the sphere would not affect the current distribution in a significant way. We therefore investigate now a spherical shell, where material is indeed removed from the center. The spherical shell is also interesting from another perspective: we found that the currents and moments of the spheres are governed by a single geometrical parameter, the radius $R$ of the sphere. A spherical shell, however, has in principle two independent geometrical parameters: its inner radius $R_{\text{in}}$ and outer radius $R_{\text{out}}$. The confining potential of such a spherical shell is given by:
\begin{eqnarray}
V(r) = \left\{
\begin{array}{lc}
0 & R_{\text{in}} \leq r \leq R_{\text{out}} \\
\infty & \text{elsewhere}
\end{array}
\right.
\end{eqnarray}
The spherical Neumann functions $y_l(r)$ do play a role now, since the origin is not involved in the wave function. Therefore $\xi$ is non-zero and should follow from the boundary conditions. Since the electron ground state predominantly originates from conduction band states, we use the approximate boundary conditions $\langle r,\theta,\phi|\tfrac{1}{2},+\tfrac{1}{2};\tfrac{1}{2},0;k\rangle |_{r=R_{\text{in}},r=R_{\text{out}}}=0$, which leads to the relations:
\begin{eqnarray}
k &=& \frac{\pi}{R_{\text{out}} - R_{\text{in}}} \\
\xi &=& \tan\left(k R_{\text{out}}\right)
\end{eqnarray}
The relation for the radial wave number $k$ is similar to the relation derived for the spherical quantum dots, only the radius $R$ is replaced by the shell thickness $R_{\text{out}}-R_{\text{in}}$. There is a simple physical interpretation for this relation: the electron will form a standing wave by reflecting between the inner and outer spherical hard-walls, and hence the wave number is inversely proportional to the distance between these walls. The modification to the wave number turns out to be the only change compared to the spherical quantum dots: all quantities are the same for the spherical shell after replacing $R$ by $R_{\text{out}}-R_{\text{in}}$. In other words, the confinement energy $\lambda$ and magnetic moment are parameterized by the radial wave number $k$. The magnetic moment depends therefore one-to-one on the confinement energy and it is not possible to tune the magnetic moment and the confinement energy of the state separately. We exemplify this in Fig.~\ref{fig:mu_shell}, where we show the integrated orbital moment ${\boldsymbol \mu}_{\text{IC-BV}}$ of InAs shells for various ratios of $R_{\text{in}}/R_{\text{out}}$ as function of the confinement energy: all curves fall on top of each other. We will show in section \ref{sec:cylindrical} that it is possible to independently tune the magnetic moment and confinement energy if the symmetry of the nanostructure is lowered. Of course it is possible to tune the magnetic moment by changing the shell thickness (see Fig.~\ref{fig:mu_shell}), which can either be done structurally (e.g. in colloidal quantum dots), or electrically by using gates.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{figure_mu_shell.pdf}
\caption{The integrated orbital moment ${\boldsymbol \mu}_{\text{IC-BV}}$ of InAs shells for various ratios $R_{\text{in}}/R_{\text{out}}$ as function of the outer radius $R_{\text{out}}$ (continuous lines) and confinement energy $\lambda$ (dotted lines).}
\label{fig:mu_shell}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
In Fig.~\ref{fig:mu_spatial_shell}(a) we plot the spatial distribution of the dominant current density $\langle {\bf j} \rangle^{\text{BV}}$ for $R_{\text{in}}/R_{\text{out}}=\tfrac{1}{2}$. The current distribution consists of an inner and outer current loop, propagating in opposite directions and partially canceling each other. These currents create oppositely oriented orbital moments, which can also be seen directly from the expression for the dominant integrated orbital moment ${\boldsymbol \mu}_{\text{IC-BV}}$:
\begin{eqnarray}
{\boldsymbol \mu}_{\text{IC-BV}} &=& -\mu_B\sqrt{\frac{2}{3}}\frac{m_0 P_0}{\pi\hbar^2} \frac{\text{Im}\{\alpha - \sqrt{2}\beta\}}{1+|\alpha|^2+|\beta|^2} \left(R_{\text{out}} - R_{\text{in}}\right) {\bf e}_z \nonumber\\
\end{eqnarray}
which can be interpreted as the difference between the orbital moment generated by the outer current and the inner current. The degree of cancelation depends therefore on the shell thickness, which shows again that the orbital moment for spherical systems is uniquely determined by the radial wave number $k$.
The current distribution of spherical shells are markedly different from the current distribution of the spheres. Removal of material from the center of the spheres has therefore a non-trivial effect on the orbital currents: the number of circulating currents and the direction in which they circulate seems to be linked to the topology (genus) of the nanostructure. This resembles the current distributions in the quantum spin hall effect\cite{Kane2005} and this analogy will be subject of further study.
\section{Cylindrical symmetry} \label{sec:cylindrical}
In the previous section we found that the nanostructures with spherical symmetry are governed by a single geometrical parameter. By reducing the symmetry of the confining potential to cylindrical symmetry, we can investigate if shape anisotropy can add a new geometrical handle on the magnetic moment. Generally speaking, the ${\bf k}\cdot{\bf p}$ Hamiltonian ${\cal H}$ can formally be decomposed in terms having respectively cylindrical, cubic and tetragonal symmetry~\cite{Winkler2003}:
\begin{eqnarray}
{\cal H} = {\cal H}_{\text{cyl}} + {\cal H}_{\text{cub}} + {\cal H}_{\text{tet}}
\end{eqnarray}
Since we will be investigating cylindrically symmetric nanostructures, we will use only the cylindrically symmetric part ${\cal H}_{\text{cyl}}$. Moreover, it has been shown\cite{Trebin1979} that ${\cal H}_{\text{cub}}$ is proportional to $\gamma_3-\gamma_2$, which is for most semiconductors a small quantity compared to $\gamma_1$ and $\gamma_2$ (see Table~\ref{table:materials}). Analogous to Sec.~\ref{sec:spherical}, this Hamiltonian will now be block diagonal in a basis of eigenstates of $F_z$\cite{Sercel1990}:
\begin{eqnarray}
{\cal H} = \sum_{F_z} {\cal H}_{F_z}
\end{eqnarray}
since only $F_z=L_{\text{E},z}+J_z$, the projection of the total angular momentum on the symmetry axis, remains quantized for nanostructures with cylindrical symmetry. A convenient basis are the product states:
\begin{eqnarray}
|F_z;J,J_z;k,k_z\rangle = |J,J_z\rangle |k,k_z,L_{\text{E},z}=F_z-J_z\rangle
\end{eqnarray}
where $|J,J_z\rangle$ are Bloch functions, $|k,k_z,L_{\text{E},z}=F_z-J_z\rangle$ the envelope wave functions, $k$ is the radial wave number, and $k_z$ the wave number along the symmetry axis (which we choose to be the $z$-axis). The envelope wave function has the coordinate representation:
\begin{eqnarray}
&& \langle r,\theta,z |k,k_z,L_{\text{E},z}=F_z-J_z\rangle = \\
&& \hspace{10mm} \frac{i^{L_{\text{E},z}}}{2\pi} \left\{J_{L_{\text{E},z}}\left(kr\right)+\xi N_{L_{\text{E},z}}\left(kr\right)\right\} e^{i L_{\text{E},z} \theta} e^{i k_z z}\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
where $J_l(r)$ is the $l$th-order Bessel function of the first kind, $N_l(r)$ is the $l$th-order Neumann function of the first kind, and $\xi$ a dimensionless parameter determined by the boundary conditions. Using the transformation as outlined in Ref.~\onlinecite{Sercel1990}, we can represent ${\cal H}_{\text{cyl}}$ in the cylindrical envelope basis. The resulting Hamiltonian is shown in Table~\ref{table:Hcyl}; the basis of Bloch functions can be found in Table~\ref{table:Bloch}. We would like to point out that, although the transformation of Ref.~\onlinecite{Sercel1990} is correct, the cylindrical symmetry is not correctly introduced in their Hamiltonian. We have therefore used the correctly derived Hamiltonian of Ref.~\onlinecite{Trebin1979}. The Hamiltonian of Ref.~\onlinecite{Sercel1990} and our Hamiltonian are identical in the spherical approximation ($\gamma_2 = \gamma_3 = \gamma_{23}$, where $\gamma_{23} = \frac{2}{5}\gamma_2 + \frac{3}{5}\gamma_3$). We will show that only in the cylindrical approximation it will be possible to independently tune the confinement energy and magnetic moment.
\subsection{Disks with hard-wall boundaries} \label{sec:harddisks}
The confining potential of a disk with radius $R$ and height $H$ with hard-wall boundaries is given by:
\begin{eqnarray}
V(r,z) = \left\{
\begin{array}{lc}
0 & r \leq R \quad \text{and} \quad |z|\leq H/2 \\
\infty & \text{elsewhere}
\end{array}
\right.
\end{eqnarray}
The envelope wave function needs to be normalizable at the center of the disk, hence only Bessel functions $J_l(kr)$ contribute to the envelope wave function (i.e. $\xi=0$). Furthermore, the traveling wave $e^{ik_z z}$ in the $z$-direction will become a standing wave. Since we assume that the electron ground state predominantly originates from conduction band states, we choose the approximate boundary condition:
\begin{eqnarray}
\langle r,\theta,z |k,k_z,0\rangle_{r=R,z=\pm\tfrac{H}{2}}=0
\end{eqnarray}
from which the relations $k=\tfrac{\rho_{0,1}}{R}$ and $k_z=\tfrac{\pi}{H}$ follow (where $\rho_{l,m}$ denotes the $m$th zero of the $l$th-order Bessel function). The envelope spinor for the electron ground state with $F_z=+\frac{1}{2}$ becomes then:
\begin{eqnarray*}
\langle r,\theta,z|\Psi\rangle = \frac{N}{2\pi} \left(
\begin{array}{r@{}l}
v_1 & J_0\left(kr\right) \cos(k_z z) \\
- v_2 & J_1\left(kr\right) \sin(k_z z) \\
i v_3 & J_1\left(kr\right) \cos(k_z z) e^{-i\theta} \\
i v_4 & J_0\left(kr\right) \sin(k_z z) \\
i v_5 & J_1\left(kr\right) \cos(k_z z) e^{+i\theta} \\
-i v_6 & J_2\left(kr\right) \sin(k_z z) e^{+2i\theta} \\
i v_7 & J_0\left(kr\right) \sin(k_z z) \\
i v_8 & J_1\left(kr\right) \cos(k_z z) e^{+i\theta}
\end{array}
\right)
\hspace{2mm}
\begin{array}{c}
\text{CB$\uparrow$} \\
\text{CB$\downarrow$} \\
\text{HH$\uparrow$} \\
\text{LH$\uparrow$} \\
\text{LH$\downarrow$} \\
\text{HH$\downarrow$} \\
\text{SO$\uparrow$} \\
\text{SO$\downarrow$}
\end{array} \label{eq:psi_cyl}
\end{eqnarray*}
where the coefficients $v_i$ indicate the amount of intermixing of different Bloch states (comparable to $\alpha$ and $\beta$ of the spheres), and where $N$ is a normalization constant:
\begin{eqnarray}
|N|^2 = \frac{8\pi\rho_{0,1}^2}{H R^2J_1(\rho_{0,1})^2 \left(\sum_{i=1}^8 |v_i|^2 \rho_{0,1}^2 - 4 |v_6|^2\right)}
\end{eqnarray}
We will first investigate the composition of the ground state, which in general depends both on the radius and height of the disk. As the composition depends on the coefficients $v_i$, we need to diagonalizing ${\cal H}_{\text{cyl}}$ to find their analytical expressions. Unfortunately these expressions are rather cumbersome, and it proves more insightful to analyze the coefficients in the quantum well limit (QW), for which $k=0$:
\begin{widetext}
\begin{eqnarray}
v_1^{\text{QW}} = 1 \quad\quad v_2^{\text{QW}} = 0 \quad\quad v_3^{\text{QW}} = 0 \quad\quad v_5^{\text{QW}} = 0 \quad\quad v_6^{\text{QW}} = 0 \quad\quad v_8^{\text{QW}} = 0
\end{eqnarray}
\begin{eqnarray}
v_4^{\text{QW}} &=& \frac{i\sqrt{\frac{2}{3}}k_z P_0\left[\frac{\hbar^2k_z^2}{2m_0}(\gamma_1-2\gamma_2)+(E_g+\Delta+\lambda)\right]}{\left[\frac{\hbar^2k_z^2}{2m_0}(\gamma_1-2\gamma_2)+(E_g+\Delta+\lambda)\right]\left[\frac{\hbar^2k_z^2}{2m_0}(\gamma_1+4\gamma_2)+(E_g+\lambda)\right] - 2\frac{\hbar^2k_z^2}{2m_0}\gamma_2 \Delta} \\
v_7^{\text{QW}} &=& \frac{i\sqrt{\frac{1}{3}}k_z P_0\left[\frac{\hbar^2k_z^2}{2m_0}(\gamma_1-2\gamma_2)+(E_g+\lambda)\right]}{\left[\frac{\hbar^2k_z^2}{2m_0}(\gamma_1-2\gamma_2)+(E_g+\Delta+\lambda)\right]\left[\frac{\hbar^2k_z^2}{2m_0}(\gamma_1+4\gamma_2)+(E_g+\lambda)\right] - 2\frac{\hbar^2k_z^2}{2m_0}\gamma_2 \Delta}
\end{eqnarray}
and in the nanowire limit (NW), for which $k_z=0$:
\begin{eqnarray}
v_1^{\text{NW}} = 1 \quad\quad v_2^{\text{NW}} = 0 \quad\quad v_4^{\text{NW}} = 0 \quad\quad v_6^{\text{NW}} = 0 \quad\quad v_7^{\text{NW}} = 0
\end{eqnarray}
\begin{eqnarray}
v_3^{\text{NW}} &=& \frac{i\sqrt{2}k P_0\left[K_1+(E_g+\Delta+\lambda)\right]\left[K_2+2(E_g+\lambda)\right]}{\left[K_1+(E_g+\Delta+\lambda)\right]\left[K_2+2(E_g+\lambda)\right]\left[K_3+2(E_g+\lambda)\right] - 8\frac{\hbar^2k^2}{2m_0}\gamma_2 \Delta\left[\frac{\hbar^2k^2}{2m_0}(\gamma_1+\gamma_2)-\frac{\hbar^2k^2}{2m_0}\frac{3(\gamma_2+\gamma_3)^2}{4\gamma_2}+(E_g+\lambda)\right]} \nonumber\\ \\
v_5^{\text{NW}} &=& \frac{i\sqrt{\frac{2}{3}}k P_0\left[K_1+(E_g+\Delta+\lambda)\right]\left[K_2+2(E_g+\lambda)\right]}{\left[K_1+(E_g+\Delta+\lambda)\right]\left[K_2+2(E_g+\lambda)\right]\left[K_3+2(E_g+\lambda)\right] - 8\frac{\hbar^2k^2}{2m_0}\gamma_2 \Delta\left[\frac{\hbar^2k^2}{2m_0}(\gamma_1+\gamma_2)-\frac{\hbar^2k^2}{2m_0}\frac{3(\gamma_2+\gamma_3)^2}{4\gamma_2}+(E_g+\lambda)\right]} \nonumber\\ \\
v_8^{\text{NW}} &=& \frac{i\sqrt{\frac{4}{3}}k P_0\left[K_1+(E_g+\lambda)\right]\left[K_2+2(E_g+\lambda)\right]}{\left[K_1+(E_g+\Delta+\lambda)\right]\left[K_2+2(E_g+\lambda)\right]\left[K_3+2(E_g+\lambda)\right] - 8\frac{\hbar^2k^2}{2m_0}\gamma_2 \Delta\left[\frac{\hbar^2k^2}{2m_0}(\gamma_1+\gamma_2)-\frac{\hbar^2k^2}{2m_0}\frac{3(\gamma_2+\gamma_3)^2}{4\gamma_2}+(E_g+\lambda)\right]}\nonumber\\
\end{eqnarray}
\end{widetext}
where $\lambda$ is the confinement energy following from one of the roots of $|{\cal H}_{\text{cyl}}-\lambda I|=0$, and where
\begin{eqnarray}
K_1 &=& \frac{\hbar^2k^2}{2m_0}(\gamma_1-2\gamma_2) \\
K_2 &=& \frac{\hbar^2k^2}{2m_0}(2\gamma_1-\gamma_2-3\gamma_3) \\
K_3 &=& \frac{\hbar^2k^2}{2m_0}(2\gamma_1+5\gamma_2+3\gamma_3)
\end{eqnarray}
It is clear that only very specific valence bands are mixing into the electron ground state for quantum wells and nanowires, which can be explained as follows. The ground state has only a finite envelope momentum associated with the directions in which the state is confined (at zero temperature). For example, in a quantum well there is only an envelope momentum in the $z$-direction ($k_z\neq0$), since there will be no motion in the plane ($k=0$). In a ${\bf k}\cdot{\bf p}$-model, the envelope momentum ${\bf k}$ is coupled to the atomic orbitals of the crystal ${\bf p}$. This means that only valence band Bloch states with atomic orbitals which are oriented in the confined directions will participate in the ground state. Thus for the quantum well, only valence band Bloch states with atomic orbitals $|z\rangle$ will contribute, while for the nanowire only the atomic orbital states $|x\rangle$ or $|y\rangle$ are relevant (see Table~\ref{table:Bloch}). Since we are examining the $F_z=+\tfrac{1}{2}$ ground state, only the spin $\uparrow$-part of the valence band Bloch state can participate. Hence only $\{$LH$\uparrow,$ SO$\uparrow\}$ (or $v_{4,7}^{\text{QW}}$) mix into the ground state of the quantum well, while only $\{$HH$\uparrow,$ LH$\downarrow,$ SO$\downarrow\}$ (or $v_{3,5,8}^{\text{NW}}$) are relevant for the nanowire.
In Fig.~\ref{fig:mix_QW}~and~\ref{fig:mix_NW} we show the height (radius) dependence of the composition of an InAs quantum well and nanowire. The composition behaves qualitatively the same as for the spheres: the intermixing of valence band states peaks at a certain height (or radius) and the conduction band contribution has a minimum of $\sim65\%$. The reason for this behavior is also the same and can be directly observed in the expressions for the $v_i$: there is a competition between the coupling term ($k P_0$ or $k_z P_0$) and the free kinetic energy ($\propto k^2$ or $k_z^2$). We would like to point out that the exact dependence of the coefficients on the height (or radius) is determined by the free kinetic energies associated with the confined direction. In particular, coefficients $v_{4,7}^{\text{QW}}$ depend only on combinations of $\gamma_1$ and $\gamma_2$ which represent the effective hole masses along the $z$-direction. However, the coefficients $v_{3,5,8}^{\text{NW}}$ for a nanowire also depend on $\gamma_3$, as the combinations of $\gamma$'s involve the in-plane effective hole masses. When using the spherical approximation these differences disappear and all coefficients have the same functional dependence on radius or height, as can be seen by comparing the dotted lines of Fig.~\ref{fig:mix_QW}~and~\ref{fig:mix_NW}.
In Fig.~\ref{fig:mix_cylinder} we show the radius and height dependence of the composition of a finite InAs disk. As expected, the electron ground state $F_z=+\tfrac{1}{2}$ is always dominated ($\geq65\%$) by the CB$\uparrow$ states. The radius and height dependence of coefficients $v_{4,7}$ is similar to coefficients $v_{3,5,8}$, only the roles of radius and height are interchanged. We therefore discuss only the dependence of coefficients $v_{3,5,8}$. Of course only coefficients $v_{3,5,8}$ play a role if the height is very large, since we are then approaching the nanowire limit. Moreover, the non-monotonic dependence of these coefficients on the radius follows the explanation of the previous paragraph. To understand why they have only a significant weight in a triangular region of the $RH$-space, we need to analyze their less-intuitive dependence on the height. To first order, we can use the analytical expressions for $v_{3,5,8}^{\text{NW}}$, recognizing that the confinement energy $\lambda$ depends in general on both the radius and height. Indeed, in the limit of large radius and height, $\lambda$ becomes:
\begin{eqnarray}
\lim_{R,H\rightarrow\infty} \lambda = \frac{E_g + \tfrac{2}{3}\Delta}{E_g(E_g + \Delta)}(k^2 + k_z^2) P_0^2
\end{eqnarray}
Inserting this expression for $\lambda$ into $v_{3,5,8}^{\text{NW}}$, we see that $v_{3,5,8} \sim 1/k_z^2$, and will thus decrease monotonically when the height gets smaller. This effect is only significant when the confinement energy $(\propto k_z^2)$ is comparable to the free kinetic energies $(\propto k^2)$, i.e. when the $H\sim R$. When $H\ll R$, the confinement energy has quenched the coefficients $v_{3,5,8}$ completely, which explains the insignificance of these coefficients in the triangular region of the $RH$-space.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{figure_mix_QW.pdf}
\caption{The height dependence of the composition and confinement energy $\lambda$ of an InAs quantum well, where only $v_{4,7}$ intermix, in the cylindrical approximation (continuous lines) and in the spherical approximation (dotted lines).}
\label{fig:mix_QW}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
We find that $v_2$ is always zero, even though there are second-order couplings between CB$\downarrow$ and CB$\uparrow$ (see Table~\ref{table:Hcyl}). It turns out that these couplings are canceling each other in the cylindrical approximation. We expect that this is no longer true when cubic terms are included in the Hamiltonian. Coefficient $v_6$, however, still has a finite weight due to third-order couplings, since the HH$\downarrow$ Bloch state can only couple to the CB$\uparrow$ Bloch state via two intermediate valence band Bloch states. This explains why $v_6$ has a (extremely) small weight in a very limited region of the $RH$-space, as it depends on the overlap of coefficients $v_{3,5,8}$ and $v_{4,7}$. Interestingly, we find that $v_6 \propto (\gamma_2 - \gamma_3)$ and consequently $v_6=0$ in the spherical approximation. Due to the extremely small weight, we set $v_6=0$ to simplify the analytical expressions.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{figure_mix_NW.pdf}
\caption{The radius dependence of the composition and confinement energy $\lambda$ of an InAs nanowire, where only $v_{3,5,8}$ intermix, in the cylindrical approximation (continuous lines) and in the spherical approximation (dotted lines).}
\label{fig:mix_NW}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure*}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=2\columnwidth]{mix_cylinder.pdf}
\caption{(a-h) The height and radius dependence of the composition of an InAs disk. The white lines are contours constant $|N|^2|v_i|^2$. The electron ground state $F_z=+\tfrac{1}{2}$ is dominated by the $v_1$ (CB$\uparrow$) state; note that (a) has a different color scale than the other plots. In the quantum wire limit, i.e. very large $H$, only $v_3$ (HH$\uparrow$), $v_5$ (LH$\downarrow$) and $v_8$ (SO$\downarrow$) mix into the ground state. Conversely, in the quantum well limit, i.e. very large $R$, only $v_4$ (LH$\uparrow$) and $v_7$ (SO$\uparrow$) mix into the ground state. The contributions of $v_2$ (CB$\downarrow$) is absent and of $v_6$ (HH$\downarrow$) negligible (enhanced by $10^5$ for visibility).}
\label{fig:mix_cylinder}
\end{center}
\end{figure*}
The itinerant BV related current density $\langle {\bf j} \rangle^{\text{BV}}$ of the electron ground state can be expressed in terms of coefficients $v_i$:
\begin{eqnarray}
&&\hspace{-4mm}\langle {\bf j} \rangle^{\text{BV}} = -\frac{e |N|^2 P_0}{2 \sqrt{6} \pi ^2 \hbar } \big[ \\
\hspace{2mm}& & J_0(kr) J_1(kr) \cos^2(k_z z) v_1 \text{Im}\{\sqrt{3}v_3 + v_5 - \sqrt{2}v_8\} \big] {\bf e}_{\theta}\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
The current is flowing in the ${\bf e}_{\theta}$-direction and the radial distribution is governed by the product of the conduction and valence band envelope wave functions, i.e. $J_0(kr)J_1(kr)$. This resembles again a current loop, see Fig.~\ref{fig:j_mu_cylinder}(a), peaking at about $R/2$ and $z=0$. The momentum matrix elements associated with the ${\bf e}_{\theta}$-direction can be written as $\langle u_j | \tfrac{1}{\rho} \tfrac{i}{\hbar} L_{\text{B},z} | u_i \rangle$. The current depends indeed on coefficients $v_{3,5,8}$, which represent valence band Bloch states carrying an orbital momentum $L_{\text{B},z}=\pm1$. In the limit of large radius and height, we find that the particular combination of these coefficients is proportional to the spin-orbit coupling:
\begin{eqnarray}
&&\hspace{-10mm}\lim_{R,H\rightarrow\infty} \text{Im}\{\sqrt{3}v_3 + v_5 - \sqrt{2}v_8\} \\
&\hspace{4mm}=& \sqrt{\frac{3}{2}} \frac{k P_0}{E_g + \lambda} - \sqrt{\frac{1}{6}} \frac{k P_0}{E_g + \lambda} - \sqrt{\frac{2}{3}} \frac{k P_0}{E_g + \Delta + \lambda}\nonumber\\ \\
&\hspace{4mm}=& \sqrt{\frac{2}{3}} k P_0 \frac{\Delta}{(E_g + \lambda)(E_g+\Delta+\lambda)}
\end{eqnarray}
which shows explicitly the spin-orbit correlated nature of the current. It also shows explicitly the cancellation mechanism, as discussed for the spheres: coefficient $v_3$ and coefficients $v_{5,8}$ create oppositely circulating currents, since they have respectively $L_{\text{B},z}=+1$ and $L_{\text{B},z}=-1$. The degree of cancellation depends on the spin-orbit splitting $\Delta$, as this tunes the presence of the SO$\downarrow$ ($v_8$) Bloch state. The proportionality to $k$ suggests that the current would be quenched in the quantum well limit. We will show later on that this does not mean that the orbital moment ${\boldsymbol \mu}_{\text{IC-BV}}$ associated with this current is quenched in quantum wells. Furthermore we point out that quenching of $\langle {\bf j} \rangle^{\text{BV}}$ in the quantum well limit can only happen in a perfect crystal at a temperature of zero Kelvin. In practice, either the finite temperature (the de Broglie wavelength) or dopants (the Bohr radius) will lead to a finite radial wave number and therefore to a finite current.
The itinerant EV related current density $\langle {\bf j}\rangle^{\text{EV}}$ can be more generally calculated using the general envelope state $|k,k_z,L_{\text{E},z}\rangle$:
\begin{eqnarray}
\langle {\bf j} \rangle^{\text{EV}}_{|k,k_z,L_{\text{E},z}\rangle} = \frac{e \hbar}{4 \pi^2 r m_0} L_{\text{E},z} J_{L_{\text{E},z}}(kr)^2 {\bf e}_{\theta}
\end{eqnarray}
where we have left out the ${\bf e}_z$-component, since for the disk the traveling plane wave $e^{i k_z z}$ is replaced by a standing wave, which cannot carry a current. Once more, it is clear the $\langle {\bf j} \rangle^{\text{EV}}$ flows in the ${\bf e}_{\theta}$-direction and is generated by envelope wave functions having a finite $L_{\text{E},z}$, meaning that the dominant CB$\uparrow$ Bloch state will not contribute. The itinerant EV related current density $\langle {\bf j} \rangle^{\text{EV}}$ of the ground state can also be expressed in terms of coefficients $v_i$:
\begin{eqnarray}
&&\hspace{-10mm} \langle {\bf j} \rangle^{\text{EV}} = -\frac{e|N|^2 \hbar}{4 \pi^2 r m_0} \big[ \\
\hspace{6mm}&& J_1(kr)^2 \cos^2(k_z z) \left\{|v_3|^2-|v_5|^2-|v_8|^2\right\} \big] {\bf e}_{\theta}\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
It is clear that this current has the same spatial symmetry as $\langle {\bf j} \rangle^{\text{BV}}$ and resembles a current loop. The radial distribution is slightly different, being proportional to $J_1(kr)^2$, as can also be seen in Fig.~\ref{fig:j_mu_cylinder}(b). It is straightforward to show that $\langle {\bf j} \rangle^{\text{EV}}$ is also proportional to the spin-orbit coupling. The Bloch velocity related current dominates the envelope velocity related current, as can be seen from Fig.~\ref{fig:j_mu_cylinder}(c). For realistic sizes (i.e. $R\geq 1$~nm), the peak current density $\langle {\bf j} \rangle^{\text{BV}}_{\text{max}}$ is more than 10 times larger than $\langle {\bf j} \rangle^{\text{EV}}_{\text{max}}$.
\begin{figure*}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=2\columnwidth]{j_mu_cylinder.pdf}
\caption{(a-b) The spatial distribution of the normalized magnitude of the ${\bf e}_y$-component of $\langle {\bf j} \rangle^{\text{BV}}$ (a) and $\langle {\bf j} \rangle^{\text{EV}}$ (b) of a disk, with $v_{6}=0$. The current density peaks at roughly $R/2$ and $z=0$ and resembles a current loop in the plane of the disk. (c) The height and radius dependence of the ratio between the peak current densities $\langle {\bf j} \rangle^{\text{BV}}_{\text{max}}$ and $\langle {\bf j} \rangle^{\text{EV}}_{\text{max}}$ for an InAs disk. The color scale is logarithmic and the leftmost contour indicates a ratio of 10. As long as $R\geq1$~nm, $\langle {\bf j} \rangle^{\text{BV}} \gg \langle {\bf j} \rangle^{\text{EV}}$. (d-h) The height and radius dependence of the different integrated orbital momenta (e-h) and the integrated spin moment (d) for an InAs disk, all in units of Bohr magnetons. The color scale is logarithmic and the white lines are contours of constant moment with a power of 10. The dashed black lines in (e) are contours of constant confinement energy.}
\label{fig:j_mu_cylinder}
\end{center}
\end{figure*}
Now that the currents are know, we can analyze the magnetic moments. Since the spatial symmetries of the orbital moments and spin moment are similar to the case of the spheres, we do not discuss them in detail. Instead we will focus on the integrated moments; the integrated orbital moments are:
\begin{eqnarray}
{{\boldsymbol \mu}_{\text{IC-BV}}} &=& -{\mu_B}\sqrt{\frac{2}{3}} \frac{m_0 P_0 R}{\hbar^2 \rho_{0,1}} \frac{v_1 \text{Im}\{\sqrt{3} v_3 + v_5 - \sqrt{2} v_8\}}{\sum_{i=1}^8 |v_i|^2} {\bf e}_z \label{eq:muICBV_disk} \\
{{\boldsymbol \mu}_{\text{LC-BV}}} &=& {\mu_B}\frac{|v_3|^2 - \frac{1}{3} \text{Im}\{v_5 - \sqrt{2} v_8\}^2 + \frac{1}{3} \text{Im}\{v_4 + \sqrt{2} v_7\}^2}{\sum_{i=1}^8 |v_i|^2} {\bf e}_z \nonumber \\ \label{eq:muLCBV_disk} \\
{{\boldsymbol \mu}_{\text{IC-EV}}} &=& -{\mu_B}\frac{|v_3|^2 - |v_5|^2 - |v_8|^2}{\sum_{i=1}^8 |v_i|^2} {\bf e}_z \label{eq:muICEV_disk} \\
{{\boldsymbol \mu}_{\text{LC-EV}}} &=& -{\mu_B}\sqrt{\frac{2}{3}}\frac{P_0 \rho_{0,1}}{R} \frac{v_1 \text{Im} \{\frac{\sqrt{3}}{E_g} v_3 + \frac{1}{E_g} v_5 - \frac{\sqrt{2}}{E_g+\Delta} v_8\}}{\sum_{i=1}^8 |v_i|^2} {\bf e}_z \nonumber \\
\end{eqnarray}
while the integrated spin moment becomes:
\begin{eqnarray}
{{\boldsymbol \mu}_{\text{spin}}} &=& {\mu_B}\left[1 - 2 \frac{\frac{1}{3}\text{Im}\{v_4 + \sqrt{2} v_7\}^2 + \frac{1}{3}\text{Im}\{\sqrt{2} v_5 + v_8\}^2}{\sum_{i=1}^8 |v_i|^2}\right] {\bf e}_z \nonumber \\
\end{eqnarray}
As expected for the $F_z=+\tfrac{1}{2}$ ground state, the integrated magnetic moments are oriented along the ${\bf e}_z$-direction. In Fig.~\ref{fig:j_mu_cylinder}(d-h) we plot the radius and height dependence of these magnetic moments for an InAs disk.
Similar to the case of the spheres, ${\boldsymbol \mu}_{\text{IC-BV}}$ dominates over all other orbital moments within the range of the validity of the envelope function approximation. It is interesting to examine the behavior of ${\boldsymbol \mu}_{\text{IC-BV}}$ in several limiting cases. In the limit of large radius and height ${\boldsymbol \mu}_{\text{IC-BV}}$ becomes again the Roth formula\cite{Roth1959}, and the disk behaves as a bulk material. In the limit of large height, we can examine the behavior of ${\boldsymbol \mu}_{\text{IC-BV}}$ in nanowires. In Fig.~\ref{fig:mu_QNW} we show the radius dependence of ${\boldsymbol \mu}_{\text{IC-BV}}$ of an InAs nanowire. The origin of this dependence is the same as we have found for the spheres, and can be explained using the simple current loop: the non-monotonic radius dependence of the integrated current is multiplied by $R^2$. This makes the orbital moment constant at large radius, and depend on $R^4$ for small radius. In the limit of large radius, we can examine the behavior of ${\boldsymbol \mu}_{\text{IC-BV}}$ in quantum wells. Since ${\boldsymbol \mu}_{\text{IC-BV}}$ originates from $\langle {\bf j} \rangle^{\text{BV}}$, this moment is proportional to coefficients $v_{3,5,8}$. As was pointed out earlier, these coefficients are proportional to $k$ in the limit of large radius, so one might expect ${\boldsymbol \mu}_{\text{IC-BV}}$ to quench in the quantum well limit. However, the orbital moment is proportional to ${\bf r} \times {\bf j}$. Since ${\bf r}\sim 1/k$, the lever arm ${\bf r}$ cancels the $k$-dependence of the current ${\bf j}$. Therefore ${\boldsymbol \mu}_{\text{IC-BV}}$ remains non-zero in the quantum well limit. We show the height dependence of ${\boldsymbol \mu}_{\text{IC-BV}}$ for an InAs quantum well in Fig.~\ref{fig:mu_QNW}. The quenching mechanism is slightly different from that of the nanowires: the height enters ${\boldsymbol \mu}_{\text{IC-BV}}$ mainly through the confinement energy. To show these differences more clearly, we can investigate the analytical expressions for ${\boldsymbol \mu}_{\text{IC-BV}}$ in nanowires (quantum wells), in the limit of large radius (height):
\begin{widetext}
\begin{eqnarray}
\frac{{\boldsymbol \mu}_{\text{IC-BV}}^{\text{NW}}}{\mu_{\text{Roth}}} &=& 1 - \left(\frac{2(\gamma_1+\gamma_2)}{E_g} + \frac{2\frac{m_0P_0^2}{\hbar^2} - \gamma_1 \Delta}{E_g(E_g+\Delta)} + 2\frac{m_0P_0^2}{\hbar^2}\frac{6(E_g+\frac{2}{3}\Delta)^2}{E_g^2(E_g+\Delta)^2}\right)\frac{\hbar^2 k^2}{2m_0} + {\cal O}(k^3) \\
\frac{{\boldsymbol \mu}_{\text{IC-BV}}^{\text{QW}}}{\mu_{\text{Roth}}} &=& 1 - \left(\frac{2(\gamma_1-2\gamma_2+3\gamma_3)}{E_g} + \frac{2\frac{m_0P_0^2}{\hbar^2} - \gamma_1 \Delta}{E_g(E_g+\Delta)} + 2\frac{m_0P_0^2}{\hbar^2}\frac{6(E_g+\frac{2}{3}\Delta)^2}{E_g^2(E_g+\Delta)^2}\right)\frac{\hbar^2 k_z^2}{2m_0} + {\cal O}(k_z^3)
\end{eqnarray}
\end{widetext}
Notice that the functional dependence of ${\boldsymbol \mu}_{\text{IC-BV}}$ is the same for the nanowire and quantum well, except for the particular combination of $\gamma$'s that appears. More precisely, only the quantum well contains contributions from $\gamma_3$, making it prone to changes when going from the cylindrical to the spherical approximation. This is indeed observed for the InAs quantum well in Fig.~\ref{fig:mu_QNW}. In the spherical approximation, we find the orbital moment of nanowires and quantum wells to depend similarly on $k$ and $k_z$. This becomes clear in Fig.~\ref{fig:mu_QNW} when the orbital moment is plotted against the confinement energy: in the spherical approximation the curves of the quantum well and nanowire fall on top of each other. This shows that the orbital moment and confinement energy cannot be tuned independently. In fact, we have checked that both are parameterized by the quantity $k^2+k_z^2$. This behavior is analogous to what has been found for the spherically symmetric nanostructures.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{figure_mu_QNW.pdf}
\caption{The integrated orbital moment ${\boldsymbol \mu}_{\text{IC-BV}}$ of an InAs quantum well/nanowire as function of height/radius (continuous lines) and confinement energy (dotted lines).}
\label{fig:mu_QNW}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
However, when using the cylindrical approximation, the orbital moments of the quantum well and nanowire do not depend in the same way on the confinement energy: in Fig.~\ref{fig:mu_QNW} we see that the confinement energy of a quantum well and nanowire can be the same, yet the orbital moments are different. Indeed we also find that for finite disks it is possible to tune independently the confinement energy and orbital moment, if we use the cylindrical approximation. This is exemplified in Fig.~\ref{fig:j_mu_cylinder}(e), where besides the white lines indicating contours of constant orbital moment, dashed black lines indicate contours of constant confinement energies. It can readily be seen that the two sets of contour lines do not fully overlap, meaning that the confinement energy is changing along a contour line of constant orbital moment. This is distinctively different from nanostructures having spherical symmetry. A cylindrically symmetric nanostructure allows therefore for more versatility in engineering the orbital moment. For example, it is possible to engineer disks with the same confinement energy, yet different orbital momenta. This different behavior arises from the different symmetry of band structure of the crystal and not from the shape of the nanostructure, as we have observed that disks in the spherical approximation are parameterized by $k^2+k_z^2$. The intermixing depends through the confinement energy and the free kinetic energies on the dispersion relation and therefore on the symmetry of the band structure.
\begin{table}
\caption{The different combinations of the Bloch orbital moment $L_{\text{B},z}$ and envelope orbital moment $L_{\text{E},z}$ for a state having $F_z=+\tfrac{1}{2}$.}
\begin{tabular}{c|r|c|r}
\hline \hline
$v_i$ & $J_z$ & $L_{\text{B},z},s_z$ & $L_{\text{E},z}$ \\
\hline
$v_3$ & $+\tfrac{3}{2}$ & $+1,+\tfrac{1}{2}$ & $-1$ \\
$v_{4,7}$ & $+\tfrac{1}{2}$ & $(+1,-\tfrac{1}{2}), (0,+\tfrac{1}{2})$ & $0$ \\
$v_{5,8}$ & $-\tfrac{1}{2}$ & $(-1,+\tfrac{1}{2}), (0,-\tfrac{1}{2})$ & $+1$ \\
$v_6$ & $-\tfrac{3}{2}$ & $-1,-\tfrac{1}{2}$ & $+2$ \\
\hline \hline
\end{tabular}
\label{table:LB_LE}
\end{table}
The localized orbital moment ${\boldsymbol \mu}_{\text{LC-BV}}$ is proportional to the Bloch orbital moment $\langle u_i | {\bf L}_{\text{B}} | u_j \rangle$. One can recognize in Eq.~\ref{eq:muLCBV_disk} the projection of the orbital Bloch moment $+1$ in front of coefficient $v_3$ (HH$\uparrow$), and $\pm\tfrac{1}{3}$ in front of coefficients $v_{5,8}$ (LH$\uparrow$, SO$\downarrow$) and coefficients $v_{4,7}$ (LH$\downarrow$, SO$\uparrow$). In contrast, ${\boldsymbol \mu}_{\text{IC-EV}}$ is proportional to the envelope orbital moment, since this current originates from $\langle {\bf j} \rangle^{\text{EV}}$. The numerical factors in front of the coefficients in Eq.~\ref{eq:muICEV_disk} are now given by $L_{\text{E},z}$ of the corresponding coefficient. Coefficients $v_{4,7}$ play therefore no role, since the corresponding envelope wave functions have $L_{\text{E},z}=0$. The projection of the Bloch and envelope orbital momenta are related via:
\begin{eqnarray}
F_z &=& L_{\text{E},z} + L_{\text{B},z} + s_z
\end{eqnarray}
In Table~\ref{table:LB_LE} we have tabulated the different possible combinations of the Bloch and envelope orbital momenta for the electron ground state of a disk having $F_z=+\tfrac{1}{2}$. We find that $L_{\text{E},z} = -L_{\text{B},z}$ for coefficients $v_{3,5,8}$. These coefficients dominate the valence band contribution to the electron ground state for $H>R$ (see Fig.~\ref{fig:mix_cylinder}), so that ${\boldsymbol \mu}_{\text{LC-BV}}\approx -{\boldsymbol \mu}_{\text{IC-EV}}$ for $H>R$. The same (near) cancellation in the total orbital moment was found in the spheres. For $H<R$, however, the coefficients $v_{4,7}$ are non-zero so that the cancellation is not so complete. This is different from the spheres and shows again how radius and height have a different influence on the orbital moments in disks.
The localized orbital moment ${\boldsymbol \mu}_{\text{LC-EV}}$ depends via the dipole matrix elements on the momentum matrix elements, see Eq.~\ref{eq:LCEV}. It therefore depends on the same coefficients as ${\boldsymbol \mu}_{\text{IC-BV}}$, although reduced by the band edge energies of the corresponding Bloch states. The main difference between these two moments arises from the different pre-factors. For ${\boldsymbol \mu}_{\text{IC-BV}}$ the pre-factor reflects the lever arm, which is proportional to $R$, while for ${\boldsymbol \mu}_{\text{LC-EV}}$ it reflects the gradient of the envelope wave function, which is proportional to $1/R$ when ${\boldsymbol \mu}_{\text{LC-EV}}$ is oriented along ${\bf e}_z$. This explains why ${\boldsymbol \mu}_{\text{LC-EV}}$ becomes larger when the radius is decreased: the envelope velocity will steadily increase. Note that ${\boldsymbol \mu}_{\text{LC-EV}}$ becomes constant at small radius: coefficients $v_{3,5,8}$ are proportional to $1/k$ due to the free kinetic energy, while the pre-factor depends on $k$, which together makes ${\boldsymbol \mu}_{\text{LC-EV}}$ constant at small radius. By decreasing the height, ${\boldsymbol \mu}_{\text{LC-EV}}$ is quenched via the dependence of coefficients $v_{3,5,8}$ on the confinement energy. This is only effective when the height is substantially affecting the confinement energy, i.e. for $H<R$. Although for small radius ${\boldsymbol \mu}_{\text{LC-EV}}$ can become larger than ${\boldsymbol \mu}_{\text{IC-BV}}$, the validity of the envelope function approximation starts to break down. This is particularly true for the envelope velocity related quantities, which depend on the gradient of the envelope wave functions.
Finally we point out that the spin moment is almost constant at one Bohr magneton, see Fig.~\ref{fig:j_mu_cylinder}(d). The reason is the same as was found for the spheres: although there is a sizeable intermixing of valence band states, the effect of different bands on the spin moment cancel to a large degree each other out. From Fig.~\ref{fig:j_mu_cylinder}(d) we observe that the radius dependence of the spin moment is different from the height dependence, i.e. the (small) corrections are different for a nanowire and quantum well. This shows once more that the radius and height have a different influence on the disks.
\subsection{Disks with soft boundaries} \label{sec:softdisks}
To show that the qualitative picture of the spin-orbit correlated currents and resulting moments does not depend on the choice of hard-wall boundaries, we will now investigate cylindrically symmetric nanostructures with soft boundaries. Such boundaries can arise when quantum dots are electrostatically defined using gates on quantum wells, see Fig.~\ref{fig:j_harmonic}(a). The confining potential of such a gate-defined quantum dot in a quantum well having height $H$ is given by:
\begin{eqnarray}
V(r,z) = \left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
\frac{1}{2}m_0 \omega^2 r^2 & |z| \leq \frac{1}{2}H \\
\infty & |z| > \frac{1}{2}H
\end{array}
\right.
\end{eqnarray}
where we take a hard-wall boundary in the $z$-direction and a harmonic potential in the lateral direction having an oscillator frequency $\omega$. Soft boundaries also arise in gate-defined quantum dot in a nanowires, see Fig.~\ref{fig:j_harmonic}(b), of which the confining potential can be described as:
\begin{eqnarray}
V(r,z) = \left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
\frac{1}{2}m_0 \omega^2 z^2 & r \leq R \\
\infty & r > R
\end{array}
\right.
\end{eqnarray}
where $R$ is the radius of the nanowire, and we take a hard-wall boundary at the nanowire surface and a harmonic potential in the axial direction.
Unfortunately the Schr{\"o}dinger equation cannot be solved analytically for either of these two confinement potentials when taking all eight bands into account. However, we can expand the electron ground state into free cylindrical waves $\Psi^{\text{free}}_{F_z,{\bf k}}({\bf r})$:
\begin{eqnarray}
\Psi({\bf r}) = \int_{V_{\bf k}} c({\bf k})\Psi^{\text{free}}_{+1/2,{\bf k}}({\bf r})~d^3k
\end{eqnarray}
where $c({\bf k})$ are expansion coefficients, and ${\bf k}=(k,k_z)$ is the wave vector of the free cylindrical wave. We have limited the expansion to $F_z=+\tfrac{1}{2}$ states, since we are only interested in the electron ground state of the quantum dots. A free cylindrical wave $\Psi^{\text{free}}_{F_z,{\bf k}}$ is straightforwardly described in terms of the product states $|F_z;J,J_z;k,k_z\rangle$ (see Sec.\ref{sec:cylindrical}):
\begin{eqnarray}
\Psi^{\text{free}}_{F_z,{\bf k}}({\bf r}) = \sum_{J,J_z} v_{J,J_z}({\bf k}) \langle {\bf r} |F_z;J,J_z;k,k_z\rangle
\end{eqnarray}
where coefficients $v_{J,J_z}({\bf k})$ follow from diagonalizing the Hamiltonian. These coefficients can one-to-one be identified with the (intermixing) coefficients $v_i$ of the disks.
\begin{figure}[t]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{j_harmonic.pdf}
\caption{(a) Gates (red) define by electrostatic means a quantum dot in a quantum well (blue). We take hard-wall confinement in the $z$-direction and a harmonic potential in the lateral direction. (b) Gates (red) define by electrostatic means a quantum dot in a nanowire (transparent). We take hard-wall confinement at the nanowire surface and a harmonic confinement potential in the axial direction. (c) The normalized magnitude of $\langle {\bf j} \rangle^{\text{BV}}$ in the ${\bf e}_y$-direction of an InAs quantum well with $H=10$~nm and $L_{\text{har}}^{\text{rad}}=10$~nm\cite{Hanson2007}. (d) The normalized magnitude of $\langle {\bf j} \rangle^{\text{BV}}$ in the ${\bf e}_y$-direction of an InAs nanowire with $R=40$~nm and $L_{\text{har}}^{\text{ax}}=10$~nm\cite{Csonka2008}. The continuous white lines indicate hard-wall boundaries, the dashed ones indicate the harmonic confinement length.}
\label{fig:j_harmonic}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{figure_mu_harmonic_QW.pdf}
\caption{The integrated orbital moment ${\boldsymbol \mu}_{\text{IC-BV}}$ as function of the harmonic confinement length $L_{\text{har}}^{\text{rad}}$ for gate-defined quantum dots in quantum wells (continuous lines) and as function of radius $R$ for disk (dotted lines), with $H=10$~nm.}
\label{fig:mu_harmonic_QW}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
Based on the analysis of the spheres and disks, we know that the dominant contribution to the electron ground state comes from the conduction band. We can therefore approximate the expansion coefficients using the envelope wave functions of a calculation involving only a single (conduction) band, $\Psi^{\text{single}}({\bf r})$:
\begin{eqnarray}
c({\bf k}) \approx \int_V \Psi^{\text{single}}({\bf r}) \Psi^{\text{free, single}}_{+1/2,{\bf k}}({\bf r})~d^3r
\end{eqnarray}
where the free cylindrical wave of a single (conduction) band is given by:
\begin{eqnarray}
\Psi^{\text{free, single}}_{+1/2,{\bf k}}({\bf r}) = \langle {\bf r} |F_z=+\tfrac{1}{2};J=\tfrac{1}{2},J_z=+\tfrac{1}{2};k,k_z\rangle\nonumber \\
\end{eqnarray}
We take for the envelope wave functions involving only the conduction band the solutions of Ref.~\onlinecite{Ikhdair2012}; for a quantum dot in a quantum well this is:
\begin{eqnarray}
\Psi^{\text{single}}_{\text{QW}}({\bf r}) = N e^{-\left(r/2L_{\text{har}}^{\text{rad}}\right)^2}\cos\left(\pi\frac{z}{H}\right)
\end{eqnarray}
where $L_{\text{har}}^{\text{rad}}=\sqrt{\hbar/2 m_0 \omega}$ is the harmonic confinement length in the lateral direction, and $N$ a normalization constant. Similarly, for a quantum dot in a nanowire we have:
\begin{eqnarray}
\Psi^{\text{single}}_{\text{NW}}({\bf r}) = N e^{-\left(z/\sqrt{2}L_{\text{har}}^{\text{ax}}\right)^2}J_0\left(\rho_{0,1}\frac{r}{R}\right)
\end{eqnarray}
where $L_{\text{har}}^{\text{ax}}=\sqrt{\hbar/m_0 \omega}$ the harmonic confinement length in the axial direction. Using these single band envelope wave functions, we find an approximation for $\Psi({\bf r})$, of which the accuracy depends on the amount of intermixing of valence band states. Although it is possible to solve this problem analytically, for practical reasons we used only a limited number of free cylindrical waves in the expansion and calculated numerically $v_{J,J_z}({\bf k})$ for each wave. This numerical approximation converges when we use $\sim50-100$ free cylindrical waves.
Now that the electron ground state is determined, we can use the techniques outlined in Sec.~\ref{sec:orbmu} to calculate the spin-orbit correlated currents. In Fig.~\ref{fig:j_harmonic}(c) we show $\langle {\bf j} \rangle^{\text{BV}}$ for a realistic gate-defined quantum dot in an InAs quantum well\cite{Hanson2007}. This current distribution is very similar to the one found for disks, see Fig.~\ref{fig:j_mu_cylinder}(a); the only difference is that the current is more smeared out in the lateral direction. In Fig.~\ref{fig:mu_harmonic_QW} we show the dependence of the integrated moment ${\boldsymbol \mu}_{\text{IC-BV}}$ on $L_{\text{har}}^{\text{rad}}$ for gated-defined quantum dots in quantum wells with $H=10$~nm. In the same graph, we show the radius dependence of disks having $H=10$~nm, so that we can directly observe the difference between hard-wall and soft boundaries. As expected, the boundaries have no influence in the limit of large $L_{\text{har}}^{\text{rad}}$ or $R$. When decreasing the size of the quantum dots, the quenching starts earlier for hard-wall boundaries than for the soft boundaries. This is easily understood by comparing the current distributions: the current is more smeared out in the lateral direction for the gate-defined quantum dots, meaning that they have a larger orbital moment for the same (effective) radius. At very small sizes, the rate of quenching is the same for hard-wall and soft boundaries. We therefore conclude that the net effect of the soft boundaries in the lateral direction is to merely change the onset of quenching, yet the underlying mechanisms remain the same.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{figure_mu_harmonic_NW.pdf}
\caption{The integrated orbital moment ${\boldsymbol \mu}_{\text{IC-BV}}$ as function of the harmonic confinement length $L_{\text{har}}^{\text{ax}}$ for gate-defined quantum dots in nanowires (continuous lines) and as function of height $H$ for disks (dotted lines), with $R=40$~nm\cite{Csonka2008,Nilsson2009}.}
\label{fig:mu_harmonic_NW}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
The current distribution for a gate-defined quantum dot in an InAs nanowire\cite{Csonka2008} is shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:j_harmonic}(d). In this case the current is smeared out in the axial direction, when comparing it to the disks, see Fig.~\ref{fig:j_mu_cylinder}(a). The dependence of the orbital moment ${\boldsymbol \mu}_{\text{IC-BV}}$ on $L_{\text{har}}^{\text{ax}}$ is plotted in Fig.~\ref{fig:mu_harmonic_NW}, along with the height dependence of the corresponding disks. Although the orbital moment of hard-wall and soft boundaries is again the same for large quantum dots, the rate of quenching at small sizes is different: for the disks the rate is proportional to $H^4$, while for the gate-defined quantum dots the rate is proportional to $L_{\text{har}}^{\text{ax}}$. We do not understand this difference, since the current distributions are qualitatively the same. It could result from the approximation scheme we have used to retrieve the electron ground state. To investigate such unwanted effects, a direct numerical calculation of the electron ground state would be needed.
\subsection{Rings} \label{sec:rings}
In Sec.~\ref{sec:harddisks} we found that lowering the symmetry from spherical to cylindrical, one more independent handle on the magnetic moment is introduced. Analogous to the analysis of spherical shells, it proves interesting to see what effect the topology has on cylindrically symmetric nanostructures. Moreover, the removal of material from the center of the spheres lead to new currents, and such effects might now be expected for cylindrical nanostructures too. We will therefore analyze a ring, with inner radius $R_{\text{in}}$, outer radius $R_{\text{out}}$, and height $H$, of which the confining potential is given by:
\begin{eqnarray}
V(r,z) = \left\{
\begin{array}{lc}
0 & R_{\text{in}} \leq r \leq R_{\text{out}} \quad \text{and} \quad |z|\leq H/2 \\
\infty & \text{elsewhere}
\end{array}
\right.
\end{eqnarray}
The Neumann functions $N_{L_{\text{E},z}}(r)$ do play a role now, since the origin is not involved in the wave function (see Sec.~\ref{sec:cylindrical}). The parameter $\xi$ is therefore non-zero and should follow from the boundary conditions. Since the electron ground state predominantly originates from conduction band states, we choose the approximate boundary condition:
\begin{eqnarray}
\langle r,\theta,z |k,k_z,0\rangle_{r=R_{\text{in}},r=R_{\text{out}},z=\pm\tfrac{H}{2}}=0
\end{eqnarray}
This condition leads to the system of equations:
\begin{eqnarray}
\left\{
\begin{array}{r}
J_0(k R_{\text{in}}) + \xi N_0(k R_{\text{in}}) = 0 \\
J_0(k R_{\text{out}}) + \xi N_0(k R_{\text{out}}) = 0
\end{array}
\right.
\end{eqnarray}
which determine $(\xi,k)$ for a given $(R_{\text{in}},R_{\text{out}})$. Although this system of equations is not generally analytically solvable, it can be inferred that both $\xi$ and $kR_{\text{out}}$ depend only on the ratio $R_{\text{in}}/R_{\text{out}}$. This can also be seen when analyzing the asymptotic limit of the equations, which results in approximate solutions:
\begin{eqnarray}
k &\approx& \frac{\pi}{R_{\text{out}} - R_{\text{in}}} \\
\xi &\approx& \tan\left(k R_{\text{out}} + \tfrac{\pi}{4}\right)
\end{eqnarray}
These approximate relations resemble the ones found for the spherical shells. In Fig.~\ref{fig:j_mu_ring}(a) we plot the current distribution of a ring with $R_{\text{in}}/R_{\text{out}}=\tfrac{1}{3}$. Analogous to the spherical shells, the existence of the inner surface leads to an additional oppositely circulating current. This shows once more that the topology of the nanostructure has a profound influence on the orbital current distribution. Contrary to the spherical shells, we find that these two current loops carry an equal amount of current, so that, irrespective of the size, the integrated current is zero. The orbital moments generated by each of the currents will partially cancel, the degree of cancellation depending on the ring thickness. This result was to be expected, since the radial wave number is determined by the ring thickness $R_{\text{out}}-R_{\text{in}}$, and the orbital moment of a disk depends on $R/\rho_{0,1}=1/k$. The orbital moment can therefore only be tuned either via the thickness or the height of the ring. It seems, therefore, that changing the topology of the nanostructure does not generate additional handles on the orbital moment, while changing the spatial symmetry does have this effect.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{j_mu_ring.pdf}
\caption{(a)~The $xz$-cross-section of the spatial distribution of the normalized magnitude of the ${\bf e}_{y}$-component of $\langle {\bf j}\rangle^{\text{BV}}$ of a ring. Similar to the spherical shells, there are two oppositely circulating current loops. For the plot we choose $R_{\text{in}}/R_{\text{out}}=\tfrac{1}{3}$ and set $v_{6}=0$. (b)~The dependence of ${\boldsymbol \mu}_{\text{IC-BV}}$ (in $\mu_B$) on the ring thickness $R_{\text{out}}-R_{\text{in}}$ and outer radius $R_{\text{out}}$, for an InAs ring with $H=100$~nm. Similar to the spherical shells, the orbital moment depends only on the ring thickness, as can be seen from the white contour lines. We have set $v_6=0$ to avoid numerical artifacts in the calculation.}
\label{fig:j_mu_ring}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
To be complete, the above reasoning only holds as long as the approximate solution is valid: in general, $k$ might not depend only on the ring thickness. We have therefore computed numerically the solution of the boundary conditions, and used them to numerically calculate the radius dependence of the most important integrated orbital moment ${\boldsymbol \mu}_{\text{IC-BV}}$, see Fig.~\ref{fig:j_mu_ring}(b). It can readily be seen that this orbital moment depends only on the ring thickness. Only when $R_{\text{in}}$ approaches zero, $R_{\text{out}}$ starts to have an influence too. These small values of $R_{\text{in}}$ correspond to an inner region comparable to the unit cell of the crystal, and the validity of the envelope function approximation is questionable. Finally we note that having a finite barrier will also lead to substantial changes at small $R_{\text{in}}$: tunneling through the inner region will reduces the strength of the inner current loop and decreases the radius of the outer current loop, both leading to a reduction of the degree of cancellation of the orbital moments.
\section{Conclusions} \label{sec:con}
We have found that the origin of spin-correlated currents of different nanostructures is related to the intermixing of valence band states into the electron ground state. Irrespective of the geometrical symmetry (spherical vs. cylindrical), type of boundaries (hard-wall vs. soft), and material, we have found that the dominant current circulates within the nanostructure, peaking roughly halfway between the center and edge of the nanostructure. This distribution can be regarded as a simple current loop, which generates the orbital moment. By changing the size of the nanostructure, both the amount of current (intermixing of valence states) and the lever arm are changed, leading to quenching of the orbital moment for small sizes. For spherically symmetric nanostructures we have found that the orbital moment and confinement energy are parameterized by a single geometrical parameter. By lowering the symmetry, such as for cylindrically symmetric nanostructures, we have found that these two quantities can be independently tuned: the radius and height have different influences on disks. Although changing the topology of nanostructures can introduce an additional geometrical handle on the orbital moment, we have observed that the orbital moment and confinement energy are then parameterized by a combination of geometrical parameters. Such handles can be interesting in relation to tuning the orbital moment, i.e. manipulating the $g$ tensor, for active manipulation of the electron spin.
|
\section{Introduction}
\label{sec:1}
\vspace*{2mm}
The cosmological inflation \cite{inf1}-\cite{inf5}
is a leading paradigm describing our universe in the pre-Big-Bang era.
Apart from solving a number of conceptual problems of Big-Bang cosmology,
it makes nontrivial predictions on the spectrum of primordial perturbation,
which can be directly compared with observations of cosmological microwave background
and large-scale structures. The inflation is expected to naturally happen
at ultra high energies, presumably around the grand unification (GUT) scale.
The released data of Planck satellite\,\cite{planck} last year
and the recent measurement of BICEP2 telescope\,\cite{BICEP2}
have generated excitements to test theories of inflation. More data are upcoming.
Indeed, these observations provide important information on the magnitude and
shape of the primordial perturbations through the CMB measurements with impressive accuracy.
By measuring the spectral index $\,n_s^{}\,$ of curvature perturbation, Planck has ruled out
the exactly scale invariant spectrum above $\,5\sigma\,$ level.
For the tensor-to-scalar ratio $\,r\,$,\, the Planck result is consistent with $\,r=0\,$,\,
while the BICEP2 result points to a larger value of $\,r\,$.\,
There is currently some tension between the indirect measurement of Planck on $\,r\,$
and the BICEP2 result, unless one assumes a rather large running of the spectral index $\,n_s^{}\,$
(which would probably ruin the slow-roll approximation).
Meanwhile, the BICEP2 analysis is under further scrutiny, concerning its foreground contamination and
dust subtraction \cite{dust1,dust2,dust3,Planck-new}.
When adopting different dust models, the current BICEP2 result could be interpreted
as either a large $\,r\,$ or a vanishingly small $\,r\,$ plus foreground dust
contributions \cite{dust1,dust2,dust3}.
Both possibilities are consistent with the latest Planck measurement
on polarized dust emission \cite{Planck-new}.
Hence, at this stage, it is prudent to keep open-minded
on all possible values of $\,r\,$ for theory studies.
So far the Higgs inflation\,\cite{HI,HI2} appears
one of the most economical and predictive candidates
among all the proposed theories of inflation. It makes use of the discovered unique scalar particle ---
the Higgs boson \cite{Higgs2012,ICHEP2014}, as the inflaton, and does not assume any new particle beyond
the standard model (SM). Its key ingredient is to include the dimension-4 nonminimal coupling term
$\,\xi \mathcal{R}H^\dag H\,$ between the Ricci scalar $\,\mathcal{R}\,$ and Higgs doublet $\,H\,$
when combining the SM with Einstein gravity.
By taking account of radiative corrections, the Higgs inflation relates inflation parameters to
the masses of Higgs boson and top quark, which can be compared with both cosmological observations
and collider experiments \cite{HI_TwoLoop}. In particular, the requirement that the Higgs potential
to be positive up to the inflation scale puts a lower bound on Higgs mass $\,m_h^{}\,$ for a given value
of top mass $\,m_t^{}\,$,\, or equivalently, an upper bound on $\,m_t^{}\,$ for a given $\,m_h^{}\,$.\,
For instance, if we choose $\,m_h^{} =126$\,GeV, then a positive Higgs potential requires $\,m_t^{}\lesssim 171$\,GeV.
On the other hand, the latest measurements of Higgs mass
$\,m_h^{} =125.6\pm 0.2(\text{stat})\pm 0.3(\text{syst})$\,GeV \cite{Higgs2014} and top mass
$\,m_t^{} = 173.39^{+1.12}_{-0.98}\,$GeV \cite{mt-new},\footnote{At the present, the most accurate
determination of top-quark mass comes from the world combination of
the ATLAS, CMS, CDF and D0 experiments\,\cite{Top2014},
$\,m_t^{} = 173.34 \pm 0.27(\text{stat}) \pm 0.71(\text{syst})\,$GeV.
This is given by the best fit to $\,m_t^{}\,$ as implemented in the respective Monte Carlo (MC) code,
and is normally called MC top mass. This MC mass definition can be converted to a theoretically well-defined
short-distance mass definition with an uncertainty of $\,\sim\!1\,\text{GeV}$\, \cite{mt-new},
and the resulted pole mass is derived\,\cite{mt-new},
$\,m_t^{} = 173.39^{+1.12}_{-0.98}\,$GeV.
The Snowmass study\,\cite{snowmass2013-top} showed that
the upgraded high luminosity LHC can further reduce the error $\,\Delta m_t^{}\,$ down to $500$\,MeV,
and an $e^+e^-$ lepton collider (like the ILC) would measure $\,\Delta m_t^{}\,$ to $100$\,MeV level.}.\,
together with the recent improved renormalization group analyses,
indicate that the stability of the SM Higgs potential is excluded above
$\,2\sigma\,$ level \cite{stability}. The Higgs self-coupling $\,\lambda\,$ turns negative around
$\,10^{11}\,$GeV \cite{stability}, far below the expected inflation scale. This requires that
new physics should enter somewhere below $\,10^{11}$\,GeV.
It applies to all inflation models with inflation scale $\,V^{1/4}\,$ larger than $\,10^{12}$\,GeV,
including the Higgs inflation.
There exist different ways of extending the SM, with new physics ranging from the TeV scale up to
around $10^{11}$\,GeV. For instance, we can make a simple extension of Higgs inflation
with TeV scale new physics by adding only two weak-singlets (a real scalar and a vector-quark)
with masses of $\order{\text{TeV}}$ \cite{He:2014ora}.
Other extensions with new heavy particles at various energy scales
were also studied recently \cite{ExtHI2}.
In this work, we explore a novel possibility that {\it the new physics is provided by quantum gravity itself,}
without introducing any new particle beyond the SM. Although a complete quantum theory of gravity remains
uncertain due to the perturbative nonrenormalizability of Einstein general relativity, there are strong
indications that the general relativity may flow nonperturbatively
to a nontrivial ultraviolet (UV) fixed point,
a scenario called the asymptotic safety (AS) as proposed by Weinberg \cite{AS}, and
further developed by many others \cite{ASReview}.
In this scenario, all dimensionless couplings flow to constants in the UV, leading to
a nontrivial conformal field theory (CFT).
For our purpose, we will study a new Higgs inflation with AS as the UV completion of the model.
In the literature, many applications of the AS to the SM and cosmology
were considered \cite{AS_HiggsMass}-\cite{ASInf-3}.
These include such as the constraints on the SM Higgs mass under AS \cite{AS_HiggsMass,Sannino},
the pure AS inflation without inflaton \cite{ASInf-1,ASInf-2},
and certain conventional inflation models improved by AS \cite{ASInf-3}, etc.
For our study, we will construct a new inflation model implementing the AS scenario,
with the SM Higgs boson acting as the inflaton,
which may be called asymptotically safe Higgs inflation (ASHI).
A crucial difference of the ASHI from the conventional Higgs inflation is that {\it it does not require
the nonminimal coupling $\,\xi R H^\dag H$,\, and the inflation is driven by an AS improved Higgs potential.}
Since no large nonminimal coupling is present, the model is free from the potential unitarity constraints
in the conventional Higgs inflation \cite{HI_naturalness}.
An ingredient of our ASHI is the conjecture suggested by previous studies\,\cite{AS_HiggsMass}
that the Higgs self-coupling $\,\lambda\,$ and its beta function $\,\beta_\lambda^{}\,$
approach zero at a transition scale $\,\mu_\text{tr}^{}\,$,\,
around and above which the AS effects become important.
Then, the resultant Higgs potential is uniquely determined by inputting the Higgs and top masses
$\,(m_h^{},\,m_t^{})\,$ measured at weak scale, which is highly predictive.
As we will show, the Higgs potential that reproduces the observed curvature perturbation requires
$\,(m_h^{},\,m_t^{})\,$ to lie within a narrow strip, perfectly consistent with
the current collider measurements\,\cite{Higgs2014,mt-new}.
\vspace*{2mm}
\section{Asymptotic Safety and Running Couplings}
\label{sec:2}
\vspace*{2mm}
To motivate a Higgs inflation via the AS approach (without nonminimal coupling),
we start with a brief review on the relevant ingredients of the AS.
More details are given in the nice reviews \cite{ASReview}\,\footnote{The
existence of UV fixed points for AS was first proposed by S.\ Weinberg as a conjecture
\cite{AS}. Since then, there have been extensive studies on it
and accumulating evidences were found in support of the AS \cite{ASReview}.
With truncated effective action, it has been shown that the UV fixed point of Einstein-Hilbert action
remains intact after adding higher order operators. So the AS with UV fixed point, though not yet
a rigorously proven fact by mathematics (due to the high nonlinearity of functional RG equations),
provides a serious possibility for the UV completion of general relativity.}.
The starting point of AS is a truncated effective action $\,\Gamma(\mu)\,$
as a direct generalization of the Einstein general relativity,
\begin{eqnarray}
\Gamma(\mu) \,=\,
\FR{M_\text{P}^2(\mu)}{2}\!\int\!\!{\mathrm{d}}^4x\,\sqrt{-g}\,\big[\mathcal{R}-2\Lambda(\mu)\big] +\cdots,
\end{eqnarray}
where $M_\text{P}(\mu)$ and $\Lambda(\mu)$ are the running Planck mass and cosmological constant,
and the dots ``$\cdots$'' represent gauge-fixing term, ghost term, and possible terms of matter fields.
The scale dependence of running couplings are governed by the beta functions through
$\,{\mathrm{d}} M_{\text{P}^{}}(\mu)/{\mathrm{d}}\ln\mu = \beta (M_{\text{P}^{}},\Lambda,\cdots)$, etc., where the dots denote matter couplings.
Here the $\beta$ functions can be derived by solving the functional renormalization group equation
of the effective action $\,\Gamma(\mu)$,\, and detailed calculations have revealed the existence of
UV fixed points for dimensionless Planck parameter $\,\widetilde{M}_\text{P}^2(\mu)\equiv \mu^{-2}M_\text{P}^2(\mu)$,\,
dimensionless cosmological constant $\,\widetilde\Lambda(\mu)\equiv \mu^{-2}\Lambda(\mu)$,\,
and dimensionless matter couplings (when present).
The fixed-point values $\widetilde M_\text{P*}$ and $\widetilde \Lambda_*$ are nonzero,
implying a nontrivial interacting CFT in the UV limit.
Hence, there exists a transition scale $\,\mu_\text{tr}^{}\,$ from the low energy general relativity
to a conformal phase \cite{ASReview,AS_HiggsMass}.
Below $\,\mu_\text{tr}^{}\,$ the dimensionful Planck mass $\,M_{\text{P}^{}}\,$
and cosmological constant $\,\Lambda\,$ remain roughly scale-independent,
while above $\,\mu_\text{tr}^{}\,$,\, one gets the power-law running,
$\,M_{\text{P}^{}} (\mu)\sim \mu \widetilde{M}_\text{P*}^{}\,$ and
$\,\Lambda(\mu)\sim \mu^2 \widetilde{\Lambda}_*^{}$\,.\,
The transition scale for pure gravity sector is somewhat lower than the conventional Planck scale
$\,M_{\text{P0}}^{} \equiv M_{\text{P}}^{}(\mu \!=\! 0) =(8\pi G)^{-1/2}\simeq 2.4\!\times\! 10^{18}$\,GeV,\,
and will become model-dependent if matter fields are included.
With the nonperturbative AS scenario,
one also obtains similar UV behaviors for matter couplings \cite{ASReview,AS_HiggsMass,AFg0,AFg}.
The gravitational contributions to the beta function for a given matter coupling $\,\lambda_j^{}\,$
typically takes the form \cite{AS,AS_HiggsMass},
%
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{beta_grav}
\beta_j^{\text{grav}}(\lambda_j^{}) \,=\,
\FR{a_j^{}}{\,8\pi\,}\FR{\mu^2}{\,M_\text{P}^2(\mu)\,}\lambda_j^{}\,,
\end{eqnarray}
%
where $\,\lambda_j^{}\,$ can be Higgs self-coupling, gauge couplings and Yukawa couplings in the SM.
These dimensionless matter couplings exhibit power-law running in general \cite{ASReview,AS_HiggsMass}.
In the literature\,\cite{ASReview,AS_HiggsMass,AFg0,AFg}
there are various detailed analyses for deriving the coefficients $\,a_j^{}\,$
via nonperturbative approaches, which indicate the existence of Gaussian UV fixed points
($\lambda_{j*}^{}\!=0$) for the gauge couplings and matter couplings under the AS
(though other possible nontrivial UV fixed points may exist as well).
Motivated by the AS scenario and following the conjecture of Ref.\,\cite{AS_HiggsMass}, we will choose
Gaussian UV fixed points ($\lambda_{j*}^{}\!=0$) with $\,a_j< 0\,$ for our current setup.
On the other hand, it is known that for the SM with
$\,(m_h^{} ,\,m_t^{})\simeq (126,\,173)$\,GeV,
the Higgs self-coupling $\,\lambda\,$ reaches zero at a scale $\,\mu_0^{}\ll M_{\text{P}^{}}$,\,
and becomes negative above $\,\mu_0^{}$\,.\, This is due to the negative contribution of
the top-Yukawa coupling to the SM $\beta$-function,
which signals instability of the SM Higgs potential \cite{stability}.
%
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=10.5cm,height=8.5cm]{fig/fig1.pdf}
\caption{Running Higgs self-coupling $\,\lambda\,$ as a function of the energy scale $\,\mu\,$,\,
with the asymptotic safety dynamics setting in at scales $\,\mu\geqslant\mu_0^{}\,$.\,
The (blue,\,purple,\,red) curves from bottom to top correspond to the Higgs mass
$\,m_h^{} =(125,\,126,\,127)$\,GeV, respectively.
The top quark mass is taken to be $\,m_t^{} =173.3$\,GeV.}
\label{fig:1}
\vspace*{5mm}
\end{figure}
%
When gravitational and SM $\beta$-functions are considered together,
it was noted \cite{AS_HiggsMass} that the Higgs self-coupling $\,\lambda\,$
and its beta function $\,\beta_\lambda^{}$\, could remain vanishing once $\,\lambda\,$ reaches zero,
due to a Gaussian UV fixed point induced by the nonperturbative quantum-gravity corrections of AS.
In Ref.\,\cite{AS_HiggsMass}, such considerations were put in use to predict
the SM Higgs mass in the context of AS scenario,
where the AS occurs at the conventional Planck scale and inflation was not considered.
Now, we can identify the recently discovered 126\,GeV particle\,\cite{Higgs2012,ICHEP2014}
as the SM Higgs boson.
Thus, the scale $\,\mu_0^{}\,$ at which $\,\lambda\,$ vanishes is around $\,10^{11}$\,GeV
as derived from the SM two-loop $\beta$-functions.
So we are led to {\it the conjecture that the transition scale
$\,\mu_\text{tr}^{}\,$ of AS may be around} $\,\order{\mu_0}\sim 10^{11}$\,GeV\,
due to the nonperturbative dynamics of quantum gravity,
and both $\,\lambda (\mu)\,$ and $\,\beta_\lambda^{}\,$ will remain zero
at all scales above $\,\mu_0^{}\,$ due to the Gaussian UV fixed point of AS.
It is quite possible that the scale of quantum gravity may appear much below the Planck scale,
as it does in many well-motivated extra dimensional models.
For physical applications, the collider phenomenology of TeV scale AS scenario was studied
before\,\cite{ASappx} and recently in the context of spontaneous dimensional reduction \cite{SDR}.
Under the conjecture that $\,\lambda\,$ and $\,\beta_\lambda^{}\,$ approach zero at and above $\,\mu_0^{}$\,
due to the UV fixed point induced by the AS dynamics,
it follows directly that the transition scale $\,\mu_\text{tr}^{}\,$ and Higgs mass
$\,m_h^{}\,$ are correlated through the requirement of $\,\mu_\text{tr}^{} = \order{\mu_0^{}}$.\,
In fact, for scales $\,\mu < \mu_0^{}\sim 10^{11}$\,GeV,
the nonperturbative quantum gravity contribution (\ref{beta_grav}) to $\,\beta_\lambda^{}\,$
can be safely neglected, and thus $\,\mu_0^{}\,$ is fully determined
by $\,(m_h^{},\,m_t^{})\,$ and the SM $\beta$-functions.
(Hence, for our practical analysis, except the existence of the UV fixed point
at the scale $\,\mu_\text{tr}^{}$ via gravity-induced $\beta$-function (\ref{beta_grav}),
our study does not rely on any detail of solving functional RG equations of AS
at scales above $\,\mu_\text{tr}^{}$\,.)
\vspace*{2mm}
In Fig.\,\ref{fig:1}, we present the two-loop running of Higgs self-coupling $\,\lambda(\mu)\,$
to illustrate the transition from the conventional SM running behavior at low energies
up to the phase of vanishing $\,\lambda\,$.\, The renormalization group equations for such running
coincide with that of the SM for the scales $\,\mu < \mu_\text{tr}^{}\,$,\,
which we summarize in Appendix\,\ref{app}.
As a first approximation for phenomenological studies, we model this transition to happen abruptly
at the scale $\,\mu_0^{}\,$.\, One may improve this approximation by considering a more elaborated model
dealing with the detailed nonperturbative dynamics of AS,
but for our present purpose of demonstration
it is enough to take the abrupt transition.
In Fig.\,\ref{fig:1}, the three curves from bottom to top correspond to the Higgs mass
$\,m_h^{} =(125,\,126,\,127)$\,GeV, respectively. We also input the top quark mass $\,m_t^{} =173.3$\,GeV.\,
For practical analysis, we will take $\,\mu_\text{tr}^{} = C\mu_0^{}\,$,\,
with the dimensionless ratio $\,C = \order{1}$.\,
It is reasonable to conjecture\,\cite{AS_HiggsMass}\cite{AFg0} that all the matter couplings
(Higgs self-coupling, gauge couplings, Yukawa couplings) become vanishingly small
around the transition scale $\,\mu_\text{tr}^{}\,$,\, according to the discussions above.
We will not illustrate the quantitative running behavior of gauge and Yukawa couplings here,
since these technical details are not needed for our following analysis of Higgs inflation.
\vspace*{2mm}
\section{Asymptotically Safe Higgs Inflation}
\label{sec:3}
In this section, applying the asymptotical safety scenario discussed in Sec.\,\ref{sec:2},
we construct a new Higgs inflation model which minimally couples Higgs boson to the Einstein gravity.
For convenience, we may denote this as asymptotically safe Higgs inflation (ASHI).
Our model requires no new particles beyond the SM, except a well-motivated conjecture that
the Einstein gravity exhibits asymptotic safety\,\cite{AS,ASReview},
under which the running Higgs self-coupling $\,\lambda\,$ behaves as in Fig.\,\ref{fig:1}
and other matter couplings approach zero around and above the transition scale
$\,\mu_\text{tr}^{}\sim\mu_0^{}$\, \cite{AS_HiggsMass,AFg0}.
The standard Friedmann-Robertson-Walker (FRW) cosmology remains unchanged in the AS scenario
except that the Planck mass becomes scale-dependent,
%
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{eq:MP-run}
M_\text{P}^2(\mu) \,=\, M_\text{P0}^2\bigg(1+\FR{\mu^2}{\mu_\text{tr}^2}\bigg),
\end{eqnarray}
%
where $\,M_{\text{P0}}^{}=(8\pi G)^{-1/2}\simeq 2.4\!\times\! 10^{18}$\,GeV
is the conventional reduced Planck mass.
When applying the formula \eqref{eq:MP-run} to cosmology,
one needs to properly choose the scale $\mu$\,.\,
A reasonable choice of this scale should be such that the corrections from both radiative correction
and higher dimensional operators are controllably small.
To find the optimal choice for $\,\mu$\,,\,
we first note that the one-loop corrections to the Higgs potential take the form,
%
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{1loopV}
\Delta V \,=\, \sum_j \FR{\,z_j^{} M_j^4\,}{16\pi^2}\log\FR{M_j^2}{\mu^2} \,,
\end{eqnarray}
%
where the sum is taken over all SM fields interacting with the Higgs field $\,h$\,,\,
the parameters $\,\{z_j^{}\}\,$ are $\,\order{1}$\, coefficients, and
$\,\{M_j^{}\}\,$ are effective masses of the fields running in the internal loop.
The effective mass $\,M_j^{}\,$ depends on the background Higgs field $\,h\,$
and background spacetime curvature $\,\mathcal{R}\sim {\mathcal{H}}^2\,$.\,
So it takes the following form,
%
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{EffMass}
M_j^2 = \order{\lambda_j^{}}\,h^2 + \order{1}\,{\mathcal{H}}^2 \,,
\end{eqnarray}
%
where $\,\lambda_j^{}\,$ is the coupling of the internal field with $\,h$,\,
and $\,{\mathcal{H}}\,$ is the Hubble parameter.
In the conventional Higgs inflation, matter couplings are roughly of $\order{1}$,\,
and the background Higgs field $\,h\,$ is much larger than the Hubble parameter
$\,{\mathcal{H}}\,$ during the inflation.
Thus, to minimize radiative corrections (\ref{1loopV}) for the Higgs potential,
it is natural to choose $\,\mu =h\,$.\footnote{In the conventional Higgs inflation,
due to the presence of nonminimal coupling term $\,\xi {\cal R}H^\dag H$\,,\,
two different approaches exist\,\cite{HI_TwoLoop}:
one is in Jordan frame, and the other is in Einstein frame
(which has the nonminimal coupling term transformed away).
The choice $\,\mu =h\,$ is taken for the Jordan frame analysis,
while in Einstein frame one chooses $\,\mu=h/\Omega\,$ instead,
where $\,\Omega\,$ is the Weyl factor that brings the spacetime metric
from Jordan frame to Einstein frame.}\,
But, in the present case of ASHI, all matter couplings $\,\lambda_j^{}\,$
become vanishingly small around the scale $\,\mu_0^{}\,$ (due to the Gaussian UV fixed point),
as explained in Section\,\ref{sec:2}. Thus, on the right-hand-side of (\ref{EffMass}),
the second term dominates over the first term during inflation.
As a result, we should choose $\,\mu ={\mathcal{H}}\,$ instead.
Besides, we further check the contributions from possible higher dimensional operators and make sure
that they are also sufficiently suppressed, since these operators are expected to appear
due to the effect of AS. The contributions to the effective action from such AS-induced
higher dimensional operators could take the form,
%
\begin{eqnarray}
\Delta\Gamma ~=\,
\sum_{n\geqslant 2}\FR{w_n^{}}{~\mu_\text{tr}^{2(n-2)}~}\mathcal{R}^n \,,
\end{eqnarray}
%
where $\,\{w_n^{}\}\sim\order{1}$ are dimensionless coefficients,
and for notational simplicity we use $\,\mathcal{R}^n\,$ to generically denote
all possible contractions among $\,n\,$ factors of Riemann curvature tensor
$\,\mathcal{R}_{\mu\nu\rho\sigma}^{}\,$.\,
During the inflation, we have $\,\mathcal{R}\sim {\mathcal{H}}^2$\,
and $\,{\mathcal{H}} < \mu_0^{}\,$,\, as will be shown below.
Recalling that $\,\mu_\text{tr}^{} = C\mu_0^{}\,$ with $\,C=\order{1}\,$,\,
we can thus estimate the contributions of higher dimensional operators to be
$\,\order{{\mathcal{H}}^{2n}/\mu_0^{2(n-2)}} \lesssim \order{{\mathcal{H}}^4}\,$.\,
This should be compared with the leading term in the gravitational sector,
namely the Einstein-Hilbert action,
$\,M_\text{P}^2(\mathcal{H})\mathcal{R}\sim M_{\text{P0}}^2{\mathcal{H}}^2$.\,
Hence, it is clear that these higher order contributions can be safely neglected
due to $\,{\mathcal{H}}^2 \ll M_{\text{P0}}^2$\,.
We also note that there could be higher dimensional operators containing matter fields
in addition to gravitational field.
Contributions of such operators are suppressed
by the approximate shift symmetry of the effective Lagrangian, as in all sensible
large field inflation models. In our case, the shift symmetry may be a low energy
consequence of local conformal symmetry at the UV fixed point.
So far we have justified the natural choice of the renormalization scale $\,\mu={\mathcal{H}}\,$.\,
Then, we can perform the inflationary analysis for the ASHI model in a straightforward way.
The standard slow roll paradigm will apply directly,
where the first two slow-roll parameters are given as follows,
%
\begin{eqnarray}
\epsilon \,=\, \fr{1}{2}M_\text{P}^2({\mathcal{H}})(V'/V)^2, ~~~~~
\eta \,=\, M_\text{P}^2({\mathcal{H}})V''/V \,,
\end{eqnarray}
%
where $\,V=\fr{1}{4}\lambda({\mathcal{H}}) h^4$\, is the Higgs potential in the unbroken phase of electroweak symmetry,
and its derivatives are defined by
$\,V'\equiv\partial V/\partial h\,$ and $\,V''\equiv \partial^2 V/\partial h^2$\,.\,
The slow-roll condition is as usual, namely, $\,\epsilon <1\,$ and $\,|\eta|<1\,$.\,
Even before doing a detailed calculation, we can immediately realize a plateau-like behavior of $\,V\,$
at large $\,h\,$.\, In fact, the sliding scale, namely the Hubble parameter $\,{\mathcal{H}}$\,,\,
increases monotonically with $\,h\,$.\, On the other hand, the running coupling $\,\lambda({\mathcal{H}})$\,
decreases monotonically with $\,{\mathcal{H}}\,$ for $\,{\mathcal{H}}<\mu_0^{}\,$.\,
Thus, we have two competing factors: the $\,h^4\,$ drives $\,V\,$ upwards,
while $\,\lambda({\mathcal{H}})\,$ drives $\,V\,$ downwards.
This competition must end in a tie, since $\,{\mathcal{H}}\,$ can never exceed $\,\mu_0^{}\,$
[otherwise $\,\lambda\,$ would vanish and drive $\,{\mathcal{H}}\,$
to very small values, cf.\ Eq.\,\eqref{eq:Feq} below].
The scalar potential $\,V\,$ should keep increasing with $\,h\,$,\,
but be fairly flat when $\,h\,$ becomes large.
%
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=11cm,height=8.5cm]{fig/fig2.pdf}
\vspace*{-1.5mm}
\caption{Higgs potential $\,V=V(h)\,$ with slow-roll approximation at large $\,h\,$.\,
The (blue,\,purple,\,red) curves from bottom to top correspond to Higgs mass
$\,m_h^{} =(125,\,126,\,127)$\,GeV, respectively. The top mass is taken to be $\,m_t^{}=173.3$\,GeV.}
\label{fig:2}
\vspace*{7mm}
\end{figure}
%
%
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=11cm,height=8.5cm]{fig/fig3.pdf}
\vspace*{-1.5mm}
\caption{Predictions of top mass $\,m_t^{}\,$ and Higgs mass $\,m_h^{}\,$ by the
asymptotically safe Higgs inflation (ASHI).
The green strip shows the range consistent with cosmological data, while the orange and yellow
regions depict the current constraints on $\,(m_h^{},\,m_t^{})\,$ by the collider experiments
at $\,1\sigma\,$ and $\,2\sigma\,$ confidence levels, respectively.}
\label{fig:3}
\end{figure}
%
The above analysis shows that there must be a region with large $\,h\,$
where the slow-roll approximation holds.
Let us focus on this case, and we have the simplified Friedmann equation,
%
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{eq:Feq}
3M_\text{P}^2({\mathcal{H}}){\mathcal{H}}^2 \,=\, V \,=\, \fr{1}{4}\lambda({\mathcal{H}})\,h^4 \,.
\end{eqnarray}
%
Below the transition scale $\,\mu_\text{tr}^{}\,$,\, we can use the two-loop SM $\beta$-functions
to derive the running behavior of $\,\lambda({\mathcal{H}})\,$ as shown in Fig.\,\ref{fig:1}.
Thus, we can solve the Hubble parameter $\,{\mathcal{H}}={\mathcal{H}}(h)$\, from Eq.\,\eqref{eq:Feq}
as a function of Higgs field $\,h\,$,\, and substitute it into the potential $\,V$,\,
which then becomes $\,V=\fr{1}{4}\lambda\big({\mathcal{H}}(h)\big)h^4$\,,\,
or equivalently, $\,V=3M_\text{P}^2\big({\mathcal{H}}(h)\big){\mathcal{H}}^2(h)$\,.\,
With these, we can plot the inflation potential $\,V\,$ in Fig.\,\ref{fig:2}
with different choices of Higgs mass $\,m_h^{}\,$.\, As we see,
Fig.\,\ref{fig:2} demonstrates that the potential is extremely flat
when $\,h\gtrsim 10^{16}$\,GeV.
With this inflation potential, we can perform standard calculation of slow-roll parameters.
There is one free parameter in our model, namely, the ratio $\,C =\mu_\text{tr}^{} /\mu_0^{}\,$,\,
which is of $\,\order{1}$\,.\, We find that the model fits the data well for $\,C\gtrsim 1\,$.\,
The end of the inflation is indicated in our case by $\,|\eta|=1$\,.\,
Then, taking the number of $e$-folding $\,N_e=50-60$\, for the inflation,
we can derive the slow-roll parameters at the beginning of the observable inflation.
These include the amplitude $\,V/\epsilon\,$,\,
the scalar spectral index $\,n_s^{}= 1-6\epsilon +2\eta\,$,\,
and the tensor-to-scalar ratio $\,r = 16\,\epsilon\,$.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=11.7cm,height=9.6cm]{fig/fig4.pdf}
\vspace*{-1.5mm}
\caption{Predictions of asymptotically safe Higgs inflation (ASHI) on the spectral index $\,n_s^{}\,$
and tensor-to-scalar ratio $\,r\,$.\, The yellow dots represent predictions of the ASHI with the ratio
$\,C=\mu_\text{tr}^{}/\mu_0^{}=1,\,1.2,\,1.4,\,\cdots,\,10$,\, from left to right with step-width
$\,\Delta C=0.2\,$.\, The red and blue shaded regions are observed limits at 68\%C.L. and 95\%C.L.,
taken from Fig.\,13 of Ref.\,\cite{BICEP2}. The green region is taken from Fig.\,1 of Ref.\,\cite{dust2},
in which the amplitude of dust polarization is not assumed \emph{a priori.} }
\label{fig:4}
\end{figure}
%
In our model, the height of the inflation potential, and thus the amplitude of the curvature perturbation,
is rather sensitive to initial values of $\,m_h^{}\,$ and $\,m_t^{}\,$,\,
as can be seen from Fig.\,\ref{fig:2}. Hence, this puts a nontrivial constraint on the range of
\,$(m_h^{},\,m_t^{})$\, to fit the observed value of $\,(V/\epsilon )^{1/4}$\,
by Planck satellite, which is
$\,(V/\epsilon )^{1/4} \,=\,
\( 0.0270^{+0.0010}_{-0.0009}\) \!M_{\text{P}^{}}
$
at $2\sigma$ level \cite{PlanckCosPara}.
In Fig.\,\ref{fig:3}, we present this constraint in the plane of \,$(m_h^{},\,m_t^{})$.\,
The green strip represents the viable parameter region allowed by Planck data at $\,2\sigma\,$ level,
and with the variation of $e$-foldings within $\,N_e=50-60$\,.\,
In the same plot, we further display the current constraints on $\,(m_h^{},\,m_t^{})$\,
by the collider experiments\,\cite{Higgs2014,Top2014},
at $\,1\,\sigma\,$ (orange) and $\,2\,\sigma\,$ (yellow) confidence levels, respectively.
In this plot, we take a sample input $\,C=2\,$ for demonstration.
It is evident that the ASHI model fits well with both the Planck data and collider measurements.
On the other hand, we find that the prediction of $\,(n_s^{},\,r)$\, is not sensitive to
the initial values of Higgs and top masses at weak scale.
Hence, we take the sample inputs $\,(m_h^{},\,m_t^{})=(125.6,\,173.0)$\,GeV, and set the number of $e$-folding
$\,N_e=50$\,.\, We present our predictions of \,$(n_s^{},\,r)$\, in Fig.\,\ref{fig:4}.
In this plot, we vary the scale ratio $\,C=\mu_\text{tr}^{} /\mu_0^{}\,$ over the range of
$\,C=1-10\,$ with a step-width
$\,\Delta C=0.2\,$.\, We have derived the predictions for the spectral index $\,n_s^{}\,$,\,
which ranges from $\,n_s^{} =0.935\,$ (for $\,C=1\,$) to $\,n_s^{} =0.967\,$ (for $\,C=10$\,).\,
We deduce the predicted tensor-to-scalar ratio $\,r = \order{10^{-7}}$\, in all cases.
These predictions are depicted by the yellow dots in Fig.\,\ref{fig:4}.
We see that the predicted value of $\,n_s^{}\,$ increases quickly for $\,C\gtrsim 1\,$,\,
and converges effectively around $\,r=0.967\,$ when $\,C>6\,$.
For comparison, we further present constraints from cosmological observations in the same Fig.\,\ref{fig:4}.
The red and blue contours are taken from Ref.\,\cite{BICEP2}, showing the measurements of $\,(n_s^{},\,r)$\,
at $\,k=0.002\,\text{Mpc}^{-1}$.\, The green contours are taken from Ref.\,\cite{dust2},
where no assumption on the amplitude of foreground dust polarization is made, except for its scaling behavior.
When the dust amplitude is allowed to vary, the analysis of Ref.\,\cite{dust2} shows
that the joint fit to Planck, WMAP and BICEP2 is consistent with $\,r=0\,$.\,
It should be noted that the analysis of Ref.\,\cite{dust2} was done at $\,k=0.05\,\text{Mpc}^{-1}$.\,
Hence, one should not compare this result (green contours) directly with that of Planck (red contours).
Nevertheless, we present them in the same plot to show that our model with $\,C\gtrsim 1\,$
can provide a successful inflation and fit well with the current measurements. The upcoming data
from Planck, Keck Array and other $B$-mode measurements will further pin down the issue of potential
foreground contamination, and thus provide more effective tests on the ASHI model.
It is also useful to compare the inflation predictions of our ASHI model with
that of related inflation models, including the conventional Higgs inflation
with large non-minimal coupling \cite{HI}, and Starobinsky inflation with $R+R^2$ type action for
gravity \cite{inf1,Starobinsky85}. It is known that Starobinsky inflation and conventional Higgs inflation
have practically the same potential at large field values in Einstein frame, and thus lead to
the same predictions for $\,(n_s^{},\,r)$.\, In particular, because of the exponentially flat potential
during inflation, they predict the tensor-to-scalar ratio $\,r = \order{10^{-3}}$\,.\,
On the other hand, our ASHI model has much flatter inflation potential than
Starobinsky inflation and conventional Higgs inflation,
so the energy scale of inflation is also lower.
In consequence, our prediction of $\,r = \order{10^{-7}}$\, is smaller.
Furthermore, as reviewed in Sec.\,1, the conventional Higgs inflation puts tight constraint
on the Higgs mass $\,m_h^{}\,$ and top quark mass $\,m_t^{}\,$ from the requirement of
stable inflation potential.
This constraint pushes the required $\,(m_h^{},\,m_t^{})\,$ values beyond their
$2\sigma$ bounds by the current collider data \cite{Higgs2014,mt-new,Top2014}.
On the other hand, to generate the correct amplitude of CMB anisotropy,
our ASHI model also puts nontrivial constraints on $(m_h^{},\,m_t^{})$,\,
which fully agree with the current collider measurements
within about 1 standard deviation, as shown in Fig.\,\ref{fig:3}.
\section{Conclusions}
\label{sec:4}
\vspace*{2mm}
Higgs inflation is one of the most economical and predictive approaches to the cosmological inflation paradigm,
which provides initial conditions for our universe before starting the Big Bang.
The conventional Higgs inflation\,\cite{HI,HI2} makes use of the nonminimal coupling of the SM Higgs boson with
Einstein general relativity.
In this work, we constructed a new model of asymptotically safe Higgs inflation (ASHI)
which minimally couples the SM Higgs boson to Einstein
gravity and has the Higgs boson act as the inflaton.
Our conjecture for the ASHI is that the Einstein gravity will exhibit
asymptotic safety (AS)\,\cite{AS,ASReview} in the UV region, which may appear at a relatively low scale
$\,\mu_\text{tr}^{} \sim 10^{11}$\,GeV,\, around which all matter couplings become effectively zero
(due to the Gaussian UV fixed points)\,\cite{AS_HiggsMass,AFg0,AFg}.
In this case, the new physics is provided by quantum gravity itself.
With these, we can achieve a fairly flat Higgs potential at the inflation scale under the impact of AS property
on the running of Higgs self-coupling (Figs.\,\ref{fig:1}$-$\ref{fig:2}).
We demonstrated that the model can produce correct amount of inflation, and agrees well with
both the collider measurements on Higgs and top masses (Fig.\,\ref{fig:3}),
and the cosmological observations (Fig.\,\ref{fig:4}).
The inflation ends when the Higgs potential becomes steep enough, with which the energy goes down,
and all matter couplings increase promptly from zero to the SM values.
Thus, an efficient reheating process can successfully take place,
driving the universe into the Big Bang era.
\vspace*{7mm}
\noindent
{\bf Acknowledgements}\\[1.5mm]
We thank John R.\ Ellis, Yun-Long Lian, Michelangelo Mangano, Anupam Mazumdar,
and Christoph Rahmede for useful discussions.
This work was supported by National NSF of China (under grants 11275101, 11135003)
and National Basic Research Program (under grant 2010CB833000).
\vspace*{3mm}
|
\section{Introduction}
\label{sec:1}
Let $\mathcal{N}=\{1,\cdots,n\}$.
For a set of (discrete) random variables
$X_\mathcal{N}=\{X_i:{i\in\mathcal{N}}\}$,
we define a function $\mathbf{h}:2^{\mathcal{N}}\rightarrow\mathbb{R}$ by
\begin{equation*}
\mathbf{h}(\mathcal{A})=H(X_\mathcal{A}),\ \mathcal{A}\subset\mathcal{N}
\end{equation*}
with $H(X_\emptyset)=0$ by convention.
Then $\mathbf{h}$ is called the \emph{entropy function} of $X_\mathcal{N}$.
Let $\mathcal{H}_n=\mathbb{R}^{
2^\mathcal{N}}$ be the \emph{entropy space} for $n$
random variables.\footnote{For a field $\mathbb{F}$ and a set $S$,
$\mathbb{F}^S$ denotes an $|S|$-dimensional space $\mathbb{F}^{|S|}$
whose coordinates are
labeled by $s\in S$.}
A vector $\mathbf{h}\in\mathcal{H}_n$ is called entropic
if $\mathbf{h}$ is the entropy function for some set of $n$ random
variables, otherwise, it is called nonentropic. The region in
$\mathcal{H}_n$ of all entropy functions
is denoted by
$\Gamma^*_n$, called the \emph{entropy function region}. As $\mathbf{h}(\emptyset)=0$ for any $X_\mathcal{N}$,
$\Gamma^*_n\subset\mathcal{H}^0_n\triangleq\{\mathbf{h}\in\mathcal{H}_n:\mathbf{h}(\emptyset)=0\}$
which is a subspace of $\mathcal{H}_n$\cite{Y97}.
It is well known that the entropy function satisfies the following
polymatroidal axioms: for all $\mathcal{A}, \mathcal{B}\subset\mathcal{N}$,
\begin{align*}
&\mathbf{h}({\emptyset})=0,\\
&\mathbf{h}({\mathcal{A}})\leq \mathbf{h}({\mathcal{B}}), \quad \text{if }\mathcal{A}\subset\mathcal{B},\\
&\mathbf{h}({\mathcal{A}})+\mathbf{h}({\mathcal{B}})\geq
\mathbf{h}({\mathcal{A}\cap\mathcal{B}})+\mathbf{h}({\mathcal{A}\cup\mathcal{B}}),
\end{align*}
that is, any entropy function $\mathbf{h}$ is (the rank
function of) a polymatroid \cite{F78}. The
polymatroidal axioms are equivalent to the basic information
inequalities \cite[App. 14A]{Y08} from which all Shannon-type
information inequalities can be derived. The set of polymatroids, or
equivalently, the region bounded by
Shannon-type information inequalities,
is denoted by $\Gamma_n$, called the \emph{polymatroidal region}. Then
$\Gamma^*_n\subset\Gamma_n$.
Now the question is whether all polymatroids are entropic, or
whether $\Gamma^*_n=\Gamma_n$. It can be shown that
$\Gamma^*_2=\Gamma_2$, while $\Gamma^*_3\subsetneq\Gamma_3$ due to
the existence of nonentropic polymatroids on the boundary of
$\Gamma_3$\cite{ZY97,M06,CY12}.
However, by taking the closure of
$\Gamma^*_3$, we have $\overline{\Gamma^*_3}=\Gamma_3$. The vectors
in $\overline{\Gamma^*_n}$ are called \emph{almost entropic}. Thus,
all polymatroids are almost entropic when $n=3$\cite{ZY97}.
This was proved not
to be true for $n\ge 4$, i.e.
$\overline{\Gamma^*_n}\subsetneq\Gamma_n$, due to
the existence of unconstrained non-Shannon-type information
inequalities\cite{ZY98}. For a comprehensive treatment of the
subject, we refer the readers to \cite[Chapter 13-15]{Y08}.
Following the discovery of the first unconstrained non-Shannon-type information
inequality in \cite{ZY98}, many such inequalities have been
found, e.g., \cite{YYZ01,MMRV02,Z03, DFZ06,XWS08,DFZ11}. The region $\Gamma^*_n$ was proved to be
``solid inside''\cite[Theorem 1]{M07b}, that is, for any
$\mathbf{h}\in\overline{\Gamma^*_n}$ and $\mathbf{h}\notin\Gamma^*_n$, $\mathbf{h}$ must be on
the boundary of $\overline{\Gamma^*_n}$. It
was further proved in \cite{M07a} that there exist infinitely many
independent linear
non-Shannon-type inequalities.
Characterizations of $\Gamma^*_n$ and its closure
$\overline{\Gamma^*_n}$ are important not only because information
inequalities play key roles in the proof of converse coding theorems
but also they are related to probability theory, quantum mechanics\cite{NC00} and
matrix theory\cite{CGY12}, and have one-to-one correspondence with network coding\cite{CG08},
group theory\cite{CY02}, Kolmogorov complexity\cite{HRSV00} and
combinatorics\cite{C01}. For a comprehensive treatment of the relations between
entropy function region and other subjects, readers are referred to
\cite{Y12, C11}. However, full characterizations of
$\Gamma^*_n$ and $\overline{\Gamma^*_n}$
are extremely difficult. To obtain partial characterizations of these regions,
constraints can be added to the boundary of the region and
corresponding constrained
non-Shannon-type inequalities have been discovered\cite{ZY97,KR11,KR12,KR13}.
In this paper, we consider \emph{partition-symmetrical entropy
functions} defined as follows. A
partition $p$ of $\mathcal{N}$ is a set of nonempty subsets $\{\mathcal{N}_1,\cdots,\mathcal{N}_t\}$ of $\mathcal{N}$ such that distinct blocks $\mathcal{N}_i$ and
$\mathcal{N}_j$ are disjoint and $\cup^t_{i=1}\mathcal{N}_i=\mathcal{N}$. It induces a permutation group
$\Sigma_p$ whose members are those
permutations that keep the elements of each block $\mathcal{N}_i$ in the same
block. We define an action of group $\Sigma_p$ on
the entropy space $\mathcal{H}_n$, for any
$\sigma\in\Sigma_p$ and for $\mathbf{h}\in\mathcal{H}_n$,
$\sigma(\mathbf{h})(\mathcal{A})=\mathbf{h}(\sigma(\mathcal{A})),\ \mathcal{A}\subset\mathcal{N}$.
This group action can naturally induce an action on the power set of
$\mathcal{H}_n$, i.e., for any $T\subset\mathcal{H}_n$, $\sigma(T)=\{\sigma(\mathbf{h}):\sigma(T)\}$.
Then the
fixed set of $\mathcal{H}_n$, $S_p=\{\mathbf{h}\in\mathcal{H}_n:\sigma \mathbf{h}=\mathbf{h},\ \text{for all
}\sigma\in\Sigma_p\}$, is a subspace of
$\mathcal{H}_n$ and is called the $p$-symmetrical subspace.
It can be seen
that, $\mathbf{h}\in S_p$ if and only if $\mathbf{h}(\mathcal{A})=\mathbf{h}(\mathcal{B})$ whenever
$|\mathcal{A}\cap\mathcal{N}_i|=|\mathcal{B}\cap\mathcal{N}_i|$ for all $i=0,\cdots,t$. We call
the polymatroids or entropy functions $p$-symmetrical if they are in
the $p$-symmetrical subspace. The $p$-symmetrical polymatroids and
$p$-symmetrical entropy functions form the $p$-symmetrical
polymatroidal region,
denoted by $\Psi_p$, and $p$-symmetrical entropy function region,
denoted by $\Psi^*_p$,
respectively.
We prove in Theorem \ref{bfdp} that $\Psi_p=\overline{\Psi^*_p}$ if and only if $p$
is the 1-partition or a 2-partition with one of its blocks being a
singleton when $n\ge 4$. To prove the ``if'' part of Theorem \ref{bfdp}, we analyze the
extreme rays of $\Psi_p$ for the two cases of $p$ such that
$\Psi_p=\overline{\Psi^*_p}$ and show that these extreme rays contain
factors of uniform matroids which are almost entropic. To prove the ``only
if'' part of Theorem \ref{bfdp}, we show that $\Psi_p$ for other $p$
contain polymatroids that can be restricted to a factor of the V\'amos
matroid, which is known to be not almost entropic. Toward establishing
Theorem \ref{bfdp}, we prove some symmetrical properties pertaining to
$\Gamma_n$, $\Gamma^*_n$, $\Psi_p$ and $\Psi^*_p$. In particular, we
prove in Theorem \ref{bafoi} that each facet of $\Psi_p$ corresponds a
$p$-orbit of facet of $\Gamma_n$.
The rest of the paper is organized as follows.
Section \ref{udifb} gives the
preliminaries on convex analysis, matroid theory, partitions and group
theory that
are relavent to the discussion in this paper. The problems we study
are set up in Section \ref{bafdg}, where Theorem \ref{bfdp} is
stated. In Section
\ref{yuber}, we
establish some symmetrical properties pertaining to $\Gamma_n$ and
$\Gamma^*_n$. The entropy function
region under the symmetrical constraints of 1-partition, 2-partition
and multi-partition are studied in detail in Section \ref{5555}. A discussion on further research
is in the last section. Table \ref{tab:1} is a list of all the
notations in this paper.
{
\scriptsize
\begin{longtable}{lllc}
\hline
\hline
$\mathcal{N}$&$\{1,\cdots,n\}$& indext set & Section \ref{sec:1}\\
$\mathcal{H}_n$&$\mathbb{R}^{2^\mathcal{N}}$& entropy space & \\
$\mathcal{H}^0_n$&$\{\mathbf{h}\in\mathcal{H}_n:\mathbf{h}(\emptyset)=0\}$& & \\
$\Gamma^*_n$& &entropy function region&\\
$\Gamma_n$& &polymatroidal region&\\
\hline
$\aff{A}$&&affine hull of $A$&Subsection \ref{sec:convex-cones}\\
$E(i)$&$\{\mathbf{h}\in \Gamma_n: \mathbf{h}(\mathcal{N}\setminus\{i\})=\mathbf{h}(\mathcal{N})\},\
i\in\mathcal{N}$& facets of
$\Gamma_n$, first type&\\
$E(ij,\mathcal{K})$&$\{\mathbf{h}\in \Gamma_n:
\mathbf{h}(\mathcal{K}\cup\{i\})+\mathbf{h}(\mathcal{K}\cup\{j\})=\mathbf{h}(\mathcal{K})$&facets of
$\Gamma_n$, second type
&\\
&$+\mathbf{h}(\mathcal{K}\cup\{i,j\})\}, i,j\in\mathcal{N},\mathcal{K}\subset
\mathcal{N}\setminus\{i,j\}$&&\\
$E(\mathcal{I},\mathcal{K})$& $E(i)=E(\{i\},\emptyset)$,
$E(ij,\mathcal{K})=E(\{i,j\},\mathcal{K})$& &\\
$\mathcal{E}_n$& &the set of all facets of $\Gamma_n$& \\
$\ball{\mathbf{c}}{r}$&$\{\mathbf{x}\in\mathbb{R}^d:\|\mathbf{x}-\mathbf{c}\|_2<r\}$&open
ball&\\
$\ri{A}$&$\{\mathbf{x}\in\mathbb{R}^d:\exists
\epsilon>0,\ball{\mathbf{x}}{\epsilon}\cap \aff{A}\subset A\}$&relative interior of $A$&\\
$\relbd{A}$&$\overline{A}\setminus\ri{A}$& relative boundary of $A$&\\
$U_{m,n}$& $U_{m,n}(\mathcal{A})=\min\{m,
|\mathcal{A}|\}\ \mathcal{A}\subset\mathcal{N}$&uniform matroid&Subsection
\ref{sec:matroid-theory}\\
$p$&$\{\mathcal{N}_1,\cdots,\mathcal{N}_t\}$ s.t. $\mathcal{N}_i$ disjoint and
$\mathcal{N}=\cup^t_{i=1}\mathcal{N}_i$&partition of $\mathcal{N}$&Subsection \ref{sdsb}
\\
$\mathcal{P}_n$&&the set of all partitions of $\mathcal{N}$&\\
$\mathcal{P}_{t,n}$&&the set of all $t$-partitions of $\mathcal{N}$&\\
$\lambda_{\mathcal{A},p}$&$(|\mathcal{A}\cap\mathcal{N}_1|,\cdots,|\mathcal{A}\cap\mathcal{N}_t|)$&partition
vector of $\mathcal{A}$ under $p$&\\
$\lambda_{\mathcal{A},p}(i)$&$|\mathcal{A}\cap\mathcal{N}_i|$& the $i$-th entry of
$\lambda_{\mathcal{A},p}$&\\
$\lambda_p$& $\lambda_{\mathcal{N},p}$&the partition vector of $p$&\\
$\mathbf{n}$&$[n_1,\cdots,n_t]$ with
$0<n_i\le n_j,1\le i<j\le t$&partition of $n$&\\
$\mathbf{n}_p$&&nondecreasing arrangement of $\lambda_{p}(i)$&\\
$\Sigma_n$&&symmetric group on $\mathcal{N}$&Section
\ref{hidmx}\\
$\Sigma_p$ &$\{\sigma\in\Sigma_n: \sigma(j)\in\mathcal{N}_i,\ j\in\mathcal{N}_i,\ i=1,\cdots,t\}$&$p$-group&\\
$\mathcal{O}_p,\mathcal{O}_p(\mathbf{h})$&&$p$-orbit&\\
$\mathrm{fix}_{p} (T)$&&fixed set of $\mathcal{T}$ under $p$-group&\\
$S_p$&$\{\mathbf{h}\in\mathcal{H}_n:\ \mathbf{h}(\mathcal{A})=\mathbf{h}(\mathcal{B}),
\text{ if } \lambda_{\mathcal{A},p}=\lambda_{\mathcal{B},p}\}$&$p$-symmetrical
subspace&\\
\hline
$\mathcal{N}_p$&$\{(k_1,\cdots,k_t):k_i\in\{0,1,\cdots,n_i\},i=1,\cdots,t\}$&&Section \ref{bafdg}\\
$\mathbf{s}(\mathbf{h},p)$&$(s_{k_1,\cdots,k_t})_{(k_1,\cdots,k_t)\in\mathcal{N}_p}$&&\\
$\Psi^*_p$&$\Gamma^*_n\cap S_p$&$p$-symmetrical entropy function
region&\\
$\Psi_p$&$\Gamma_n\cap S_p$&$p$-symmetrical polymatroidal
region&\\
$S^0_p$&$\{\mathbf{h}\in S_p:\mathbf{h}(\emptyset)=0\}$&&\\
$\mathcal{P}^*_n$&&representative set of partitions of $\mathcal{N}$&\\
$\mathcal{P}^*_{t,n}$&&representatives set of $t$-partitions of $\mathcal{N}$&\\
\hline
$\mathfrak{F}_p$&&collection of all $p$-orbits of faces of $\Gamma_n$&Section \ref{yuber}\\
$\mathfrak{E}_p$&&collection of all $p$-orbits of facets of $\Gamma_n$&\\
$\mathfrak{N}_p$&&set
of all distinct pairs of
$(\lambda_{\mathcal{I},p},\lambda_{\mathcal{K},p})$&\\
$\mathcal{E}_p(\lambda_{\mathcal{I},p},\lambda_{\mathcal{K},p})$&&the $p$-orbit that
$E(\mathcal{I},\mathcal{K})$ belongs to&\\
$\mathbf{0}_t$&&zero vector with dimension
$t$&\\
$\mathbf{1}_{t}(l)$&&$t$-dimensional vector with the $l$-th &\\
&&entry 1 and other
entries 0&\\
$\mathbf{2}_{t}(l)$&&$t$-dimensional vector with the $l$-th &\\
&&entry 2 and other
entries 0&\\
$\mathbf{1}_{t}(l_1,l_2)$&&$t$-dimensional vector with the $l_1$-th&\\
&&
and $l_2$-th entries 1 and other entries 0&\\
$\mathcal{G}_p$&&the collection of all facets of $\Psi_p$&\\
$\omega_p$&$E\mapsto E\cap S_p$ &&\\
$G_p(\lambda_{\mathcal{I},p},\lambda_{\mathcal{K},p})$&$
E(\mathcal{I},\mathcal{K})\cap S_p$&facet of $\Psi_p$&\\
\hline
$\mathfrak{E}_{\mathcal{E},p}$&& the family
$p$-orbits contained in $p'$-orbit $\mathcal{E}$&Appendix\\
\hline
\hline
\caption{Notation List}
\label{tab:1}
\end{longtable}
\section{Preliminaries}
\label{udifb}
\subsection{Convex cone}
\label{sec:convex-cones}
A convex set $C\subset\mathbb{R}^d$ is called a \emph{convex cone} if for
any $\mathbf{c}\in C$ and $a\ge 0$, we have $a\mathbf{c}\in C$.
A convex
cone which does not contain a line is called \emph{pointed}. In
this paper, convex cones are assumed to be pointed and closed unless
otherwise specified. From the definition, it can be seen that
$\Gamma_n$ is a convex cone in $\mathcal{H}_n$. It was shown in
\cite{ZY97} that $\overline{\Gamma^*_n}$ is also a convex cone.
A convex cone is called \emph{polyhedral} if it is the intersection
of a finite set of closed halfspaces. Since each closed halfspace is
induced by a linear inequality and the number of linear inequalities
in the set of polymatroidal axioms is finite for a fixed $n$,
$\Gamma_n$ is a polyhedral cone. On the contrary,
$\overline{\Gamma^*_n}$ is not polyhedral as proved
in \cite{M07a}.
A hyperplane $P$ is called a \emph{supporting hyperplane} of a
convex set $C\subset\mathbb{R}^d$
if one of its corresponding closed halfspaces\footnote{For a
hyperplane $P=\{\mathbf{x}\in\mathbb{R}^d: \mathbf{c}^T\mathbf{x}=a\}$, its two
corresponding closed halfspace are $\{\mathbf{x}\in\mathbb{R}^d: \mathbf{c}^T\mathbf{x}
\leq a\}$ and $\{\mathbf{x}\in\mathbb{R}^d: \mathbf{c}^T\mathbf{x}\geq a\}$, where
$\mathbf{c}\in\mathbb{R}^d$ and $a\in\mathbb{R}$.}
$P^+\supset C$ and
$\mathrm{dist}(P,C)=0$.\footnote{Given $A, B\subset\mathbb{R}^d$,
$\mathrm{dist}(A,B)=\inf_{x\in A,y\in B}\|x-y\|_2.$
}
\begin{definition}
[Face]
\label{def:sd}
A \emph{face} of a convex cone
$C\subset\mathbb{R}^d$
is the cone $C$ itself or
$C\cap P$, where $P$ is a supporting hyperplane of $C$. A face that
is not $C$ or the origin is called a \emph{proper face} of the cone.
\end{definition}
Note that if $\mathrm{dim} C< d$,\footnote{
Given $A\subset\mathbb{R}^d$, $\mathrm{dim}A$
denotes the dimension of $\aff{A}$, the affine hull of
$A$.
} for any hyperplane $P\supset C$, we
have $C=C\cap P$. We can readily see that $P$ is a supporting hyperplane
of $C$.
Therefore, for convex cone $C$ with $\mathrm{dim}
C< d$, all faces $F$ of
$C$ can be written as $C\cap P$ for some supporting hyperplane $P$ of $C$.
A \emph{maximum proper face} of a convex cone is a proper face which
is not contained by any other proper face. Similarly, a
\emph{minimum proper face} is a proper face that does not contain
other proper faces.
\begin{definition}[Extreme ray] An \emph{extreme ray} $R$ of
a convex cone $C$ is a subset of $C$ and for any $\mathbf{r}\in R$ such
that $\mathbf{r}=\mathbf{c}_1+\mathbf{c}_2$ and $\mathbf{c}_1,\mathbf{c}_2\in C$, we
have $\mathbf{c}_1, \mathbf{c}_2\in R$, where $\mathbf{c}_1=a \mathbf{r}$ and
$\mathbf{c}_2=(1-a)\mathbf{r}$ for some $a\in\mathbb{R}$.
\end{definition}
For a polyhedral convex cone $C$ with $\mathrm{dim}
C=d'$, where $d'\ge 2$,
the maximum proper faces, also called \emph{facets}, are the
$(d'-1)$-dimensional faces, while the minimum proper faces are the
$1$-dimensional faces and they coincide with the extreme rays
of the cone. Note that if $\mathrm{dim}
C=1$, then $C$ does not have a proper face.
The family $\mathcal{F}$ of faces of a convex cone $C$ form a lattice
called the \emph{face lattice} of the convex cone, which is
partially ordered by inclusion. That is, for any $F_1, F_2\in
\mathcal{F}$, $F_1\le F_2$ if and only if $F_1\subset F_2$. Furthermore,
the faces of a convex cone have the following properties.
\begin{proposition}
Any non-origin face of a
convex cone is the convex combination of some extreme rays of the cone.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proposition}
\label{njkdf}
The intersection of any collection of faces
of a convex cone is a face of the cone.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proposition}
\label{vssld}
Any face of a convex cone that is not the cone itself is the
intersection of some facets.
\end{proposition}
For convex sets and convex polyhedral cones, readers are referred to
\cite{G03,Z95,R70} for a detailed discussion.
Elemental information inequalities involving $X_\mathcal{N}$ have the
following two forms:
\begin{enumerate}
\item $H(X_\mathcal{N})\geq H(X_{\mathcal{N}\setminus\{i\}}),\
i\in\mathcal{N}$;
\item $I(X_i;X_j|X_\mathcal{K})\geq 0,\quad$ distinct $i,j\in\mathcal{N},\ \mathcal{K}\subset
\mathcal{N}\setminus\{i,j\}$.
\end{enumerate}
These inequalities are called elemental since every Shannon-type
information inequality can be written as a conic
combination of these inequalities, and they form the minimal set of
inequalities that has this property \cite[Section 14.6]{Y08}. In other
words, the two forms of elemental inequalities give the ``minimal''
characterization of $\Gamma_n$.
Setting the elemental inequalities to equalities and intersecting
the corresponding hyperplanes with $\Gamma_n$, we
obtain the facets of the cone $\Gamma_n$ in the following forms:
\begin{enumerate}
\item $E(i)\triangleq\{\mathbf{h}\in \Gamma_n: \mathbf{h}(\mathcal{N}\setminus\{i\})=\mathbf{h}(\mathcal{N})\},\
i\in\mathcal{N}$;
\item $E(ij,\mathcal{K})\triangleq\{\mathbf{h}\in \Gamma_n: \mathbf{h}(\mathcal{K}\cup\{i\})+\mathbf{h}(\mathcal{K}\cup\{j\})=\mathbf{h}(\mathcal{K})+\mathbf{h}(\mathcal{K}\cup\{i,j\})\},\ \text{ distinct } i,j\in\mathcal{N},\mathcal{K}\subset
\mathcal{N}\setminus\{i,j\}$.
\end{enumerate}
The set of all facets of $\Gamma_n$ is denoted by $\mathcal{E}_n$. For
notational convenience, the members of $\mathcal{E}_n$ are denoted by
$E(\mathcal{I},\mathcal{K})$: $E(i)=E(\{i\},\emptyset)$, $E(ij,\mathcal{K})=E(\{i,j\},\mathcal{K})$.
For $\mathbf{c}\in\mathbb{R}^d$ and $r>0$, let
$\ball{\mathbf{c}}{r}=\{\mathbf{x}\in\mathbb{R}^d:\|\mathbf{x}-\mathbf{c}\|_2<r\}$, the open
ball centered at $\mathbf{c}$ with radius $r$.
\begin{definition}[Relative interior, relative boundary]
For a set $A\subset\mathbb{R}^d$,
$\ri{A}\triangleq\{\mathbf{x}\in\mathbb{R}^d:\exists
\epsilon>0,\ball{\mathbf{x}}{\epsilon}\cap \aff{A}\subset A\}$ is called
the \emph{relative interior} of $A$, where $\aff{A}$ is the affine
hull of $A$, and $\relbd{A}\triangleq
\overline{A}\setminus\ri{A}$ is called the \emph{relative boundary} of $A$.
\end{definition}
\begin{proposition}
\label{coidl}
For any polyhedral cone, its relative boundary is the union of all its facets.
\end{proposition}
\subsection{Matroid}
\label{sec:matroid-theory}
There exist various cryptomorphic
definitions of a matroid. Here we discuss matroid theory from the
perspective of rank functions and regard matroids as special cases
of polymatroids. For a detailed treatment of matroid theory,
readers are referred to \cite{W76,O92}.
\begin{definition}
A \emph{matroid} $M$ is an ordered pair $\{\mathcal{N}, \mathbf{r}\}$, where the \emph{ground set}
$\mathcal{N}$ and the \emph{rank function} $\mathbf{r}$ satisfy the conditions
that: for any
$\mathcal{A},\mathcal{B}\subset\mathcal{N}$,
\begin{itemize}
\item $0\le\mathbf{r}(\mathcal{A})\le|\mathcal{A}|$ and
$\mathbf{r}(\mathcal{A})\in\mathbb{Z}$.
\item $\mathbf{r}(\mathcal{A})\leq \mathbf{r}(\mathcal{B}),\ \text{if }\mathcal{A}\subseteq\mathcal{B}$,
\item $\mathbf{r}(\mathcal{A})+\mathbf{r}(\mathcal{B}) \geq \mathbf{r}({\mathcal{A}\cup\mathcal{B}})+\mathbf{r}({\mathcal{A}\cap\mathcal{B}})$.
\end{itemize}
\end{definition}
For a matroid $M=\{\mathcal{N}, \mathbf{r}\}$, let $\mathcal{N}'\subset\mathcal{N}$ and let
$\mathbf{r}'$ be a set function which is the restriction of $\mathbf{r}$ on the
power set of $\mathcal{N}'$. Then $\{\mathcal{N}', \mathbf{r}'\}$ is called a
\emph{submatroid} of $M$. For $e\in\mathcal{N}$, if $\mathbf{r}(\{e\})=0$, $e$
is called a \emph{loop} of $M$.
Note that for a polymatroid $\mathbf{h}\in\Gamma_n$, if
$\mathbf{h}(\mathcal{A})\in\mathbb{Z}$ and $\mathbf{h}(\mathcal{A})\le|\mathcal{A}|$, then $\mathbf{h}$ is a matroid.
Therefore, matroids are special cases of polymatroids. With a slight
abuse of terminology, we do not differentiate a matroid and its
rank function. So $M, \mathbf{r}(M)$ and $\mathbf{r}$ may all denote the rank
function of $M$ when there is no ambiguity.
For a matrix $D$ over a field $\mathbb{F}$, we can define a matroid by
letting the ground set $\mathcal{N}$ be
the set of columns of $D$ and the rank function $\mathbf{r}(\mathcal{A})$ for $\mathcal{A}\subset\mathcal{N}$ be the
rank of the submatrix of $D$ whose columns are those in $\mathcal{A}$. It
can be checked that $\{\mathcal{N}, \mathbf{r}\}$ is indeed a matroid. Such a matroid is called
\emph{representable} over $\mathbb{F}$ or $\mathbb{F}$-representable.
\begin{proposition}
\label{prop:rpr_entr}
A representable matroid is almost entropic.
\end{proposition}
\textbf{Remark} It is not difficult to show that an
$\mathbb{F}$-representable matroid is entropic if the base $b$ of the
logarithm defining entropy is taken to be
$|\mathbb{F}|$ (see for example\cite[Theorem 7.3]{YLCZ}). If $b$ is not
taken to be $|\mathbb{F}|$, since $\overline{\Gamma^*_n}$ is a
cone,
it follows that a representable matroid is almost entropic.
\begin{definition}[Free expansion, factor \cite{N78},\cite{W86}]
\label{def:fr_ex}
Let $\mathbf{h}\in \Gamma_n$ be an integer-valued polymatroid. Consider a set
$\mathcal{M}$ with cardinality $m\triangleq\sum_{i\in\mathcal{N}}\mathbf{h}(\{i\})$ and
any mapping $\phi:\mathcal{N}\rightarrow 2^{\mathcal{M}}$ such that $\phi(i)$ has
the cardinality $\mathbf{h}(\{i\}),i\in\mathcal{N}$ and
$\phi(i)\cap\phi(j)=\emptyset$ for $i\neq j$. Then the \emph{free
expansion} $\mathbf{g}\in\Gamma_m$ of $\mathbf{h}$ by $\phi$ is defined by
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:2}
\mathbf{g}(\mathcal{A})=\min_{\mathcal{B}\subset \mathcal{N}}\big(\mathbf{h}(\mathcal{B})+|\mathcal{A}\setminus \phi(\mathcal{B})|\big),\
\mathcal{A}\subset \mathcal{M}.
\end{equation}
It is said that $\mathbf{g}$ \emph{factors to} $\mathbf{h}$ under $\phi$ or $\mathbf{h}$ is a
\emph{factor} of $\mathbf{g}$.
\end{definition}
It can be checked that $\mathbf{g}$ is also an
integer-valued polymatroid and furthermore, can be proved to be a
matroid \cite{N78}.
The fact that the integer-valued polymatroid $\mathbf{h}\in\Gamma_n$ is a factor of $\mathbf{g}\in\Gamma_m$ under
some $\phi$ can be understood as that any $i\in\mathcal{N}$ is split into
$\mathbf{h}(\{i\})$ ``independent'' elements $j\in\phi(i)\subset\mathcal{M}$. We
now offer an ``information theoretic'' interpretation.
Consider any $\mathcal{A}\subset\mathcal{M}$ such that $\mathcal{A}=\phi(\mathcal{B}')$
for some $\mathcal{B}'\subset\mathcal{N}$. Then for all $\mathcal{B}\subset\mathcal{N}$,
\begin{align*}
\mathbf{h}(\mathcal{B})+|\mathcal{A}\setminus\phi(\mathcal{B})|
=\ &\mathbf{h}(\mathcal{B})+|\phi(\mathcal{B}')\setminus\phi(\mathcal{B})|\\
=\ &\mathbf{h}(\mathcal{B})+|\phi(\mathcal{B}' \setminus\mathcal{B})|\\
=\ &\mathbf{h}(\mathcal{B})+\sum_{i\in \mathcal{B}' \setminus\mathcal{B}}\mathbf{h}(\{i\})\\
\ge\ &\mathbf{h}(\mathcal{B})+\mathbf{h}(\mathcal{B}' \setminus\mathcal{B})\\
\ge\ &\mathbf{h}(\mathcal{B}\cup \mathcal{B}')\\
\ge\ & \mathbf{h}(\mathcal{B}'),
\end{align*}
where the inequalities above follow from the polymatroidal axioms
because $\mathbf{h}\in\Gamma_n$. Togethor with \eqref{eq:2}, we see that $\mathbf{g}(\mathcal{A})=\mathbf{h}(\mathcal{B}')$
So
the ``inverse operation'' of free expansion can be written as
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:7}
\mathbf{h}(\mathcal{B})=\mathbf{g}(\phi(\mathcal{B})),\
\mathcal{B}\subset \mathcal{N}.
\end{equation}
Note that Definition \ref{def:fr_ex} allows $\mathbf{h}(\{i\})$ to be equal to
zero.
\begin{proposition}
\label{prop:fr_ex} Let $\mathbf{h}\in\Gamma_n$ be integer-valued and a
factor of $\mathbf{g}\in\Gamma_m$ under some $\phi$. Then
$\mathbf{g}\in\overline{\Gamma^*_m}$ if and only if $\mathbf{h}\in\overline{\Gamma^*_n}$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
The ``if'' part is proved in \cite[Theorem 4]{M07b}. For the ``only
if'' part, by the continuity of free expansion, it suffices to prove
that $\mathbf{h}\in\Gamma^*_n$ if $\mathbf{g}\in\Gamma^*_m$. Let $\mathbf{g}$ be the entropy
function of the random vector
$Y_\mathcal{M}=(Y_j)_{j\in\mathcal{M}}$. Now define $X_\mathcal{N}=(X_i)_{i\in\mathcal{N}}$ by
$X_i=(Y_j)_{j\in\phi(i)}$ for all $i\in\mathcal{N}$. Then it can be checked that $\mathbf{h}$ is the
entropy function of $X_\mathcal{N}$.
\end{proof}
\begin{definition}[Uniform matroid]
A \emph{uniform matroid} $U_{m,n}$ is a matroid with ground set $\mathcal{N}$ and
rank function
\begin{equation*}
U_{m,n}(\mathcal{A})=\min\{m, |\mathcal{A}|\}
\end{equation*}
for any $\mathcal{A}\subset\mathcal{N}$.
\end{definition}
Since uniform matroids are representable(e.g. by the Vandermonde matrix), they are almost entropic
by Proposition \ref{prop:rpr_entr}. For a matroid with ground set
$\mathcal{N}$, it can be shown it is also almost entropic if its submatroid on
some $\mathcal{M}\subset\mathcal{N}$ is uniform and elements in $\mathcal{N}\setminus\mathcal{M}$
are all loops.
By Proposition \ref{prop:fr_ex},
a polymatroid which is a factor of a uniform matroid is almost
entropic.
\subsection{Partition}
\label{sdsb}
\begin{definition}[Partition of a set]
For a set $\mathcal{S}$ and an index set $\mathcal{I}$, a collection $p=\{\mathcal{S}_i,i\in\mathcal{I}\}$ of
disjoint subsets of $\mathcal{S}$ such that $\mathcal{S}=\cup_{i\in\mathcal{I}}\mathcal{S}_i$ and
$\mathcal{S}_i\neq\emptyset$ is called a \emph{partition} of $\mathcal{S}$. The sets $\mathcal{S}_i$ are called \emph{blocks}
of the partition $p$.
\end{definition}
For two partitions of $\mathcal{S}$, $p_1=\{\mathcal{S}^{(1)}_i,i\in\mathcal{I}_1\}$ and $p_2=\{\mathcal{S}^{(2)}_i,i\in\mathcal{I}_2\}$,
$p_1\le p_2$ if for any $\mathcal{S}^{(2)}_i,i\in\mathcal{I}_2$, there
exists $\mathcal{J}_i\subset\mathcal{I}_1$ such that
$\mathcal{S}^{(2)}_i=\cup_{j\in\mathcal{J}_i}\mathcal{S}^{(1)}_j$.
We say that
$p_1$ is a \emph{refinement} of $p_2$, $p_1$
is \emph{finer than} $p_2$ or $p_2$ is \emph{coarser than} $p_1$. For
$p_1,p_2\in\mathcal{P}_n$, $p_1<p_2$ if $p_1\le p_2$ and $p_1\neq p_2$.
In this subsection, we discuss some properties of a partition of a
finite set that will be used later in this paper. Consider a partition
of $\mathcal{N}=\{1,\cdots,n\}$ with $t\le n$ blocks. Such a
partition $\{\mathcal{N}_1,\cdots,\mathcal{N}_t\}$ is also called a $t$-partition of $\mathcal{N}$.
The set of all $t$-partitions of $\mathcal{N}$ is denoted by
$\mathcal{P}_{t,n}$. The cardinality of $\mathcal{P}_{t,n}$ is called the
Stirling number (of the second kind) with respect to $t$ and $n$.
Let $\mathcal{P}_n=\cup^n_{t=1}\mathcal{P}_{t,n}$ be the set of
all partitions of $\mathcal{N}$. The cardinality of $\mathcal{P}_n$ is called
the Bell number with respect to $n$\cite{LW92}.
For $p\in\mathcal{P}_{t,n}$ and $\mathcal{A}\subset\mathcal{N}$,
we call $\boldsymbol{\lambda}_{\mathcal{A},p}\triangleq(|\mathcal{A}\cap\mathcal{N}_1|,\cdots,|\mathcal{A}\cap\mathcal{N}_t|)$
the \emph{partition vector} of $\mathcal{A}$ under $p$. Let
$\boldsymbol{\lambda}_{\mathcal{A},p}(i)=|\mathcal{A}\cap\mathcal{N}_i|$ denote the $i$-th entry of $\boldsymbol{\lambda}_{\mathcal{A},p}$.
In particular, when
$\mathcal{A}=\mathcal{N}$, we call $\boldsymbol{\lambda}_{\mathcal{N},p}$ or simply $\boldsymbol{\lambda}_p$ the
partition vector of $p$.
The set of all partitions of $\mathcal{N}$, denoted by
$\mathcal{P}_n$, is a partial order set with order ``$\le$''. It can be shown
that the partial order
set $\mathcal{P}_n$ is a lattice with the set of all singletons
$\{\{i\}:i\in\mathcal{N}\}$ being the least element and the 1-partition $\{\mathcal{N}\}$ as the
greatest element. In a lattice $\mathcal{L}$, for $l_1,l_2\in\mathcal{L}$, $ l_2$
\emph{covers} $l_1$, if $l_1< l_2$ and for any
$l\in\mathcal{L}$ such that $l_1\le l\le l_2$, either $l=l_1$ or $l=l_2$. For
$p_1,p_2\in\mathcal{P}_n$, it can be shown that $p_2$ covers $p_1$
if and only if $p_1\le p_2$ and one of blocks of $p_2$ is the union of two blocks
of $p_1$ and all other blocks of $p_2$ are also blocks of
$p_1$. Therefore, any $p\in\mathcal{P}_{t,n}$ is covered by some
$p'\in\mathcal{P}_{t-1,n}$ for $2\le t\le n$ and covers some
$p''\in\mathcal{P}_{t+1,n}$ for $1\le t\le n-1$.
\begin{definition}[Partition of a number]
For a positive integer $n$, a vector $\mathbf{n}=[n_1,\cdots,n_t]$ with
$0<n_i\le n_j$ for $1\le i<j\le t$ such that $n=\sum^t_{i=1}n_i$ is called a \emph{partition} of $n$.
\end{definition}
The number of the partitions of $n$ is called the partition function with
respect to $n$
\cite{LW92}. For $p\in\mathcal{P}_n$, let $\mathbf{n}_p$ be a vector whose
entries are a nondecreasing rearrangement of $\boldsymbol{\lambda}_p(i),\ i=1,\cdots,t$.
It can be seen that $\mathbf{n}_p$
is a partition of $n$.
\subsection{Group action}
\label{hidmx}
To study symmetry, group theory is a regular tool. For the
basics of group theory, readers are referred to \cite{Rotman06}. In
this subsection, we discuss group actions and how they can be used to
study the symmetries in the entropy space $\mathcal{H}_n$. For a detailed
introduction to group actions, readers are referred to \cite{DM96}.
A bijection $\sigma:\mathcal{N}\rightarrow\mathcal{N}$ is called a \emph{permutation} of
$\mathcal{N}$. The set $\Sigma_n$ of all permutations of $\mathcal{N}$ is a
group with order $n!$ taking composition as its group operation. The group
$\Sigma_n$ is called the \emph{symmetric group} on $\mathcal{N}$.
For $p=\{\mathcal{N}_1,\cdots,\mathcal{N}_t\}\in\mathcal{P}_{n}$,
define
\begin{align}
\label{feqbs}
\Sigma_p= &\{\sigma\in\Sigma_n: \sigma(j)\in\mathcal{N}_i,\ j\in\mathcal{N}_i,\ i=1,\cdots,t\},
\end{align}
the set of permutations that keep the members of a block in the same block. It can be checked that $\Sigma_p$ is a
subgroup of $\Sigma_n$ with order $\prod^t_{i=1}n_i!$.
When $p=\{\mathcal{N}\}$, $\Sigma_{\mathcal{N}}$ coincides with $\Sigma_n$. Following the
notation simplification in Section \ref{bafdg}, we write $\Sigma_{\mathcal{N}}$ as $\Sigma_n$.
\begin{definition}[Group action]
For a set $\mathcal{S}$, a group $\Sigma$ \emph{acts} on
$\mathcal{S}$ if there exists a function $\Sigma\times \mathcal{S}\rightarrow
\mathcal{S}$, called an action, denoted by $(\sigma, s)\mapsto
\sigma s$, such that
\begin{enumerate}
\item $(\sigma_1 \sigma_2)s=\sigma_1(\sigma_2 s)$ for all
$\sigma_1,\sigma_2\in \Sigma$ and $s\in\mathcal{S}$;
\item $1 s=s$ for all $s\in \mathcal{S}$, where $1$ is the identity of $\Sigma$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{definition}
For any $\sigma\in\Sigma_n$, define
$\sigma':\mathcal{H}_n\rightarrow\mathcal{H}_n$ by
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:1}
\sigma'(\mathbf{h})(\mathcal{A})=\mathbf{h}(\sigma(\mathcal{A})),\ \mathcal{A}\subset\mathcal{N}.
\end{equation}
It can readily be verified that $\sigma: 2^\mathcal{N}\rightarrow 2^\mathcal{N}$
(defined by $\sigma(\mathcal{A})=\{\sigma(i):i\in\mathcal{A}\}$) is a
bijection and so a permutation of $2^\mathcal{N}$. It then follows that
$\sigma'(\mathbf{h})$ is obtained from $\mathbf{h}$ by permutating the components of
$\mathbf{h}$, and hence $\sigma'$ is a bijection. With a slight abuse of
notation, we write $\sigma'(\mathbf{h})$ as $\sigma(\mathbf{h})$.
It can be checked that $\sigma(\mathbf{h})$ defines a group action $\Sigma_n$
on $\mathcal{H}_n$. By restricting the
action on a subgroup $\Sigma_p$, we obtain the group action $\Sigma_p$
on $\mathcal{H}_n$.
\begin{definition}[Orbit]
\label{uisdo}
If group $\Sigma$ acts on $\mathcal{S}$, then for $s\in\mathcal{S}$, the
\emph{orbit}
of the action of $s$ is defined by
\begin{equation*}
\mathcal{O}_{\Sigma}(s)=\{\sigma s:\sigma\in \Sigma\}.
\end{equation*}
\end{definition}
It can be verified that 1) $s\in\mathcal{O}_\Sigma(s)$, 2) if $s_2\in\mathcal{O}_\Sigma(s_1)$, then
$s_1\in\mathcal{O}_\Sigma(s_2)$ and 3) if $s_2\in\mathcal{O}_\Sigma(s_1),s_3\in\mathcal{O}_\Sigma(s_2)$, then
$s_3\in\mathcal{O}_\Sigma (s_1)$. Therefore, orbits of the action defines a
relation on $\mathcal{S}$ which implies the following proposition.
\begin{proposition}\cite[Proposition 2.142]{Rotman06}
\label{dfoib}
If group $\Sigma$ acts on a set $\mathcal{S}$, then the orbits induced by the action
of $\Sigma$ on $\mathcal{S}$ forms
a partition of $\mathcal{S}$.
\end{proposition}
For $p\in\mathcal{P}_n$, consider the action of $\Sigma_p$ on
$\mathcal{H}_n$. For any $\mathbf{h}\in\mathcal{H}_n$, we call the orbit
$\mathcal{O}_{\Sigma_p}(\mathbf{h})$, or $\mathcal{O}_p$ in short,
a \emph{$p$-orbit}. If $\mathbf{h}_1$ and $\mathbf{h}_2$ are in the same
$p$-orbit, i.e., $\mathbf{h}_2\in\mathcal{O}_p(\mathbf{h}_1)$, we say that $\mathbf{h}_1$ and $\mathbf{h}_2$ are \emph{$p$-equivalent}.
\begin{definition}
If a group $\Sigma$ acts on $\mathcal{S}$, for
$\mathcal{T}\subset\mathcal{S}$, the \emph{fixed set} of $\mathcal{T}$ is defined by
\begin{equation*}
\mathrm{fix}_{\Sigma} (\mathcal{T})=\{s\in\mathcal{T}:\sigma s=s, \forall \sigma\in\Sigma\}.
\end{equation*}
When $\mathcal{T}=\mathcal{S}$, we call $\mathrm{fix}_{\Sigma} (\mathcal{S})$
the fixed set of the action.
\end{definition}
It can be shown that $\mathrm{fix}_{\Sigma}
(\mathcal{T})=\mathrm{fix}_{\Sigma}(\mathcal{S})\cap\mathcal{T}$. Furthermore, for any $s\in
\mathrm{fix}_{\sigma}(\mathcal{S})$, the singleton
$\{s\}$ forms an orbit of the action.
For the action of $\Sigma_p$ on $\mathcal{H}_n$ and $T\subset\mathcal{H}_n$,
$\mathrm{fix}_{\Sigma_p} (T)$ is denoted by $\mathrm{fix}_{p} (T)$ for
simplicity. For $p=\{\mathcal{N}_1,\cdots,\mathcal{N}_t\}\in\mathcal{P}_{n}$, it can be checked that
\begin{equation}
\label{symt_c}
\mathrm{fix}_{p}(\mathcal{H}_n)=\{\mathbf{h}\in\mathcal{H}_n:\ \mathbf{h}(\mathcal{A})=\mathbf{h}(\mathcal{B})
\text{ if } \boldsymbol{\lambda}_{\mathcal{A},p}=\boldsymbol{\lambda}_{\mathcal{B},p}\}.
\end{equation}
Therefore, the set $\mathrm{fix}_{p}(\mathcal{H}_n)$ is a subspace of $\mathcal{H}_n$. We
denote this subspace by $S_p$ and call it the \emph{$p$-symmetrical
subspace}. Then $\mathrm{fix}_{p}(\Gamma_n)=\Gamma_n\cap S_p$ and
$\mathrm{fix}_{p}(\Gamma^*_n)=\Gamma^*_n\cap S_p$.
\begin{proposition}
\label{o238}
If a group $\Sigma$ acts on a set $\mathcal{S}$, then $\Sigma$ also acts on
$2^{\mathcal{S}}$, where $\sigma \mathcal{T}=\{\sigma s: s\in\mathcal{T}\}$ for
$\mathcal{T}\subset\mathcal{S}$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
This proposition can be readily proved by checking the definition of
group action.
\end{proof}
For the induced group action on the power set as in Proposition \ref{o238}, we call an orbit of the
action a \emph{setwise orbit} of the original action. Specifically,
for any
$\mathcal{T}\subset\mathcal{S}$, the setwise orbit of $\mathcal{T}$ is given by
\begin{equation*}
\mathcal{O}_\Sigma(\mathcal{T})=\{\sigma\mathcal{T}:\sigma\in\Sigma\}.
\end{equation*}
To distinguish a setwise orbit from an orbit of the
original action (cf. Definition \ref{uisdo}), we will refer to the
latter as a
\emph{pointwise orbit}.
Note that a setwise orbit of the original group action is a pointwise
orbit of the induced group action on the power set.
By Proposition \ref{dfoib}, all of the
setwise orbits form a partition of the power set.
For action $\Sigma_p$ on $\mathcal{H}_n$, we also call the setwise orbits of
the action $p$-orbits and denoted them by $\mathcal{O}_p$ if there is no
ambiguity.
For $T_1, T_2\subset \mathcal{H}_n$, if they are in the same
$p$-orbit, i.e., $T_2\in\mathcal{O}_p(T_1)$, we also say that they are
$p$-equivalent.
\begin{definition}[Invariance]
If a group $\Sigma$ acts on a set $\mathcal{S}$, a subset
$\mathcal{T}\subset\mathcal{S}$ is called \emph{invariant} if
\begin{equation*}
\mathcal{T}=\sigma(\mathcal{T}) \text{ for any }\sigma\in\Sigma.
\end{equation*}
\end{definition}
It can be checked that $\mathcal{T}$ is invariant if and only if $\mathcal{T}$ is in the fixed set of the induced action
on the power set. If $\mathcal{T}$ is invariant, then
$\mathcal{T}=\sigma(\mathcal{T})=\{\sigma(s):s\in\mathcal{T}\}=\cup_{s\in\mathcal{T}}\sigma(s)$,
i.e., $\mathcal{T}$ is the union of pointwise orbits.
As any $s\in\mathrm{fix}_{\Sigma}(\mathcal{S})$ itself forms a pointwise
orbit, any subset of the fixed set is invariant. Note that an invariant set
$\mathcal{T}$ itself forms a setwise orbit
For the action of $\Sigma_p$ on $\mathcal{H}_n$, if $T\subset\mathcal{H}_n$ is invariant,
we say that it is \emph{$p$-invariant}. For a $p$-invariant set, the
following propositions are straightforward.
\begin{proposition}
\label{sioab}
$\mathbf{h}\in\mathcal{H}_n$ is $p$-invariant if and only if $\mathbf{h}\in S_p$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proposition}
\label{badlm}
If $T\subset S_p$, then $T$ is $p$-invariant.
\end{proposition}
Obviously, $\Gamma_n$, $\Gamma^*_n$ and $\overline{\Gamma^*_n}$ are all
$p$-invariant for any $p\in\mathcal{P}_n$.
\section{Problem Formulation}
\label{bafdg}
For
$p=\{\mathcal{N}_1,\cdots,\mathcal{N}_t\}\in\mathcal{P}_{n}$, the $p$-symmetrical subspace is
\begin{equation}
\label{symt_cc}
S_p=\{\mathbf{h}\in\mathcal{H}_n:\ \mathbf{h}(\mathcal{A})=\mathbf{h}(\mathcal{B}),
\text{ if } \boldsymbol{\lambda}_{\mathcal{A},p}=\boldsymbol{\lambda}_{\mathcal{B},p}\}.
\end{equation}
Note that $S_p$ is an $n_p\triangleq\prod^t_{i=1}(n_i+1)$
dimensional subspace of $\mathcal{H}_n$, where $n_i\triangleq\boldsymbol{\lambda}_p(i)=|\mathcal{N}_i|$. It is because for any
$\mathcal{A}\subset\mathcal{N}$, $\boldsymbol{\lambda}_{\mathcal{A},p}(i)=|\mathcal{A}\cap\mathcal{N}_i|$ can be
$0,1,\cdots,n_i$, i.e., there are $n_i+1$ possible values of
$\boldsymbol{\lambda}_{\mathcal{A},p}(i)$ for each $i=1,\cdots,t$. It follows that
$\boldsymbol{\lambda}_{\mathcal{A},p}$ can take $n_p$ possible values.
For notational convenience, in the subsequent discussions, we map
$S_p$ to an $n_p$-dimensional Euclidean space as follows.
Let
$\mathcal{N}_p=\{(k_1,\cdots,k_t):k_i\in\{0,1,\cdots,n_i\},i=1,\cdots,t\}$.
For $\mathbf{h}\in S_p$, let $s_{k_1,\cdots,k_t}$ be the common value taken by
$\mathbf{h}(\mathcal{A})$ for all $\mathcal{A}$ such that $\boldsymbol{\lambda}_{\mathcal{A},p}=(k_1,\cdots,k_t)$.
For a fixed $(k_1,\cdots,k_t)\in\mathcal{N}_p$, the total number of $\mathcal{A}$
such that $\mathbf{h}(\mathcal{A})=s_{k_1,\cdots,k_t}$ is precisely $\prod^{t}_{i=1}\binom{n_i}{k_i}$.
For every $\mathbf{h}\in S_p$, let
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:3}
\mathbf{s}(\mathbf{h},p)=(s_{k_1,\cdots,k_t})_{(k_1,\cdots,k_t)\in\mathcal{N}_p},
\end{equation}
such that $s_{k_1,\cdots,k_t}=\mathbf{h}(\mathcal{A})$ if
$\boldsymbol{\lambda}_{\mathcal{A},p}=(k_1,\cdots,k_t)$. Note that $\mathbf{s}(\mathbf{h},p)$ is properly
defined because for all $\mathbf{h}\in S_p$, $\mathbf{h}(\mathcal{A})=\mathbf{h}(\mathcal{B})$ if
$\boldsymbol{\lambda}_{\mathcal{A},p}=\boldsymbol{\lambda}_{\mathcal{B},p}$. When there is no
ambiguity, $\mathbf{s}(\mathbf{h},p)$ is simply written as $\mathbf{s}$.
\begin{proposition}
\label{sdbpo}
For $p_1,p_2\in\mathcal{P}_n$ such that
$p_1\le p_2$, $S_{p_2}\subset S_{p_1}$. Furthermore, if $p_1<p_2$, $S_{p_2}\subsetneq S_{p_1}$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
Let $p_1=\{\mathcal{N}^{(1)}_1,\cdots,\mathcal{N}^{(1)}_{t_1}\}$ and $p_2=\{\mathcal{N}^{(2)}_1,\cdots,\mathcal{N}^{(2)}_{t_2}\}$,
where $p_1\le p_2$. Following the discussion in Subsection \ref{sdsb}, for any $\mathcal{A}\subset\mathcal{N}$ and any
$i=1,\cdots,t_2$,
$\boldsymbol{\lambda}_{\mathcal{A},p_2}(i)=|\mathcal{A}\cap\mathcal{N}^{(2)}_i|=|\mathcal{A}\cap(\cup_{j\in\mathcal{J}_i}\mathcal{N}^{(1)}_j)|=\sum_{j\in\mathcal{J}_i}|\mathcal{A}\cap
\mathcal{N}^{(1)}_j|=\sum_{j\in\mathcal{J}_i}\boldsymbol{\lambda}_{\mathcal{A},p_1}(j)$.
That is, each entry of $\boldsymbol{\lambda}_{\mathcal{A},p_2}$ is the
summation of some entries of $\boldsymbol{\lambda}_{\mathcal{A},p_1}$. Hence, for any
$\mathcal{A},\mathcal{B}\subset\mathcal{N}$,
$\boldsymbol{\lambda}_{\mathcal{A},p_2}=\boldsymbol{\lambda}_{\mathcal{B},p_2}$ if
$\boldsymbol{\lambda}_{\mathcal{A},p_1}=\boldsymbol{\lambda}_{\mathcal{B},p_1}$. Then for $\mathbf{h}\in
S_{p_2}$, for any $\mathcal{A},\mathcal{B}\subset\mathcal{N}$,
$\mathbf{h}(\mathcal{A})=\mathbf{h}(\mathcal{B})$ if
$\boldsymbol{\lambda}_{\mathcal{A},p_2}=\boldsymbol{\lambda}_{\mathcal{B},p_2}$. It follows that $\mathbf{h}(\mathcal{A})=\mathbf{h}(\mathcal{B})$ if
$\boldsymbol{\lambda}_{\mathcal{A},p_1}=\boldsymbol{\lambda}_{\mathcal{B},p_1}$. Hence, $\mathbf{h}\in S_{p_1}$.
For $p_1<p_2$, there exists $i\in\{1,\cdots,t_2\}$ with
$\mathcal{N}^{(2)}_i=\cup_{j\in\mathcal{I}_i}\mathcal{N}^{(1)}_j$ such that $|\mathcal{J}_i|\ge 2$. Let $\mathcal{A}=\{l_1\},\mathcal{B}=\{l_2\}$ with
$l_1\in\mathcal{N}^{(1)}_{j_1}$ and $l_2\in\mathcal{N}^{(1)}_{j_2}$ such that
$j_1,j_2\in\mathcal{J}_i$. Let $\mathbf{h}\in S_{p_1}$ be such that $\mathbf{h}(\mathcal{A})\neq
\mathbf{h}(\mathcal{B})$. Then $\mathbf{h}\notin S_ {p_2}$.
\end{proof}
Therefore, for any
$p\in\mathcal{P}_n$, $S_{\{\mathcal{N}\}}\subset S_p$, and
$S_{\{\{i\}:i\in\mathcal{N}\}} $, which is equal to $\mathcal{H}_n$, contains any $S_p$.
A vector $\mathbf{h}\in\mathcal{H}_n$ is called a $p$-symmetrical entropy function of if
$\mathbf{h}\in\Gamma^*_n\cap S_p$.
Then naturally, we define \emph{$p$-symmetrical entropy function region}
\begin{equation*}
\Psi^*_p\triangleq\mathrm{fix}_p(\Gamma^*_n)=\Gamma^*_n\cap S_p
\end{equation*}
and \emph{$p$-symmetrical polymatroidal region}
\begin{equation*}
\Psi_p\triangleq\mathrm{fix}_p(\Gamma_n)=\Gamma_n\cap S_p,
\end{equation*}
respectively. Note that if $\mathbf{h}\in\Gamma^*_n\cap S_p$, then for any
$\mathcal{A},\mathcal{B}\subset\mathcal{N}$, $\mathbf{h}(\mathcal{A})=\mathbf{h}(\mathcal{B})$ whenever
$|\mathcal{A}\cap\mathcal{N}_i|=|\mathcal{B}\cap\mathcal{N}_i|$, $i=1,\cdots,t$.
As
$\Gamma_n,\Gamma^*_n\subset\mathcal{H}^0_n$, $\Psi_p,\Psi^*_p\subset
S^0_p\triangleq\{\mathbf{h}\in S_p:\mathbf{h}(\emptyset)=0\}$.
For $p=\{\mathcal{N}_1,\cdots,\mathcal{N}_t\}\in\mathcal{P}_n$, if $\mathbf{n}_{p_1}=\mathbf{n}_{p_2}$, we say $p_1$ and $p_2$ are \emph{equivalent} for
the purpose of our subsequent discussions. For
each equivalence class determined by $\mathbf{n}_p=[n_1,\cdots,n_t]$, we choose a
representative $\{\mathcal{N}_1,\cdots,\mathcal{N}_t\}$ such that $\mathcal{N}_1=\{1,\cdots,n_1\},\mathcal{N}_2=\{n_1+1,\cdots,n_1+n_2\},\cdots,\mathcal{N}_t=\{\sum^{t-1}_{i=1}n_i+1,\cdots,\sum^{t}_{i=1}n_i\}$.
Let $\mathcal{P}^*_{t,n}$ be the set of all such representatives of
$t$-partitions, and let $\mathcal{P}^*_n=\cup^n_{t=1}\mathcal{P}^*_{t,n}$. The
cardinality of $\mathcal{P}^*_n$ is equal to the partition function with
respect to $n$, i.e., the number of all partitions
of $n$.
For $p_1,p_2\in\mathcal{P}_n$, if they are equivalent, i.e.,
$\mathbf{n}_{p_1}=\mathbf{n}_{p_2}$, then the characterization of $\Psi^*_{p_2}$ can be
obtained by the characterization of $\Psi^*_{p_1}$ by permuting
the indices. For example, consider $p_1=\{\{1\},\{2,3\}\}$ and
$p_2=\{\{2\},\{1,3\}\}$. It can be seen that $\mathbf{n}_{p_1}=\mathbf{n}_{p_2}=[1,2]$.
If $\mathbf{h}\in S_{\{\{1\},\{2,3\}\}}$ is the entropy function of $\{X_1, X_2,
X_3\}$, then there exists $\mathbf{h}'\in S_{\{\{2\},\{1,3\}\}}$ which is the
entropy function of $\{X'_1, X'_2,
X'_3\}$ where $X'_1=X_2,X'_2=X_1$ and $X'_3=X_3$. Therefore, for each such
equivalence class of
partitions, we only need to consider one partition in the equivalence
class. In the following
discussion, without loss of generality, we consider only those
$p\in\mathcal{P}^*_n$ and such a $p$ will be denoted by $\mathbf{n}_p$ for simplicity, e.g., partition $\{\{1\},\{2,3\}\}$ will be
written as $[1,2]$. Furthermore, if $p$ is in the subscript, the
bracket may be dropped when there is no ambiguity. For example, we write $\Psi_{\{\{1\},\{2,3\}\}}$ as
$\Psi_{1,2}$, $\Sigma_{\{\mathcal{N}\}}$ as $\Sigma_n$, etc.
For $1\le n\le 3$, $\overline{\Psi^*_p}=\Psi_p$ for any
$p\in\mathcal{P}^*_n$ since $\overline{\Gamma^*_n}=\Gamma_n$ and
$\overline{\Psi^*_p}=\overline{\Gamma^*_n}\cap S_p$ by Theorem
\ref{lem:psi2}.
\begin{theorem}
\label{bfdp}
For $n\ge 4$ and any $p\in\mathcal{P}^*_n$,
\begin{equation}
\label{meq:1}
\overline{\Psi^*_p}=\Psi_p,
\end{equation}
if and only if $p=[n]$ or $p=[1,n-1]$.
\end{theorem}
Theorem \ref{bfdp} says that $\overline{\Psi^*_p}$,
is completely characterized by
Shannon-type information inequalities if and only if $p$ is the
$1$-partition or a $2$-partition with one of its blocks being a
singleton.
This theorem, the main result of this paper, will be established
through Theorems \ref{oibsa}, \ref{qwekl}, \ref{fbad} and
\ref{qpads}. Specifically, we will prove \eqref{meq:1}
in Theorems \ref{oibsa} and \ref{qwekl} for the cases $p=[n]$ and $p=[1,n-1]$,
respectively. In Theorems \ref{fbad} and \ref{qpads}, we will prove
that $\overline{\Psi^*_p}\subsetneq\Psi_p$ for all other cases.
\section{Symmetrical properties of $\Gamma_n$ and $\Gamma^*_n$}
\label{yuber}
For $p\in\mathcal{P}_n$, the (setwise) $p$-orbits form a partition of the
power set of $\mathcal{H}_n$.
In the following lemma, we show that if a $p$-orbit contains a face of
$\Gamma_n$, then all the members of the $p$-orbit are faces of $\Gamma_n$.
\begin{lemma}
\label{iwds}
For $p\in\mathcal{P}_n$, let $T_1,T_2\subset\mathcal{H}_n$ be $p$-equivalent.
Then $T_1$ is a face (facet) of $\Gamma_n$ if and only
if $T_2$ is a face (facet) of $\Gamma_n$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Since $\dim{\Gamma_n}=2^n-1<\dim\mathcal{H}_n=2^n$, by the discussion following
Definition \ref{def:sd}, each face $F$ of $\Gamma_n$
can be written as $F=\Gamma_n\cap P$ for some supporting hyperplane
$P$ of $\Gamma_n$.
Now if $T_1$ is a face of $\Gamma_n$, there exists a supporting hyperplane $P$ of $\Gamma_n$ such that
$T_1=\Gamma_n\cap P$. Then for any $\sigma\in\Sigma_p$,
$\sigma(T_1)=\sigma(P\cap\Gamma_n)
=\sigma(P)\cap\sigma(\Gamma_n)=\sigma(P)\cap\Gamma_n$, where the
second equality follows because
$\sigma$ is a bijection. As
$\sigma(P)$ is also a supporting hyperplane of $\Gamma_n$,
$\sigma(T_1)$ is a face of $\Gamma_n$.
On the other hand, if there exists $\sigma\in\Sigma_p$ such that
$T_2=\sigma(T_1)$ is a face of $\Gamma_n$, i.e., there exists a
supporting hyperplane $P$ of $\Gamma_n$ such that
$\sigma(T_1)=\Gamma_n\cap P$, then $T_1=\Gamma_n\cap\sigma^{-1}(P)$ is
also a face of $\Gamma_n$.
Furthermore, as $T_2=\sigma(T_1)$ has the same dimension with $T_1$,
$T_2$ is facet if and only if $T_1$ is a facet.
\end{proof}
By Lemma \ref{iwds}, for $p\in\mathcal{P}_n$, all faces of $\Gamma_n$ are divided
into $p$-orbits, and some of them are families of facets of
$\Gamma_n$ which play a more important role because they correspond to
the elemental inequalities defining $\Gamma_n$. The collection of all
$p$-orbits of faces of $\Gamma_n$ is denoted by $\mathfrak{F}_p$ and the collection of all
$p$-orbits of facets is denoted by $\mathfrak{E}_p$.
\begin{lemma}
\label{oiabd}
For $p\in\mathcal{P}_n$ and $E_i\triangleq E(\mathcal{I}_i,\mathcal{K}_i)\in\mathcal{E}_n,
i=1,2$, the following three statements are equivalent:
\begin{enumerate}
\item $E_1$ and $E_2$ are $p$-equivalent;
\item there exists $\sigma\in\Sigma_p$ such that
$\mathcal{I}_1=\sigma(\mathcal{I}_2)$ and $\mathcal{K}_1=\sigma(\mathcal{K}_2)$;
\item $\boldsymbol{\lambda}_{\mathcal{I}_1,p}=\boldsymbol{\lambda}_{\mathcal{I}_2,p}$ and $\boldsymbol{\lambda}_{\mathcal{K}_1,p}=\boldsymbol{\lambda}_{\mathcal{K}_2,p}$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
We first prove that the first two statements are equivalent. If $E_1$ and $E_2$ are $p$-equivalent,
there exists $\sigma\in\Sigma_p$ such that $\sigma(E_1)=E_2$.
For $|\mathcal{I}_1|=1$, i.e., $E_1=E(i)$ and $\mathcal{I}_1=\{i\}$ for some
$i\in\mathcal{N}$, since for any $\mathbf{h}\in E_2$, $\sigma^{-1}(\mathbf{h})\in E_1$, we have
\begin{align*}
E_2&\ =\{\mathbf{h}\in\Gamma_n:\sigma^{-1}(\mathbf{h})(\mathcal{N})=\sigma^{-1}(\mathbf{h})(\mathcal{N}\setminus\{i\})\}\\
&\ =\{\mathbf{h}\in\Gamma_n:\mathbf{h}(\sigma^{-1}(\mathcal{N}))=\mathbf{h}(\sigma^{-1}(\mathcal{N}\setminus\{i\}))\}\\
&\ =\{\mathbf{h}\in\Gamma_n:\mathbf{h}(\mathcal{N})=\mathbf{h}(\mathcal{N}\setminus\sigma^{-1}(\{i\}))\}.
\end{align*}
Hence, $\mathcal{I}_2=\sigma^{-1}(\{i\})=\sigma^{-1}(\mathcal{I}_1)$ or
$\mathcal{I}_1=\sigma(\mathcal{I}_2)$. In this case,
$\mathcal{K}_1=\sigma(\mathcal{K}_2)=\emptyset$.
For $|\mathcal{I}_1|=2$, i.e., $E_1=E(ij,\mathcal{K})$ and $\mathcal{I}_1=\{ij\}$ for some
$i,j\in\mathcal{N}$, similarly, we have
\begin{align*}
E_2&\ =\{\mathbf{h}\in\Gamma_n:\sigma^{-1}(\mathbf{h})(\{i\}\cup\mathcal{K}_1)+\sigma^{-1}(\mathbf{h})(\{j\}\cup\mathcal{K}_1)\\
&\ =\sigma^{-1}(\mathbf{h})(\mathcal{K}_1)+\sigma^{-1}(\mathbf{h})(\{ij\}\cup\mathcal{K}_1)\}\\
&\ =\{\mathbf{h}\in\Gamma_n:\mathbf{h}(\sigma^{-1}(\{i\})\cup
\sigma^{-1}(\mathcal{K}))+\mathbf{h}(\sigma^{-1}(\{j\})\cup
\sigma^{-1}(\mathcal{K}))\\
&\ =\mathbf{h}(\sigma^{-1}(\mathcal{K}))+\mathbf{h}(\sigma^{-1}(\{ij\})\cup
\sigma^{-1}(\mathcal{K})).
\end{align*}
Hence, $\mathcal{I}_1=\sigma(\mathcal{I}_2)$ and
$\mathcal{K}_1=\sigma(\mathcal{K}_2)$. As each step above is invertible, the
second statement also implies the first one.
We now prove that the second and third statements are equivalent. If there exists $\sigma\in\Sigma_p$ such that
$\mathcal{I}_1=\sigma(\mathcal{I}_2)$ and $\mathcal{K}_1=\sigma(\mathcal{K}_2)$,
then for any block $\mathcal{N}_l$ of $p$,
$|\mathcal{I}_1\cap\mathcal{N}_l|=|\sigma(\mathcal{I}_2)\cap\mathcal{N}_l|=|\mathcal{I}_2\cap\mathcal{N}_l|$,
where the second equality holds since
$\sigma\in\Sigma_p$. Therefore,
$\boldsymbol{\lambda}_{\mathcal{I}_1,p}=\boldsymbol{\lambda}_{\mathcal{I}_2,p}$. Similarly,
$\boldsymbol{\lambda}_{\mathcal{K}_1,p}=\boldsymbol{\lambda}_{\mathcal{K}_2,p}$.
On the other hand, assume that
$\boldsymbol{\lambda}_{\mathcal{I}_1,p}=\boldsymbol{\lambda}_{\mathcal{I}_2,p}$ and
$\boldsymbol{\lambda}_{\mathcal{K}_1,p}=\boldsymbol{\lambda}_{\mathcal{K}_2,p}$.
Since $\mathcal{I}_i$ and $\mathcal{K}_i$ are
disjoint for $i=1,2$, given any block $\mathcal{N}_l$ of $p$,
$\mathcal{N}_l\cap\mathcal{I}_i$, $\mathcal{N}_l\cap\mathcal{K}_i$ and
$\mathcal{N}_l\setminus(\mathcal{I}_i\cup\mathcal{K}_i)$ are disjoint.
As $|\mathcal{I}_1\cap\mathcal{N}_l|=\boldsymbol{\lambda}_{\mathcal{I}_1,p}(l)=\boldsymbol{\lambda}_{\mathcal{I}_2,p}(l)=|\mathcal{I}_2\cap\mathcal{N}_l|$ and
$|\mathcal{K}_1\cap\mathcal{N}_l|=\boldsymbol{\lambda}_{\mathcal{K}_1,p}(l)=\boldsymbol{\lambda}_{\mathcal{K}_2,p}(l)=|\mathcal{K}_2\cap\mathcal{N}_l|$,
then there exists
$\sigma\in\Sigma_p$ such that
$\mathcal{I}_1\cap\mathcal{N}_l=\sigma(\mathcal{I}_2\cap\mathcal{N}_l)$ and
$\mathcal{K}_1\cap\mathcal{N}_l=\sigma(\mathcal{K}_2\cap\mathcal{N}_l)$ for any $l$.
Then it can be seen for such a $\sigma$, $\mathcal{I}_1=\sigma(\mathcal{I}_2)$ and $\mathcal{K}_1=\sigma(\mathcal{K}_2)$.
\end{proof}
For a facet $E(\mathcal{I},\mathcal{K})$, denote the $p$-orbit it belongs to by
$\mathcal{E}_p([\boldsymbol{\lambda}_{\mathcal{I},p},\boldsymbol{\lambda}_{\mathcal{K},p}])$. Note that
$\mathcal{E}_p([\boldsymbol{\lambda}_{\mathcal{I},p},\boldsymbol{\lambda}_{\mathcal{K},p}])$ is well-defined in
light of Lemma 2.
Let $\mathfrak{N}_p$ be the set
of all possible distinct pairs of
$\boldsymbol{\lambda}=[\boldsymbol{\lambda}_{\mathcal{I},p},\boldsymbol{\lambda}_{\mathcal{K},p}]$. Then
$\mathfrak{E}_p=\{\mathcal{E}_p(\boldsymbol{\lambda}):\boldsymbol{\lambda}\in\mathfrak{N}_p\}$. Evidently, $|\mathfrak{E}_p|=|\mathfrak{N}_p|$.
\begin{example}
\label{jaodm}
Let $p=[n]$. For any $i\in\mathcal{N}$, facet $E(i)=E(\{i\},\emptyset)$
with $[\boldsymbol{\lambda}_{\mathcal{I},p},\boldsymbol{\lambda}_{\mathcal{K},p}]=[(1),(0)]$.
It follows from Lemma \ref{oiabd} that
all $E(i)$ are in the $[n]$-orbit $\mathcal{E}_{[n]}([(1),(0)])$.
For distinct $i,j\in\mathcal{N}$, $\mathcal{K}\subset\mathcal{N}\setminus\{i,j\}$
with the same $k\triangleq|\mathcal{K}|$, facets $E(ij,\mathcal{K})=E(\{i,j\},\mathcal{K})$
with $[\boldsymbol{\lambda}_{\mathcal{I},p},\boldsymbol{\lambda}_{\mathcal{K},p}]=[(2),(k)]$. So by Lemma
\ref{oiabd}, all such facets are in the same $[n]$-orbit
$\mathcal{E}_{[n]}([(2),(k)])$. It can be seen that
$\mathfrak{N}_{[n]}=\{[(1),(0)]\}\cup\{[(2),(k)]:k=0,\cdots,n-2\}$ with cardinality $n$
and $\mathfrak{E}_{[n]}=\{\mathcal{E}_{[n]}(\boldsymbol{\lambda}):\boldsymbol{\lambda}\in\mathfrak{N}_{[n]}\}$ is a partition
of $\mathcal{E}_n$.
\hfill\QED
\end{example}
\begin{lemma}
\label{lfdbp}
For $E_1,E_2\in\mathcal{E}_n$, $E_1\cap S_p=E_2\cap S_p$ if
they are $p$-equivalent.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
If $E_1$ and $E_2$ are $p$-equivalent, there exists $\sigma\in
\Sigma_p$ such that $E_2=\sigma(E_1)$. Then $E_2\cap
S_p=\sigma(E_1)\cap S_p=\sigma(E_1)\cap\sigma(S_p)=\sigma(E_1\cap
S_p)=E_1\cap S_p$, where the second last equality holds because $\sigma$ is a
bijection and the last equality is due to Proposition \ref{badlm}.
\end{proof}
It can be seen from Lemma \ref{vysid} that the converse of Lemma
\ref{lfdbp} is also true.
\begin{lemma}
\label{vysid}
For $E_1,E_2\in\mathcal{E}_n$, if they
are not $p$-equivalent, then neither $E_1\cap S_p\subset E_2\cap
S_p$ nor $E_2\cap S_p\subset E_1\cap S_p$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
See Appendix.
\end{proof}
Let $\mathcal{G}_p$ be the collection of all facets of $\Psi_p$.
\begin{lemma}
\label{josd}
For any facet $G\in\mathcal{G}_p$ of $\Psi_p$, there exists a facet $E\in\mathcal{E}_n$ of
$\Gamma_n$ such that $G\subset E$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
We claim that $\relbd{\Psi_p}\subset \relbd{\Gamma_n}$.
Assume
the contrary. Then there exists $\mathbf{h}\in \relbd{\Psi_p}$ but $\mathbf{h}\in
\ri{\Gamma_n}$ because $\Psi_p\subset\Gamma_n$. Since $\mathbf{h}\in
\ri{\Gamma_n}$, there exists $\epsilon>0$, such that
$\ball{\mathbf{h}}{\epsilon}\cap S^0_p\subset \ball{\mathbf{h}}{\epsilon}\cap
\mathcal{H}^0_n\subset \ri{\Gamma_n}\subset\Gamma_n$.
Then $\ball{\mathbf{h}}{\epsilon}\cap S^0_p\subset\Gamma_n\cap S^0_p=\Psi_p$.
On the other hand, since $\mathbf{h}\in \relbd{\Psi_p}$,
$\ball{\mathbf{h}}{\epsilon}\cap S^0_p\not\subset\Psi_p$, a contradiction.
By
Proposition \ref{coidl}, $\relbd{\Gamma_n}=\cup_{E\in\mathcal{E}_n}E$ and
$\relbd{\Psi_p}=\cup_{G\in\mathcal{G}_p}G$. As $\relbd{\Psi_p}\subset
\relbd{\Gamma_n}$, $G\subset
\relbd{\Gamma_n}$ for any $G\in\mathcal{G}_p$.
For a fixed $G\in\mathcal{G}_p$, we now prove that for any $E\in\mathcal{E}_n$,
$G\cap E$ is a face of $G$. Let $P$ be the supporting hyperplane of
$\Gamma_n$ such that $E=\Gamma_n\cap P$. As the origin $O\in G\cap P$ and
$P^+\supset\Gamma_n\supset G$, $P$ is also a supporting
hyperplane of $G$. It follows that $G\cap P$ is a face of $G$. Since
$G\subset\Gamma_n$, $G\cap P=(G\cap\Gamma_n)\cap P=G\cap(\Gamma_n\cap
P)=G\cap E$. Therefore $G\cap E$ is a face of $G$.
Finally, we prove that for any $G\in\mathcal{G}_p$, there must exist $E\in\mathcal{E}_n$ such that $G\cap
E=G$. Assume the contrary. Then for all $E\in\mathcal{E}_n$, $G\cap
E\subsetneq G$. Since we have shown that $G\cap E$ is a face of
$G$, it is a proper face of $G$ and $G\cap E\subset\relbd{G}$. It
follows that for any $E\in\mathcal{E}_n$ and
for any
$\mathbf{h}\in\ri{G}$, $\mathbf{h}\not\in G\cap E
$. Therefore $\mathbf{h}\not\in \cup_{E\in\mathcal{E}_n}(G\cap E)= G\cap
(\cup_{E\in\mathcal{E}_n}E)=G\cap\relbd{\Gamma_n}=G$, a contradiction.
Hence there must exist $E$ such that $G\cap
E=G$ or $G\subset E$.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}
\label{hd9db}
For any $E\in\mathcal{E}_n$, $E\cap S_p$ is a facet of
$\Psi_p$,
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
To prove $E\cap S_p$ is a facet of $\Psi_p$, we first prove that it is
a face of $\Psi_p$. As $E$ is a face of $\Gamma_n$, there
exists a supporting hyperplane $P$ of $\Gamma_n$ such that
$E=\Gamma_n\cap P$. So
$E\cap S_p=\Gamma_n\cap P\cap S_p=\Psi_p\cap
P$. Since $P^+\supset\Psi_p$, $P$ is also a
supporting hyperplane of $\Psi_p$. Then $E\cap S_p$ is a
face of $\Psi_p$. We now prove that the face $E\cap S_p$ of $\Psi_p$ is indeed a facet.
Assume $E\cap S_p$ is not a facet of $\Psi_p$, i.e., there exists a facet
$G$ of $\Psi_p$ such that $G\supsetneq(E\cap S_p)$. By Lemma~\ref{josd}, there exists a facet $E'$ of $\Gamma_n$ such that
$G\subset E'$. As $G\subset S_p$, $G\subset E'\cap S_p$ which implies
that $E\cap S_p\subset E'\cap S_p$. By Lemma \ref{vysid}, $E$ and $E'$
are $p$-equivalent. Hence by Lemma \ref{lfdbp}, $E\cap S_p=
E'\cap S_p$. It follows that
$G=E\cap S_p$ which contradicts the fact that $G\supsetneq(E\cap
S_p)$. Therefore $E\cap S_p$ is facet of $\Psi_p$.
\end{proof}
\begin{theorem}
\label{bafoi}
Every $p$-orbit of facets of $\Gamma_n$ corresponds to a
facet of $\Psi_p$, i.e., mapping $\omega_p:E\mapsto E\cap S_p$ satisfies
\begin{enumerate}
\item $\omega_p(E_1)=\omega_p(E_2)$ if and only if $E_1$ and
$E_2$ are $p$-equivalent and
\item $\omega_p$ is a surjection from $\mathcal{E}_n$ onto $\mathcal{G}_p$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof} 1) follows immediately from Lemma \ref{lfdbp} and Lemma
\ref{vysid}. We now prove 2).
By Lemma \ref{hd9db}, $\omega_p$ is a mapping from $\mathcal{E}_n$ to $\mathcal{G}_p$. For a facet $G\in\mathcal{G}_p$ of $\Psi_p$, by Lemma \ref{josd}, there exists a facet
$E$ of $\Gamma_n$ such that $G\subset E$. As $G\subset S_p$, $G\subset
E\cap S_p$. Since $E\cap S_p$ is a facet of $\Psi_p$, $G=E\cap S_p$
(because for a polyhedral cone, no facet can contain another facet),
i.e., for each $G\in\mathcal{G}_p$, there exists $E\in\mathcal{E}_n$ such that
$\omega_p(E)=E\cap S_p=G$. Therefore $\omega_p$ is surjective.
\end{proof}
When
$|\mathcal{I}|=1$ or $\mathcal{I}=\{i\}$ for some $i\in\mathcal{N}$, we must have $\mathcal{K}=\emptyset$ which implies that
$\boldsymbol{\lambda}_{\mathcal{K},p}$ must be equal to $\mathbf{0}_t$, a zero vector with dimension
$t$. In this case, the number of
possible pairs of
$[\boldsymbol{\lambda}_{\mathcal{I},p},\boldsymbol{\lambda}_{\mathcal{K},p}]$ is equal to
on the numbers of possible values of $\boldsymbol{\lambda}_{\mathcal{I},p}$,
because both $p$ and $\mathcal{K}$ are fixed. If
$i\in\mathcal{N}_l$, the $l$-th block of $p$, it can
be seen that $\boldsymbol{\lambda}_{\mathcal{I},p}=\mathbf{1}_{t}(l)$, a $t$-vector
with the $l$-th entry equal to 1 and other
entries equal to 0. Hence there are $t$
possible such values. By Lemma \ref{lfdbp}, for any
$E\in\mathcal{E}_p([\mathbf{1}_{t}(l),\mathbf{0}_t])$, $E\cap S_p$ are all
the same, i.e.,
\begin{align}
E\cap S_p&=\{\mathbf{h}\in\Psi_p: s_{\boldsymbol{\lambda}_p}=
s_{\boldsymbol{\lambda}_{\mathcal{N}\setminus\{i\},p}} \}\nonumber\\
\label{soidv}
&=\{\mathbf{h}\in\Psi_p: s_{n_1,\cdots,n_t}=
s_{n_1,\cdots,n_l-1,\cdots,n_t}. \}
\end{align}
Note that $\mathbf{h}\in S_p$ and by \eqref{eq:3}, $s_{n_1,\cdots,n_t}$, $s_{n_1,\cdots,n_l-1,\cdots,n_t}$ are entries of $\mathbf{s}(\mathbf{h},p)$.
When $|\mathcal{I}|=2$ or $\mathcal{I}=\{i,j\}$ for some distinct $i,j\in\mathcal{N}$, if
$i,j$ are in different blocks, i.e., $i\in\mathcal{N}_{l_1}$, $j\in\mathcal{N}_{l_2}$ or
$j\in\mathcal{N}_{l_1}$, $i\in\mathcal{N}_{l_2}$ with some $1\le l_1<l_2\le t$,
$\boldsymbol{\lambda}_{\mathcal{I},p}=\mathbf{1}_{t}(l_1,l_2)$, a $t$-vector with the $l_1$-th
and $l_2$-th entries equal to 1 and other
entries equal to 0; else if $i,j$ are in the same $\mathcal{N}_l$,
$\boldsymbol{\lambda}_{\mathcal{I},p}=\mathbf{2}_{t}(l)$, a $t$-vector with the $l$-th
entry equal to 2 and other
entries equal to 0. For $\boldsymbol{\lambda}_{\mathcal{I},p}=\mathbf{1}_{t}(l_1,l_2)$,
the number of possible values of $\boldsymbol{\lambda}_{\mathcal{K},p}=(k_1,\cdots,k_t)$
is $\frac{n_{l_1}n_{l_2}}{(n_{l_1+1})(n_{l_2+1})}\prod^t_{m=1}(n_m+1)$.
It is because $k_m$ can be equal to $0,\cdots,n_m-1$ if $m=
l_1,l_2$, and $k_m$ can be equal to $0,\cdots,n_m$,
otherwise. In other words, $\boldsymbol{\lambda}_{\mathcal{K},p}$ can be equal to any
$(k_1,\cdots,k_t)\in\mathcal{N}_p$ such that $k_{l_1}\neq n_{l_1}$ and $k_{l_2}\neq n_{l_2}$. For $E\in\mathcal{E}_p([\mathbf{1}_{t}(l_1,l_2),(k_1,\cdots,k_t)])$,
\begin{align}
E\cap S_p&=\{\mathbf{h}\in\Psi_p
s_{\boldsymbol{\lambda}_{\mathcal{K}\cup\{i\},p}}+s_{\boldsymbol{\lambda}_{\mathcal{K}\cup\{j\},p}}=
s_{\boldsymbol{\lambda}_{\mathcal{K},p}}+s_{\boldsymbol{\lambda}_{\mathcal{K}\cup\{i,j\},p}}\}\nonumber\\
&=\{\mathbf{h}\in\Psi_p
s_{k_1,\cdots,k_{l_1}+1,\cdots,k_t}+s_{k_1,\cdots,k_{l_2}+1,\cdots,k_t}=
s_{k_1,\cdots,k_t}+s_{k_1,\cdots,k_{l_1}+1,\cdots,k_{l_2}+1,\cdots,k_t}\}.
\label{kobix}
\end{align}
Similarly, for $\boldsymbol{\lambda}_{\mathcal{I},p}=\mathbf{2}_{t}(l)$, the
number of possible values of $\boldsymbol{\lambda}_{\mathcal{K},p}$
is $\frac{n_{l}-1}{n_{l}+1}\prod^t_{m=1}(n_m+1)$.
It is because $\boldsymbol{\lambda}_{\mathcal{K},p}$ can be any
$(k_1,\cdots,k_t)\in\mathcal{N}_p$ such that $k_{l}\neq n_l-1,n_l$.
For $E\in\mathcal{E}_p([\mathbf{2}_{t}(l),(k_1,\cdots,k_t)])$,
\begin{align}
E\cap S_p&=\{\mathbf{h}\in\Psi_p
s_{\boldsymbol{\lambda}_{\mathcal{K}\cup\{i\},p}}+s_{\boldsymbol{\lambda}_{\mathcal{K}\cup\{j\},p}}=
s_{\boldsymbol{\lambda}_{\mathcal{K},p}}+s_{\boldsymbol{\lambda}_{\mathcal{K}\cup\{i,j\},p}}\}\nonumber\\
&=\{\mathbf{h}\in\Psi_p
2s_{k_1,\cdots,k_{l}+1,\cdots,k_t}=
s_{k_1,\cdots,k_t}+s_{k_1,\cdots,k_{l}+2,\cdots,k_t}\}.
\label{xiobd}
\end{align}
Let $\mathfrak{N}_A=\{[\mathbf{1}_{t}(l),\mathbf{0}_t]:1\le l\le
t\}$, $\mathfrak{N}_B=\{[\mathbf{1}_{t}(l_1,l_2),(k_1,\cdots,k_t)]:(k_1,\cdots,k_t)\in\mathcal{N}_p,
k_{l_1}\neq n_{l_1}, k_{l_2}\neq n_{l_2}, 1\le l_1<l_2\le t\}$ and $\mathfrak{N}_C=\{[\mathbf{2}_{t}(l),(k_1,\cdots,k_t)]:(k_1,\cdots,k_t)\in\mathcal{N}_p,
k_{l}\neq n_{l},1\le l\le t\}$.
From the above discussion, we see that $\mathfrak{N}_p=\mathfrak{N}_A\cup
\mathfrak{N}_B\cup \mathfrak{N}_C$. Since $\mathfrak{E}_p=\{\mathcal{E}_p(\boldsymbol{\lambda}):\boldsymbol{\lambda}\in\mathfrak{N}_p\}$,
we have
\begin{equation}
\label{bfkdg}
|\mathfrak{E}_p|=|\mathfrak{N}_p|=t+\sum_{1\le l_1<l_2\le t}\frac{n_{l_1}n_{l_2}}{(n_{l_1+1})(n_{l_2+1})}\prod^t_{m=1}(n_m+1)+\sum_{1\le l\le t}\frac{n_{l}-1}{n_{l}+1}\prod^t_{m=1}(n_m+1).
\end{equation}
What we have
proved in Theorem \ref{bafoi} implies that there exists a bijection
between $\mathfrak{E}_p$ and $\mathcal{G}_p$, and so $E\cap S_p$ as listed in
\eqref{soidv}, \eqref{kobix} and \eqref{xiobd} are precisely all the members of
$\mathcal{G}_p$, and so $|\mathcal{G}_p|=|\mathfrak{E}_p|$.
\textbf{Remark} When $p=\{\mathcal{N}\}$, the first term of the right hand side of
\eqref{bfkdg} is 1, the second term vanishes and the last term is
$n-1$, and so $|\mathfrak{E}_p|=n$ as we discussed in Example
\ref{jaodm}. When $p=\{\{i\}:i\in\mathcal{N}\}$, the first term of the right hand side of
\eqref{bfkdg} is $n$, the
second term is $\binom{n}{2}2^{n-2}$ and the third term
vanishes. Therefore, $|\mathfrak{E}_p|=n+\binom{n}{2}2^{n-2}$, which is equal
to $|\mathcal{E}_n|$, the
number of facets of $\Gamma_n$ \cite[(14.2)]{Y08}. In this case,
$\Psi_p=\Gamma_n$, so $|\mathcal{E}_n|=|\mathcal{G}_p|$ and by Theorem
\ref{bafoi}, $|\mathcal{G}_p|=|\mathfrak{E}_p|$.
For $p=\{\mathcal{N}_1,\cdots,\mathcal{N}_t\}$, when $t\ll n$, it can be seen from
\eqref{bfkdg} that $|\mathfrak{E}_p|\ll|\mathcal{E}_n|$, and then by Theorem
\ref{bafoi}, $|\mathcal{G}_p|\ll|\mathcal{E}_n|$. Therefore, for an information
theory problem with symmetrical structures induced by such a partition
$p$, the
complexity of this problem can be significantly reduced.
By Theorem \ref{bafoi}, we denote the facets of $\Psi_p$ by
$G_p([\boldsymbol{\lambda}_{\mathcal{I},p},\boldsymbol{\lambda}_{\mathcal{K},p}])$ and thus
$\mathcal{G}_p=\{G_p(\boldsymbol{\lambda}):\lambda\in\mathfrak{N}_p\}$. Specifically,
\begin{align*}
G_p([\boldsymbol{\lambda}_{\mathcal{I},p},\boldsymbol{\lambda}_{\mathcal{K},p}])&=
E(\mathcal{I},\mathcal{K})\cap S_p\\
&=
\begin{cases}
&G_p([\mathbf{1}_{t}(l),\mathbf{0}_t])=E(i)\cap S_p,\text{ if } \mathcal{I}=\{i\},\mathcal{K}=\emptyset,\ i\in\mathcal{N}_l,\ l=1,\cdots,t\\
&G_p([\mathbf{1}_t(l_1,l_2),\boldsymbol{\lambda}_{\mathcal{K},p}])=E(ij,\mathcal{K})\cap S_p,\text{ if } \mathcal{I}=\{i,j\},\ i\in\mathcal{N}_{l_1},
j\in\mathcal{N}_{l_2}, 1\le
l_1<l_2\le t,\\
&G_p([\mathbf{2}_t(l),\boldsymbol{\lambda}_{\mathcal{K},p}])=E(ij,\mathcal{K})\cap S_p,\text{ if } \mathcal{I}=\{i,j\},\ i,j\in\mathcal{N}_{l},\
l=1,\cdots,t.
\end{cases}
\end{align*}
\textbf{Remark} For certain sets of parameters, the condition that guarantees the existence of the
facets in $\mathcal{G}_p$ may not hold. For example, if $|\mathcal{N}_1|=1$, then
$G_p([\mathbf{2}_t(1),\boldsymbol{\lambda}_{\mathcal{K},p}])$ does not exist. For
such cases, the facets discussed above do not need to be considered for the chosen
set of parameters.
For any $p\in\mathcal{P}_{t,n}$, define $\psi_p:\mathcal{H}_n\rightarrow \mathcal{H}_n$ as follows. For any
$\mathcal{A}\subset\mathcal{N}$,
\begin{equation*}
\psi_p(\mathbf{h})(\mathcal{A})=\bigg(\prod^t_{i=1}\binom{n_i}{a_i}\bigg)^{-1}\sum_{
\mathcal{B}:\ \boldsymbol{\lambda}_{\mathcal{B},p}=\boldsymbol{\lambda}_{\mathcal{A},p}}
\mathbf{h}(\mathcal{B}).
\end{equation*}
where
$a_i\triangleq\boldsymbol{\lambda}_{\mathcal{A},p}(i)=|\mathcal{A}\cap\mathcal{N}_i|,i=1,\cdots,t$. It
can be shown that $\psi_p$ is a surjection from $\mathcal{H}_n$ onto
$S_p$. This is because it can be checked that for any $\mathbf{h}\in\mathcal{H}_n$,
$\psi_p(\mathbf{h})\in S_p$, and for any $\mathbf{h}\in S_p$, $\mathbf{h}=\psi_p(\mathbf{h})$.
\begin{theorem}
\label{iobad}
For any $p\in\mathcal{P}_{n}$,
\begin{equation*}
\psi_p(\mathbf{h})=\frac{1}{|\Sigma_p|}\sum_{\sigma\in\Sigma_p}\sigma(\mathbf{h}).
\end{equation*}
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Let $p=\{\mathcal{N}_1,\cdots,\mathcal{N}_t\}$. By definition, as discussed above, $\Sigma_p$ is a group with composition as its group
operation, which is a subgroup of the symmetrical group
$\Sigma_n$ and $|\Sigma_p|=\prod^t_{i=1}n_i!$. For a fixed
$\mathcal{A}\subset\mathcal{N}$, define
\begin{equation*}
\Sigma_{\mathcal{A},p}=\{\sigma\in\Sigma_p:\sigma(\mathcal{A})=\mathcal{A}\}.
\end{equation*}
It can be checked that $\Sigma_{\mathcal{A},p}$ is a subgroup of
$\Sigma_p$. Since for $\sigma\in\Sigma_p$, $\sigma_i(j)=j$ for all
$j\notin\mathcal{N}_i,i=1,\cdots,t$ according to \eqref{feqbs}, we have
$|\Sigma_{\mathcal{A},p}|=\prod^t_{i=1} a_i!(n_i-a_i)!$.
Furthermore, for any $\mathcal{B}\in\mathcal{N}$ such that $\boldsymbol{\lambda}_{\mathcal{B},p}=\boldsymbol{\lambda}_{\mathcal{A},p}$,
\begin{equation*}
\Sigma_{\mathcal{B}|\mathcal{A},p}\triangleq\{\sigma\in\Sigma_p:\sigma(\mathcal{A})=\mathcal{B}\}
\end{equation*}
is a left coset of $\Sigma_{\mathcal{A},p}$ in $\Sigma_p$. To see this, let $\sigma_b\in
\Sigma_{\mathcal{B}|\mathcal{A},p}$. Then it is routine to check that the mapping
$f:\Sigma_{\mathcal{A},p}\rightarrow\Sigma_{\mathcal{B}|\mathcal{A},p}$ defined by
$f(\sigma)=\sigma_b\circ\sigma$ is a bijection. Therefore,
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:6}
|\Sigma_{\mathcal{B}|\mathcal{A},p}|=|\Sigma_{\mathcal{A},p}|=\prod^t_ia_i!(n_i-a_i)!.
\end{equation}
Then
\begin{align}
\label{qdavd}
\left(\frac{1}{|\Sigma_p|}\sum_{\sigma\in\Sigma_p}\sigma(\mathbf{h})\right)(\mathcal{A})
=&\frac{1}{|\Sigma_p|}\sum_{\sigma\in\Sigma_p}\sigma(\mathbf{h})(\mathcal{A})\\
\label{ladid}
=&\frac{1}{|\Sigma_p|}\sum_{\sigma\in\Sigma_p}\mathbf{h}(\sigma(\mathcal{A}))\\
\label{hhobr}
=&\frac{1}{|\Sigma_p|}\sum_{
\mathcal{B}:\ \boldsymbol{\lambda}_{\mathcal{B},p}=\boldsymbol{\lambda}_{\mathcal{A},p}}\sum_{\sigma\in\Sigma_{\mathcal{B}|\mathcal{A},p}}\mathbf{h}(\sigma(\mathcal{A}))\\
=&\frac{1}{|\Sigma_p|}\sum_{
\mathcal{B}:\ \boldsymbol{\lambda}_{\mathcal{B},p}=\boldsymbol{\lambda}_{\mathcal{A},p}}|\Sigma_{\mathcal{B}|\mathcal{A},p}|\mathbf{h}(\mathcal{B})\nonumber\\
\label{ciosd}
=&\frac{|\Sigma_{\mathcal{A},p}|}{|\Sigma_p|}\sum_{\sigma\in\Sigma_{\mathcal{B}|\mathcal{A},p}}\mathbf{h}(\mathcal{B})\nonumber\\
=&\frac{|\Sigma_{\mathcal{A},p}|}{|\Sigma_p|}\sum_{
\mathcal{B}:\ \boldsymbol{\lambda}_{\mathcal{B},p}=\boldsymbol{\lambda}_{\mathcal{A},p}}\mathbf{h}(\mathcal{B})\\
\label{dfbio}
=&\frac{\prod^t_ia_i!(n_i-a_i)!}{\prod^t_{i=1}n_i!}\sum_{
\mathcal{B}:\ \boldsymbol{\lambda}_{\mathcal{B},p}=\boldsymbol{\lambda}_{\mathcal{A},p}}\mathbf{h}(\mathcal{B})\\
\label{odfbi}
=&\left(\prod^t_{i=1}\binom{n_i}{a_i}\right)^{-1}\sum_{
\mathcal{B}:\
\boldsymbol{\lambda}_{\mathcal{B},p}=\boldsymbol{\lambda}_{\mathcal{A},p}}\mathbf{h}(\mathcal{B})\nonumber\\
=&\psi_p(\mathbf{h})(\mathcal{A})\nonumber,
\end{align} which proves the theorem.
Equation \eqref{qdavd} is valid since the summation is component-wise. Equation
\eqref{ladid} is due to \eqref {eq:1}. For \eqref{hhobr}, we partition
$\Sigma_p$ into cosets $\Sigma_{\mathcal{B}|\mathcal{A},p}$
of $\Sigma_{\mathcal{A},p}$. Equations \eqref{ciosd} and \eqref{dfbio}
are due to \eqref{eq:6}.
\end{proof}
Therefore, we have proved that $\psi_p(\mathbf{h})$ is the average of all $\sigma(\mathbf{h})$,
$\sigma\in\Sigma_p$, i.e., all elements in $\mathcal{O}_p(\mathbf{h})$.
\begin{lemma}
\label{oifdb}
If $T\subset \mathcal{H}_n$ is $p$-invariant and convex, $\psi_p(T)=T\cap S_p$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Since $T$ is $p$-invariant and convex,
$\psi_p(T)\subset T$
and so
$\psi_p(T)\subset T\cap
S_p$.
On the other hand, for any $\mathbf{s}\in
T\cap S_p$, $\mathbf{s}=\psi_p(\mathbf{s})\in
\psi_p(T)$ which implies that
$\psi_p(T)\supset T\cap
S_p$.
\end{proof}
So, $\psi_p(\Gamma_p)=\Psi_p$ and
$\psi_p(\overline{\Gamma^*_n})=\overline{\Gamma^*_n}\cap S_p$. In
particular, if $T=\{\mathbf{h}\}$ for some $\mathbf{h}\in \mathcal{H}_n$ which is
$p$-invariant, $\mathbf{h}\in S_p$ by Proposition
\ref{sioab}, then $\psi_p(\mathbf{h})=\mathbf{h}$. On the other hand, again by Proposition
\ref{sioab}, for any $\mathbf{h}\in S_p$, $\psi_p(\mathbf{h})=\mathbf{h}$.
\begin{theorem}
\label{lem:psi2}
For any $p\in\mathcal{P}_n$,
\begin{equation*}
\overline{\Psi^*_p}=\overline{\Gamma^*_n}\cap S_p.
\end{equation*}
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Toward proving this theorem, we first prove that
\begin{equation}
\label{L:int}
\overline{\ri{\Gamma^*_n}}=\overline{\Gamma^*_n}.
\end{equation}
By \cite[Theorem 1]{M07b},
$\ri{\overline{\Gamma^*_n}}\subset\Gamma^*_n$. Since
$\ri{\overline{\Gamma^*_n}}$ is open,
$\ri{\overline{\Gamma^*_n}}\subset\ri{\Gamma^*_n}$. On the
other hand,
$\ri{\Gamma^*_n}\subset\ri{\overline{\Gamma^*_n}}$. Thus
$\ri{\Gamma^*_n}=\ri{\overline{\Gamma^*_n}}$. Taking the closure
of the both sides, we have
$\overline{\ri{\Gamma^*_n}}=\overline{\ri{\overline{\Gamma^*_n}}}$.
Hence $\overline{\ri{\Gamma^*_n}}=\overline{\Gamma^*_n}$ by
\cite[Theorem 6.3]{R70}.
Now we prove Theorem \ref{lem:psi2}. Since $\overline{\Gamma^*_n}\cap S_p\supset\Gamma^*_n\cap
S_p$, by taking the closure of both sides, we have $\overline{\Gamma^*_n}\cap
S_p\supset\overline{\Gamma^*_n\cap S_p}$. Then it suffices to prove
$\overline{\Gamma^*_n}\cap S_p\subset\overline{\Gamma^*_n\cap S_p}$, or for any
$\mathbf{h}\in\overline{\Gamma^*_n}\cap S_p$, $\mathbf{h}\in\overline{\Gamma^*_n\cap S_p}$. Let
$\ball{c}{r}$ denote an open ball centered at $c$ with radius $r$.
Given any $\epsilon>0$, let $B=\ball{\mathbf{h}}{\epsilon}\cap\ri{\Gamma^*_n}$.
Since $\mathbf{h}\in\overline{\Gamma^*_n}=\overline{\ri{\Gamma^*_n}}$ by \eqref{L:int},
$B\neq\emptyset$. Let $\mathbf{g}\in B$. Then there exits a set of
random variables $X_\mathcal{N}$ whose entropy function is $\mathbf{g}$.
Then for $\sigma\in\Sigma_p$, $\sigma(\mathbf{g})$ is the entropy function of
$X'_\mathcal{N}\triangleq\{X'_i=X_{\sigma(i)}:i\in\mathcal{N}\}$.
Since $\mathbf{h}\in S_n$, for
any $\sigma\in\Sigma_p$, $\|\mathbf{h}-$ $\sigma(\mathbf{g})\|_2=\|\mathbf{h}-\mathbf{g}\|_2<\epsilon$, i.e., $\sigma(\mathbf{g})\in
\ball{\mathbf{h}}{\epsilon}$. Let $\mathbf{h}^*=\frac{1}{|\Sigma_p|}\sum_{\sigma\in \Sigma_p}\sigma(\mathbf{g})$.
Note that $\mathbf{h}^*=\psi_p(\mathbf{h})\in S_p$. Due to the convexity of
$\ball{\mathbf{h}}{\epsilon}$ and $\ri{\Gamma^*_n}$, we have $\mathbf{h}^*\in
\ball{\mathbf{h}}{\epsilon}\cap\ri{\Gamma^*_n}$. Hence $\mathbf{h}^*\in
\ball{\mathbf{h}}{\epsilon}\cap\ri{\Gamma^*_n}\cap S_p$, that is,
$\ball{\mathbf{h}}{\epsilon}\cap\ri{\Gamma^*_n}\cap S_p\neq\emptyset$
for all $\epsilon>0$, which implies $\mathbf{h}\in\overline{\ri{\Gamma^*_n}\cap
S_p}\subset\overline{\Gamma^*_n\cap S_p}$. Therefore $\overline{\Gamma^*_n}\cap
S_p\subset\overline{\Gamma^*_n\cap S_p}$.
\end{proof}
Then Theorem
\ref{lem:psi2} implies that $\psi_p(\overline{\Gamma^*_n})=\overline{\Psi^*_p}$.
For any
$p\in\mathcal{P}_n$, $\psi_p$ is linear by Theorem \ref{iobad} and so continuous. Hence
$\overline{\psi_p(\Gamma^*_n)}=\psi_p(\overline{\Gamma^*_n})$.
By Lemma \ref{oifdb}, $\psi_p(\overline{\Gamma^*_n})=\overline{\Gamma^*_n}\cap
S_p$.
Together with Theorem \ref{lem:psi2}, we have $\overline{\psi_p(\Gamma^*_n)}=\overline{\Gamma^*_n\cap
S_p}=\overline{\Psi^*_p}$.
\textbf{Remark}: As $\dim\overline{\Gamma^*_n}=\dim \mathcal{H}^0_n=\dim S^0_{\{\{i\},i\in\mathcal{N}\}}$, then $\dim S^0_p<
\dim\overline{\Gamma^*_n}$ for all $p\neq \{\{i\},i\in\mathcal{N}\}$ by
Proposition \ref{sdbpo}. By \cite[Theorem 6.2]{R70},
$\dim\overline{\Gamma^*_n}=\dim\ri{\overline{\Gamma^*_n}}$ which implies $\dim S^0_p<
\dim\ri{\overline{\Gamma^*_n}}$.
Hence there exists
$\mathbf{h}\in\ri{\overline{\Gamma^*_n}}$ such that $\mathbf{h}\notin S^0_p$ and for any $\sigma\in\Sigma_p$,
$\sigma(\mathbf{h})\notin S^0_p$ by Proposition \ref{sioab}. As $\overline{\Gamma^*_n}$ is
$p$-invariant and so is $\ri{\overline{\Gamma^*_n}}$ which implies
$\sigma(\mathbf{h})\in\ri{\overline{\Gamma^*_n}}$. Then
$\psi_p(\mathbf{h})\in \ri{\overline{\Gamma^*_n}}$ as
$\ri{\overline{\Gamma^*_n}}$ is convex. Furthermore, $\psi_p(\mathbf{h})\in
S^0_p$ by the definition of $\psi_p$. Therefore, $S^0_p\cap
\ri{\overline{\Gamma^*_n}}\neq\emptyset$ and there exists $\mathbf{h}\in \ri{\overline{\Gamma^*_n}}$ such
that $\sigma(\mathbf{h})\not\in$ for any $\sigma\in \Sigma_p$. So we say $S^0_p$ `cuts through' $\overline{\Gamma^*_n}$ if
$p\neq \{\{i\},i\in\mathcal{N}\}$.
\hfill\QED
\section{Partition-symmetrical entropy functions}
\label{5555}
\subsection{One-partition-symmetrical entropy functions}
\label{bfdare}
In this subsection, we consider $\mathcal{P}_{1,n}=\mathcal{P}^*_{1,n}$ which
consists of the partition
$p=[n]$.
When $p=[n]$, \eqref{symt_cc} becomes
\begin{align}
S_n=&\{\mathbf{h}\in\mathcal{H}_n:\mathbf{h}(\mathcal{A})=\mathbf{h}(\mathcal{B})
\text{ if }
|\mathcal{A}|=|\mathcal{B}|,\ \mathcal{A},\mathcal{B}\subset\mathcal{N}\}\label{sym_c}.
\end{align}
\begin{theorem}
\label{oibsa}
\begin{equation*}
\overline{\Psi^*_n}=\Psi_n.
\end{equation*}
\end{theorem}
By Theorem \ref{bafoi} and Example \ref{jaodm}, the family of
facets of $\Psi_n$ is given by
$\mathcal{G}_n=\{G_n(\boldsymbol{\lambda}):\boldsymbol{\lambda}\in\mathfrak{N}_n\}$, where $\mathfrak{N}_n=\{[(1),(0)]\}\cup\{[(2),(k)]:k=0,\cdots,n-2\}$. For notational
convenience, let $G^n_{n}=G_n([(1),(0)])$ and $G^n_{k}=G_n([(2),(k-1)]),k\in\mathcal{N}\setminus\{n\}$.
Then $\mathcal{G}_n=\{G^n_{k}:k\in\mathcal{N}\}$. According to \eqref{soidv} and \eqref{xiobd},
we see that
\begin{equation*}
G^n_{k} = \{ {\bf h} \in \Psi_n :
\ 2 s_k = s_{k-1} + s_{k+1} ,\}
\end{equation*}
for $k \in {\cal N}$, where $s_{n+1} \triangleq s_n$ for notational convenience.
Then
\begin{align}
\Psi_n =\Gamma_n \cap S_n =\{ {\bf h} \in S_n :
2 s_k \ge s_{k-1} + s_{k+1}, k \in {\cal N} \} .
\label{aeuibv}
\end{align}
For a fixed $n$, let $R_{m,n}$ be the ray originated from the origin that
contains the uniform matroid $U_{m,n}$, $m\in\mathcal{N}$.
\begin{theorem}
\label{th:3}
The set of rays $\{R_{m,n}:m\in\mathcal{N}\}$ are all the
extreme rays of $\Psi_n$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
We first prove that for all $m \in {\cal N}$,
\begin{equation}
R_{m,n} = \bigcap_{k \in {\cal N} \backslash \{ m \} } G^n_k.
\label{289foc}
\end{equation}
It is straightforward to verify that $R_{m,n}$ is a subset of the right hand side above.
Now we prove the inclusion in the other direction. For a fixed $m \in {\cal N}$ and
${\bf h} \in \bigcap_{k \in {\cal N} \backslash \{ m \} } G^n_k$, $\bf h$ is in $n-1$ facets of $\Psi_n$, i.e.,
${\bf s} = \mathbf{s}( {\bf h}, [n])$ satisfies all the $n$ inequalities in (\ref{aeuibv}) with equality
except for $k = m$. With this set of $n-1$ inequalities, we have
$s_k = s_1 \min \{ k,m \}$. Together with the inequality in (\ref{aeuibv}) for $k = m$, we have
$s_1 \ge 0$. Therefore, ${\bf h} = s_1 U_{m,n} \in R_{m,n}$.
It follows from (\ref{289foc}) that for $m \in {\cal N}$, $R_{m,n}$ is a face and hence an extreme
ray of $\Psi_n$.
Since $\Psi_n$ is an $n$-dimensional polyhedral cone, an extreme ray of $\Psi_n$ can be expressed as the intersection of
$n-1$ facets of $\Psi_n$, i.e., $R_{m,n}$ for some $m \in {\cal N}$.
Thus we have shown that an extreme ray of $\Psi_n$ has the form (\ref{289foc}).
The theorem is proved.
\end{proof}
\begin{corollary}
\label{lem:psi1}
\begin{equation*}
\Psi_n=\overline{\Gamma^*_n}\cap S_n
\end{equation*}
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}
Since $\overline{\Gamma_n^*} \cap S_n \subset \Gamma_n \cap S_n = \Psi_n $, it suffices to prove that $\Psi_n \subset
\overline{\Gamma_n^*} \cap S_n$. It follows from the definition of $\Psi_n$ that $\Psi_n \subset S_n$, so we only need
to prove $\Psi_n \subset \overline{\Gamma_n^*}$. Toward this end, observe that the uniform matroids
$U_{m,n}, m \in {\cal N}$ are representable, and so they are almost
entropic by
Proposition
\ref{prop:rpr_entr}
. Furthermore,
$R_{m,n}, m \in {\cal N}$ are almost entropic because $\overline{\Gamma_n^*}$ is a convex cone.
Since $\{R_{m,n}: m\in\mathcal{N}\}$ is the set of all the extreme rays of
$\Psi_n$ by Theorem \ref{th:3}, for any $\mathbf{h}\in\Psi_n$, it is the convex combination of some
polymatroids on these extreme rays and thus almost entropic, which
implies $\Psi_n\subset\overline{\Gamma^*_n}\cap S_n$.
\end{proof}
Then Theorem \ref{oibsa} follows immediately from Corollary \ref{lem:psi1} and
Theorem \ref{lem:psi2}.
\noindent\textbf{Remark} Corollary \ref{lem:psi1} is equivalent to \cite[Theorem 4.1]{Han78} which was
rediscovered in \cite{CW09}. \cite[Theorem 4.1]{Han78} and \cite{CW09}
obtained the results similar to Theorem \ref{th:3} by Vandermonde matrix
and Reed-Solomon codes respectively and then derived the statements
which are equivalent to Corollary \ref{lem:psi1}.
\subsection{Two-partition-symmetrical entropy functions}
\label{oibfdm}
In this subsection, we discuss the characterization of two-partition
symmetrical entropy function regions, i.e., $p$-symmetrical entropy function regions
for $p\in\mathcal{P}_{2,n}$. For representative
$p\in\mathcal{P}^*_{2,n}$, i.e., $p=[1,n-1],[2,n-2],\cdots,[\lfloor
n/2\rfloor,n-\lfloor n/2\rfloor]$, we prove that
$\overline{\Psi^*_p}=\Psi_p$ if and only if $p=[1,n-1]$.
For $p=\{\mathcal{N}_1,\mathcal{N}_2\}\in\mathcal{P}_{2,n}$, \eqref{symt_cc} becomes
\begin{align}
S_p=&\{\mathbf{h}\in\mathcal{H}_n:\mathbf{h}(\mathcal{A})=\mathbf{h}(\mathcal{B})\nonumber\\
\label{sym_c}
&\text{ if }
|\mathcal{A}\cap\mathcal{N}_i|=|\mathcal{B}\cap\mathcal{N}_i|,\ \mathcal{A},\mathcal{B}\subset\mathcal{N},i=1,2\}.
\end{align}
Similar to the one-partition case, by \eqref{soidv}-\eqref{xiobd}, we obtain the
$p$-symmetrical polymatroidal region
\begin{align*}
\Psi_p=
\{\mathbf{h}\in S_p
&s_{n_1,n_2}\ge s_{n_1-1,n_2},\\
&s_{n_1,n_2}\ge s_{n_1,n_2-1},\\
& 2s_{k_1,k_2}\ge s_{k_1-1,k_2}+s_{k_1+1,k_2},\quad
1\le k_1\le n_1-1,0\le k_2\le n_2,\\
& s_{k_1,k_2-1}+ s_{k_1-1,k_2}\ge
s_{k_1-1,k_2-1}+s_{k_1,k_2},\quad
1\le k_1\le n_1,1\le k_2\le n_2,\\
& 2s_{k_1,k_2}\ge s_{k_1,k_2-1}+s_{k_1,k_2+1},\quad
0\le k_1\le n_1,1\le k_2\le n_2-1.\}
\end{align*}
In Subsection \ref{A999} below, we first discuss the case
$p=[1,n-1]$. In the Subsection \ref{B999}
then the other cases.
\subsubsection{$p=[1,n-1]$}
\label{A999}
The $[1,n-1]$-symmetrical problem can be treated in similar steps
as we dealt with the one-partition-symmetrical entropy function region in the last
section.
\begin{theorem}
\label{qwekl}
\begin{equation*}
\overline{\Psi^*_{1,n-1}}=\Psi_{1,n-1}.
\end{equation*}
\end{theorem}
Similar to the last section in
discussion for the one-partition case,
we obtain
\begin{align}
\Psi_{1,n-1} =\{\mathbf{h}\in S_{1,n-1}
\label{A6}
&s_{1,n-1}\ge s_{1,n-2},\\
\label{A7}
&s_{1,n-1}\ge s_{0,n-1},\\
\label{A8}
& s_{1,j-1}+ s_{0,j}\ge s_{0,j-1}+s_{1,j},\ 1\le j\le n-1,\\
\label{A9}
& 2s_{i,j}\ge s_{i,j-1}+s_{i,j+1}, i=0,1,1\le j\le n-2
\}.
\end{align}
\begin{theorem}
\label{lem:1,n-1}
For $n\ge2$, the set of all extreme rays of $\Psi_{1,n-1}$ are the
rays containing
the polymatroids
\begin{align}
\label{r1}
&U^{\{1\},n}_{1,1},\\
\label{r2}
&U^n_{1,n-1 },\cdots,U^n_{n-1,n-1 },\\
\label{r3}
&U^n_{1,n},\cdots,U^n_{n-1,n},\\
\label{r4}
&U^n_{2,n+1},\cdots,U^n_{n-1,n+1},\\
\label{r5}
&\cdots,\\
\label{r6}
&U^n_{n-2,2n-3},U^n_{n-1,2n-3},\\
\label{r7}
&U^n_{n-1,2n-2}
\end{align}
\end{theorem}
to be defined next.
In \eqref{r1}, $U^{\{1\},n}_{1,1}$ is the matroid with ground set $\mathcal{N}$
which has submatroid $U_{1,1}$ on $\{1\}$ and loops $2,\cdots,n$.
Specifically, for any $\mathcal{A}\subset\mathcal{N}$,
$U^{\{1\},n}_{1,1}(\mathcal{A})=|\{1\}\cap\mathcal{A}|$. Note that $U^{\{1\},n}_{1,1}\in
S_{1,n-1}$ and for
$(u_{j_1,j_2})_{(j_1,j_2)\in\mathcal{N}_{1,n-1}}\triangleq\mathbf{s}(U^{\{1\},n}_{1,1},[1,n-1])$,
\begin{equation}
\label{u}
u_{j_1,j_2}=j_1.
\end{equation}
In \eqref{r2}-\eqref{r7}, for $n-1\le m\le 2n-2$ and $\max\{1,m-n+1\}\le k
\le n-1$, $U^n_{k,m}$ denotes an integer-valued polymatroid with ground
set $\mathcal{N}$ which is the factor of the uniform matroid $U_{k,m}$ under
$\phi_{m,n}:\mathcal{N}\rightarrow 2^\mathcal{M}$ with $\mathcal{M}=\{1,\cdots,m\}$ defined as follow:
\begin{equation*}
\phi_{m,n}(i)=
\begin{cases}
\{1,\cdots,m-n+1\},&\text{ if } i=1,\\
\{ i+m-n\}, &\text{ if } i\in\mathcal{N}\setminus\{1\}.
\end{cases}
\end{equation*}
It can be seen that $U^n_{k,m}(\mathcal{A})=\min\{k,|\phi_{m,n}(\mathcal{A})|\}$
for any $\mathcal{A}\subset\mathcal{N}$ and $U^n_{k,m}\in S_{1,n-1}$. Then for
$(u_{j_1,j_2})_{(j_1,j_2)\in\mathcal{N}_{1,n-1}}\triangleq\mathbf{s}(U^n_{k,m},[1,n-1])$,
\begin{equation}
\label{u_km}
u_{j_1,j_2}=\min\{k,(m-n+1)j_1+j_2\}.
\end{equation}
Note that when $m=n-1$,
$\phi_{m,n}(1)=\emptyset$ and $U^n_{k,m}$ is
the matroid which has submatroid $U_{k,n-1}$ on $\{2,\cdots,n\}$ and loop
$1$; when $m=n$, $U^n_{k,m}$ coincides with the uniform matroid $U_{k,n}$.
The set of all polymatroids in \eqref{r1}-\eqref{r7} is denoted by $\mathcal{U}_n$.
We use $R$ in place of $U$ to denote the ray containing the corresponding
polymatroids, i.e., $R^{\{1\},n}_{1,1}$ is the ray
containing $U^{\{1\},n}_{1,1}$ and $R^n_{k,m}$ is the ray containing
$U^n_{k,m}$. The set of all rays containing the
polymatroids in $\mathcal{U}_n$ is denoted by $\mathcal{R}_n$.
\begin{lemma}
For $n\ge2$, any ray $R\in\mathcal{R}_n$ is an extreme ray of $\Psi_{1,n-1}$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
The proof of this lemma is similar to the first part of the poof of Theorem \ref{th:3}.
To prove this lemma, it suffices to prove that any $R\in\mathcal{R}_n$ is a
face of $\Psi_{1,n-1}$. Let $\mathcal{G}(R)=\{G\in\mathcal{G}_{1,n-1}:R\subset
G\}$. Specifically, we will prove that
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:01}
R=\bigcap_{G\in\mathcal{G}(R)} G,
\end{equation}
where the right hand side above is a face of $\Psi_{1,n-1}$
(cf. Proposition \ref{njkdf}) which by
definition contains $R$.
We now prove that $\bigcap_{G\in\mathcal{G}(R)} G$, the right hand side of \eqref{eq:01}, is a subset of
$R$. Since $\bigcap_{G\in\mathcal{G}(R)} G$ is a
face of $\Psi_{1,n-1}$, we only need to prove that it is $1$-dimensional
to conclude that $R$ is an extreme ray of $\Psi_{1,n-1}$. Toward this end,
for a specific $R$, we will consider a suitably chosen subset
$\mathcal{G}'(R)$ of $\mathcal{G}(R)$ such that
$\bigcap_{G\in\mathcal{G}'(R)} G$ is $1$-dimensional. It then follows that
$\bigcap_{G\in\mathcal{G}(R)} G$ is also $1$-dimensional because $R\subset\bigcap_{G\in\mathcal{G}(R)} G\subset\bigcap_{G\in\mathcal{G}'(R)} G$.
First, we consider $R^{\{1\},n}_{1,1}$. It can be checked that \eqref{u}
implies that
\begin{align*}
2u_{j_1,j_2+1}& =u_{j_1,j_2}+u_{j_1,j_2+2},\quad j_1=0,1,\text{ and
} j_2=0,\cdots,n-3,\\
u_{1,n-1}& =u_{1,n-2},\\
u_{1,1}& =u_{1,0}+u_{0,1}.
\end{align*}
Then $R^{\{1\},n}_{1,1}$ is contained in the following three types of
facets with the respective constraints.
\begin{itemize}
\item $G_{[1,n-1]}([(0,2),(j_1,j_2)],\ j_1=0,1,$ and
$j_2=0,\cdots,n-3$ (cf. \eqref{xiobd}):
\begin{equation}
\label{eqf91}
2s_{j_1,j_2+1} =s_{j_1,j_2}+s_{j_1,j_2+2};
\end{equation}
\item $G_{[1,n-1]}([(0,1),(0,0)])$ (cf. \eqref{soidv}):
\begin{equation}
\label{eqf92}
s_{1,n-1} =s_{1,n-2};
\end{equation}
\item $G_{[1,n-1]}([(1,1),(0,0)])$ (cf. \eqref{kobix}):
\begin{equation}
\label{eqf93}
s_{1,1} =s_{1,0}+s_{0,1}.
\end{equation}
\end{itemize}
Let $\mathcal{G}'(R^{\{1\},n}_{1,1})$ be the set of all the above facets, and we
now prove that $\bigcap_{G\in\mathcal{G}'(R^{\{1\},n}_{1,1})} G$ is $1$-dimensional.
By setting $j_1=1$ in \eqref{eqf91} and \eqref{eqf92}, we can show by
induction that $s_{1,n-1}=s_{1,n-2}=\cdots=s_{1,0}$, or
\begin{equation}
\label{eq0la}
s_{1,j_2}=s_{1,0},\quad j_2=1,\cdots,n-1.
\end{equation}
Since $s_{1,1}=s_{1,0}$, together with \eqref{eqf93}, we have
\begin{equation}
\label{eq0lb}
s_{0,1}=0.
\end{equation}
Using \eqref{eqf91} for $j_1=0$, \eqref{eq0lb}, and the fact that $s_{0,0}=\mathbf{h}(\emptyset)=0$,
, we can
show by induction that
\begin{equation}
\label{eq0lc}
s_{0,j_2}=0,\quad j_2=1,\cdots,n-1.
\end{equation}
Finally, by combining \eqref{eq0la} and \eqref{eq0lc}, we have
\begin{equation*}
s_{j_1,j_2}=s_{1,0}j_1,\quad (j_1,j_2)\in\mathcal{N}_{1,n-1},
\end{equation*}
which implies that the right hand side of \eqref{eq:01} is
1-dimensional and so \eqref{eq:01} is valid for $R=R^{\{1\},n}_{1,1}$.
For $R^n_{k,m}$, we prove \eqref{eq:01} in the same way as we have proved
the case for $R^{\{1\},n}_{1,1}$.
For the convenience of discussion, we will specify the elements of
$\mathcal{G}'(R^n_{k,m})$ as we
progress. Let $\mathcal{N}'=\{1,\cdots,n-1\}$. We first consider the facets and the
face (an intersection of two facets) below which contain $R^n_{k,m}$
for particular values of the indices (depending on the values of $k$
and $m$):
\begin{itemize}
\item $G^n_{j_1,j_2}\triangleq G_{[1,n-1]}([(0,2),(j_1,j_2-1)])$, $ j_1=0,1$ and
$ j_2=1,\cdots,n-2$ (cf. \eqref{xiobd}):
\begin{equation}
\label{eqg91}
2s_{j_1,j_2}= s_{j_1,j_2-1}+s_{j_1,j_2+1};
\end{equation}
\item $G^n_{0,n-1}\triangleq G_{[1,n-1]}([(0,1),(0,0)])\cap
G_{[1,n-1]}([(1,1),(0,n-2)])$ (cf. \eqref{soidv},\eqref{kobix}):
\begin{equation}
\label{eqg93}
s_{0,n-1}=s_{0,n-2};
\end{equation}
\item $G^n_{1,n-1}\triangleq G_{[1,n-1]}([(0,1),(0,0)])$ (cf. \eqref{soidv}):
\begin{equation}
\label{eqg92}
s_{1,n-1} =s_{1,n-2};
\end{equation}
\item $G_{[1,n-1]}([(1,0),(0,0)])$ (cf. \eqref{soidv}):
\begin{equation}
\label{eqg94}
s_{1,n-1}=s_{0,n-1};
\end{equation}
\item $G_{[1,n-1]}([(1,1),(0,0)])$(cf. \eqref{kobix}):
\begin{equation}
\label{eqg95}
s_{1,1}=s_{0,1}+s_{1,0}.
\end{equation}
\end{itemize}
Using \eqref{u_km}, it can be checked that $R^n_{k,m}\subset
\bigcap_{j_1\in\mathcal{N}',j_2\neq k}G_{0,j_2}$. By letting $s_{0,n}=s_{0,n-1}$, we
can combine
\eqref{eqg91} for $j_1=0$ and \eqref{eqg93} to obtain
\begin{equation*}
2s_{0,j_2}=s_{0,j_2-1}+s_{0,j_2+1},\quad j_2\in\mathcal{N}',\ j_2\neq k.
\end{equation*}
Using the same argument in the proof of
Theorem \ref{th:3}, we can show that
\begin{equation}
\label{eq0l}
s_{0,j_2}=s_{0,1}\min\{k,j_2\},\quad j_2\in\mathcal{N}'.
\end{equation}
\begin{itemize}
\item If $k= m-n+1$, by \eqref{u_km},
$R^n_{k,m}\subset\bigcap_{j_2\in\mathcal{N}'}G^n_{1,j_2}$.
By letting $s_{1,n}=s_{1,n-1}$, we can combine
\eqref{eqg91} for $j_1=1$ and \eqref{eqg92} to obtain
\begin{equation*}
2s_{1,j_2}=s_{1,j_2-1}+s_{1,j_2+1},\quad j_2\in\mathcal{N}'.
\end{equation*}
Then we can show by induction that
$s_{1,n-1}=s_{1,n-2}=\cdots=s_{1,0}$, or
\begin{equation}
\label{eq1la}
s_{1,j_2}=s_{1,n-1},\quad j_2\in\mathcal{N}'.
\end{equation}
Consider \eqref{eq0l} for $j_2=n-1$. Since $k\le n-1$,
\begin{equation}
\label{add1}
s_{0,n-1}=ks_{0,1}.
\end{equation}
Since $R^n_{k,m}\subset G_{[1,n-1]}([(1,0),(0,0)])$, we have
\eqref{eqg94}. Together with \eqref{add1},
\begin{equation}
\label{add2}
s_{1,n-1}=ks_{0,1}.
\end{equation}
Then by \eqref{add2} and \eqref{eq1la},
\begin{equation}
\label{add3}
s_{1,j_2}=ks_{0,1},\quad j_2\in\mathcal{N}'.
\end{equation}
Combining \eqref{eq0l} and \eqref{add3}, we have
\begin{equation}
\label{eqla}
s_{j_1,j_2}=s_{0,1}\min\{k,j_1k+j_2\},\quad(j_1,j_2)\in\mathcal{N}_{1,n-1}.
\end{equation}
\item If $k> m-n+1$, by \eqref{u_km},
$R^n_{k,m}\subset \bigcap_{j_2\in\mathcal{N}',j_2\neq k+n-m-1}G^n_{1,j_2}$. By letting $s_{1,n}=s_{1,n-1}$, we can combine
\eqref{eqg91} for $j_1=1$ and \eqref{eqg92} to obtain
\begin{equation*}
2s_{1,j_2} =s_{1,j_2-1}+s_{1,j_2+1},\quad j_2\in\mathcal{N}',\ j_2\neq
k+n-m-1,
\end{equation*}
Note that $R^n_{k,m} \subset G_{[1,n-1]}([(1,1),(0,0)])$. Using the
argument in the proof of Theorem \ref{th:3}, together with
\eqref{eqg95}, we can show that
\begin{equation}
\label{eq1lb}
s_{1,j_2}=s_{1,0}+s_{0,1}\min\{k+n-m-1,j_2\},\quad j_2\in\mathcal{N}'.
\end{equation}
Consider \eqref{eq1lb} for $j_2=n-1$. Since $k\le n-1\le m$, we have
\begin{equation}
\label{bdd1}
s_{1,n-1}=s_{1,0}+s_{0,1}(k+n-m-1).
\end{equation}
Since $R^n_{k,m}\subset G_{[1,n-1]}([(1,0),(0,0)])$, we have
\eqref{eqg94}. Together with \eqref{bdd1},
\begin{equation}
\label{bdd2}
s_{0,n-1}=s_{1,0}+s_{0,1}(k+n-m-1).
\end{equation}
By \eqref{add1} and \eqref{bdd2}, we have $s_{1,0}=s_{0,1}(m-n+1)$,
and so by \eqref{eq1lb},
\begin{equation}
\label{bdd3}
s_{1,j_2}=s_{0,1}\min\{k,m-n+1+j_2\},\quad j_2\in\mathcal{N}'.
\end{equation}
Combining \eqref{eq0l} and \eqref{bdd3}, we have
\begin{equation}
\label{eqlb}
s_{j_1,j_2}=s_{0,1}(m-n+1)j_1+s_{0,1}\min\{k+(n-m-1)j_1,j_2\}, \quad(j_1,j_2)\in\mathcal{N}_{1,n-1}.
\end{equation}
\end{itemize}
It can be seen that both \eqref{eqla} and \eqref{eqlb} can be written as
\begin{equation*}
s_{j_1,j_2}=s_{0,1}\min\{k,(m-n+1)j_1+j_2\}, \quad(j_1,j_2)\in\mathcal{N}_{1,n-1},
\end{equation*}
which implies that the right hand side of \eqref{eq:01} is
1-dimensional and then \eqref{eq:01} is valid for $R=R^n_{k,m}$.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}
For $n\ge 2$, $\mathcal{R}_n$ contains all the extreme rays of $\Psi_{1,n-1}$.
\end{lemma}
\emph{Proof} It can be readily checked that $\mathcal{R}_2$ contains all
the extreme rays of $\Psi_{1,1}$. So it suffices to prove that if
$\mathcal{R}_n$ contains all the extreme rays of $\Psi_{1,n-1}$, then
$\mathcal{R}_{n+1}$ contains all the extreme rays of $\Psi_{1,n}$.
To this end, we will prove that for an arbitrary
$\mathbf{h}_{n+1}\in\Psi_{1,n}$, it
can be written as a conic combination of the polymatroids in
$\mathcal{U}_{n+1}$.
Consider $\mathbf{h}_n\in\Psi_{1,n-1}$. Let
$\mathbf{s}_n\triangleq(s_{j_1,j_2})_{(j_1,j_2)\in\mathcal{N}_{1,n-1}}=\mathbf{s}(\mathbf{h}_n,[1,n-1])$. Let
$\mathbf{h}_{n+1}\in\Psi_{1,n}$ such that
$\mathbf{s}(\mathbf{h}_{n+1},[1,n])=\mathbf{s}_{n+1}\triangleq(s_{j_1,j_2})_{(j_1,j_2)\in\mathcal{N}_{1,n}}$,
i.e., $\mathbf{s}_{n+1}$ contains $\mathbf{s}_n$ as a subvector with two additional entries
$s_{0,n}$ and $s_{1,n}$. These two entries satisfy the following five constraints:
\begin{align}
\label{l1}
&s_{1,n}\ge s_{1,n-1},\\
\label{l2}
&s_{1,n}\ge s_{0,n},\\
\label{l3}
& s_{1,n-1}+ s_{0,n}\ge s_{0,n-1}+s_{1,n},\\
\label{l4}
& 2s_{1,n-1}\ge s_{1,n-2}+s_{1,n},\\
\label{l5}
& 2s_{0,n-1}\ge s_{0,n-2}+s_{0,n},
\end{align}
which can be rewritten as
\begin{align}
\label{t1}
s_{1,n-1}\le &\ s_{1,n}\le 2s_{1,n-1}-s_{1,n-2},\\
\label{t2}
s_{1,n}-s_{1,1-n}+s_{0,n-1}\le &\ s_{0,n}\le \min \{s_{1,n},2s_{0,n-1}-s_{0,n-2}\},
\end{align}
or
\begin{align}
\label{e1}
s_{1,n}=&\ s_{1,n-1}+e_1,\\
\label{e2}
s_{0,n}=&\ s_{0,n-1}+e_1+e_2,
\end{align}
where $0\le e_1\le s_{1,n-1}-s_{1,n-2}$ and $0\le e_2\le
\min\{s_{1,1-n}-s_{0,n-1},s_{0,n-1}-s_{0,n-2}-e_1\}$ which can be seen
by substituting \eqref{e1} into \eqref{t2}. Then $L\triangleq
(s_{1,n-1}-s_{1,n-2},s_{1,1-n}-s_{0,n-1},s_{0,n-1}-s_{0,n-2})$
bounds the range of auxiliary variables $e_1,e_2$, where the first
component is the upper bound of $e_1$ and the second and third
components together with $e_1$ define the upper bound on $e_2$. If $\mathbf{s}_{n}\in\mathcal{U}_n$, the entries of $L$ can only be 0 or
1. We classify the members of $\mathcal{U}_n$ into four classes according
to $L$ as follow.
\begin{enumerate}
\item $L=(0,1,0)$, $\mathcal{A}=\{U^{\{1\},n}_{1,1}\}$,
\item $L=(1,0,1)$, $\mathcal{B}=\{U^n_{n-1,n-1}\}$,
\item $L=(0,0,1)$, $\mathcal{C}=\{U^n_{n-1,m}:n\le m\le 2n-2\}$,
\item $L=(0,0,0)$, $\mathcal{D}=\mathcal{U}_n\setminus(\mathcal{A}\cup\mathcal{B}\cup\mathcal{C})$.
\end{enumerate}
These can be verified from \eqref{u} and \eqref{u_km}.
For $\tilde{\mathbf{s}}_{n+1} \in\mathbf{s}(\Psi_{1,n},[1,n])$ with subvector
$\tilde{\mathbf{s}}_{n}\in\mathbf{s}(\Psi_{1,n-1},[1,n-1])$ and two additional entries
$\tilde{s}_{0,n},\tilde{s}_{1,n}$, we write it as $(\tilde{\mathbf{s}}_{n}, \tilde{s}_{0,n},
\tilde{s}_{1,n})$.
For
\begin{equation*}
\mathbf{h}_n=a\mathbf{u}_A+b\mathbf{u}_B+\sum_{\mathbf{u}_C\in\mathcal{C}} c_{\mathbf{u}_C}\mathbf{u}_C+\sum_{\mathbf{u}_D\in\mathcal{D}} d_{\mathbf{u}_D}\mathbf{u}_D,
\end{equation*}
where $\mathbf{u}_A\in\mathcal{A},\mathbf{u}_B\in\mathcal{B}$, $a, b,
c_{\mathbf{u}_C},d_{\mathbf{u}_D}\ge0$, and $s_{1,n}=
s_{1,n-1}+e_1,s_{0,n}=s_{0,n-1}+e_1+e_2$, it can be checked that
\begin{align}
\mathbf{s}_{n+1}=\ &(a-e_2)(\mathbf{s}(\mathbf{u}_A,[1,n-1]),0,1)\nonumber\\
&+\left( b-e_1-e_2+\sum_{\mathbf{u}_C\in\mathcal{C}} c'_{\mathbf{u}_C}\right) (\mathbf{s}(\mathbf{u}_B,[1,n-1]),n-1,n-1) \nonumber\\
&+e_1(\mathbf{s}(\mathbf{u}_B,[1,n-1]),n,n) \nonumber\\
&+\left(e_2-\sum_{\mathbf{u}_C\in\mathcal{C}} c'_{\mathbf{u}_C}\right)(\mathbf{s}(\mathbf{u}_A+\mathbf{u}_B,[1,n-1]),n,n) \nonumber\\
&+\sum_{\mathbf{u}_C\in\mathcal{C}} (c_{\mathbf{u}_C}-c'_{\mathbf{u}_C})(\mathbf{s}(\mathbf{u}_C,[1,n-1]),n-1,n-1) \nonumber\\
&+\sum_{\mathbf{u}_C\in\mathcal{C}} c'_{\mathbf{u}_C}(\mathbf{s}(\mathbf{u}_A+\mathbf{u}_C,[1,n-1]),n,n) \nonumber\\
&+\sum_{\mathbf{u}_D\in\mathcal{D}} d_{\mathbf{u}_D}(\mathbf{s}(\mathbf{u}_D,[1,n-1]),k_{\mathbf{u}_D},k_{\mathbf{u}_D}),\label{dec}
\end{align}
where $0\le c'_{\mathbf{u}_C}\le \min\{c_{\mathbf{u}_C},e_2\}$ and $\sum
c'_{\mathbf{u}_C}\ge e_1+e_2$. For $\mathbf{u}_A=U^{\{1\},n}_{1,1}$,
$\mathbf{u}_B=U^n_{n-1,n-1}$, $\mathbf{u}_C=U^n_{n-1,m_{\mathbf{u}_C}}$ and
$\mathbf{u}_D=U^n_{k_{\mathbf{u}_D},m_{\mathbf{u}_D}}$. It can be checked that
\begin{align*}
(\mathbf{s}(\mathbf{u}_A ,[1,n-1]),0,1)& =\mathbf{s}(U^{\{1\},n+1}_{1,1},[1,n]),\\
(\mathbf{s}(\mathbf{u}_B ,[1,n-1]),n-1,n-1)& =\mathbf{s}(U^{n+1}_{n-1,n},[1,n]),\\
(\mathbf{s}(\mathbf{u}_B ,[1,n-1]),n,n)& =\mathbf{s}(U^{n+1}_{n,n},[1,n]), \\
(\mathbf{s}(\mathbf{u}_A+\mathbf{u}_B ,[1,n]),n,n)& =\mathbf{s}(U^{n+1}_{n,n+1},[1,n]),\\
(\mathbf{s}(\mathbf{u}_C ,[1,n-1]),n-1,n-1)& =\mathbf{s}(U^{n+1}_{n-1,m_{\mathbf{u}_C}+1},[1,n]),\\
(\mathbf{s}(\mathbf{u}_A+\mathbf{u}_C ,[1,n]),n,n)& =\mathbf{s}(U^{n+1}_{n,,m_{\mathbf{u}_C}+1},[1,n]),\\
(\mathbf{s}(\mathbf{u}_D),k_{\mathbf{u}_D},m_{\mathbf{u}_D})& =\mathbf{s}(U^{n+1}_{k_{\mathbf{u}_D},m_{\mathbf{u}_D}+1},[1,n]).
\end{align*}
Then by taking
$s^{-1}$ on both sides of \eqref{dec}, $\mathbf{h}_{n+1}$ is a conic
combination of polymatroids in
$\mathcal{U}_{n+1}$.
By exhausting all $\mathbf{h}_{n}\in\Psi_{1,n-1}$ and possible $e_1,e_2$, we
can write an arbitrary $\mathbf{h}_{n+1}\in\Psi_{1,n}$ as a conic combination of the
polymatroids in $\mathcal{U}_{n+1}$, which implies that there exit no other
extreme rays of $\Psi_{1,n}$. \hfill\QED
Then Theorem \ref{lem:1,n-1} is proved. Together with Proposition
\ref{prop:fr_ex},
we obtain
\begin{corollary}
\label{fdbds}
\begin{equation*}
\Psi_{1,n-1}=\overline{\Gamma^*_n}\cap S_{1,n-1}.
\end{equation*}
\end{corollary}
Then Theorem \ref{qwekl} follows from Corollary \ref{fdbds} and Theorem \ref{lem:psi2}.
\subsubsection{$p=[n_1,n_2]$ with $n_1,n_2\ge 2$}
\label{B999}
Consider $\widetilde{\h}\in \mathcal{H}^0_4$, where
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:13}
\widetilde{\h}(\mathcal{A})=
\begin{cases}
2\quad \text{ if }|\mathcal{A}|=1,\\
3\quad \text{ if }|\mathcal{A}|=2 \text{ and } \mathcal{A}\neq\{1,2\},\\
4\quad \text{ if } \mathcal{A}=\{1,2\} \text{ or }|\mathcal{A}|\ge 3.
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
It can be checked that $\widetilde{\h}\in\Gamma_4$ and $\widetilde{\h}\in S_{2,2}$, so
$\widetilde{\h}\in\Psi_{2,2}$. On the other hand, $\widetilde{\h}$ violates the Zhang-Yeung
inequality \cite{ZY98} which implies that
$\widetilde{\h}\notin\overline{\Gamma^*_4}$, and so $\widetilde{\h}\notin\overline{\Psi^*_{2,2}}$.
It follows that
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:004}
\overline{\Psi^*_{2,2}}\subsetneq\Psi_{2,2}.
\end{equation}
\textbf{Remark} The free expansion of $\widetilde{\h}$ is the V\'amos matroid, a well-known
non-representable matroid,.
\begin{theorem}
\label{fbad}
For any $p=[n_1,n_2]\in\mathcal{P}^*_{2,n}$ such that $n_1,n_2\ge2$,
\begin{equation*}
\overline{\Psi^*_{n_1,n_2}}\subsetneq \Psi_{n_1,n_2}.
\end{equation*}
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Consider $\widetilde{\h}_{n_1,n_2}\in \mathcal{H}^0_n$, where
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:13}
\widetilde{\h}_{n_1,n_2}(\mathcal{A})=
\begin{cases}
2\quad \text{ if }|\mathcal{A}|=1,\\
3\quad \text{ if }|\mathcal{A}|=2\text{ and } \mathcal{A}\not\subset\mathcal{N}_1,\\
4\quad \text{ if } |\mathcal{A}|=2\text{ and } \mathcal{A}\subset\mathcal{N}_1,\\
4\quad \text{ if } |\mathcal{A}|\ge 3.
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
It can be checked that $\widetilde{\h}_{n_1,n_2}\in\Gamma_n$ and $\widetilde{\h}\in S_{n_1,n_2}$, so
$\widetilde{\h}\in\Psi_{n_1,n_2}$. We claim that
$\widetilde{\h}_{n_1,n_2}\notin\overline{\Gamma^*_n}$. Assume otherwise. Let
$\mathcal{N}'_i\subset\mathcal{N}_i$, $i=1,2$ such that $|\mathcal{N}'_i|=2$. Let $\widetilde{\h}'$ be a
polymatroid with ground set $\mathcal{N}'_1\cup\mathcal{N}'_2$ such that for any $\mathcal{A}\subset \mathcal{N}'_1\cup\mathcal{N}'_2$,
\begin{equation*}
\widetilde{\h}'(\mathcal{A})=\widetilde{\h}_{n_1,n_2}(\mathcal{A}).
\end{equation*}
Then
\begin{equation*}
\widetilde{\h}'(\mathcal{A})=
\begin{cases}
2\quad \text{ if }|\mathcal{A}|=1,\\
3\quad \text{ if }|\mathcal{A}|=2 \text{ and } \mathcal{A}\neq \mathcal{N}'_1\\
4\quad \text{ if } \mathcal{A}=\mathcal{N}'_1\text{ or }|\mathcal{A}|\ge 3.
\end{cases}
\end{equation*}
Since $\widetilde{\h}'$ is the restriction of $\widetilde{\h}_{n_1,n_2}$ on $\mathcal{N}_1\cup\mathcal{N}_2$,
$\widetilde{\h}'$ is almost entropic. On the other hand, it is seen that
$\widetilde{\h}'$ is not almost entropic because it violates the Zhang-Yeung
inequality (cf.\eqref{eq:13}). This leads to a contradiction.
. Therefore
$\widetilde{\h}_{n_1,n_2}\notin\overline{\Gamma^*_n}$ and so
$\widetilde{\h}_{n_1,n_2}\notin\overline{\Psi^*_{n_1,n_2}}$. Hence, $\overline{\Psi^*_{n_1,n_2}}\subsetneq \Psi_{n_1,n_2}$.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Multi-partition-symmetrical entropy functions}
\label{iobrs}
In this subsection, we consider the cases $p\in\mathcal{P}_{n}$ with more
than two partitions.
\begin{theorem}
\label{qpads}
For $n\ge4,t\ge3$ and any $p\in\mathcal{P}_{t,n}$, $\overline{\Psi^*_p}\subsetneq\Psi_p$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
When $n\ge4,t\ge3$, any $p\in\mathcal{P}_{t,n}$, there
exists $p'\in\mathcal{P}_{2,n}$ such that $p\le p'$ and the cardinality of each
block of
$p'$ is at least 2. Then by Proposition \ref{sdbpo}, $S_{p}\supset
S_{p'}$ which implies that $\Psi_p\supset\Psi_{p'}$.
Now by Theorem
\ref{fbad}, $\overline{\Psi^*_{p'}}\subsetneq\Psi_{p'}$, i.e., there
exists $\mathbf{h}\in\Psi_{p'}$ but $\mathbf{h}\notin
\overline{\Psi^*_{p'}}$. Consider
$\mathbf{h}\neq\overline{\Psi^*_{p'}}=\overline{\Gamma^*_n\cap
S_{p'}}=\overline{\Gamma^*_p}\cap S_{p'}$ (cf. Theorem \ref{lem:psi2}). Since
$\mathbf{h}\in\Psi_{p'}=\Gamma_n\cap S_{p'}$ implies $\mathbf{h}\in S_{p'}$, we see that
$\mathbf{h}\notin \overline{\Gamma^*_n}$ which in turen implies that $\mathbf{h}\notin
\overline{\Gamma^*_p}\cap S_{p}=\overline{\Psi^*_p}$. On the other
hand, $\mathbf{h}\in\Psi_{p'}\subset\Psi_p$. Therefore
$\mathbf{h}\in\Psi_p\setminus \overline{\Psi^*_p}$ or $\overline{\Psi^*_{p}}\subsetneq\Psi_{p}$.
\end{proof}
\section{Discussion}
\label{baddf}
We have proved in Theorem \ref{bfdp}
, the main theorem, that $\overline{\Psi^*_p}=\Psi_p$
if and only if $p=[n]$ or $p=[1,n-1]$ for $p\in\mathcal{P}^*_n$, $n\ge 4$, i.e.,
$\overline{\Psi^*_p}$,
s completely characterized by
Shannon-type information inequalities if and only if $p$ is the
$1$-partition or a $2$-partition with one of its blocks being a
singleton.
For those $p\in\mathcal{P}_n$ such
that $\overline{\Psi^*_p}=\Psi_p$, the characterization of
$\overline{\Psi^*_p}$ is complete. However, further work is needed to
characterize
$\Psi^*_p$ for those $p\in\mathcal{P}_n$ such that
$\overline{\Psi^*_p}\subsetneq\Psi_p$. For example, Theorem \ref{bfdp}
asserts that $\mathcal{N}=\{1,2,3,4\}$ together with
$p=\{\{1,2\},\{3,4\}\}$ gives the smallest example for which
$\overline{\Psi^*_p}\subsetneq\Psi_p$. Here, both $\overline{\Psi^*_p}$
and $\overline{\Gamma^*_4}$, where
$\overline{\Psi^*_p}\subset\overline{\Gamma^*_4}$, cannot be
completely characterized. Nevertheless, characterizing $\overline{\Psi^*_p}$ can be
regarded as an intermediate step toward characterizing $\overline{\Gamma^*_4}$.
The characterizations of $\overline{\Psi^*_p}$ may also be
helpful for tackling information theory problems with symmetrical
structures.
In the definition of $\Psi^*_p=\Gamma^*_n\cap S_p$ and
$\Psi_p=\Gamma_n\cap S_p$, the constraint $S_p$ is the fixed set
of a group action of a subgroup $\Sigma_p$ of symmetric subgroup
$\Sigma_n$ induced by the partition $p$. For further research, we can also
define for
any subgroup $\Sigma$ of $\Sigma_n$, the corresponding group action and its fixed set $S_\Sigma$, and then study
whether $\overline{\Psi^*_\Sigma}=\Psi_\Sigma$, where $\Psi^*_\Sigma=\Gamma^*_n\cap S_\Sigma$ and
$\Psi_\Sigma=\Gamma_n\cap S_\Sigma$.
\section*{Appendix: Proof of Lemma \ref{vysid}}
For $p\in\mathcal{P}_n$, the set $\mathfrak{E}_p$ of all $p$-orbits of
facets of $\Gamma_n$ is a partition of $\mathcal{E}_n$, the set of all facets of
$\Gamma_n$. Therefore, there exists a partial order on $\{\mathfrak{E}_p:p\in\mathcal{P}_n\}$ as we discussed in
Subsection \ref{sdsb}.
\begin{lemma}
\label{joasd}
For $p,p'\in\mathcal{P}_n$, if $p\le p'$, then
$\mathfrak{E}_p\le\mathfrak{E}_{p'}$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
To prove this lemma, it suffices to prove that two $p$-equivalent
facets are $p'$-equivalent if $p\le p'$. Let facets $E_i=E(\mathcal{I}_i,\mathcal{K}_i), i=1,2$ of $\Gamma_n$ be
$p$-equivalent. By
Lemma \ref{oiabd},
$\boldsymbol{\lambda}_{\mathcal{I}_1,p}=\boldsymbol{\lambda}_{\mathcal{I}_2,p}$ and $\boldsymbol{\lambda}_{\mathcal{K}_1,p}=\boldsymbol{\lambda}_{\mathcal{K}_2,p}$.
Since $p\le p'$, any entry of $\boldsymbol{\lambda}_{\mathcal{I},p'},i=1,2$ is the
summation of the entries of $\boldsymbol{\lambda}_{\mathcal{I},p}$ as we discussed
in Proposition \ref{sdbpo}. Therefore
$\boldsymbol{\lambda}_{\mathcal{I}_1,p'}=\boldsymbol{\lambda}_{\mathcal{I}_2,p'}$. Similarly, $\boldsymbol{\lambda}_{\mathcal{K}_1,p'}=\boldsymbol{\lambda}_{\mathcal{K}_2,p'}$.
It follows that $E_1$ and $E_2$ are $p'$-equivalent. Hence $\mathfrak{E}_{p}\le\mathfrak{E}_{p'}$.
\end{proof}
For notational convenience, let $p_0$ be a virtual partiton such that
$\{\mathcal{N}\}\le p_0$ and $\mathcal{E}_n$ be the only $p_0$-orbit.
Hence all facets of $\Gamma_n$ are $p_0$-equivalent.
For $p,p'\in\mathcal{P}_n\cup\{p_0\}$ such that $p\le p'$, by Lemma
\ref{joasd}, each $\mathcal{E}\in
\mathfrak{E}_{p'}$ can be partitioned into some $p$-orbits. For a particular
$\mathcal{E}\in\mathfrak{E}_{p'}$, let $\mathfrak{E}_{\mathcal{E},p}$ be the family
of all such $p$-orbits. Note that $\mathfrak{E}_{\mathcal{E},p}$ is a subset of
$\mathfrak{E}_{p}$ and the union of all members of $\mathfrak{E}_{\mathcal{E},p}$ is $\mathcal{E}$.
\begin{definition}[Isolation]
\label{kodf8}
Let $p, p'\in\mathcal{P}_n\cup\{p_0\}$ such that $p\le p'$. For
$\mathcal{F}\in\mathfrak{E}_{p'}$ and $\mathcal{E}\in\mathfrak{E}_{\mathcal{F},p}$,
$\mathbf{i}\in\Psi_p$ is called an \emph{isolation} of $\mathcal{E}$ in $\mathfrak{E}_{\mathcal{F},p}$ if for any
$E\in\mathcal{E}$, $\mathbf{i}\notin E\cap S_p$ but for all
$E'\in(\mathcal{F}\setminus\mathcal{E})$, $\mathbf{i}\in E'\cap S_p$. We also say
$\mathcal{E}$ has an isolation $\mathbf{i}$ in $\mathfrak{E}_{\mathcal{F},p}$.
\end{definition}
\begin{lemma}
\label{pr0e8}
If each $\mathcal{E}\in\mathfrak{E}_{\mathcal{F},p}$ has an isolation in
$\mathfrak{E}_{\mathcal{F},p}$, for any non $p$-equivalent $E_1, E_2\in\mathcal{F}$,
neither $E_1\cap S_p\subset
E_2\cap S_p$ nor $E_2\cap S_p\subset E_1\cap S_p$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
By the definition, if $\mathcal{E}$ has an isolation in
$\mathfrak{E}_{\mathcal{F},p}$, for all $E\in\mathcal{E}$ and all
$E'\in\mathcal{F}\setminus\mathcal{E}$, $E'\cap S_p\not\subset E\cap
S_p$. Then the lemma follows.
\end{proof}
\begin{example}
\label{nlas9}
Let $p'=p_0, p=\{\mathcal{N}\}$. By Example \ref{jaodm},
$\mathfrak{N}_p=\{[(1),(0)]\}\cup\{[(2),(k)]:k=0,\cdots,n-2\}$.
It can be checked that for the uniform matroid $U_{n,n}$, whose rank
function is $U_{n,n}(\mathcal{A})=|\mathcal{A}|,\mathcal{A}\subset\mathcal{N}$, $\mathbf{s}(U_{n,n},p)$ satisfies,
\begin{align*}
s_n&>s_{n-1},\\
2s_{i+1}&=s_{i}+s_{i+2},\ i=0,\cdots,n-2.
\end{align*}
Hence,
for any $E\in\mathcal{E}_p([(1),(0)])$, the
uniform matroid $U_{n,n}\notin E\cap S_{[n]}$, but for any $E\in\mathcal{E}_p(\boldsymbol{\lambda})$
with $\boldsymbol{\lambda}\in\mathfrak{N}_p$ and $\boldsymbol{\lambda}\neq [(1),(0)]$,
$U_{n,n}\in E\cap S_p$. Therefore $U_{n,n}$ is an isolation of $\mathcal{E}_p([(1),(0)])$
in $\mathfrak{E}_{\mathcal{E}_n,n}$.
Similarly, for a particular
$k=0,\cdots,n-2$, uniform matroid $U_{k+1,n}$ with rank function $U_{k+1,n}(\mathcal{A})=\min\{k+1,
|\mathcal{A}|\},\mathcal{A}\subset\mathcal{N}$, $\mathbf{s}(U_{k+1,n},p)$ satisfies,
\begin{align*}
2 s_{k+1}&>s_{k}+s_{k+2},\\
s_n&=s_{n-1},\\
2s_{i+1}&=s_{i}+s_{i+2},\ i=0,\cdots,n-2,\ i\neq k.
\end{align*}
So $U_{k+1,n}\notin
E\cap S_p$,
for any $E\in\mathcal{E}_p([(2),(k)])$ but for any $E\in\mathcal{E}_p(\boldsymbol{\lambda})$
with $\boldsymbol{\lambda}\in\mathfrak{N}_p$ and $\boldsymbol{\lambda}\neq [(2),(k)]$,
$U_{k+1,n}\in E\cap S_p$. Therefore $U_{k+1,n}$ is an isolation of $\mathcal{E}_p([(2),(k)])$
in $\mathfrak{E}_{\mathcal{E}_n,n}$.\hfill\QED
\end{example}
Example \ref{nlas9} discussed the case when $p$ is the one-partition. The
following lemma studies the case when $p$ is a two-partition which is
covered by the one-partition $p'=\mathcal{N}$.
\begin{lemma}
\label{u89sd}
Let $p'=\mathcal{N}$ and $p=\{\mathcal{N}_1,\mathcal{N}_2\}\in\mathcal{P}_{2,n}$.
For a particular $\boldsymbol{\lambda}'\in\mathfrak{N}_{p'}$ and each
$\boldsymbol{\lambda}\in\mathfrak{N}_p$ such that
$\mathcal{E}_p(\boldsymbol{\lambda})\in\mathfrak{E}_{\mathcal{E}_{p'}(\boldsymbol{\lambda}'),p}$, $\mathcal{E}_p(\boldsymbol{\lambda})$ has
an isolation in $\mathfrak{E}_{\mathcal{E}_{p'}(\boldsymbol{\lambda}'),p}$.
\end{lemma}
The proof of Lemma \ref{u89sd} is given after Lemmas \ref{xlkds}.
The following discussion facilitates the proof of Lemma \ref{u89sd}. For $p'=\mathcal{N}$ and $p=\{\mathcal{N}_1,\mathcal{N}_2\}\in\mathcal{P}_{2,n}$, for
$\mathcal{E}_p(\boldsymbol{\lambda})\in\mathfrak{E}_p$ with $\boldsymbol{\lambda}\in\mathfrak{N}_p$, let
$J_p(\boldsymbol{\lambda})\subset\Gamma_n$ be the set of all isolations of
$\mathcal{E}_p(\boldsymbol{\lambda})$ in $\mathfrak{E}_{\mathcal{E}_{p'}(\boldsymbol{\lambda}'),p}$ for some
$\boldsymbol{\lambda}'\in\mathfrak{N}_{p'}$. Note that because each
$\mathcal{E}_p(\boldsymbol{\lambda})$ belongs to a unique
$\mathfrak{E}_{\mathcal{E}_{p'}(\boldsymbol{\lambda}'),p}$, we do not need to specify
which $\mathfrak{E}_{\mathcal{E}_{p'}(\boldsymbol{\lambda}'),p}$ the $p$-orbit
$\mathcal{E}_p(\boldsymbol{\lambda})$ belongs to in the notation $J_p(\boldsymbol{\lambda})$.
For $\mathcal{E}_{p'}([(1),(0)])$, it can be seen that
$\mathfrak{E}_{\mathcal{E}_{p'}([(1),(0)]),p}$ contains two members,
\begin{itemize}
\item $\mathcal{E}_p([(1,0),(0,0)])$, the $p$-orbit of all $E(i)$ such that $i\in\mathcal{N}_1$
and
\item $\mathcal{E}_p([(0,1),$ $(0,0)])$, the $p$-orbit of all $E(i)$ such that
$i\in\mathcal{N}_2$.
\end{itemize}
For $\mathbf{i}\in J_p([(1,0),(0,0)])$, by the definition of an isolation,
$\mathbf{i}\not\in E\cap S_p$ for $E\in\mathcal{E}_p([(1,0),(0,0)])$. Then by
\eqref{soidv}, $\mathbf{s}(\mathbf{i},p)$ satisfies
$s_{n_1,n_2}>s_{n_1-1,n_2}$. Similarly, as $\mathbf{i}\in E\cap S_p$ for
$E\in\mathcal{E}_p([(0,1),(0,0)])$, $\ s_{n_1,n_2}=s_{n_1,n_2-1}$. Therefore,
\begin{align}
J_p([(1,0),(0,0)])=&\{\mathbf{i}\in\Psi_p
s_{n_1,n_2}>s_{n_1-1,n_2},\ s_{n_1,n_2}=s_{n_1,n_2-1}\}.\label{eq:5}
\end{align}
Region $ J_p([(0,1),(0,0)])$ can be obtained from \eqref{eq:5} by symmetry.
For $\mathcal{E}_p([(2),(k)]),k=0,\cdots,n-2$, the members in
$\mathfrak{E}_{\mathcal{E}_p([(2),(k)]),p}$ are
\begin{itemize}
\item $\mathcal{E}_p([(1,1),(k_1,k_2)])$, $(k_1,k_2)\in\mathcal{N}_p$ with
$k_1+k_2=k$ and $k_i\neq
n_i,i=1,2$;
\item $\mathcal{E}_p([(2,0),(k_1,k_2)])$, $(k_1,k_2)\in\mathcal{N}_p$ with
$k_1+k_2=k$ and $k_1\neq
n_1-1,n_1$;
\item $\mathcal{E}_p([(0,2),(k_1,k_2)])$, $(k_1,k_2)\in\mathcal{N}_p$ with
$k_1+k_2=k$, $k_2\neq
n_2-1,n_2$.
$\mathcal{K}\cap\mathcal{N}_l=k_l,l=1,2$.
\end{itemize}
Therefore, by the definition of an isolation and \eqref{kobix}
and \eqref{xiobd}, for fixed $(k_1,k_2)$, we have
\begin{align}
J_p&([(1,1),(k_1,k_2)])\nonumber\\
&=\{\mathbf{h}\in\Psi_p
s_{k_1+1,k_2}+s_{k_1,k_2+1}>s_{k_1,k_2}+s_{k_1+1,k_2+1},\nonumber\\
&s_{i+1,j}+s_{i,j+1}=s_{i,j}+s_{i+1,j+1},\ (i,j)\in\mathcal{N}_p,i\neq
n_1,j\neq n_2, i+j=k_1+k_2,\ (i,j)\neq
(k_1,k_2),\nonumber\\
&2s_{i+1,j}=s_{i,j}+s_{i+2,j},\ (i,j)\in\mathcal{N}_p, i\neq n_1-1,n_1,i+j=k_1+k_2,\nonumber\\
&2s_{i,j+1}=s_{i,j}+s_{i,j+2},\ (i,j)\in\mathcal{N}_p,j\neq n_2-1,n_2, i+j=k_1+k_2\}.\label{eq:10}
\end{align}
Similarly, for fixed $(k_1,k_2)$, we have
\begin{align}
J_p&([(2,0),(k_1,k_2)]) \nonumber\\
&=\{\mathbf{h}\in\Psi_p
2s_{k_1+1,k_2}>s_{k_1,k_2}+s_{k_1+2,k_2},\nonumber\\
&s_{i+1,j}+s_{i,j+1}=s_{i,j}+s_{i+1,j+1},\ (i,j)\in\mathcal{N}_p,i\neq
n_1, j\neq n_2, i+j=k_1+k_2,\nonumber\\
&2s_{i+1,j}=s_{i,j}+s_{i+2,j},\ (i,j)\in\mathcal{N}_p,i\neq n_1-1,n_1, i+j=k_1+k_2,(i,j)\neq(k_1,k_2),\nonumber\\
&2s_{i,j+1}=s_{i,j}+s_{i,j+2},\ (i,j)\in\mathcal{N}_p,j\neq n_2-1,n_2, i+j=k_1+k_2.\label{eq:81}\}
\end{align}
Region $ J_p([(0,2),(k_1,k_2)])$ can be obtained from
\eqref{eq:81} by symmetry.
Thus, to prove Lemma \ref{u89sd} is indeed to prove
that $J_p(\boldsymbol{\lambda})$ for all $\boldsymbol{\lambda}\in\mathfrak{N}_p$ are
nonempty. Before we prove Lemma \ref{u89sd}, we first present a
technical lemma.
\begin{lemma}
\label{xlkds}
Let $p=\{\mathcal{N}_1,\mathcal{N}_2\}\in\mathcal{P}_{2,n}$. For a fixed $(k_1,k_2)\in\mathcal{N}_p$ such that
$k_i\neq n_i$, let $l_m=k_m+1,m=1,2$. Then $\mathbf{i}\in S_p$ with
$\mathbf{s}(\mathbf{i},p)$ satisfying
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:8}
s_{i,j}=
\begin{cases}
&in_2+jn_1-ij\quad 0\le i\le l_1, 0\le j\le l_2 \text{ or } l_1+1\le
i\le n_1, l_2+1\le
j\le n_2\\
&jl_1-(j-l_2)\max\{0,l_1-i-1\}+i(n_2-j)+j(n_1-l_1)\quad 0\le i\le
l_1,l_2+1\le j\le n_2\\
&il_2-(i-l_1)\max\{0,l_2-j-1\}+j(n_1-i)+i(n_2-l_2)\quad l_1+1\le i\le
n_1,0\le j\le l_2
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
is in $ J_p([(1,1),(k_1,k_2)])$.
\end{lemma}
The proof of Lemma \ref{xlkds} will be deferred to the end of this
appendix. With this lemma, we are now ready to prove Lemma \ref{u89sd}.
\emph{Proof of Lemma \ref{u89sd}}
We first consider $\mathbf{i}\in J_p([(1,0),(0,0)])$. Let
\begin{equation}
\label{d037h}
\mathbf{i}(\mathcal{A})=|\mathcal{A}\cap\mathcal{N}_1|,\ \mathcal{A}\subset\mathcal{N}.
\end{equation}
Then $\mathbf{i}$ is a matroid on $\mathcal{N}$ with $U_{n_1,n_1}$ as its submatroid on
$\mathcal{N}_1$ and elements in $\mathcal{N}_2$ as loops.
As the entries of
$\mathbf{s}(\mathbf{i},p)$, by \eqref{d037h}, $s_{i,j}=i$ for all $(i,j)\in\mathcal{N}_p$.
It can be checked by
\eqref{eq:5} that $\mathbf{i}\in J_p([(1,0),(0,0)])$. Similarly,
we can prove $ J_p([(0,1),(0,0)])$ is also nonempty.
Now we consider $J_p([(2,0),(k_1,k_2)])$ with $(k_1,k_2)\in\mathcal{N}_p$ and
$k_1\neq n_1-1,n_1$.
Let
\begin{equation}
\label{siud}
\mathbf{i}(\mathcal{A})=\min\{|\mathcal{A}\cap\mathcal{N}_1|,k_1+1\},\ \mathcal{A}\subset\mathcal{N}.
\end{equation}
Then $\mathbf{i}$ is a matroid on $\mathcal{N}$ with $U_{k_1+1,n_1}$ as its submatroid on
$\mathcal{N}_1$ and elements in $\mathcal{N}_2$ as loops. As the entries of
$\mathbf{s}(\mathbf{i},p)$, by \eqref{siud}, $s_{i,j}=\min\{i,k_1+1\}$ for all $(i,j)\in\mathcal{N}_p$.
It can be checked by \eqref{eq:81}
that
$\mathbf{i}\in J_p([(2,0),(k_1,k_2)])$. Similarly,
we can prove $ J_p([(0,2),(k_1,k_2)])$ with $(k_1,k_2)\in\mathcal{N}_p$ and
$k_2\neq n_2-1,n_2$ is also nonempty.
Finally, by Lemma \ref{xlkds}, for any $(k_1,k_2)\in\mathcal{N}_p$ with
$k_i\neq n_i,i=1,2$, $J_p([(1,1),(k_1,k_2)])$ is nonempty.
\hfill\QED
Lemma \ref{u89sd} can be generalized from the two-partition case to the
multi-partition case, which will be stated in
the next lemma whose
proof will also be deferred to the end of this appendix.
\begin{lemma}
\label{fd802}
Let $p,p'\in\mathcal{P}_n$ and $p'$ covers $p$.
For any
$\mathcal{E}_{p'}(\boldsymbol{\lambda}')\in\mathfrak{E}_{p'}$ with
$\boldsymbol{\lambda}'\in\mathfrak{N}_{p'}$, for each $\boldsymbol{\lambda}\in\mathfrak{N}_{p}$,
$\mathcal{E}_{p}(\boldsymbol{\lambda})\in
\mathfrak{E}_{\mathcal{E}_{p'}(\boldsymbol{\lambda}'),p}$ has
an isolation in $\mathfrak{E}_{\mathcal{E}_{p'}(\boldsymbol{\lambda}'),p}$.
\end{lemma}
\emph{Proof of Lemma \ref{vysid}} We prove the lemma by induction
on the lattice $\mathcal{P}_n$. First, we show that this lemma is
true for $p=\{\mathcal{N}\}$.
From Example \ref{nlas9}, we see that for any $\boldsymbol{\lambda}\in\mathfrak{N}_n$, $\mathcal{E}_n(\boldsymbol{\lambda})$ has an isolation
$U_{k,n}$ in $\mathfrak{E}_n$. Then the lemma follows immediately from
Lemma \ref{pr0e8}.
Then it is sufficient to prove that if the lemma is true for
$p'\in\mathcal{P}_{t-1,n}$, it is also true for any $p\in\mathcal{P}_{t,n}$ covered by
$p'$. Now assume that
the lemma is true for a fixed
$p'\in\mathcal{P}_{t-1,n}$, and consider any
$p\in\mathcal{P}_{t,n}$ covered by $p'$.
Let $E_1,E_2$ be two facets of $\Gamma_n$ which are not
$p$-equivalent. If $E_1,E_2$ are not $p'$-equivalent, by
the induction hypothesis, $E_1\cap S_{p'}\not\subset E_2\cap S_{p'}$. As $p\le
p'$, by Proposition \ref{sdbpo}, $S_{p'}\subset S_{p}$. So if
$E_1\cap S_{p}\subset E_2\cap S_{p}$, then $E_1\cap S_{p}\cap
S_{p'}\subset E_2\cap S_{p}\cap S_{p'}$, which implies that
$E_1\cap S_{p'}\subset E_2\cap S_{p'}$, a contradiction. Therefore
$E_1\cap S_{p}\not\subset E_2\cap S_{p}$. Similarly, $E_2\cap
S_{p}\not\subset E_1\cap S_{p}$.
Then it remains to prove the case that
$E_1$ and $E_2$ are $p'$-equivalent but not $p$-equivalent.
To this end, in light of Lemma \ref{pr0e8}, it suffices to prove that, for any
$\mathcal{E}_{p'}(\boldsymbol{\lambda}')\in\mathfrak{E}_{p'}$ with
$\boldsymbol{\lambda}'\in\mathfrak{N}_{p'}$, for each $\boldsymbol{\lambda}\in\mathfrak{N}_{p}$,
$\mathcal{E}_{p}(\boldsymbol{\lambda})\in
\mathfrak{E}_{\mathcal{E}_{p'}(\boldsymbol{\lambda}'),p}$ has
an isolation in $\mathfrak{E}_{\mathcal{E}_{p'}(\boldsymbol{\lambda}'),p}$. This is
what we have proved in Lemma \ref{fd802}. Then this lemma follows.
\hfill\QED
\emph{Proof of Lemma \ref{xlkds}}
To prove that $\mathbf{i}\in S_p$ with $\mathbf{s}(\mathbf{i},q)$ satisfying \eqref{eq:8} is
in $J_p([(1,1),(k_1,k_2)])$, we need to check that first
$\mathbf{i}\in\Gamma_n$, i.e., $\mathbf{s}(\mathbf{i},q)$ satisfies
\begin{align}
\label{eq:12}
&s_{n_1,n_2}\ge s_{n_1-1,n_2}\\
&s_{n_1,n_2}\ge s_{n_1,n_2-1}\label{eq:121}\\
&2s_{i+1,j}\ge s_{i,j}+s_{i+2,j}\quad 0\le i\le n_1-2, 0\le j\le n_2 \label{eq:122}\\
&2s_{i,j+1}\ge s_{i,j}+s_{i,j+2}\quad 0\le i\le n_1, 0\le j\le n_2-2 \label{eq:123}\\
&s_{i+1,j}+s_{i,j+1}\ge s_{i,j}+s_{i+1,j+1}\quad 0\le i\le n_1, 0\le j\le n_2-2 \label{eq:124}
\end{align}
(cf. \eqref{soidv}-\eqref{xiobd}) and second it satisfies \eqref{eq:10}, i.e.,
\begin{align}
\label{eq:101}
&s_{l_1,l_2-1}+s_{l_1-1,l_2}>s_{l_1-1,l_2-1}+s_{l_1,l_2}\\
\label{eq:102} &s_{i+1,j}+s_{i,j+1}=s_{i,j}+s_{i+1,j+1}\quad (i,j)\in\mathcal{N}_p;i\neq
n_1;j\neq n_2; i+j=l_1+l_2-2;\ (i,j)\neq
(l_1-1,l_2-1)\\
\label{eq:103}&2s_{i+1,j}=s_{i,j}+s_{i+2,j}\quad (i,j)\in\mathcal{N}_p; i\neq n_1-1,n_1;i+j=l_1+l_2-2\\
\label{eq:104} &2s_{i,j+1}=s_{i,j}+s_{i,j+2}\quad (i,j)\in\mathcal{N}_p; j\neq n_2-1,n_2;i+j=l_1+l_2-2
\end{align}
Note that the above are obtained by replacing $k_m$ by $l_m-1,m=1,2$
in \eqref{eq:10}.
Now we do the checking. According to \eqref{eq:8}, let
\begin{itemize}
\item $\mathcal{A}=\{(i,j): 0\le i\le l_1, 0\le j\le
l_2\}$,
\item $\mathcal{B}=\{(i,j):0\le i\le
l_1,l_2+1\le j\le n_2\}$,
\item $\mathcal{C}=\{(i,j): l_1+1\le i\le
n_1,0\le j\le l_2\}$ and
\item $\mathcal{D}=\{(i,j):l_1+1\le
i\le n_1, l_2+1\le
j\le n_2\}$
\end{itemize}
be the four blocks of a partition of $\mathcal{N}_p$.
For an inequality in \eqref{eq:12}-\eqref{eq:124}, if the indices of
all the terms are in a particular block, say $\mathcal{A}$, we say that the
inequality is in $\mathcal{A}$; otherwise, if the indices are in more than one
block, say $\mathcal{A}$ and $\mathcal{B}$, we say the inequality is between
$\mathcal{A}$ and $\mathcal{B}$. If the condition that guarantees the existence
of the inequalities does not hold, then the inequality does not need
to be considered for the chosen set of parameter.
We will check that \eqref{eq:12}-\eqref{eq:124} hold, which proves that
$\mathbf{i}\in\Gamma_n$. During the process, by noting which inequality hold
with equality and which hold strictly, we can verify the
equalities or inequalities in \eqref{eq:101}-\eqref{eq:104} along the
way. The details are given below, where the checking of \eqref{eq:12}-\eqref{eq:124} are organized according to the indices involved in the inequalities. Table II indicates how the inequalities and equalities in (67)-(70) are verified in the process. For example, \eqref{eq:101} is verified under Inequalities in $\cal A$, and \eqref{eq:102} is verified under Inequalities in $\cal B$, Inequalities in $\cal C$, Inequalities in $\cal A$ and $\cal B$, and Inequalities in $\cal A$ and $\cal C$ for the corresponding ranges of $(i,j)$, respectively.
The result of the check are listed in Table \ref{tab:2}. Then we
can prove that $\mathbf{i}\in J_p([(1,1),(k_1,k_2)])$. The details are given below.
\noindent\underline{Inequalities in $\mathcal{A}$:}
\begin{itemize}
\item \eqref{eq:122} holds with equality since the first case in
\eqref{eq:8} gives
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:131}
s_{i,j}= in_2+jn_1-ij
\end{equation}
which is linear in $i$ for a fixed $j$.
When $i=l_1-2,j=l_2$, it proves \eqref{eq:103} holds for such $i,j$.
\item \eqref{eq:123}: it holds with equality since $s_{i,j}$
above is linear in $j$ for a fixed $i$.
When $i=l_1$ and $j=l_2-2$, it proves that \eqref{eq:104} holds for
such $i$ and $j$.
\item \eqref{eq:124} holds strictly since
\begin{align*}
(s_{i+1,j}&+s_{i,j+1})- (s_{i,j}+s_{i+1,j+1})\\
=\ &((-(i+1)j)+(-i(j+1)))-(-ij-(i+1)(j+1))\\
=\ &1.
\end{align*}
When $i=l_1-1,j=l_2-1$, it proves that \eqref{eq:101} holds.
\item If $l_1=n_1$ and $l_2=n_2$, \eqref{eq:12} is in $\mathcal{A}$ and it holds with equality since
$s_{n_1,n_2}=s_{n_1-1,n_2}=n_1n_2$.
\item If $l_1=n_1$ and $l_2=n_2$, \eqref{eq:121} is in $\mathcal{A}$ and it holds with equality since
$s_{n_1,n_2}=s_{n_1-1,n_2}=n_1n_2$.
\end{itemize}
\noindent\underline{Inequalities in $\mathcal{B}$:}
The second case in \eqref{eq:8} can be written in two subcases ($0\le
i\le l_1-1$ and $i=l_1$)
as
\begin{align}
\label{eq:132}
s_{i,j}=\ & l_1l_2+j-l_2+i(n_2-l_2)+j(n_1-l_1)\quad\text{if } 0\le i
\le l_1-1,\\
\label{eq:133}
s_{l_1,j}=\ & l_1n_2+j(n_1-l_1).
\end{align}
\begin{itemize}
\item \eqref{eq:122} with $i\le l_1-3$ holds with equality since \eqref{eq:132}
is linear in $i$ for a fixed $j$.
When $i\le l_1-3$ and $i+j=l_1+l_2-2$, it proves
\eqref{eq:103} holds for such $i,j$.
\item \eqref{eq:122} with $i=l_1-2$ holds strictly since by
\eqref{eq:132} and \eqref{eq:133}
\begin{align*}
2s_{l_1-1,j}&-s_{l_1-2,j}-s_{l_1,j}\\
=\ &2( l_1l_2+j-l_2+(l_1-1)(n_2-l_2)+j(n_1-l_1))\\ \ &-(
l_1l_2+j-l_2+(l_1-2)(n_2-l_2)+j(n_1-l_1))-(l_1n_2+j(n_1-l_1))\\
=\ &j-l_2>0.
\end{align*}
\item \eqref{eq:123} holds with equality since
\eqref{eq:132} is linear in $j$ for a fixed $i$ and \eqref{eq:133} is linear in $j$.
When $i\le l_1-3$ and $i+j=l_1+l_2-2$, it proves
\eqref{eq:104} holds for such $i,j$.
\item \eqref{eq:124} with $i\le l_1-2$ holds with equality since
by \eqref{eq:132}
\begin{align*}
(s_{i+1,j}&+s_{i,j+1})- (s_{i,j}+s_{i+1,j+1})\\
=\ & (s_{i,j+1}-s_{i,j})- (s_{i+1,j+1}-s_{i+1,j})\\
=\ & (1+n_1-l_1)-(1+n_1-l_2)=0.
\end{align*}
When $i\le l_1-3$ and $i+j=l_1+l_2-2$, it proves
\eqref{eq:102} holds for such $i,j$.
\item \eqref{eq:124} with $i= l_1-1$ holds strictly since by \eqref{eq:132} and \eqref{eq:133}
\begin{align*}
(s_{l_1,j}&+s_{l_1-1,j+1})- (s_{l_1-1,j}+s_{l_1,j+1})\\
=\ & (s_{l_1-1,j+1}-s_{l_1-1,j})- (s_{l_1,j+1}-s_{i_1,j})\\
=\ & (1+n_1-l_1)-(n_1-l_2)=1.
\end{align*}
\item If $l_1=n_1$, \eqref{eq:12} is in this block and it holds with equality since by
\eqref{eq:132} and \eqref{eq:133},
$s_{n_1,n_2}=s_{n_1-1,n_2}=n_1n_2$.
\item If $l_1=n_1$ and $l_2\le n_2-2$, \eqref{eq:121} is in this block and it holds with equality since by
\eqref{eq:133},
$s_{n_1,n_2}=s_{n_1,n_2-1}=n_1n_2$.
\end{itemize}
\noindent\underline{Inequalities in $\mathcal{C}$:}
These inequalities are symmetrical to those inequalities in
$\mathcal{B}$. The details are ommited here.
\noindent\underline{Inequalities in $\mathcal{D}$:}
\begin{itemize}
\item \eqref{eq:122}, \eqref{eq:123} and \eqref{eq:124} hold by the
same reason as they in $\mathcal{A}$.
\item If $l_1\le n_1-2$ and $l_2\le n_2-1$ \eqref{eq:12} is in this
block and it holds by the same reason in $\mathcal{A}$.
\item If $l_1\le n_1-1$ and $l_2\le n_2-2$, \eqref{eq:121} is in this
block and it holds by the same reason in $\mathcal{A}$.
\end{itemize}
\noindent\underline{Inequalities between $\mathcal{A}$ and $\mathcal{B}$:}
\begin{itemize}
\item \eqref{eq:123} with $i\le l_1-1$, $j=l_2-1$ holds since by \eqref{eq:131} and \eqref{eq:132},
\begin{align*}
2s_{i,l_2}&-s_{i,l_2-1}-s_{i,l_2+1}\\
=\ &
2(in_2+l_2n_1-il_2)-(in_2+(l_2-1)n_1-i(l_2-1))-(l_1l_2+1+i(n_2-l_2)+(l_2+1)(n_1-l_1))\\
=\ &l_1-i-1 \ge 0.
\end{align*}
Furthermore, when $i= l_1-1$ and $j=l_2-1$, it holds with equality which proves
\eqref{eq:104} for such $i$ and $j$.
\item \eqref{eq:123} with $i= l_1$, $j=l_2-1$ holds with equality since by \eqref{eq:131} and \eqref{eq:133},
\begin{align*}
2s_{l_1,l_2}&-s_{l_1,l_2-1}-s_{l_1,l_2+1}\\
=\ &
2(l_1n_2+l_2n_1-l_1l_2)-(l_1n_2+(l_2-1)n_1-l_1(l_2-1))-(l_1n_2+(l_2+1)(n_1-l_1))\\
=\ &0.
\end{align*}
\item \eqref{eq:123} with $i\le l_1-1$, $j=l_2$ holds with equality since by in \eqref{eq:131} and \eqref{eq:132},
\begin{align*}
2s_{i,l_2+1}&-s_{i,l_2+2}-s_{i,l_2}\\
=\ & 2(l_1l_2+1+i(n_2-l_2)+(l_2+1)(n_1-l_1))\\ \ &-(l_1l_2+2+i(n_2-l_2)+(l_2+2)(n_1-l_1))-(in_2+l_2n_1-il_2)\\
=\ &0;
\end{align*}
When $i=l_1-2$ and $j=l_2$, it proves
\eqref{eq:104} for such $i$ and $j$.
\item \eqref{eq:123} with $i= l_1$, $j=l_2$ holds with equality since by in \eqref{eq:131} and \eqref{eq:133},
\begin{align*}
2s_{l_1,l_2+1}&-s_{l_1,l_2+2}-s_{l_1,l_2}\\
=\ & 2(l_1n_2+(l_2+1)(n_1-l_1))-(l_1n_2+(l_2+2)(n_1-l_1))-(l_1n_2+l_2n_1-l_1l_2)\\
=\ &0;
\end{align*}
\item \eqref{eq:124} with $i\le l_1-2$, $j=l_2$ holds with equality since by \eqref{eq:131} and \eqref{eq:132},
\begin{align*}
(s_{i+1,l_2}&+s_{i,l_2+1})-(s_{i,l_2}+s_{i+1,l_2+1}) \\
=\ & (s_{i+1,l_2}-s_{i,l_2})-(s_{i+1,l_2+1}-s_{i,l_2+1}) \\
=\ & (n_2-l_2)-(n_2-l_2)=0.
\end{align*}
When $i=l_1-1$ and $i+j=l_1+l_2-2$, it proves \eqref{eq:102} holds for
such $i$ and $j$.
\item \eqref{eq:124} with $i= l_1-1$, $j=l_2$ holds strictly since by \eqref{eq:131} and \eqref{eq:133},
\begin{align*}
(s_{l_1,l_2}&+s_{l_1-1,l_2+1})-(s_{l_1-1,l_2}+s_{l_1,l_2+1}) \\
=\ & (s_{l_1,l_2}-s_{l_1-1,l_2})-(s_{l_1,l_2+1}-s_{l_1-1,l_2+1}) \\
=\ & (n_2-l_2)-(n_2-l_2-1)=1.
\end{align*}
\item If $l_1=n_1$ and $l_2=n_2-1$, \eqref{eq:121} is in this case and it holds with
equality since by \eqref{eq:131} and \eqref{eq:133}, $s_{n_1,n_2}=s_{n_1,n_2-1}=n_1,n_2$.
\end{itemize}
\begin{table}
\centering
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|l|l|l|l|}
\hline
\hline
&Inequalities&Inequalities in $\mathcal{B}$&Inequalities in
$\mathcal{C}$&Inequalities between&Inequalities between
\\
&in $\mathcal{A}$&&& $\mathcal{A}$ and $\mathcal{B}$& $\mathcal{A}$ and $\mathcal{C}$
\\
\hline
\hline
\eqref{eq:101}&$\cdot$& & & &\\
\hline
\eqref{eq:102}& &$\max\{0,n_1-l_1-l_2+1\}$&$(i,j):l_1+1\le i\le $
&$(i,j)=$&$(i,j)=$\\
& &$\le i\le l_1-3$&$ \min\{n_1-1,l_1+l_2-2\}$
&$(l_1-2,l_2)$&$(l_1,l_2-2)$\\
& &$j=l_1+l_2-2-i$&$j=l_1+l_2-2-i$& &\\
\hline
\eqref{eq:103}& &$\max\{0,n_1-l_1-l_2+2\}$&$l_1+1\le i\le $ &
&$(i,j)=$\\
&$(l_1-2,l_2)$ &$\le i\le
l_1-3$&$\min\{n_1-2,l_1+l_2-2\}$ & &$(l_1-1,l_2-1)$\\
& &$j=l_1+l_2-2-i$&$j=l_1+l_2-2-i$& &or $(l_1,l_2-2)$\\
\hline
\eqref{eq:104}& &$\max\{0,n_1-l_1-l_2\}$&$l_1+1\le i\le $&$(i,j)=$ &\\
&$(l_1,l_2-2)$&$\le i\le
l_1-3$&$\min\{n_1,l_1+l_2-2\}$&$(l_1-2,l_2)$ or&\\
& &$j=l_1+l_2-2-i$&$j=l_1+l_2-2-i$&$(l_1-1,l_2-1)$ &\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{Verification of \eqref{eq:101}-\eqref{eq:104}}
\label{tab:2}
\end{table}
\noindent\underline{Inequalities between $\mathcal{A}$ and $\mathcal{C}$:}
These inequalities are symmetrical to those inequalities between
$\mathcal{A}$ and
$\mathcal{B}$. The details are ommited here.
\noindent\underline{Inequalities between $\mathcal{B}$ and $\mathcal{D}$:}
\begin{itemize}
\item \eqref{eq:122} with $i=l_1-1$ holds with equality since by
\eqref{eq:131}, \eqref{eq:132} and \eqref{eq:133},
\begin{align*}
2s_{l_1,j}&-s_{l_1-1,j}-s_{l_1+1,j}\\
=\ &2(l_1n_2+j(n_1-l_1))-(l_1l_2+j-l_2+(l_1-1)(n_2-l_2)+j(n_1-l_1))\\ &-((l_1+1)n_2+jn_1-(l_1+1)j)\\
=\ &0.
\end{align*}
\item \eqref{eq:122} with $i=l_1$ holds with equality since by
\eqref{eq:131} and \eqref{eq:133},
\begin{align*}
2s_{l_1+1,j}&-s_{l_1,j}-s_{l_1+2,j}\\
=\ &2((l_1+1)n_2+jn_1-(l_1+1)j)-(l_1n_2+j(n_1-l_1))-((l_1+2)n_2+jn_1-(l_1+2)j)\\
=\ &0.
\end{align*}
\item \eqref{eq:124} with $i=l_1$ holds strictly since by \eqref{eq:131} and \eqref{eq:133},
\begin{align*}
(s_{l_1+1,j}&+s_{l_1,j+1})-(s_{l_1,j}+s_{l_1+1,j+1})\\
=\ &(s_{l_1,j+1}-s_{l_1,j})-(s_{l_1+1,j+1}-s_{l_1,j+1})\\
=\ &(n_1-l_1)-(n_1-l_1-1)=1.
\end{align*}
\item If $l_1=n_1-1$, \eqref{eq:12} belongs to this case and it holds since
by \eqref{eq:131} and \eqref{eq:133}, $s_{n_1,n_2}=s_{s_{n_1-1,n_2}}=n_1n_2$.
\end{itemize}
\noindent\underline{Inequalities between $\mathcal{C}$ and $\mathcal{D}$:}
These inequalities are symmetrical to those inequalities between
$\mathcal{B}$ and $\mathcal{D}$. The details are ommited here.
\noindent\underline{Inequalities between $\mathcal{A}$, $\mathcal{B}$, $\mathcal{C}$ and $\mathcal{D}$:}
\begin{itemize}
\item \eqref{eq:124} with $i=l_1$ and $j=l_2$ holds strictly since by \eqref{eq:8},
\begin{align*}
(s_{l_1+1,l_2}&+s_{l_1,l_2+1})-(s_{l_1,l_2}+s_{l_1+1,l_2+1})\\
=\ &(l_2n_1+(l_1+1)(n_2-l_2)+l_1n_2+(l_2+1)(n_1-l_1))\\ &-(l_1n_2+l_2n_1-l_1l_2+(l_1+1)n_2+(l_2+1)n_1-(l_1+1)(l_2+1))\\
=\ &1.
\end{align*}
\end{itemize}
\hfill\QED
\emph{Proof of Lemma \ref{fd802}}
Without
loss of generality, we assume $p,p'\in\mathcal{P}^*_n$ and the first block $p'$ is the union
of the first two blocks of $p$
and the other blocks of $p'$ are the other corresponding blocks of $p$,
i.e., $\mathcal{N}'_1=\mathcal{N}_1\cup\mathcal{N}_2=\{1,\cdots,n'_1\}$ and
$\mathcal{N}'_i=\mathcal{N}_{i+1},l=2,\cdots,t-1$ and furthermore $\mathcal{N}_1=\{1,\cdots,n_1\},\mathcal{N}_2=\{n_1+1,\cdots,n'_1\}$.
With
this assumption, we have $n'_1=n_1+n_2$ and $n'_i=n_{i+1}$,
$i=2,\cdots,t-1$.
By the discussion above \eqref{bfkdg},
$\mathfrak{E}_{p'}=\{\mathcal{E}_{p'}(\boldsymbol{\lambda}'):\boldsymbol{\lambda}'\in\mathfrak{N}_{p'}\}$ with
\begin{align*}
\mathfrak{N}_{p'}= &\mathfrak{N}_A\cup\mathfrak{N}_B\cup\mathfrak{N}_C\\
= &\{[\mathbf{1}_{t-1}(l),\mathbf{0}_{t-1}]:1\le l\le
t-1\}\\ &\cup\{[\mathbf{1}_{t-1}(l_1,l_2),(k'_1,\cdots,k'_{t-1})]:1\le l_1<l_2\le t-1, (k'_1,\cdots,k'_t)\in\mathcal{N}_{p'},
k'_{l_1}\neq n'_{l_1}, k'_{l_2}\neq n'_{l_2}\}
\\ &\cup\{[\mathbf{2}_{t-1}(l),(k'_1,\cdots,k'_{t-1})] :1\le l\le t-1,(k'_1,\cdots,k'_{t-1})\in\mathcal{N}_{p'},
k'_{l}\neq n'_{l}-1, n'_{l}\}.
\end{align*}
For the convenience of our discussion, we partition $\mathfrak{N}_{p'}$ into
the following five disjoint subsets,
\begin{enumerate}
\item
$\mathfrak{N}_1\triangleq\{[\mathbf{1}_{t-1}(1),\mathbf{0}_{t-1}]\}
\cup\{[\mathbf{2}_{t-1}(1),(k'_1,\cdots, k'_{t-1})]:(k'_1,\cdots,k'_{t-1})\in\mathcal{N}_{p'},
k'_1\neq n'_1-1,n'_1\}$;
\item
$\mathfrak{N}_2\triangleq\{[\mathbf{1}_{t-1}(1,l),(k'_1,\cdots,k'_{t-1})]: 2\le
l\le t-1, (k'_1,\cdots,k'_t)\in\mathcal{N}_{p'}, k'_{1}\neq
n'_{1}, k'_{l}\neq n'_{l}\}$;
\item
$\mathfrak{N}_3\triangleq\{[\mathbf{1}_{t-1}(l),\mathbf{0}_{t-1}]:2\le l\le
t-1\}$;
\item
$\mathfrak{N}_4\triangleq\{[\mathbf{2}_{t-1}(l),(k'_1,\cdots,k'_{t-1})]: 2\le l\le t-1, (k'_1,\cdots,k'_{t-1})\in\mathcal{N}_{p'},
k'_{l}\neq n'_{l}-1, n'_{l}\}$;
\item
$\mathfrak{N}_5\triangleq
\{[\mathbf{1}_{t-1}(l_1,l_2),(k'_1,\cdots,k'_{t-1})]:2\le l_1<l_2\le t-1, (k'_1,\cdots,k'_t)\in\mathcal{N}_{p'},
k'_{l_1}\neq n'_{l_1}, k'_{l_2}\neq n'_{l_2}\}$.
\end{enumerate}
Note that $\mathfrak{N}_1$ is composed of those $\boldsymbol{\lambda}$ in $\mathcal{N}_A$ or $\mathcal{N}_C$
such that $l=1$, that is, for $\boldsymbol{\lambda}\in\mathfrak{N}_1$, $\mathcal{E}_p(\boldsymbol{\lambda})$ contains
$E(\mathcal{I},\mathcal{K})$ such that $\mathcal{I}\subset\mathcal{N}'_1$. Subset
$\mathfrak{N}_2\subset\mathfrak{N}_B$ and for
$\boldsymbol{\lambda}\in\mathfrak{N}_2$, $\mathcal{E}_p(\boldsymbol{\lambda})$ contains
$E(\mathcal{I},\mathcal{K})$ such that $|\mathcal{I}\cap\mathcal{N}'_1|=1$. For the remaining, we have $\mathfrak{N}_3=\mathfrak{N}_A\setminus \mathfrak{N}_1$,
$\mathfrak{N}_4=\mathfrak{N}_C\setminus \mathfrak{N}_1$ and $\mathfrak{N}_5=\mathfrak{N}_B\setminus \mathfrak{N}_2$.
\noindent\underline{$\boldsymbol{\lambda}'\in\mathfrak{N}_1$:}
Consider $q=\{\mathcal{N}_1,\mathcal{N}_2\}$ and $q'=\{\mathcal{N}'_1\}$ in
$\mathcal{P}_{n'_1}$. By Lemma \ref{u89sd}, for every particular $\hat{\boldsymbol{\lambda}}'\in\mathfrak{N}_{q'}$ and each
$\hat{\boldsymbol{\lambda}}\in\mathfrak{N}_q$ such that
$\mathcal{E}_q(\hat{\boldsymbol{\lambda}})\in\mathfrak{E}_{\mathcal{E}_{[q']}(\hat{\boldsymbol{\lambda}}'),q}$, $\mathcal{E}_q(\hat{\boldsymbol{\lambda}})$ has
an isolation in $\mathfrak{E}_{\mathcal{E}_{q'}(\hat{\boldsymbol{\lambda}}'),q}$. For
$E(\mathcal{I},\mathcal{K})\in\mathcal{E}_{p'}(\boldsymbol{\lambda}')$ with $\boldsymbol{\lambda}'\in\mathfrak{N}_1$,
since $\mathcal{I}\subset\mathcal{N}'_1$, they can be treated as
$E(\mathcal{I},\mathcal{K}')\in \mathcal{E}_{n'_1}$ with
$\mathcal{K'}=\mathcal{K}\cap\mathcal{N}'_1$. The details are explained in the following.
For $\boldsymbol{\lambda}'\in\mathfrak{N}_{p'}$, let $\boldsymbol{\lambda}'(1)$ denote
the pair of the first entry of the two vectors in $\boldsymbol{\lambda}'$. For
$\boldsymbol{\lambda}\in\mathfrak{N}_p$, let $\boldsymbol{\lambda}(1,2)$ denote the pair of the
first two entries of the two
vectors in $\boldsymbol{\lambda}$. For example,
$[\mathbf{1}_{t-1}(1),\mathbf{0}_{t-1}](1)=[(1),(0)]$ and
$[\mathbf{1}_{t}(1),\mathbf{0}_{t}](1,2)=[(1,0),(0,0)]$.
Now for each
$\boldsymbol{\lambda}'\in \mathfrak{N}_1$, it can be seen that there exists
$\hat{\boldsymbol{\lambda}}'\in\mathfrak{N}_{q'}$ such that
$\boldsymbol{\lambda}'(1)=\hat{\boldsymbol{\lambda}}'$. Observe that there exists a
bijection
$\omega_{\lambda'}:\mathfrak{E}_{\mathcal{E}_{p'}(\boldsymbol{\lambda}'),p}\to\mathfrak{E}_{\mathcal{E}_{q'}(\hat{\boldsymbol{\lambda}}'),q}$
defined by
\begin{equation*}
\omega_{\lambda'}(\mathcal{E}_p(\boldsymbol{\lambda}))=\mathcal{E}_q(\hat{\boldsymbol{\lambda}})
\text{ if }\boldsymbol{\lambda}(1,2)=\hat{\boldsymbol{\lambda}}.
\end{equation*}
For example, for
$[\mathbf{1}_{t-1}(1),\mathbf{0}_{t-1}]\in\mathfrak{N}_1$,
$[\mathbf{1}_{t-1}(1),\mathbf{0}_{t-1}](1)=[(1),(0)]\in\mathfrak{N}_{q'}$. Note that
$\mathfrak{E}_{\mathcal{E}_{p'}([\mathbf{1}_{t-1}(1),\mathbf{0}_{t-1}]),p}=\{\mathcal{E}_{p}([\mathbf{1}_{t}(1),\mathbf{0}_{t}]),\mathcal{E}_{p}([\mathbf{1}_{t}(2),\mathbf{0}_{t}])\}$
and $\mathfrak{E}_{\mathcal{E}_{q'}([(1),(0)]),q}=\{\mathcal{E}_{q}([(1,0),(0,0)]),\mathcal{E}_{q}([(0,1),(0,0)])\}$.
It can be checked that $[\mathbf{1}_{t}(1),\mathbf{0}_{t}](1,2)=[(1,0),(0,0)]$
and $[\mathbf{1}_{t}(2),\mathbf{0}_{t}](1,2)=[(0,1),(0,0)]$.
Let $\mathbf{i}_q$ be an isolation of
$\mathcal{E}_q(\hat{\boldsymbol{\lambda}})$
in $\mathfrak{E}_{\mathcal{E}_{q'}(\hat{\boldsymbol{\lambda}}'),q}$. Define $\mathbf{i}_p$ by
\begin{equation}
\label{io8dn}
\mathbf{i}_p(\mathcal{A})=\mathbf{i}_q(\mathcal{A}\cap\mathcal{N}'_1),\ \mathcal{A}\subset\mathcal{N}.
\end{equation}
It can be checked that $\mathbf{i}_p$ is an isolation of
$\mathcal{E}_p(\boldsymbol{\lambda})$ in
$\mathfrak{E}_{\mathcal{E}_{p'}(\boldsymbol{\lambda}'),p}$. For example, let $\mathbf{i}_q$ be
an isolation of $\mathcal{E}_{q}([(1,0),(0,0)])$ in
$\mathfrak{E}_{\mathcal{E}_{q'}([(1),(0)]),q}$. Then by \eqref{eq:5},
$\mathbf{s}^q\triangleq\mathbf{s}(\mathbf{i}_q,q)$ satisfies
\begin{align*}
s^q_{n_1,n_2}>s^q_{n_1-1,n_2},\ s^q_{n_1,n_2}=s^q_{n_1,n_2-1}.
\end{align*}
By \eqref{io8dn}, $\mathbf{s}^p\triangleq\mathbf{s}_p(\mathbf{i}_p,p)$ satisfies
$s^p_{n_1,n_2,n_3,\cdots,n_t}=s^q_{n_1,n_2}$,
$s^p_{n_1-1,n_2,n_3,\cdots,n_t}=s^q_{n_1-1,n_2}$ and
$s^p_{n_1,n_2-1,n_3,\cdots,n_t}=s^q_{n_1,n_2-1}$ which implies that
\begin{align*}
s^p_{n_1,\cdots,n_t}>s^p_{n_1-1,n_2,\cdots,n_t},\ s^p_{n_1,\cdots,n_t}=s^p_{n_1,n_2-1,n_3,\cdots,n_t}.
\end{align*}
Hence $\mathbf{i}_p$ is an isolation of
$\mathcal{E}_p([\mathbf{1}_t,\mathbf{0}_t])$ in
$\mathfrak{E}_{\mathcal{E}_{p'}([\mathbf{1}_{t-1},\mathbf{0}_{t-1}]),p}$.
\noindent\underline{$\boldsymbol{\lambda}'\in\mathfrak{N}_2$:}
For
this case, we have
$\mathfrak{E}_{\mathcal{E}_{p'}(\boldsymbol{\lambda}'),p}=\{\mathcal{E}_p(\boldsymbol{\lambda}):\boldsymbol{\lambda}\in\{[\mathbf{1}_{t}(1,l+1),(k_1,\cdots,k_{t})]:(k_1,\cdots,k_{t})\in\mathcal{N}_p,
k_1\neq n_1,\ k_1+k_2=k'_1,k_i=k'_{i-1},i=3,\cdots,t\}\cup\{
[\mathbf{1}_{t}(2,l+1),(k_1,\cdots,k_{t})]:(k_1,\cdots,k_{t})\in\mathcal{N}_p, k_2\neq n_2,\
k_1+k_2=k'_1,k_i=k'_{i-1},i=3,\cdots,t\}\}$. We only need to treat the
case that $\boldsymbol{\lambda}$ has the form
$[\mathbf{1}_{t}(1,l+1),(k_1,\cdots,k_{t})]$; the other case follows by
symmetry. Fix $\boldsymbol{\lambda}=[\mathbf{1}_{t}(1,l+1),(k_1,\cdots,k_{t})]$ where $(k_1,\cdots,k_{t})\in\mathcal{N}_p,
k_1\neq n_1,\ k_1+k_2=k'_1,k_i=k'_{i-1},i=3,\cdots,t$.
Let $\mathbf{i}$ be a matroid on $\mathcal{N}$ with $U_{k_1+k_{l+1}+1,n_1+n_{l+1}}$ as its submatroid on $\mathcal{N}_1\cup\mathcal{N}_{l+1}$
and other elements as loops, i.e.,
\begin{equation*}
\mathbf{i}(\mathcal{A})=\min\{k_1+k_{l+1}+1,|\mathcal{A}\cap (\mathcal{N}_1\cup\mathcal{N}_{l+1})|\},\ \mathcal{A}\subset\mathcal{N}.
\end{equation*}
It can be checked that $\mathbf{s}=\mathbf{s}(\mathbf{i},p)$ satisfies that
\begin{align*}
s_{k_1+1,k_2,\cdots,k_t}+s_{k_1,k_2,\cdots,k_l,k_{l+1}+1,k_{l+2},\cdots,k_t}&>s_{k_1,k_2,\cdots,k_t}+s_{k_1+1,k_2,\cdots,k_l,k_{l+1}+1,k_{k+2},\cdots,k_t},\\
s_{i+1,j,k_3,\cdots,k_t}+s_{i,j,k_3,\cdots,k_l,k_{l+1}+1,k_{l+2},\cdots,k_t}&=s_{i,j,k_3,\cdots,k_t}+s_{i+1,j,k_3,\cdots,k_{l+1}+1,\cdots,k_t},\
i+j=k_1+k_2,(i,j)\neq(k_1,k_2),\\
s_{i,j+1,k_3,\cdots,k_t}+s_{i,j,k_3,\cdots,k_l,k_{l+1}+1,\cdots,k_{l+2},k_t}&=s_{i,j,k_3,\cdots,k_t}+s_{i,j+1,k_3,\cdots,k_l,k_{l+1}+1,k_{l+2},\cdots,k_t},\ i+j=k_1+k_2,
\end{align*}
which implies that $\mathbf{i}$ is an isolation of
$\mathcal{E}_{p}(\boldsymbol{\lambda})$ with
$\boldsymbol{\lambda}=[\mathbf{1}_{t}(1,l+1),(k_1,\cdots,k_{t})]$ in
$\mathfrak{E}_{\mathcal{E}_{p'}(\boldsymbol{\lambda}'),p}$.
\noindent\underline{$\boldsymbol{\lambda}'\in\mathfrak{N}_3$:}
For this case, we have $\mathfrak{E}_{\mathcal{E}_{p'}(\boldsymbol{\lambda}'),p}=\{\mathcal{E}_{p}([\mathbf{1}_{t}(l+1),\mathbf{0}_{t}])\}$, containing only one
element. Therefore, all $E\in
\mathcal{E}_{p'}(\boldsymbol{\lambda}')$ are $p$-equivalent.
Then, any $\mathbf{i}\in\Psi_p$
such that $\mathbf{i}\notin E\cap S_p$ for all $E\in
\mathcal{E}_{p}(\boldsymbol{\lambda})$ is by definition an isolation of $\mathcal{E}_{p}(\boldsymbol{\lambda})$ in $\mathfrak{E}_{\mathcal{E}_{p'}(\boldsymbol{\lambda}'),p}$.
\noindent\underline{$\boldsymbol{\lambda}'\in\mathfrak{N}_4$:}
For this case,
we have
$\mathfrak{E}_{\mathcal{E}_{p'}(\boldsymbol{\lambda}'),p}=\{\mathcal{E}_p([\mathbf{2}_{t}(l+1),(k_1,\cdots,k_{t})]):(k_1,\cdots,k_{t})\in\mathcal{N}_p, k_1+k_2=k'_1,k_i=k'_{k-1},i=3,\cdots,t\}$.
Fix $\boldsymbol{\lambda}=[\mathbf{2}_{t}(l+1),(k_1,\cdots,k_{t})]$.
Let $\mathbf{i}$ be a matroid on $\mathcal{N}$ with $U_{k_1+k_{l+1}+1,n_1+n_{l+1}}$ as its submatroid on $\mathcal{N}_1\cup\mathcal{N}_{l+1}$
and other elements as loops, i.e.,
\begin{equation*}
\mathbf{i}(\mathcal{A})=\min\{k_1+k_{l+1}+1,|\mathcal{A}\cap (\mathcal{N}_1\cup\mathcal{N}_{l+1})|\},\ \mathcal{A}\subset\mathcal{N}.
\end{equation*}
It can be checked that $\mathbf{s}=\mathbf{s}(\mathbf{i},p)$ satisfies
\begin{align*}
2s_{k_1,k_2,\cdots,k_l,k_{l+1}+1,k_{l+2},\cdots,k_t}&>s_{k_1,k_2,\cdots,k_t}+s_{k_1,k_2,\cdots,k_l,k_{l+1}+2,k_{l+2},\cdots,k_t},\\
2s_{i,j,k_3,\cdots,k_l,k_{l+1}+1,k_{l+2},\cdots,k_t}&=s_{i,j,k_3,\cdots,k_t}+s_{i,j,k_3,\cdots,k_l,k_{l+1}+2,k_{l+2},\cdots,k_t},\
i+j=k_1+k_2,(i,j)\neq(k_1,k_2),
\end{align*}
which implies that $\mathbf{i}$ is an isolation of $\mathcal{E}_{p}([\mathbf{2}_{t}(l+1),(k_1,\cdots,k_{t})])$ in
$\mathfrak{E}_{\mathcal{E}_{p'}([\mathbf{2}_{t-1}(l),(k'_1,\cdots,k'_{t-1})]),p}$.
\noindent\underline{$\boldsymbol{\lambda}'\in\mathfrak{N}_5$:}
For this case,
$\mathfrak{E}_{\mathcal{E}_{p'}(\boldsymbol{\lambda}'),p}=\{\mathcal{E}_p([\mathbf{1}_{t}(l_1+1,l_2+1),(k_1,\cdots,k_{t})]):(k_1,\cdots,k_{t})\in\mathcal{N}_p,
k_1+k_2=k'_1,k_i=k'_{k-1},i=3,\cdots,t\}$.
Fix $\boldsymbol{\lambda}=[\mathbf{1}_{t}(l_1+1,l_2+1),(k_1,\cdots,k_{t})]$.
Let $\mathbf{i}$ be a matroid on $\mathcal{N}$ with submatroid
$U_{k_1+k_{l_1+1}+k_{l_2+1}+1,n_1+n_l}$
on $\mathcal{N}_1\cup\mathcal{N}_{l+1}\cup\mathcal{N}_{l+2}$ and other elements as loops, i.e.,
\begin{equation*}
\mathbf{i}(\mathcal{A})=\min\{k_1+k_{l_1+1}+k_{l_2+1}+1,|\mathcal{A}\cap (\mathcal{N}_1\cup\mathcal{N}_{l+1}\cup\mathcal{N}_{l+2})|\},\ \mathcal{A}\subset\mathcal{N}.
\end{equation*}
It can be checked that $\mathbf{s}=\mathbf{s}(\mathbf{i},p)$ satisfies
\begin{align*}
s_{k_1,k_2,\cdots,k_l,k_{l+1}+1,k_{l+2},\cdots,k_t}+s_{k_1,k_2,\cdots,k_{l_2},k_{l_2+1}+1,k_{k_2+2}\cdots,k_t}&>s_{k_1,k_2,\cdots,k_t}+s_{k_1,k_2,\cdots,k_{l_1},k_{l_1+1}+1,k_{l_1+2},\cdots,k_{l_2}, k_{l_2+1}+1,k_{l_2+2},\cdots,k_t},\\
s_{i,j,k_3,\cdots,k_l,k_{l+1}+1,k_{l+2},\cdots,k_t}+s_{i,j,k_3,\cdots,k_{l_2},k_{l_2+1}+1,k_{k_2+2}\cdots,k_t}&=s_{i,j,k_3,\cdots,k_t}+s_{i,j,k_3,\cdots,k_{l_1},k_{l_1+1}+1,k_{l_1+2},\cdots,k_{l_2}, k_{l_2+1}+1,k_{l_2+2},\cdots,k_t},\\
i+j=k_1+k_2,(i,j)\neq(k_1,k_2),
\end{align*}
which implies that
$\mathcal{E}_{p}(\boldsymbol{\lambda})$ in
$\mathfrak{E}_{\mathcal{E}_{p'}(\boldsymbol{\lambda}'),p}$.
Now, we have proved that
For any
$\mathcal{E}_{p'}(\boldsymbol{\lambda}')\in\mathfrak{E}_{p'}$ with
$\boldsymbol{\lambda}'\in\mathfrak{N}_{p'}$, for each $\boldsymbol{\lambda}\in\mathfrak{N}_{p}$,
$\mathcal{E}_{p}(\boldsymbol{\lambda})\in
\mathfrak{E}_{\mathcal{E}_{p'}(\boldsymbol{\lambda}'),p}$ has
an isolation in $\mathfrak{E}_{\mathcal{E}_{p'}(\boldsymbol{\lambda}'),p}$.
Therefore, this
lemma is true.
\hfill\QED
\section*{Acknowledgments}
Qi Chen thanks Dr.\ Tarik Kaced and Dr.\ Satyajit Thakor for the insightful
discussions.
This work was partially supported by a grant from the University
Grants Committee of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, China
(Project No. AoE/E-02/08) and
partially supported by grants from National Natural Science Foundation of China (Funding Code), and Shenzhen Key Laboratory of Network Coding Key Technology and Application, Shenzhen, China (ZSDY20120619151314964).
|
\section{Introduction}
Comments are widely growing in web: for a product, a news article, or a sport game. They are usually much shorter than main articles, but large in number with numerous authors. The rich set of responses from varieties of audience, comments, now are analyzed by lots of researchers who believe that they show important aspects of the main article.
Spammers also found the importance of the comments and started to abuse all kinds of comment system and overwhelmed other legitimate comments. They usually exploits the comment system with automatic programs to keep posting their propaganda.
The behavior of the spammers shows a critical point to detect them. Most of their contents are repeated under the same author name. There are sever researches \cite{Mishne2005a,Jindal2007,Lim2010,Fei2013} that compute content similarity to detect such spammers. They make use of language model \cite{Mishne2005a}, or set intersection similarity \cite{Broder1997,Jindal2007}, or average cosine similarity \cite{Lim2010,Fei2013}. In this paper, we will use much faster but an effective method: the structural rank of author specific term-document matrix to detect the spammers.
\section{Related Work}
Our work is close to social media spam detection as they usually deal with short documents with large number of authors. The approaches are slightly different from traditional spam detection which focuses emails or websites. \cite{Heymann2007} is a good survey of dealing with spam in social media.
Various content-based features were found effective detecting spams or spammers. \cite{Mishne2005a} used language models to detect spams in blog posts. Bag-of-anchors and bag-of-url were used in \cite{Kolari2006}. \cite{Cattuto2007} defined folksonomy which are tags co-occurancing in network neighbors to detect spammers. \cite{Lim2010,Fei2013} computed average all-pair cosine similarity of one specific author with the help of other features.
User networking behavior were also well studied in this area. \cite{Krause2008} make use of tagging behavior of a user, such as user concurrence with other spammers. \cite{Benevenuto2009} did similar approach categorizing users on Youtube into spammers, promoters, or legitimate users. \cite{Moh2010} did similar approach on Twitter. \cite{Lim2010} proposed a behavior model adding review score features testing such as its fairness with other features. \cite{Fei2013} additionally takes in to account trends of the review (called burstness of review). Graph similarity based detection was used in \cite{Wang2011}.
\section{Structural Rank}\label{sec:structural-rank}
The structural rank is the maximum rank of all possible matrices of the same non-zero pattern. Since it only considers the non-zero patterns, we can make use of bipartite graph traverse algorithms for an efficient computation instead of traditional methods for numerical (or theoretical) rank of the matrix. Computing the numerical rank takes $O(m n^2)$ with a matrix $A\in\mathbb{R}^{m \times n}, m \ge n$ by computing only singular values using SVD.
There are efficient algorithms computing structural rank \cite{Pothen1990,Duff1981}. The worst case time complexity was shown $O(\tau n)$ where $\tau$ is the number of non-zero entries of the matrix; however, \cite{Duff1981} also showed it will run $O(\tau + n)$ in most practices.
The computation benefit is easily noticeable in sparse matrices. In sparse matrices, we know number of non-zero entries are much smaller than the size of the matrix: $\tau \ll mn$. Consequently, $O(\tau n) \ll O(m n^2)$. Moreover, the practical bound $O(\tau + n)$ is obviously smaller than $O(m n^2)$. In section~\ref{sec:computation}, we will empirically compare the computation speed.
\section{Spammer Detection}\label{sec:method}
\subsection{Computing Content Similarity of a Set of Documents}
We assume spammers will keep posting similar contents that have similar vocabulary set. If we model comments of a spammer with a term-document matrix (rows as vocabularies and columns as documents), each columns will be similar to each other, and will become linearly dependent to each other. The rank of the term-document matrix will be \emph{relatively} lower than similar size matrix of non-spam user.
There are other ways to compute the similarity metric between columns such as cosine similarity, but traditional metrics usually defined in pairwise and not very intuitive to measure similarities of multiple documents as a whole. Average of all combinations of pairwise cosine similarities was suggested in \cite{Lim2010,Fei2013}, and it was found effected in detecting spammers. However, this type of approach is much slower than rank based metric since it needs to compute all possible combinations. Given a $n$ documents with $m$ vocabularies (term-document matrix is $\mathbb{R}^{m \times n}$), the average cosine measure needs $O(4m \cdot n^2)$. $4m$ is for a cosine similarity between two documents (note that this will be much slower in sparse vector multiplications), and $n^2$ is for all possible pairs. It is indeed slower than computing the structural rank $O(\tau + n)$. See section~\ref{sec:computation} for empirical computation results.
We propose to use structural rank (Section~\ref{sec:structural-rank}) for computing content similarity of a set of documents. 1) Solely considering the non-zero pattern will be enough to measure the content similarity of a set of documents. 2) Term-document matrices are usually very sparse and our case will be even more sparser as we deals with very short documents (comments). Bipartite graph traverse algorithm will be extremely efficient in this case. 3) It will be also much faster than other pairwise based similarity metrics.
\subsection{Spammer Score}
We propose this $SpammerScore$, which will be use to determine a spammer:
\begin{align}
SpammerScore(A) &= 1 - \frac{StructuralRank( D(A) )}{N} \label{eq:score}\\
& \quad \text{where $D(A)$ is a $M \times N$ term-document matrix of author $A$.}\notag
\end{align}
Higher the score, the relative structural rank will be lower, and will be determined as a spammer. For example, if one author keep posting the same contents over and over the score will be $1-\frac{1}{N}$. The other end will be $0$ when an author posted very different postings at each time: $1-\frac{N}{N} = 0$.
It is noteworthy to mention that our method can also be combined with other types of features such as spam dictionary or user profiles. Our method can be a good add-on features on spam detection systems providing a natural concept of duplicated comments. For example, our method is a good surrogate of average cosine similarity in \cite{Lim2010,Fei2013}.
\section{Experiment}
\subsection{Dataset}
We used NBA dataset for XDATA 2014 challenge\footnote{\url{http://www.darpa.mil/OpenCatalog/XDATA.html}}. The dataset contains 352936 comments from Yahoo sport and ESPN sport website. Comments were from public audience and were responses for NBA games of season 2011-2012$\sim$2013-2014 (3481 games). There were 42382 authors and most authors doesn't post much (35K authors have less than 10 comments). Standard preprocessing was performed to generate term-document matrices. We removed all HTML tags, lowercased, tokenized, stemmed, and removed stop words.
\subsection{Observations}
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=.65\linewidth]{spammerscore-hist}
\end{center}
\caption{Histogram of the $SpammerScore$ \eqref{eq:score} of 42K authors. Please note that upper part of histogram (around $SpammerScore=0$) are clipped for visualization. See text for details.}
\label{fig:histogram}
\end{figure}
Figure~\ref{fig:histogram} shows histogram of 42K authors of our dataset. Most of author have $SpammerScore$ of $0$, but there are also many authors with non-zero $SpammerScore$ (1237 authors). Although, the sketchy authors are in small number, they produced a large portion of comments (28\% of entire comments). They averagely wrote 80.93 comments per author while other innocent authors averagely have 6.14 comments per person. It is not surprising fact since many spammers tent to post far more actively.
Belows are examples of comments from a sample author in each score range. Please note each quote indicates one comment.
\begin{itemize}
\item \textbf{0.1 $\sim$ 0.2}: author\#74 ($N=13,StructuralRank=11,SpammerScore = 0.1538$)\vspace{0.5em}\\
``man bum hole ?",
``burn hell !",
``night lmao",
``merri christma wizard fan",
``wizard win",
``merri christma",
``dirti wizard wash ur bum",
``shawn kemp back ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !",
``. ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !",
``lol",
``lol",
``merri christma sun fan ! ! ! !",
``lol"
\item \textbf{0.2 $\sim$ 0.3}: author\#2038 ($N=28,StructuralRank=20,SpammerScore = 0.2857$)\vspace{0.5em}\\
``thunderup",
``thunderup ! ! ! westbrook",
``thunderup ! ! !",
``thunderup",
``okc babi roll !",
``damn ref ! call made mav !",
``blazer season",
``bet guy indianapoli game board complain leav baltimor .",
``thunderup",
``meh , tough loss bound lose eventu .",
``true rocket fan credit , optim , fake suddenli rocket fan pt win hilari",
``home",
``not-rocket fan houston",
``harden ball hog troll",
``thunderup",
``surg bit charact night , profession opinion .",
``bulk dive paint aggress game man .",
``lmao , guess consensu heat thunder final thunder round ... .",
``not-, clip fan .",
``thunderup houston .",
``westbrook alright !",
``thunderup",
``kd humbl",
``thunderup !",
``thunderup ! ! !",
``thunderup !",
``",
``cook shoot !"
\item \textbf{0.3 $\sim$ 0.4}: author\#1900 ($N=32,StructuralRank=22,SpammerScore = 0.3125$)\vspace{0.5em}\\
``thunder start win streak ! ! ! thunder !",
``? ?",
``thunder !",
``steven adam top player posit year . book",
``thunder ! ! ! ! !",
``beat percentag year tough task .",
``thunder ! tough game , thunder win ! !",
``! home . thunder ! ! !",
``lebron kd . absolut worthless",
``thunder ! ! ! ! !",
``thunder ! beaten game . hold fight ! okc !",
``time back track . thunder !",
``thunder ! ! ! !",
``okc ! !",
``thunder ! ! ! !",
``codi palmer not-win 'em . game !",
``okc ! ! ! !",
``thunder ! !",
``justin breakdown russel westbrook serg eject buzzer beater record west not-great . thunder team road record claim .",
``mad , bro ?",
``thunder ! !",
``thunder ! ! ! ! !",
``ayn bland point proven",
``lol",
``russel claim not-elit player .",
``mad , bro ?",
``tnt yea . mad , bro ...",
``thunder ! ! ! !",
``bench play great night . young team warrior ? gs la",
``thunder ! !",
``okc",
``okc . not-easi . thunder win ! !"
\item \textbf{0.4 $\sim$ 0.5}: author\#16625 ($N=24,StructuralRank=14,SpammerScore = 0.4167$)\vspace{0.5em}\\
``wiz",
``wizard",
``win game wizard team year",
``wizard win",
``wiz",
``blow",
``bout wizard",
``row tonight wiz",
``wiz",
``john wall good",
``wizard",
``wizard",
``easi win wizard",
``good win wizard",
``wiz",
``wiz",
``wizard win game",
``wiz",
``wiz nice comeback",
``win wiz",
``wiz babi",
``wizard win today",
``wizard win",
``wiz"
\item \textbf{0.5 $\sim$ 0.6}: author\#18054 ($N=7,StructuralRank=3,SpammerScore = 0.5714$)\vspace{0.5em}\\
``random nbsp ;",
``random nbsp ; random nbsp ; random nbsp ; random nbsp ; random nbsp ;",
``random nbsp ; random nbsp ; random nbsp ; random nbsp ;",
``random nbsp ; random nbsp ; random nbsp ;",
``random nbsp ;",
``random nbsp ;",
``random nbsp ;"
\item \textbf{0.6 $\sim$ 0.7}: author\#17205 ($N=33,StructuralRank=12,SpammerScore = 0.6364$)\vspace{0.5em}\\
``forward buck play decent team . win streak nice play ? !",
``prost !",
``prost !",
``prost !",
``prost !",
``prost !",
``prost !",
``prost !",
``prost !",
``prost !",
``prost !",
``prost !",
``scott skile bo ryan nba ... ... flourish . rest team grow tire skile yell defens orient game , leuer sir .",
``prost !",
``ersan !",
``put gooden !",
``prost !",
``play leuer !",
``milwauke buck : fun team watch ? ! awhil !",
``put leuer !",
``buck play ? ?",
``prost !",
``prost !",
``prost !",
``prost !",
``prost !",
``prost !",
``prost !",
``prost !",
``play leuer !",
``prost !",
``prost !",
``ersan final decid join team !"
\item \textbf{0.7 $\sim$ 0.8}: author\#13938 ($N=7,StructuralRank=2,SpammerScore = 0.7143$)\vspace{0.5em}\\
``http :",
``http :",
``http :",
``http :",
``http :",
``http :",
``http :"
\item \textbf{0.8 $\sim$ 0.9}: author\#11049 ($N=41,StructuralRank=7,SpammerScore = 0.8293$)\vspace{0.5em}\\
``hate gg rz smell ballz",
``hate gg rz smell ballz",
``hate gg rz smell ballz",
``hate gg rz smell ballz",
``hate gg rz smell ballz",
``hate gg rz smell ballz",
``hate gg rz smell ballz",
``hate gg rz smell ballz",
``hate gg rz smell ballz",
``hate gg rz smell ballz",
``hate gg rz smell ballz",
``hate gg rz smell ballz",
``hate gg rz smell ballz",
``hate gg rz smell ballz",
``hate gg rz smell ballz",
``hate gg rz smell ballz",
``hate gg rz smell ballz",
``hate gg rz smell ballz",
``hate gg rz smell ballz",
``hate gg rz smell ballz",
``hate gg rz smell ballz",
``hate gg rz smell ballz",
``hate gg rz smell ballz",
``hate gg rz smell ballz",
``hate gg rz smell ballz",
``hate gg rz smell ballz",
``hate gg rz smell ballz",
``hate gg rz smell ballz",
``hate gg rz smell ballz",
``hate gg rz smell ballz",
``! scum bag , seek doctor",
``mom",
``hate gg rz smell ballz",
``hate gg rz smell ballz",
``hate gg rz smell ballz",
``hate gg rz smell ballz",
``hate gg rz smell ballz",
``hate gg rz smell ballz",
``hate gg rz smell ballz",
``hate gg rz smell ballz",
``hate gg rz smell ballz"
\item \textbf{0.9 $\sim$ 1.0}: author\#7383 ($N=52,StructuralRank=5,SpammerScore = 0.9038$)\vspace{0.5em}\\
``weaker wade",
``bad deal foy crawford",
``sd sport curs",
``sam cassel",
``dsfaasdfasdf",
``dsfaasdfasdf",
``dsfaasdfasdf",
``dsfaasdfasdf",
``dsfaasdfasdf",
``dsfaasdfasdf",
``dsfaasdfasdf",
``dsfaasdfasdf",
``dsfaasdfasdf",
``dsfaasdfasdf",
``dsfaasdfasdf",
``dsfaasdfasdf",
``dsfaasdfasdf",
``dsfaasdfasdf",
``dsfaasdfasdf",
``dsfaasdfasdf",
``dsfaasdfasdf",
``dsfaasdfasdf",
``dsfaasdfasdf",
``dsfaasdfasdf",
``dsfaasdfasdf",
``dsfaasdfasdf",
``dsfaasdfasdf",
``dsfaasdfasdf",
``dsfaasdfasdf",
``dsfaasdfasdf",
``dsfaasdfasdf",
``dsfaasdfasdf",
``dsfaasdfasdf",
``dsfaasdfasdf",
``dsfaasdfasdf",
``dsfaasdfasdf",
``dsfaasdfasdf",
``dsfaasdfasdf",
``dsfaasdfasdf",
``dsfaasdfasdf",
``dsfaasdfasdf",
``dsfaasdfasdf",
``dsfaasdfasdf",
``dsfaasdfasdf",
``dsfaasdfasdf",
``dsfaasdfasdf",
``dsfaasdfasdf",
``dsfaasdfasdf",
``dsfaasdfasdf",
``dsfaasdfasdf",
``dsfaasdfasdf",
``dsfaasdfasdf"
\end{itemize}
\vspace{1em}
As we expected, the higher $SpammerScore$ is, the larger number of similar contents an author posts. Choosing a right threshold to determine spammers is not trivial. We may augment our $SpammerScore$ feature with other features and learn a classifier on a labeled training set to automatically determine the threshold.
\subsection{Computation}\label{sec:computation}
\begin{table}
\centering
\begin{tabular}{l r}
\toprule
\bf Method & \bf Time (sec) \\
\midrule
Structural rank (our proposal) & 1.523 \\
Rank (using sparse SVD) & 537.630 \\
Sparse numeric rank & 265.614 \\
Average cosine similarity & 21435.117 \\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\caption{Time comparison of four methods to compute content similarity of 42K term-document matrices. See text for details.}\label{tbl:speed}
\end{table}
In section~\ref{sec:method}, we claimed that we chose structural rank for faster content similarity computation. In this section, we empirically compare the computation time with other comparable methods as it will be a bottleneck of computing the $SpammerScore$. The task involve 42K term-document matrices with average size of $7368 \times 11$ (dictionary size is 7346 and average number of comments per author is 11).
Table~\ref{tbl:speed} includes time consumptions of four different content similarity methods. 1) The structural rank is computed with Matlab's implementation \cite{Pothen1990}, and is our proposal. 2) We also computed a true rank of the matrix using sparse SVD, which is one of the most accurate way to determine matrix rank. The method is very close to default Matlab procedure, but we change dense SVD to sparse SVD as the default method failed to run. 3) There is another method that directly compute numeric rank of a sparse matrix without SVD. We uses a \emph{SPNRANK}\footnote{Leslie Foster: \url{http://www.math.sjsu.edu/singular/matrices/software/SJsingular/spnrank.m}} for this. 4) The average cosine similarity \cite{Lim2010,Fei2013} was computed by Matlab implementation \emph{PDIST}\footnote{http://www.mathworks.com/help/stats/pdist.html} then take average of all pairwise similarities.
Results in Table~\ref{tbl:speed} show that the proposed method is far faster than any other method in large magnitude. It is because our dataset is extremely sparse (average density = 0.001206). Please note that it is a usual case of handling comments as lengths of document is very short. We believe this efficient computation is especially useful in practice since we usually have billions of users and comments.
\newpage
\section{Discussion}
In this paper, we introduced an efficient way detecting spammers by structural rank of per-author term-document matrix. The use of structural rank turned out to be much faster than using traditional rank in our scenario. We hope to extend this line of work to include richer set of features to achieve state-of-the-art spammer detection performance.
We also feel the structural rank needs an additional attention measuring multi-document similarity; for example, evaluating document clusters, document relevance, or in search engines.
\bibliographystyle{plain}
|
\section{Introduction}
Let $q$ be a non-zero complex number which is not a root of unity.
Let $\Glie := \mathfrak{gl}(M,N)$ be the {\it general linear Lie superalgebra}. Let $U_q(\Gaff)$ be the associated quantum affine superalgebra. (We refer to \S \ref{sec: quantum affine superalgebra} for the precise definition.) This is a Hopf superalgebra neither commutative nor co-commutative, and it can be seen as a deformation of the universal enveloping algebra of the following affine Lie superalgebra:
\begin{align*}
& L \Glie := \Glie \otimes \BC[t,t^{-1}] = \bigoplus_{1 \leq i,j \leq M+N} E_{ij} \otimes \BC[t,t^{-1}].
\end{align*}
Here the $E_{ij}$ for $1 \leq i,j \leq M+N$ are the elementary matrices in $\Glie$.
In this paper we are mainly concerned with the structure of tensor products of finite-dimensional simple $U_q(\Gaff)$-modules.
\subsection{Backgrounds.} Quantum superalgebras appear as the algebraic supersymmetries of some solvable models. For example, the quantum affine superalgebra $U_q(\widehat{\mathfrak{sl}(M,N)})$ is the quantum supersymmetry analogue of the supersymmetric $t-J$ model (with or without a boundary). A key problem is to diagonalize the commuting transfer matrices. In principle, this can be achieved \cite{Kojima} by constructing the bosonization of vertex operators, which are built over some highest weight Fock representations of $U_q(\widehat{\mathfrak{sl}(M,N)})$.
Another main interest in quantum superalgebras comes from the integrability structure in the context of the AdS/CFT correspondence \cite{Beisert1}. In this case, the underlying simple Lie superalgebra is $\mathfrak{psl}(2,2)$, which is the quotient of Lie superalgebra $\mathfrak{sl}(2,2)$ by its center, the line generated by the identity matrix. A striking feature differing $\mathfrak{psl}(2,2)$ from all the other simple Lie superalgebras (including simple Lie algebras) is that this simple Lie superalgebra admits a non-trivial three-fold central extension. Based on the Lie superalgebra $\mathfrak{psl}(2,2)$, several quantum superalgebras have been built as algebraic supersymmetries in AdS/CFT and the closely related Hubbard model: the quantum deformation of extended $\mathfrak{sl}(2,2)$ in \cite{Beisert2}, the quantum affine deformation of extended $\mathfrak{sl}(2,2)$ in \cite{Beisert3}, and the conventional Yangian of extended $\mathfrak{sl}(2,2)$ in \cite{Beisert4,Beisert5}, to name a few. Representations of these superalgebras have been considered from different perspectives: \cite{Beisert6,Molev1} for centrally extended $\mathfrak{sl}(2,2)$ and \cite{ADT} for the conventional Yangian. For the quantum (affine) superalgebra of extended $\mathfrak{sl}(2,2)$, only 4-dimensional fundamental representations and $R$-matrices arising from their tensor products were discussed in \cite{Beisert2,Beisert3}.
More closely related to our present paper is the work of Bazhanov-Tsuboi \cite{BT} on Baxter's $\textbf{Q}$-operators related to the quantum affine superalgebra $U_q(\widehat{\mathfrak{sl}(2,1)})$. In {\it loc. cit} they constructed the so-called {\it oscillator representations} of the upper Borel subalgebra $\mathfrak{B}_+$. These representations gave rise directly to the $\textbf{Q}$-operators and therefore found remarkable applications in spin chain models and in quantum field theory. Their oscillation construction has been generalized to the quantum affine superalgebra $U_q(\widehat{\mathfrak{gl}(M,N)})$ in a recent paper of Tsuboi \cite{Tsuboi} by using RTT realization.
On the other hand, Hernandez-Jimbo \cite{HJ} constructed similar oscillator representations of the upper Borel subalgebra $\mathfrak{B}_+$ of an arbitrary non-twisted quantum affine algebra. In their context, oscillator representations were realized as certain asymptotic limits of Kirillov-Reshetikhin modules over the quantum affine algebra, hence bearing the name {\it asymptotic representations}. The asymptotic construction enabled Frenkel-Hernandez \cite{FH} to give a representation theoretic interpretation of Baxter's $\textbf{T-Q}$ relations and to solve a conjecture of Frenkel-Reshetikhin on the spectra of quantum integrable systems \cite{FR}.
Based on the above progress, it is natural to consider representation theory of the quantum affine superalgebra $U_q(\Gaff)$, and more specifically the quantum superalgebras related to centrally extended $\mathfrak{sl}(2,2)$. In the present paper, $U_q(\Gaff)$ is our main concern.
We are motivated by the following question: can the oscillator representations related to the quantum affine superalgebra $U_q(\Gaff)$ in \cite{BT,Tsuboi} be realized as asymptotic limits of Kirillov-Reshetikhin modules in the spirit of Hernandez-Jimbo?
In the super case, the representation theory of quantum affine superalgebras is still less developed, compared to the vast literature on representations of quantum affine algebras (see the two review papers \cite{CH,L}).
\subsection{Representations of $U_q(\Gaff)$.} In a recent paper \cite{Z}, we obtained a classification of finite-dimensional simple modules for the quantum affine superalgebra $U_q(\Gaff)$. For the Kac-Moody superalgebra $\Glie$, let $I_0 := \{1,2,\cdots,M+N-1\}$ be the set of vertices of the distinguished Dynkin diagram. Hence $i \in I_0$ corresponds to the simple root $\alpha_i$ and $\alpha_M$ is an odd isotopic simple root. The main result in {\it loc. cit} can be stated as follows: up to tensor product by one-dimensional modules, finite-dimensional simple $U_q(\Gaff)$-modules are of the form $S(\underline{f})$ where $\underline{f} = (f_i)_{i \in I_0}$ is an $I_0$-tuple of rational functions $f_i(z) \in \BC(z)$ such that:
\begin{itemize}
\item[(a)] if $i \neq M$ then there exists a polynomial $P_i(z)$ with constant term $1$ such that $f(z) = q_i^{\deg P_i} \frac{P_i(zq_i^{-1})}{P_i(zq_i)}$. Here $q_i = q$ for $i \leq M$ and $q^{-1}$ otherwise;
\item[(b)] if $i = M$, then $f_i(z)$ as a meromorphic function is regular at $z = 0$ and $z = \infty$. Moreover, $f_i(0) f_i(\infty) = 1$.
\end{itemize}
We remark that (a) implies (b) but not vice versa. Hence this classification result is different from the case of quantum affine algebras \cite{CP1}.
In analogy with the non-graded case, Kirillov-Reshetikhin modules for $U_q(\Gaff)$ will be those modules $S(\varpi_{n,a}^{(i)})$ where $i \in I_0$ is a Dynkin vertex, $a \in \BC^{\times}$ is a spectral parameter, $n \in \BZ_{>0}$ is a positive integer, and $\varpi_{n,a}^{(i)}$ is the $I_0$-tuple of rational functions whose $i$-th coordinate is $q_i^n\frac{1-zaq_i^{-n}}{1-zaq_i^n}$ and whose other coordinates are $1$. When $n = 1$, the Kirillov-Reshetikhin modules are also called {\it fundamental modules}.
\subsubsection{Asymptotic limits.} Let us fix a Dynkin vertex $i \in I_0$ and a spectral parameter $a \in \BC^{\times}$. For $n \in \BZ_{> 0}$, the $i$-th coordinate for $\varpi_{n,aq_i^n}^{(i)}$ has the asymptotic expression $q_i^n \frac{1-za}{1-zaq_i^{2n}}$.
Informally, by taking asymptotic limit of the Kirillov-Reshetikhin modules $S(\varpi_{n,aq_i^n}^{(i)})$ we should get a \lq\lq module\rq\rq where the $i$-th coordinate is $1-za$ (by first forgetting the constant term $q_i^n$ and then taking the analysis limit $\lim_{n \rightarrow \infty} q_i^n = 0$).
This module should be an oscillator module.
The above intuitive argument was made mathematically rigorous in \cite{HJ}, where inductive/projective systems of Kirillov-Reshetikhin modules were constructed and their inductive/projective limits were shown to be oscillator modules. One of the main ingredients for the construction of these systems is a cyclicity property of tensor products of Kirillov-Reshetikhin modules of a particular form. Also a result of \cite[Proposition 3.2]{Hernandez} on $q$-characters of tensor products of simple modules was needed to establish stability and asymptotic properties of these systems.
\subsubsection{Tensor products of Kirillov-Reshetikhin modules.} Let us explain in detail the cyclicity result used in \cite{HJ}. In this paragraph let us replace the Lie superalgebra $\Glie$ by an arbitrary simple Lie algebra $\Glie''$. The set $J$ of Dynkin vertices, the numbers $q_j$ for $j \in J$, and the Kirillov-Reshetikhin modules $S(\varpi_{n,a}^{(j)})$ are similarly defined. Then
\begin{itemize}
\item[(C)] the tensor products $\bigotimes_{l=1}^k S(\varpi_{1,aq_j^{-2l}}^{(j)})$ for $k \geq 1$ are cyclic.
\end{itemize}
Here being {\it cyclic} means being of highest $\ell$-weight with respect to the Drinfeld type triangular decomposition of $U_q(\widehat{\Glie''})$.
Let us give a quick overview of cyclicity property of tensor products of finite-dimensional simple modules over $U_q(\widehat{\Glie''})$. We refer to \cite[\S 5]{CH} for more historical comments. In \cite[Conjecture 1]{AK} it was conjectured by Akasaka-Kashiwara that
\begin{itemize}
\item[(AK)] let $V_1,V_2,\cdots,V_n$ be fundamental $U_q(\widehat{\Glie''})$-modules and let $x_1,x_2,\cdots,x_n \in \BZ$. Then the tensor product $\bigotimes_{l=1}^n (V_i)_{q^{x_i}}$ is cyclic if $x_i \geq x_j$ for all $1 \leq i < j \leq n$.
\end{itemize}
This conjecture has been proved in the case of type $A_n^{(1)}$ and $C_n^{(1)}$ in {\it loc. cit} and later by Kashiwara \cite[Theorem 9.1]{Kashiwara} in full generality. Both proofs relied on crystal bases theory for modules over the quantum affine algebra. Now (C) is a direct consequence of (AK).
At the same time, a geometric proof of (AK) in the simply laced case was given by Varagnolo-Vasserot using quiver varieties \cite[Corollary 7.17]{VV}.
Also (AK) was generalized by Chari \cite[Theorem 4.4]{Chari} with a more Lie theoretic and algebraic approach. By using the Weyl group action on the set of weights of a $U_q(\Glie'')$-module, and the Braid group action on the affine Cartan subalgebra of $U_q(\widehat{\Glie''})$, Chari reduced the cyclicity problem on $U_q(\widehat{\Glie''})$-modules to a series of similar problems on $U_q(\widehat{\mathfrak{sl}_2})$-modules corresponding to a fixed reduced expression of the longest element $w_0$ in the Weyl group. Eventually a sufficient condition for a tensor products of simple modules $S(\underline{f})$ to be cyclic was given in terms of Drinfeld polynomials defining these $\underline{f}$ as in (a).
\subsubsection{The super case.}
To construct asymptotic limits, we need inevitably such cyclicity property as (C) of tensor products of Kirillov-Reshetikhin modules over the quantum affine superalgebra $U_q(\Gaff)$. However, the main techniques used in the non-graded case to deduce cyclicity results cannot be applied directly to the super case. For example, crystal base theory and quiver geometry for quantum affine superalgebras, or even for finite type quantum superalgebras, are still less developed \cite{BKK}. The main drawback comes from the fact that the Weyl group of $\Glie$, being $\mathfrak{S}_M \times \mathfrak{S}_N$ instead of $\mathfrak{S}_{M+N}$, is too small to capture enough information on weights and linkage.
Nevertheless, we can prove a weak version of (AK) (yet stronger than (C)) for quantum affine superalgebras, by modifying the arguments of Chari in \cite{Chari}. Although our motivation of studying the cyclicity property of tensor products comes from the asymptotic construction, we think that cyclicity property is of independent interest, and a large part of the present paper is devoted to proving this weak version of (AK), Theorem \ref{thm: cyclicity of tensor product of KR modules}.
For this purpose, we shall adopt the RTT realization of the quantum affine superalgebra $U_q(\Gaff)$ instead of the Drinfeld realization. The main advantages are that: first of all, RTT generators are quantum analogues of such loop generators $E_{ij} \otimes t^n \in L\Glie$; secondly and more importantly, RTT generators have nice coproduct formulas. Our present work is inspired on the one hand by the work \cite{Molev} of Molev, Tolstoy and Rui-Bin Zhang on simplicity of tensor products of evaluation modules for the quantum affine algebra $U_q(\widehat{\mathfrak{gl}_N})$, where RTT realization and coproduct formulas for RTT generators made the relevant calculations transparent, and on the other hand by the work of Tsuboi \cite{Tsuboi} on oscillation constructions using RTT realization as mentioned before.
In comparison to the non-graded case \cite{AK,Chari,Kashiwara,VV}, our approach of studying cyclicity of tensor products differs from the perspective that we use (quantum analogue of) root vectors of the quantum affine superalgebra instead of Weyl groups. This is an idea already explored in our previous paper \cite{Z} on classification of finite-dimensional simple modules, where Weyl group was replaced by Poincar\'{e}-Birkhoff-Witt linear generators in terms of Drinfeld generators for the quantum affine superalgebra. In particular, our approach applies also to quantum affine algebras of type $A$ (non-graded).
\subsection{Main results.} We study in full detail the RTT realization of the quantum affine superalgebra $U_q(\Gaff)$, including its definition, different kinds of grading, its degeneration to the finite type quantum superalgebra $U_q(\Glie)$, evaluation morphisms, its relationship with quantum double construction, and coproduct formulas for Drinfeld generators. Almost all the relevant results are proved in a uniform way. This makes the present paper longer than we have expected.
The first main result is an analogue of (AK) under the assumption that the fundamental modules $V_i$ are the same (Theorem \ref{thm: cyclicity of tensor product of KR modules}).
The idea of proof follows largely that of Chari \cite{Chari}. The RTT generators will replace the role of the Weyl group. The quantum analogues of $E_{1,M+N} \otimes t^n, E_{M+N,1} \otimes t^n$ will be candidates for the longest element $w_0$ in the Weyl group. For the reduction argument, we will use representation theory of the $q$-Yangian $Y_q(\mathfrak{gl}(1,1))$ instead of $U_q(\widehat{\mathfrak{sl}_2})$. Here $q$-Yangian $Y_q(\Glie)$ is a sub-Hopf-superalgebra of $U_q(\Gaff)$ generated by half of the RTT generators. It can be viewed as the upper Borel subalgebra.
Our second main result (Theorem \ref{thm: web property}) is on representation theory of $Y_q(\mathfrak{gl}(1,1))$.
\begin{itemize}
\item[(1)] There is a classification of finite-dimensional simple modules, up to tensor product by one-dimensional modules, in terms of highest $\ell$-weights parametrized by the set $\CR$ of such rational functions $f(z)$ that $f(0) = 1$ (hence regular at $z = 0$). Let $V(f)$ be the simple module of highest $\ell$-weight $f$.
\item[(2)] For $f_1,\cdots,f_k \in \CR$, the tensor product $\bigotimes_{j=1}^k V(f_j)$ is of highest $\ell$-weight (resp. of lowest $\ell$-weight) if and only if: for all $1 \leq i < j \leq k$ (resp. for all $1 \leq j < i \leq k$) the set of poles of $f_i$ does not intersect with the set of zeros of $f_j$.
\item[(3)] The tensor product in (2) is simple if and only if it is of highest and lowest $\ell$-weight.
\end{itemize}
We can see (2) as a stronger improvement of (AK) for the $q$-Yangian $Y_q(\mathfrak{gl}(1,1))$ as the necessary condition of cyclicity is also described. However, (2) cannot be generalized to higher rank quantum affine superalgebras or $q$-Yangians. Indeed, (2) already fails if we replace $Y_q(\mathfrak{gl}(1,1))$ by the quantum affine algebra $U_q(\widehat{\mathfrak{sl}_2})$, as seen in \cite{CP1,Mukhin} where the condition for a tensor product of simple $U_q(\widehat{\mathfrak{sl}_2})$-modules to be cyclic was more sophisticated. Also, in the non-graded case due to the Weyl group action (more precisely the element $w_0$) a tensor product of simple modules is of highest $\ell$-weight if and only if it is of lowest $\ell$-weight. Hence (3) is really a special feature in the super case.
Except Chari's Lemma which requires coproduct formulas of Drinfeld generators, the proof of Theorem \ref{thm: web property} is quite elementary and explicit. Eventually we arrive at a classical linear algebra problem on determining linear independence of some polynomials of a particular form (Lemma \ref{lem: linear independence of polynomials}).
Surprisingly, reductions from $U_q(\Gaff)$-modules to $Y_q(\mathfrak{gl}(1,1))$-modules are already enough to prove Theorem \ref{thm: cyclicity of tensor product of KR modules}. We believe that more general cyclicity results can be deduced in this way, although this needs extra efforts. See the end of \S \ref{sec: proof}.
In an upcoming paper \cite{Z2}, we shall use Theorem \ref{thm: cyclicity of tensor product of KR modules} to construct inductive systems of Kirillov-Reshetikhin modules and realize their limits as asymptotic modules over the $q$-Yangian $Y_q(\Glie)$, hence extending Hernandez-Jimbo's asymptotic construction to the super case. Indeed, the $Y_q(\mathfrak{gl}(1,1))$-modules $V(1-z)$ and $V(\frac{1}{1-z})$ can be viewed as prototypes of asymptotic modules.
At last, we would like to point out that nearly all the results in the present paper have direct analogues when replacing the quantum affine superalgebra $U_q(\Gaff)$ (or the $q$-Yangian) by the Yangian $Y(\Glie)$, a deformation of the universal enveloping algebra of the current Lie superalgebra $\Glie \otimes \BC[t]$. The proofs of these results are essentially the same, as $Y(\Glie)$ admits a similar RTT realization \cite{Zrb2}. In \cite[Theorem 5]{Zrb1}, a similar criteria for a tensor product of finite-dimensional simple $Y(\mathfrak{gl}(1,1))$-modules to be simple was given by Rui-Bin Zhang with a quite different approach from ours. Cyclicity of tensor products and Drinfeld realization for the Yangian were not considered there in full generality.
\subsection{Outline.} The paper is organized as follows. \S \ref{sec: preparation} collects some basic facts about highest weight representations of the finite type quantum superalgebra $U_q(\Glie)$. In \S \ref{sec: definition} we study in detail the RTT realization of the quantum affine superalgebra $U_q(\Gaff)$, review the Ding-Frenkel homomorphism between Drinfeld realization and RTT realization, and give an estimation for coproduct of Drinfeld generators (Proposition \ref{prop: Drinfeld coproduct estimation}), which is needed to prove Chari's lemma in the super case (Lemma \ref{lem: cyclicity Chari}). \S \ref{sec: main result} studies highest $\ell$-weight representations for $U_q(\Gaff)$ and states the first main result (Theorem \ref{thm: cyclicity of tensor product of KR modules}) on tensor products of Kirillov-Reshetikhin modules. \S \ref{sec: Yangian} discusses finite-dimensional representation theory for the $q$-Yangian $Y_q(\mathfrak{gl}(1,1))$, which is used in \S \ref{sec: proof} to conclude the proof of Theorem \ref{thm: cyclicity of tensor product of KR modules}. In \S \ref{sec: app}, we give the complete proof of Proposition \ref{prop: Drinfeld coproduct estimation} on coproduct of Drinfeld generators.
\subsection*{Acknowledgments.} The author is grateful to his supervisor David Hernandez for numerous discussions, and to Paul Zinn-Justin from whom he learned the notion of a Yang-Baxter algebra in his course \lq\lq Int\'{e}grabilit\'{e} Quantique\rq\rq\ at Universit\'{e}\ Paris 6.
Part of the present work was done while the author was visiting Centre de Recherches Math\'{e}matiques in Montr\'{e}al and was participating in the workshops \lq\lq Combinatorial Representation Theory\rq\rq\ in Montr\'{e}al and \lq\lq Yangians and Quantum Loop Algebras\rq\rq\ in Austin. He is grateful to the organizers for hospitality and to Vyjayanthi Chari, Sachin Gautam and Valerio Toledano Laredo for stimulating discussions.
\section{Preliminaries} \label{sec: preparation}
In this section, we introduce the basic notations concerning the quantum superalgebra $U_q(\mathfrak{gl}(M,N))$ and its representations. Following Benkart-Kang- Kashiwara we review the character formula for fundamental representations.
\subsection{Conventions.} \label{sec: convention}
Throughout this paper, $q$ is fixed to be a non-zero complex number and not a root of unity. All the vector superspaces and superalgebras are defined over the base field $\BC$. Recall that a vector superspace $V$ is a vector space $V$ with a $\super$-grading $V = V_{\even} \oplus V_{\odd}$. We write $|x| = i$ for $i \in \super$ and $x \in V_i$. It will happen usually that $V$ carries another grading by an abelian group $P$. In this case, we write $V = \oplus_{\alpha \in P} (V)_{\alpha}$ (we keep the parenthesis most of the time) and $|x|_P = \alpha$ for $\alpha \in P$ and $x \in (V)_{\alpha}$.
Fix $M,N \in \BZ_{\geq 0}$. Set $I := \{1,2,\cdots,M+N\}$. Define two maps as follows:
\begin{displaymath}
|\cdot|: I \longrightarrow \super, i \mapsto |i| =: \begin{cases}
\even & (i\leq M), \\
\odd & (i > M);
\end{cases} \quad d_{\cdot}: I \longrightarrow \BZ, i \mapsto d_i := \begin{cases}
1 & (i \leq M),\\
-1 & (i > M).
\end{cases}
\end{displaymath}
Set $q_i := q^{d_i}$. Set $\BP := \oplus_{i \in I} \BZ \epsilon_i$. Let $(,): \BP \times \BP \longrightarrow \BZ$ be the bilinear form defined by $(\epsilon_i,\epsilon_j) = \delta_{ij}d_i$. Let $|\cdot|: \BP \longrightarrow \super$ be the morphism of abelian groups such that $|\epsilon_i| = |i|$.
In the following, {\it only} three cases of $|x| \in \super$ are admitted: $x \in I$; $x \in \BP$; $x$ is a $\super$-homogeneous vector of a vector superspace.
Unless otherwise stated, $\Glie$ will always be the Lie superalgebra $\mathfrak{gl}(M,N)$, which is, the vector space $\oplus_{i,j \in I} \BC E_{ij}$ with $\super$-grading and Lie bracket:
\begin{displaymath}
|E_{ij}| = |i| + |j|, \quad [E_{ij},E_{kl}] = \delta_{jk} E_{il} - (-1)^{(|i|+|j|)(|k|+|l|)} \delta_{il} E_{kj}.
\end{displaymath}
Here, we view $\super$ as a ring and $(-1)^{\cdot}: \super \longrightarrow \{1,-1\}$ as the sign map. Let $\Hlie = \oplus_{i\in I} \BC E_{ii}$. Then $\Hlie$ is a Cartan subalgebra with respect to which $\Glie$ has a root space decomposition:
\begin{displaymath}
\Glie = \Hlie \oplus (\bigoplus_{i,j \in I, i \neq j} (\Glie)_{\epsilon_i - \epsilon_j}), \quad (\Glie)_{\epsilon_i - \epsilon_j} = \{x \in \Glie \ |\ [E_{kk},x] = (\delta_{ik}-\delta_{jk}) x\ \textrm{for}\ k \in I \} = \BC E_{ij}.
\end{displaymath}
Set $I_0 := I \setminus \{M+N\}$. For $i \in I_0$, set $\alpha_i := \epsilon_i - \epsilon_{i+1} \in \BP$. Introduce the root lattice $\BQ := \oplus_{i\in I_0} \BZ \alpha_i \subset \BP$. Define $\BQ_{\geq 0} := \oplus_{i\in I_0} \BZ_{\geq 0} \alpha_i$.
\subsection{The quantum superalgebra $U_q(\Glie)$.} This is the superalgebra defined by generators $e_i^{\pm}, t_j^{\pm 1}$ ($i \in I_0,\ j \in I$) with $\super$-degrees $|e_i^{\pm}| = |\alpha_i|$ and $|t_j^{\pm 1}| = 0$ and with relations
\begin{align*}
& t_j t_j^{-1} = t_j^{-1} t_j = 1,\quad t_i t_j = t_j t_i \quad (i,j \in I), \\
& t_i e_j^{\pm} t_i^{-1} = q^{\pm d_i (\epsilon_i, \epsilon_j - \epsilon_{j+1})} e_j^{\pm} \quad (i \in I, j \in I_0), \\
& [e_i^+,e_j^-] = \delta_{ij} \frac{t_i^{d_i}t_{i+1}^{-d_{i+1}}- t_i^{-d_i}t_{i+1}^{d_{i+1}} }{q_i - q_i^{-1}} \quad (i,j \in I_0),
\end{align*}
together with Serre relations which we do not repeat (see \cite[\S 2.2]{Z} for example). $U_q(\Glie)$ has a Hopf superalgebra structure with coproduct: for $i \in I_0, j \in I$
\begin{align*}
& \Delta (e_i^+) = 1 \otimes e_i^+ + e_i^+ \otimes t_i^{-d_i}t_{i+1}^{d_{i+1}},\quad \Delta(e_i^-) = t_i^{d_i}t_{i+1}^{-d_{i+1}} \otimes e_i^- + e_i^- \otimes 1, \quad \Delta(t_j) = t_j \otimes t_j.
\end{align*}
There exists a $\BQ$-grading on $U_q(\Glie)$ respecting the Hopf superalgebra structure:
\begin{displaymath}
|t_j|_{\BQ} = 0, \quad |e_i^{\pm}|_{\BQ} = \pm \alpha_i \quad (i \in I_0,\ j \in I).
\end{displaymath}
In general, for $\alpha \in \BQ \subset \BP$, we have
\begin{displaymath}
(U_q(\Glie))_{\alpha} = \{x \in U_q(\Glie)\ |\ t_i x t_i^{-1} = q^{d_i(\epsilon_i,\alpha)} x\ \textrm{for}\ i \in I \}.
\end{displaymath}
This $\BQ$-grading is compatible with the $\super$-grading: $(U_q(\Glie))_{\alpha} \subset U_q(\Glie)_{|\alpha|}$ for $\alpha \in \BQ$.
\subsection{Highest weight representations.} Let $\lambda \in \BP$. Up to isomorphism, there exists a unique simple $U_q(\Glie)$-module, denoted by $L(\lambda)$, which is generated by a vector $v_{\lambda}$ satisfying:
\begin{displaymath}
|v_{\lambda}| = |\lambda|,\quad e_i^+ v_{\lambda} = 0, \quad t_j v_{\lambda} = q^{d_j(\epsilon_j,\lambda)} v_{\lambda} \quad (i \in I_0, j \in I).
\end{displaymath}
The action of the $t_j$ endows $L(\lambda)$ with the following $\BP$-grading:
\begin{displaymath}
(L(\lambda))_{\alpha} := \{x \in L(\lambda)\ |\ t_j x = q^{d_j(\epsilon_j,\lambda)} x\ \textrm{for}\ j \in I\}.
\end{displaymath}
Using the triangular decomposition for $U_q(\Glie)$, one can show the following: $(L(\lambda))_{\lambda} = \BC v_{\lambda}$; the $\BP$-grading on $L(\lambda)$ is compatible with the $\super$-grading; for $\alpha \in \BP$, $(L(\lambda))_{\alpha} \neq 0$ only if $\lambda - \alpha \in \BQ_{\geq 0}$.
It was shown \cite{Zrb} that for $\lambda \in \BP$, $L(\lambda)$ is finite-dimensional if and only if $d_i(\lambda,\alpha_i) > 0$ for all $i \in I_0\setminus \{M\}$.
\begin{example} \label{example: natural representation quantum superalgebra}
(Natural representation.) Let $\BV = \oplus_{i\in I} \BC v_i$ be the vector superspace with $\super$-grading $|v_i| = |i|$. On $\BV$ there is a natural representation $\rho_{(0)}$ of $U_q(\Glie)$ defined by:
\begin{displaymath}
\rho_{(0)}(e_i^+) = E_{i,i+1},\quad \rho_{(0)}(e_i^-) = E_{i+1,i},\quad \rho_{(0)}(t_j) = \sum_{k\in I} q^{d_j(\epsilon_j,\epsilon_k)} E_{kk} \quad (i \in I_0, j \in I).
\end{displaymath}
Here the $E_{ij} \in \End(\BV)$ for $i,j \in I$ are defined by $E_{ij} v_k = \delta_{jk}v_i$. Clearly, $\BV = L(\epsilon_1)$ as a $U_q(\Glie)$-module with $v_1$ a highest weight vector, and $(\BV)_{\epsilon_i} = \BC v_i$ for $i \in I$.
\end{example}
\begin{example} \label{example: tensor square of natural representations}
Consider the tensor product $\BV^{\otimes 2}$ as a $U_q(\Glie)$-module. Define subspaces
\begin{align}
& \BV^{+} := \bigoplus_{1 \leq i < j \leq M+N} \BC(qv_i \otimes v_j + (-1)^{|i||j|} v_j \otimes v_i) \oplus \bigoplus_{k=1}^M \BC (v_k \otimes v_k), \label{def: quantum symmetric space} \\
& \BV^{-} := \bigoplus_{1 \leq i < j \leq M+N} \BC(q^{-1}v_i \otimes v_j - (-1)^{|i||j|} v_j \otimes v_i) \oplus \bigoplus_{k=1}^N \BC (v_{M+k} \otimes v_{M+k}). \label{def: quantum anti-symmetric space}
\end{align}
Then $\BV^{\otimes 2} = \BV^{+} \oplus \BV^-$ is a decomposition of $U_q(\Glie)$-modules as follows:
\begin{displaymath}
L(\epsilon_1)^{\otimes 2} = L(2 \epsilon_1) \oplus L(\epsilon_1 + \epsilon_2).
\end{displaymath}
In the following, the three vector superspaces $\BV,\BV^+,\BV^-$ will be used frequently.
\end{example}
\subsubsection{Characters.} \label{sec: characters}
Let $V$ be a $U_q(\Glie)$-modules $\BP$-graded via the action of the $t_i$:
\begin{displaymath}
(V)_{\alpha} = \{x \in V \ |\ t_i x = q^{d_i(\alpha,\epsilon_i)} x \ \textrm{for}\ i \in I \}.
\end{displaymath}
Suppose that all the weight spaces $(V)_{\alpha}$ are finite-dimensional. Introduce {\it characters}
\begin{equation} \label{def: classical character}
\chi (V) := \sum_{\alpha \in \BP} \dim (V)_{\alpha} [\alpha] \in \BZ^{\BP}.
\end{equation}
Here $\BZ^{\BP}$ is the abelian group of functions $\BP \longrightarrow \BZ$ and $[\alpha] = \delta_{\alpha,\cdot}$. By definition, it is clear that $(U_q(\Glie))_{\alpha} (V)_{\beta} \subseteq (V)_{\alpha+\beta}$ for $\alpha,\beta \in \BP$.
\subsubsection{Fundamental weights.} For $r \in I_0$, let us define the $r$-th {\it fundamental weight}
\begin{displaymath}
\varpi_r := \begin{cases}
\sum_{i=1}^r \epsilon_i & (r \leq M), \\
-\sum_{i=r+1}^{M+N} \epsilon_i & (r > M).
\end{cases}
\end{displaymath}
Clearly, $d_s(\varpi_r, \alpha_s) = \delta_{rs}$ for $r,s \in I_0$.
For $1 \leq r \leq M$ let $\CB_r$ be the set of functions $f: \{1,2,\cdots, r \} \longrightarrow I$ such that: $f(i) \leq f(i')$ for $i \leq i'$; if $1 \leq i < r$ and $f(i) \leq M$, then $f(i) < f(i+1)$.
\begin{theorem} \label{thm: BKK Schur-Weyl duality} \cite{BKK}
For $1 \leq r \leq M$ we have
\begin{equation} \label{equ: character of simple modules}
\chi (L(\varpi_r)) = \sum_{f \in \CB_r} [\sum_{i=1}^r \epsilon_{f(i)}] \in \BZ[\BP].
\end{equation} \hfill $\Box$
\end{theorem}
Similar character formula for the simple modules $L(\varpi_r)$ with $M < r < M+N$ can be obtained with the help of a superalgebra isomorphism $U_q(\mathfrak{gl}(M,N)) \longrightarrow U_q(\mathfrak{gl}(N,M))$. We shall return to this point later (Remark \ref{remark: reduction to even cases}).
\section{Quantum affine superalgebra and $q$-Yangians} \label{sec: definition}
In this section, we introduce our central objects of study: the quantum affine superalgebra $U_q(\Gaff)$ and the $q$-Yangian $Y_q(\Glie)$ within the framework of RTT. Most of the results in this section have appeared in the literature separately (for example \cite{FM,Molev,Tsuboi}). For completeness and for later reference, we prove all of them in a uniform way, except the Ding-Frenkel homomorphism relating Drinfeld realization and RTT realization, which requires lengthy calculations as done in \cite{Ding-Frenkel,Zyz}.
\subsection{Yang-Baxter algebras.} We say that $R \in \End(\BV \otimes \BV)$ is an $R$-matrix if: $R$ is invertible and of $\super$-degree $\even$; $R$ satisfies the {\it Yang-Baxter equation}
\begin{equation} \label{equ: Yang-Baxter equation}
R_{12}R_{13}R_{23} = R_{23}R_{13}R_{12} \in (\End \BV)^{\otimes 3}.
\end{equation}
Here $R_{12} = R \otimes \Id_V, R_{23} = \Id_V \otimes R$ and
\begin{displaymath}
R_{13} = (\Id_{\BV} \otimes c_{\BV,\BV}) R_{12} (\Id_{\BV} \otimes c_{\BV,\BV}) = (c_{\BV,\BV} \otimes \Id_{\BV}) R_{23} (c_{\BV,\BV} \otimes \Id_{\BV})
\end{displaymath}
with $c_{\BV,\BV}: \BV \otimes \BV \mapsto \BV \otimes \BV, v_i \otimes v_j \mapsto (-1)^{|i||j|} v_j \otimes v_i$ the braiding.
\begin{defi} \label{def: Yang-Baxter algebra}
For an $R$-matrix $R \in \End(\BV \otimes \BV)$, the Yang-Baxter algebra $\YB(R)$ is the superalgebra with
\begin{itemize}
\item[(YB1)] generators $l_{ij}$ for $i,j \in I$ of $\super$-degrees $|l_{ij}| = |i|+|j|$;
\item[(YB2)] relations $R_{23}L_{12}L_{13} = L_{13}L_{12}R_{23} \in \YB(R) \otimes \End \BV \otimes \End \BV$.
\end{itemize}
Here $L = \sum_{i,j \in I} l_{ij} \otimes E_{ij} \in \YB(R) \otimes \End \BV$.
\end{defi}
Already from the definition of $R$-matrix, one reads a natural representation of $\YB(R)$.
\begin{lem} \label{lem: natural representations of Yang-Baxter algebra}
There is a representation $(\rho,\BV)$ of the superalgebra $\YB(R)$ on $\BV$ defined by $(\rho \otimes \Id_{\End \BV})(L) = R^{-1}$.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
This is obvious in view of the following: $S \mapsto S_{23}$ is a morphism of superalgebras $(\End \BV)^{\otimes 2} \longrightarrow (\End \BV)^{\otimes 3}$; $R^{-1}$ also satisfies the Yang-Baxter equation.
\end{proof}
\subsubsection{Super bialgebra structure.} \label{sec: coproduct for Yang-Baxter algebras}
The Yang-Baxter algebra $\YB(R)$ can be made into a super bialgebra with coproduct and counit
\begin{equation} \label{equ: coproduct of Yang-Baxter algebra}
\Delta (l_{ij}) = \sum_{k\in I} (-1)^{(|i|+|k|)(|j|+|k|)} l_{ik} \otimes l_{kj},\quad \varepsilon(l_{ij}) = \delta_{ij}.
\end{equation}
To prove that $\Delta$ is a well-defined superalgebra morphism, introduce
\begin{displaymath}
T := \sum_{i,j,k \in I}(-1)^{(|i|+|k|)(|j|+|k|)} l_{ik} \otimes l_{kj} \otimes E_{ij} = L_{13}L_{23} \in \YB(R) \otimes \YB(R) \otimes \End \BV.
\end{displaymath}
It is enough to ensure that
\begin{displaymath}
R_{34} T_{123}T_{124} = T_{124}T_{123}R_{34} \in \YB(R)^{\otimes 2} \otimes (\End \BV)^{\otimes 2}.
\end{displaymath}
Observe first of all that $|L| = \even$ implies
\begin{displaymath}
L_{23}L_{14} = L_{14}L_{23},\quad L_{13}L_{24} = L_{24}L_{13}.
\end{displaymath}
It follows that
\begin{eqnarray*}
R_{34}T_{123}T_{124} &=& R_{34}L_{13}(L_{23}L_{14})L_{24} = (R_{34}L_{13}L_{14}) L_{23}L_{24} \\
&\myLongEqual{YB}& L_{14}L_{13}(R_{34}L_{23}L_{24}) \myLongEqual{YB} L_{14}(L_{13}L_{24})L_{23}R_{34} \\
&=& L_{14}L_{24}L_{13}L_{23}R_{34} = T_{124}T_{123}R_{34}.
\end{eqnarray*}
The co-associativity of $\Delta$ is clear from Equation \eqref{equ: coproduct of Yang-Baxter algebra}.
Remark that in the above proof we do not need the Yang-Baxter equation for $R$.
\subsubsection{Dependence on $R$-matrices.} Given an $R$-matrix $R$, we will construct two new $R$-matrices $R',R''$ whose associated Yang-Baxter algebras are isomorphic.
The operator $R'$ is easy to define:
\begin{displaymath}
R' := c_{\BV,\BV} R^{-1} c_{\BV,\BV} \in \End(\BV \otimes \BV).
\end{displaymath}
Before giving the second operator $R''$, let us introduce a super version of transpose of matrices. This is the linear map $\tau: \End \BV \longrightarrow \End \BV$ given by
\begin{equation} \label{equ: transpose of matrices}
\tau(E_{ij}):= \varepsilon_{ij} E_{ji},\quad \varepsilon_{ij} := (-1)^{|i|(|i|+|j|)} = \begin{cases}
1 & (i \leq j), \\
(-1)^{|i|+|j|} & (i > j).
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
Now $R''$ is given by
\begin{displaymath}
R'' := (\tau \otimes \tau)(R^{-1}) \in \End (\BV \otimes \BV).
\end{displaymath}
\begin{lem} \label{lem: transpose of matrices is an anti-automorphism}
$\tau: \End \BV \longrightarrow \End \BV$ is an anti-automorphism of superalgebra.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
We explain that $\tau$ is indeed a duality map. Let $\BV^*$ be the dual of $\BV$, with $(v_i^*: i \in I)$ the dual basis with respect to $(v_i: i \in I)$. Then $|v_i^*| = |v_i| = |i|$. Let $e_{ij} \in \End \BV^*$ be $v_k^* \mapsto \delta_{jk} v_i^*$. Then the linear isomorphism of vector superspaces $\BV \longrightarrow \BV^*, v_i \mapsto v_i^*$ induces an isomorphism of superalgebras $a: \End \BV \longrightarrow \End \BV^*, E_{ij} \mapsto e_{ij}$.
On the other hand, let $f: \BV \longrightarrow \BV$ be a $\super$-homogeneous linear map. Define its {\it dual}:
\begin{displaymath}
f^*: \BV^* \mapsto \BV^*,\quad l \mapsto ( x \mapsto (-1)^{|l||f|}f(x) )
\end{displaymath}
where $l \in \BV^*$ is $\super$-homogeneous and $x \in \BV$. In this way, we construct an anti-isomorphism of superalgebras $b: \End \BV \longrightarrow \End \BV^*, f \mapsto f^*$. It is straightforward to check that $\tau = a^{-1} \circ b$. Hence $\tau$ is an anti-automorphism of superalgebra.
\end{proof}
Now we can state the main result of this paragraph.
\begin{prop} \label{prop: dependence of R-matrices}
Let $R \in \End (\BV \otimes \BV)$ be an $R$-matrix. Then $R',R''$ are also $R$-matrices. Moreover: the assignment $l_{ij}' \mapsto l_{ij}$ extends to an isomorphism $\YB(R') \longrightarrow \YB(R)$ of super bialgebras; the assignment $l_{ij}'' \mapsto \varepsilon_{ji} l_{ji}$ extends to an isomorphism $\Psi: \YB(R'') \longrightarrow \YB(R)^{\mathrm{cop}}$ of super bialgebras.
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
We only prove the part for $R''$. To show that $R''$ is an $R$-matrix, note that $\tau^{\otimes 2},\tau^{\otimes 3}$ are anti-automorphisms of superalgebras, from which the Yang-Baxter equation for $R''$ follows. Next, in order to show that the superalgebra morphism $\Psi$ is well defined, we only need to ensure that
\begin{displaymath}
R_{23}'' T_{12}T_{13} = T_{13}T_{12}R_{23}'' \in \YB(R) \otimes \End \BV \otimes \End \BV
\end{displaymath}
where $T = (\Id_{\YB(R)} \otimes \tau)(L) \in \YB(R) \otimes \End \BV$.
By applying $\Id_{\YB(R)} \otimes \tau \otimes \tau$ to the Yang-Baxter equation $R_{23}L_{12}L_{13} = L_{13}L_{12}R_{23}$ we get
\begin{displaymath}
T_{12}T_{13} ((\tau \otimes \tau)(R))_{23} = ((\tau \otimes \tau)(R))_{23} T_{13}T_{12},
\end{displaymath}
from which comes the desired equation. The rest is clear.
\end{proof}
Remark that the two operations $R \mapsto R', R \mapsto R''$ are involutions. We will sometimes be in the situation $R' = R''$. Proposition \ref{prop: dependence of R-matrices} then gives us an isomorphism $\Psi: \YB(R) \longrightarrow \YB(R)^{\mathrm{cop}}$ of super bialgebras.
\subsection{The quantum affine superalgebra $U_q(\Gaff)$.} \label{sec: quantum affine superalgebra}
Recall the vector superspaces $\BV^+,\BV^{-}$ in Example \ref{example: tensor square of natural representations}. Define the {\it Perk-Schultz matrix} \cite{Perk-Schultz}
\begin{equation} \label{equ: Perk-Schultz matrix}
R(z,w) = c_{\BV,\BV}((z q - w q^{-1}) P^+ + (w q - z q^{-1}) P^-) \in \End (\BV \otimes \BV)[z,w]
\end{equation}
where $P^+,P^-$ are projections with respect to the decomposition $\BV^{\otimes 2} = \BV^+ \oplus \BV^-$.
\begin{defi} \label{def: quantum affine superalgebras}
The quantum affine superalgebra $U_q(\Gaff)$ is the superalgebra defined by
\begin{itemize}
\item[(R1)] generators $s_{ij}^{(n)}, t_{ij}^{(n)}$ for $i,j \in I$ and $n \in \BZ_{\geq 0}$;
\item[(R2)] $\super$-grading $|s_{ij}^{(n)}| = |t_{ij}^{(n)}| = |i| + |j|$;
\item[(R3)] RTT-relations \cite{FRT2}
\begin{eqnarray}
&& R_{23}(z,w) T_{12}(z) T_{13}(w) = T_{13}(w) T_{12}(z) R_{23}(z,w), \label{rel: RTT = TTR} \\
&& R_{23}(z,w) S_{12}(z) S_{13}(w) = S_{13}(w) S_{12}(z) R_{23}(z,w), \label{rel: RSS = SSR} \\
&& R_{23}(z,w) T_{12}(z) S_{13}(w) = S_{13}(w) T_{12}(z) R_{23}(z,w), \label{rel: RTS = STR} \\
&& t_{ij}^{(0)} = s_{ji}^{(0)} = 0 \quad \mathrm{for}\ 1 \leq i < j \leq M+N, \label{rel: FRTS zero condition} \\
&& t_{ii}^{(0)} s_{ii}^{(0)} = 1 = s_{ii}^{(0)} t_{ii}^{(0)} \quad \mathrm{for}\ i \in I. \label{rel: FRTS invertibility condition}
\end{eqnarray}
\end{itemize}
Here $T(z) = \sum_{i,j \in I} t_{ij}(z) \otimes E_{ij} \in (U_q(\Gaff) \otimes \End \BV)[[z^{-1}]]$ and $t_{ij}(z) = \sum_{n \in \BZ_{\geq 0}} t_{ij}^{(n)} z^{-n} \in U_q(\Gaff)[[z^{-1}]]$ (similar convention for $S(z)$ with the $z^{-n}$ replaced by the $z^{n}$).
The $q$-Yangian $Y_q(\Glie)$ is the subalgebra of $U_q(\Gaff)$ generated by the $(s_{ii}^{(0)})^{-1}, s_{ij}^{(n)}$ for $i,j \in I$ and $n \in \BZ_{\geq 0}$.
\end{defi}
As in \S \ref{sec: coproduct for Yang-Baxter algebras}, $U_q(\Gaff)$ is endowed with a super bialgebra structure:
\begin{eqnarray}
&&\Delta (s_{ij}^{(n)}) = \sum_{a=0}^n \sum_{k \in I} (-1)^{(|i|+|k|)(|k|+|j|)} s_{ik}^{(a)} \otimes s_{kj}^{(n-a)}, \label{for: coproduct for quantum affine superalgebra S} \\
&&\Delta (t_{ij}^{(n)}) = \sum_{a=0}^n \sum_{k \in I} (-1)^{(|i|+|k|)(|k|+|j|)} t_{ik}^{(a)} \otimes t_{kj}^{(n-a)}. \label{for: coproduct for quantum affine superalgebra T}
\end{eqnarray}
Indeed, the antipode $\Sm: U_q(\Gaff) \longrightarrow U_q(\Gaff)$ exists:
\begin{eqnarray}
&&\sum_{i,j \in I} \Sm(s_{ij}(z)) \otimes E_{ij} = (\sum_{i,j \in I} s_{ij}(z) \otimes E_{ij})^{-1} \in (U_q(\Gaff)\otimes \End \BV)[[z]], \label{for: antipode for S} \\
&&\sum_{i,j \in I} \Sm(t_{ij}(z)) \otimes E_{ij} = (\sum_{i,j \in I} t_{ij}(z) \otimes E_{ij})^{-1} \in (U_q(\Gaff) \otimes \End \BV)[[z^{-1}]]. \label{for: antipode for T}
\end{eqnarray}
Here the RHS of the above formulas are well defined thanks to Relation \eqref{rel: FRTS zero condition}. It follows that $U_q(\Gaff)$ is a Hopf superalgebra, with $Y_q(\Glie)$ a sub-Hopf-superalgebra.
\subsection{Structure of the quantum affine superalgebra.} We study the weight grading, the $\BZ$-grading and evaluation morphisms for $U_q(\Gaff)$. Moreover, we explain that $U_q(\Gaff)$ is indeed a quantum double associated with a Hopf pairing.
\subsubsection{The Perk-Schultz $R$-matrix.} \label{sec: Perk-Schultz matrix}
The exact form of $R(z,w) \in (\End \BV \otimes \End \BV)[z,w]$ is:
\begin{eqnarray} \label{for: Perk-Schultz matrix coefficients}
\begin{array}{rcl}
R(z,w) &=& \sum\limits_{i\in I}(zq_i - wq_i^{-1}) E_{ii} \otimes E_{ii} + (z-w) \sum\limits_{i \neq j} E_{ii} \otimes E_{jj} \\
&\ & + z \sum\limits_{i<j} (q_i-q_i^{-1}) E_{ji} \otimes E_{ij} + w \sum\limits_{i<j}(q_j-q_j^{-1}) E_{ij} \otimes E_{ji}.
\end{array}
\end{eqnarray}
Let us gather the following fundamental properties of the Perk-Schultz $R$-matrix $R(z,w)$.
\begin{prop} \label{prop: properties of Perk-Schultz matrix}
The Perk-Schultz $R$-matrix $R(z,w)$ verifies the following relations.
\begin{itemize}
\item[(PS1)] Yang-Baxter: $ R_{12}(z_1,z_2)R_{13}(z_1,z_3)R_{23}(z_2,z_3) = R_{23}(z_2,z_3)R_{13}(z_1,z_3)R_{12}(z_1,z_2)$.
\item[(PS2)] Unitarity relation: $R(z,w) c_{\BV,\BV} R(w,z) c_{\BV,\BV} = (zq-wq^{-1})(wq-zq^{-1}) \Id_{\BV \otimes \BV}$.
\item[(PS3)] Ice rule: $R_{ab,cd}(z,w) \neq 0 \Longrightarrow \epsilon_a + \epsilon_b = \epsilon_c + \epsilon_d \in \BP$ for $a,b,c,d \in I$.
\item[(PS4)] $c_{\BV,\BV} R(z,w) c_{\BV,\BV} = (\tau \otimes \tau)(R(z,w)) \in (\End \BV)^{\otimes 2}[z,w]$.
\item[(PS5)] Let $R = R(1,0),R' = c_{\BV,\BV} R^{-1} c_{\BV,\BV}$. Then $R(z,w) = z R - w R'$.
\item[(PS6)] Hecke relation: $R' = R - (q - q^{-1}) c_{\BV,\BV}$.
\end{itemize}
\end{prop}
Here $R_{ab,cd}(z,w) \in \BC[z,w]$ for $a,b,c,d \in I$ are the matrix elements defined by
\begin{displaymath}
R(z,w) (v_c \otimes v_d) = \sum_{a,b \in I} R_{ab,cd}(z,w) (v_a \otimes v_b) \in \BV^{\otimes 2}[z,w].
\end{displaymath}
\begin{proof}
(PS1)-(PS3) have been observed in \cite{Perk-Schultz}. (PS4) comes from Formula \eqref{for: Perk-Schultz matrix coefficients}. (PS5) follows from (PS2) and Formula \eqref{equ: Perk-Schultz matrix}. For (PS6), note that
\begin{displaymath}
c_{\BV,\BV}R = q P^+ - q^{-1} P^-
\end{displaymath}
gives a diagonal decomposition for the matrix $c_{\BV,\BV}R \in \End (\BV^{\otimes 2})$. Henceforth
\begin{displaymath}
(c_{\BV,\BV}R)^2 = (q-q^{-1})c_{\BV,\BV}R + \Id_{\BV\otimes \BV},\quad (c_{\BV,\BV}R)^{-1} = c_{\BV,\BV}R - (q-q^{-1}) \Id_{\BV \otimes \BV},
\end{displaymath}
from which the Hecke relation follows.
\end{proof}
\begin{rem} \label{rem: inverse of R matrices}
(1) Later we shall care about the parameter $q$. In this case, write $R(z,w) = R_q(z,w), R = R_q, R' = R_q'$. Define
\begin{displaymath}
\Rc(z,w) = \Rc_q(z,w) := \frac{R(z,w)}{zq - wq^{-1}}.
\end{displaymath}
Then the inverses of these matrices $R_q,R_q',R_q(z,w)$ have the following simple expression:
\begin{itemize}
\item[(PS7)] $(R_q)^{-1} = R_{q^{-1}},\quad (R_q')^{-1} = R_{q^{-1}}',\quad \Rc_q(z,w)^{-1} = \Rc_{q^{-1}}(z,w)$.
\end{itemize}
(2) Remark that in Definition \ref{def: quantum affine superalgebras} of $U_q(\Gaff)$, one can replace $R(z,w)$ by $\Rc_q(z,w)$ everywhere. As for Relation \eqref{rel: RTS = STR}, $\Rc_q(z,w)$ should be viewed as a formal power series in $\frac{w}{z}$.
(3) From Proposition \ref{prop: dependence of R-matrices} and (PS4) follows an isomorphism of Hopf superalgebras
\begin{equation} \label{equ: transposition in quantum affine superalgebra}
\Psi: U_q(\Gaff) \longrightarrow U_q(\Gaff)^{\mathrm{cop}},\quad s_{ij}^{(n)} \mapsto \varepsilon_{ji}t_{ji}^{(n)},\quad t_{ij}^{(n)} \mapsto \varepsilon_{ji}s_{ji}^{(n)}.
\end{equation}
\end{rem}
\subsubsection{$\BZ$-grading.} There exists a $\BZ$-grading on $U_q(\Gaff)$:
\begin{equation} \label{equ: Z grading}
|s_{ij}^{(n)}|_{\BZ} = n,\quad |t_{ij}^{(n)}|_{\BZ} = -n.
\end{equation}
This $\BZ$-grading is compatible with the Hopf superalgebra structure. In particular, we get an one-parameter family $(\Phi_a: a \in \BC^{\times})$ of Hopf superalgebra automorphisms:
\begin{equation} \label{for: automorphisms of Z-graded superalgebras}
\Phi_a: U_q(\Gaff) \longrightarrow U_q(\Gaff),\quad s_{ij}^{(n)} \mapsto a^n s_{ij}^{(n)},\ t_{ij}^{(n)} \mapsto a^{-n} t_{ij}^{(n)}.
\end{equation}
The main reason behind this $\BZ$-grading is that $\Rc(az,aw) = \Rc(z,w)$ for all $a \in \BC^{\times}$.
\subsubsection{Automorphisms given by power series.} Let $f(z) \in 1 + z^{-1}\BC[[z^{-1}]]$ and $g(z) \in 1 + z\BC[[z]]$. There exists an automorphism of superalgebra:
\begin{equation} \label{for: automorphism by power series}
\phi_{(f(z),g(z))}: U_q(\Gaff) \longrightarrow U_q(\Gaff),\quad t_{ij}(z) \mapsto f(z) t_{ij}(z),\ s_{ij}(z) \mapsto g(z) s_{ij}(z).
\end{equation}
These automorphisms behave well under coproduct in the following way:
\begin{displaymath}
(\phi_{(f_1(z),g_1(z))} \otimes \phi_{(f_2(z),g_2(z))} ) \circ \Delta = \Delta \circ \phi_{(f_1(z)f_2(z),g_1(z)g_2(z))}: U_q(\Gaff) \longrightarrow U_q(\Gaff)^{\otimes 2}
\end{displaymath}
for $f_1(z),f_2(z) \in 1 + z^{-1}\BC[[z^{-1}]],\ g_1(z),g_2(z) \in 1 + z\BC[[z]]$.
Note that $\phi_{(f(z),g(z))}$ restricts to an automorphism of $q$-Yangian: $\phi_{g}: Y_q(\Glie) \longrightarrow Y_q(\Glie)$.
\subsubsection{Evaluation morphisms.} \label{sec: evaluation maps}
Recall the $R$-matrix $R \in (\End \BV)^{\otimes 2}$ in Proposition \ref{prop: properties of Perk-Schultz matrix}. As in Definition \ref{def: quantum affine superalgebras}, let us define $\Uc_q(\Glie)$ to be the superalgebra generated by $s_{ij},t_{ji}$ for $1 \leq i \leq j \leq M+N$, with $\super$-degrees
\begin{displaymath}
|s_{ij}| = |t_{ji}| = |i|+|j|
\end{displaymath}
and with RTT relations (\cite{FRT})
\begin{eqnarray*}
&& R_{23}T_{12}T_{13} = T_{13}T_{12}R_{23},\quad R_{23}S_{12}S_{13} = S_{13}S_{12}R_{23} \\
&& R_{23}T_{12}S_{13} = S_{13}T_{12}R_{23},\quad s_{ii} t_{ii} = 1 = t_{ii}s_{ii}.
\end{eqnarray*}
Here, as usual, $T = \sum_{i\leq j} t_{ji} \otimes E_{ji},\ S = \sum_{i\leq j}s_{ij} \otimes E_{ij} \in \Uc_q(\Glie) \otimes \End \BV$. $\Uc_q(\Glie)$ is endowed with a Hopf superalgebra structure with similar coproduct as in formulas \eqref{for: coproduct for quantum affine superalgebra S}-\eqref{for: coproduct for quantum affine superalgebra T}.
\begin{prop} \label{prop: evaluation morphism}
(1) The assignment $s_{ij} \mapsto s_{ij}^{(0)},\ t_{ji} \mapsto t_{ji}^{(0)}$ extends uniquely to a Hopf superalgebra morphism $\iota: \Uc_q(\Glie) \longrightarrow U_q(\Gaff)$.
(2) The assignment $s_{ij}(z) \mapsto s_{ij} - z t_{ij},\ t_{ij}(z) \mapsto t_{ij} - z^{-1}s_{ij}$ extends uniquely to a superalgebra morphism $\ev: U_q(\Gaff) \longrightarrow \Uc_q(\Glie)$.
\end{prop}
We understand that $s_{ji} = t_{ij} = 0$ in the superalgebra $\Uc_q(\Glie)$ for $1 \leq i < j \leq M+N$. The morphism $\ev$ is called an {\it evaluation morphism}. It is clear that $\ev \circ \iota = \Id_{\Uc_q(\Glie)}$.
\begin{proof}
(1) To show that $\iota$ is well defined, we only need to check that in $U_q(\Gaff) \otimes \End \BV$,
\begin{eqnarray*}
&&R_{23} T_{12}(\infty) T_{13}(\infty) = T_{13}(\infty) T_{12}(\infty) R_{23},\quad R_{23} S_{12}(0) T_{13}(\infty) = T_{13}(\infty)S_{12}(0)R_{23},\\
&& R_{23}S_{12}(0)S_{13}(0) = S_{13}(0)S_{12}(0)R_{23}.
\end{eqnarray*}
By comparing the coefficients of $z$ in both sides of Relations \eqref{rel: RTT = TTR},\eqref{rel: RTS = STR},\eqref{rel: RSS = SSR}, we get the above three equations respectively.
(2) As before, we only need to check that $\ev$ respects Relations \eqref{rel: RTT = TTR}-\eqref{rel: RTS = STR} (the other relations are obvious). We do this for Relation \eqref{rel: RTS = STR}, the other two being analogous. In other words, we need to show that in the superalgebra $(\Uc_q(\Glie)\otimes (\End \BV)^{\otimes 2} )[z,z^{-1},w]$,
\begin{displaymath}
(zR_{23} - wR'_{23})(T_{12} - z^{-1} S_{12})(S_{13} - wT_{13}) = (S_{13} - wT_{13}) (T_{12} -z^{-1}S_{12} )(zR_{23}-wR'_{23}).
\end{displaymath}
Note that Proposition \ref{prop: dependence of R-matrices} says that in $\Uc_q(\Glie) \otimes (\End \BV)^{\otimes 2} $
\begin{displaymath}
R_{23}' S_{12}S_{13} = S_{13}S_{12}R_{23}',\quad R_{23}'T_{12}T_{13} = T_{13}T_{12}R_{23}',\quad R_{23}'S_{12}T_{13} = T_{13}S_{12}R_{23}'.
\end{displaymath}
By comparing the coefficients of both sides, we are left to verify the following:
\begin{displaymath}
R_{23}S_{12}T_{13} - T_{13}S_{12}R_{23} = R_{23}'T_{12}S_{13} - S_{13}T_{12}R_{23}'.
\end{displaymath}
By using the Hecke relation (PS6) in Proposition \ref{prop: properties of Perk-Schultz matrix} we get (writing $c = c_{\BV,\BV}$)
\begin{eqnarray*}
RHS &=& (R_{23}-(q-q^{-1}) c_{23})T_{12}S_{13} - S_{13}T_{12}(R_{23}-(q-q^{-1})c_{23}) \\
&=& (R_{23}T_{12}S_{13}-S_{13}T_{12}R_{23}) - (q-q^{-1})c_{23} T_{12}S_{13} + (q-q^{-1})S_{13}T_{12}c_{23} \\
&=& LHS + T_{13}S_{12}R_{23} -(q-q^{-1})c_{23}T_{12}S_{13} - R_{23}S_{12}T_{13} + (q-q^{-1}) S_{13}T_{12}c_{23} \\
&=& LHS + T_{13}S_{12}(R_{23}-(q-q^{-1})c_{23}) - (R_{23}-(q-q^{-1})c_{23}) S_{12}T_{13} \\
&=& LHS + T_{13}S_{12}R_{23}' - R_{23}'S_{12}T_{13} = LHS.
\end{eqnarray*}
In the above, we used that $c_{23}T_{1i} = T_{1j}c_{23}$ for $\{i,j\} = \{2,3\}$. This concludes the proof.
\end{proof}
In the above proof, the quadratic Hecke relation (PS6) has been used repeatedly in an essential way. This may gives an explanation of the fact: for $\mathfrak{g}'$ a complex simple finite-dimensional Lie algebra, evaluation morphisms $\ev: U_q(\widehat{\mathfrak{g}'}) \longrightarrow U_q(\mathfrak{g}')$ exist only in type A. (Even in type A, the image of $\ev$ is contained in certain enlargement of $U_q(\mathfrak{g}')$.)
\subsubsection{Isomorphisms between $U_q(\Glie)$ and $\Uc_q(\Glie)$.} \label{sec: DF isomorphism}
As their notations suggest, the two Hopf superalgebras $U_q(\Glie)$ and $\Uc_q(\Glie)$ should be isomorphic.
\begin{prop} \label{prop: FRT realization of quantum superalgebra}
There is an isomorphism of Hopf superalgebras $DF: U_q(\Glie) \longrightarrow \Uc_q(\Glie)$
\begin{displaymath}
e_i^+ \mapsto \frac{s_{ii}^{-1}s_{i,i+1}}{1 - q_i^{-2}},\quad e_i^- \mapsto \frac{t_{i+1,i}t_{ii}^{-1}}{1-q_i^2},\quad t_j^{d_j} \mapsto s_{jj} = t_{jj}^{-1} \quad (i \in I_0,\ j \in I).
\end{displaymath}
\end{prop}
We postpone the proof of this proposition to \S \ref{sec: DF quantum superalgebra}.
In the above formulas, the scalars are chosen in such a way that the natural representation of $\Uc_q(\Glie)$ on $\BV$ defined later will match perfectly with that of $U_q(\Glie)$ (see Example \ref{example: natural representation quantum superalgebra} and \S \ref{sec: natural representations}). We list the following relations in the superalgebra $\Uc_q(\Glie)$ to be used later:
\begin{eqnarray*}
[s_{i,i+1}, t_{j+1,j}] &=& \delta_{ij}(q_i-q_i^{-1}) (t_{ii}s_{i+1,i+1} - s_{ii}t_{i+1,i+1}) \quad i,j \in I_0, \\
\left[t_{ji},t_{kj}\right] &=& (q_j-q_j^{-1}) t_{jj} t_{ki} \quad i,j,k \in I, i<j<k.
\end{eqnarray*}
The second equation above is deduced in the proof of Lemma \ref{lem: zero node}. See Equation \eqref{equ: relations in qas}. The first equation will follow from Theorem \ref{thm: Ding-Frenkel}.
\subsubsection{Quantum double construction.}\label{sec: quantum double}
We reformulate the RTT definition of $U_q(\Gaff)$ as a quantum double construction, as in the non-graded case \cite[Theorem 16]{FRT}. This will in turn give a RTT presentation of the $q$-Yangian $Y_q(\Glie)$ in Definition \ref{def: quantum affine superalgebras}.
Let $A,B$ be two Hopf superalgebras. Call a bilinear form $\varphi: A \times B \longrightarrow \BC$ a {\it Hopf pairing} if $\varphi$ is of $\super$-degree $\even$, and if $\varphi$ satisfies
\begin{eqnarray*}
&&\varphi(a,bb') = (-1)^{|b||b'|} \varphi(a_{(1)},b) \varphi(a_{(2)},b'),\quad \varphi(a,1) = \varepsilon_A(a); \\
&&\varphi(aa',b) = \varphi(a',b_{(1)}) \varphi(a,b_{(2)}),\quad \varphi(1,b) = \varepsilon_B(b)
\end{eqnarray*}
for $\super$-homogeneous $a,a' \in A$ and $b,b' \in B$. Here we adapt the Sweedler notation $\Delta (x) = x_{(1)} \otimes x_{(2)}$. Given such a Hopf pairing, one can endow the vector superspace $A \otimes B$ with a unique Hopf superalgebra structure satisfying \cite[Theorem 3.2]{Rosso}
\begin{itemize}
\item[(QD1)] $a \mapsto a \otimes 1,\ b \mapsto 1 \otimes b$ are morphisms of Hopf superalgebras respectively;
\item[(QD2)] for $\super$-homogeneous $a \in A, b \in B$, we have $(a \otimes 1)(1 \otimes b) = a \otimes b$ and
\begin{equation*}
(1 \otimes b) (a \otimes 1) = (-1)^{|a_{(1)}||b| + (|b_{(2)}|+|b_{(3)}|)|a_{(2)}| + |a_{(3)}||b_{(3)}|} \varphi (a_{(1)}, S_B (b_{(1)})) \varphi(a_{(3)}, b_{(3)}) a_{(2)} \otimes b_{(2)}.
\end{equation*}
\end{itemize}
Let $\Dc_{\varphi}(A,B)$ be the Hopf superalgebra thus obtained.
In our context, $A$ (resp. $B$) is the superalgebra generated by the $s_{ij}^{(n)},(s_{ii}^{(0)})^{-1}$ (resp. the $t_{ij}^{(n)},(t_{ii}^{(0)})^{-1}$) with $\super$-gradings and with defining relations as in Definition \ref{def: quantum affine superalgebras} (without Relation \eqref{rel: RTS = STR} which makes no sense). Clearly $A$ and $B$ are Hopf superalgebras with coproducts defined by formulas \eqref{for: coproduct for quantum affine superalgebra S}-\eqref{for: coproduct for quantum affine superalgebra T}.
\begin{prop} \label{prop: quantum double construction}
There exists uniquely a Hopf pairing $\widehat{\varphi}: A \times B \longrightarrow \BC$ such that
\begin{equation} \label{equ: Hopf pairing}
\sum_{i,j,a,b \in I} E_{ab} \otimes E_{ij} \sum_{m,n \in \BZ_{\geq 0}} z^{-m}w^n \widehat{\varphi}(s_{ij}^{(n)},t_{ab}^{(m)}) = \Rc(z,w) \in (\End \BV)^{\otimes 2}[[z^{-1},w]].
\end{equation}
The assignment $s_{ij}^{(n)} \otimes 1 \mapsto s_{ij}^{(n)},\ 1 \otimes t_{ij}^{(n)} \mapsto t_{ij}^{(n)}$ extends uniquely to a surjective morphism of Hopf superalgebras $D: \Dc_{\widehat{\varphi}}(A,B) \longrightarrow U_q(\Gaff)$ whose kernel is the ideal generated by the
\begin{displaymath}
s_{ii}^{(0)} \otimes 1 - 1 \otimes (t_{ii}^{(0)})^{-1},\quad 1 \otimes t_{ii}^{(0)} - (s_{ii}^{(0)})^{-1} \otimes 1 \quad (i \in I).
\end{displaymath}
Moreover, $D$ restricts to a Hopf superalgebra isomorphism $D|_A: A \longrightarrow Y_q(\Glie)$.
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
(Sketch) By abuse of language, let $\mathcal{F}_A$ (resp. $\mathcal{F}_B$) be the superalgebra freely generated by the $s_{ij}^{(n)}$ (resp. the $t_{ij}^{(n)}$) for $i,j \in I, n \in \BZ_{\geq 0}$, and with $\super$-gradings $|s_{ij}^{(n)}| = |t_{ij}^{(n)}| = |i|+|j|$. Then $\mathcal{F}_A$ and $\mathcal{F}_B$ are super bialgebras with coproduct given by Equations \eqref{for: coproduct for quantum affine superalgebra S}-\eqref{for: coproduct for quantum affine superalgebra T}. Now Formula \eqref{equ: Hopf pairing} above determines a bilinear form $\varphi: \mathcal{F}_A \times \mathcal{F}_B \longrightarrow \BC$ satisfying all the properties of a Hopf pairing. According to \cite[Chapter 3]{Rosso} it is enough to show that $\varphi$ respects Relations \eqref{rel: RTT = TTR}-\eqref{rel: RSS = SSR}, \eqref{rel: FRTS zero condition}-\eqref{rel: FRTS invertibility condition}, and that (QD2) is equivalent to Relation \eqref{rel: RTS = STR}. We only check Relation \eqref{rel: RSS = SSR}. (The other relations can be done in the same way.) For this, define the bilinear map
\begin{align*}
& \begin{cases}
\varphi_3: \mathcal{F}_A^{\otimes 2} \otimes (\End V)^{\otimes 2} \times \mathcal{F}_B^{\otimes 2} \otimes \End V \longrightarrow (\End V)^{\otimes 3} \\
(a \otimes a' \otimes x \otimes y, b \otimes b' \otimes z) \mapsto (-1)^{(|x|+|y|)(|b|+|b'|+|z|) + |a'||b|} \varphi(a,b)\varphi(a',b')z \otimes x \otimes y.
\end{cases}
\end{align*}
for $\super$-homogeneous vectors $a,a',x,y,z,b,b'$. Then Relation \eqref{rel: RSS = SSR} amounts to:
\begin{align*}
& \varphi_3(R_{34}(z,w)S_{13}(z)S_{24}(w)- S_{14}(w)S_{23}(z)R_{34}(z,w), T_{23}(u)T_{13}(u)) = 0.
\end{align*}
From the definitions of $\varphi$ and $\varphi_3$, we see that the LHS of the above equation becomes:
\begin{displaymath}
R_{23}(z,w) \Rc_{13}(u,w) \Rc_{12}(u,z) - \Rc_{12}(u,z) \Rc_{13}(u,w) R_{23}(z,w),
\end{displaymath}
which is zero because of the Yang-Baxter Equation \ref{prop: properties of Perk-Schultz matrix} (PS1).
\end{proof}
\subsubsection{Weight grading.} \label{sec: weight grading}
The following relations hold in $U_q(\Gaff)$:
\begin{equation} \label{rel: Cartan relations for weight grading}
s_{ii}^{(0)} s_{jk}^{(n)} = q^{(\epsilon_i,\epsilon_j - \epsilon_k)} s_{jk}^{(n)}s_{ii}^{(0)},\quad s_{ii}^{(0)}t_{jk}^{(n)} = q^{(\epsilon_i,\epsilon_j - \epsilon_k)} t_{jk}^{(n)}s_{ii}^{(0)}.
\end{equation}
As the $s_{ii}^{(0)}$ are invertible, $U_q(\Gaff)$ is endowed with a $\BQ$-grading: for $\alpha \in \BQ$,
\begin{displaymath}
(U_q(\Gaff))_{\alpha} = \{ x \in U_q(\Gaff) \ |\ s_{ii}^{(0)} x (s_{ii}^{(0)})^{-1} = q^{(\epsilon_i,\alpha)} x \quad \textrm{for}\ i \in I \}.
\end{displaymath}
The $\BQ$-grading is compatible with the Hopf superalgebra structure and with the $\super$-grading:
\begin{equation} \label{equ: weight grading}
|s_{ij}^{(n)}|_{\BQ} = |t_{ij}^{(n)}|_{\BQ} = \epsilon_i - \epsilon_j \quad (i,j \in I).
\end{equation}
Let us prove Equation \eqref{rel: Cartan relations for weight grading}. To begin with, for $n \in \BZ_{\geq 0}$, by taking the coefficients of $z^{n+1}$ (resp. $z^{1-n}$) in Relation \eqref{rel: RSS = SSR} (resp. Relation \eqref{rel: RTS = STR}), we observe that
\begin{displaymath}
R_{23}S_{12}^{(n)}S_{13}^{(0)} = S_{13}^{(0)}S_{12}^{(n)}R_{23},\quad R_{23}T_{12}^{(n)}S_{13}^{(0)} = S_{13}^{(0)}T_{12}^{(n)}R_{23}.
\end{displaymath}
Here $S^{(n)} := \sum_{ij} s_{ij}^{(n)} \otimes E_{ij} \in U_q(\Gaff) \otimes E_{ij}$ (similar for $T^{(n)}$). Now Equation \eqref{rel: Cartan relations for weight grading} comes from the following lemma and from the automorphism defined by Equation \eqref{equ: transposition in quantum affine superalgebra}.
\begin{lem}
Let $U$ be a superalgebra. For $i,j \in I$ let $a_{ij},b_{ij} \in U$ be elements of $\super$-degree $|i|+|j|$. Assume that $b_{ij} = 0$ if $i > j$. Introduce
\begin{displaymath}
A := \sum_{i,j \in I} a_{ij} \otimes E_{ij},\quad B:= \sum_{i,j \in I} b_{ij} \otimes E_{ij} \in U \otimes \End \BV.
\end{displaymath}
Suppose that $R_{23}A_{12}B_{13} = B_{13}A_{12}R_{23}$. Then
\begin{displaymath}
b_{kk} a_{ij} = q^{(\epsilon_k,\epsilon_i - \epsilon_j)} a_{ij}b_{kk} \quad \textrm{for}\ i,j,k \in I.
\end{displaymath}
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
We shall prove only the case $k \neq i,j$. The idea is to compare the matrix coefficients of $v_j \otimes v_k \mapsto v_i \otimes v_k$ for the operator equation
\begin{displaymath}
A_{12} B_{13} = R_{23}^{-1} B_{13}A_{12}R_{23} \in U \otimes \End \BV^{\otimes 2}.
\end{displaymath}
For a statement $P$ define $\delta(P) = 1$ if $P$ is true and $0$ otherwise. The matrix coefficient for the LHS is $a_{ij} b_{kk}$. For the RHS, in view of the ice rule for $R$, we see that the corresponding coefficient $c$ should be the coefficient $c_1$ of $v_i \otimes v_k$ in
\begin{displaymath}
R_{23}^{-1}B_{13}A_{12} (v_j \otimes v_k + \delta(j<k) (q_j -q_j^{-1}) v_k \otimes v_j).
\end{displaymath}
To determine $c_1$, it is enough to consider the part $u_1$ containing $v_i \otimes v_k, v_k \otimes v_i$ in the vector
\begin{displaymath}
B_{13}A_{12} (v_j \otimes v_k + \delta(j<k) (q_j -q_j^{-1}) v_k \otimes v_j)
\end{displaymath}
A straightforward calculation shows that
\begin{displaymath}
u_1 = (b_{kk}a_{ij} \pm \delta(j<k)(q_j-q_j^{-1}) b_{kj}a_{ik}) v_i \otimes v_k + (\delta(j<k) (q_j-q_j^{-1})b_{ij}a_{kk}\pm b_{ik} a_{kj}) v_k \otimes v_i.
\end{displaymath}
Observe that the last three terms in $u_1$ do not contribute to $v_i \otimes v_k$ when applying $R_{23}^{-1}$. It follows that the coefficient $c = c_1$ of $v_i \otimes v_k$ in $R_{23}^{-1}u_1$ is exactly $b_{kk} a_{ij}$. In other words, $a_{ij} b_{kk} = b_{kk} a_{ij}$, as desired.
\end{proof}
Remark that in a similar way, we can introduce the weight grading for $\Uc_q(\Glie)$:
\begin{displaymath}
|s_{ij}|_{\BQ} = |t_{ji}|_{\BQ} = \epsilon_i - \epsilon_j \quad \textrm{for}\ 1 \leq i \leq j \leq M+N.
\end{displaymath}
The superalgebra morphisms $\iota, \ev$ in Proposition \ref{prop: evaluation morphism} respect $\BQ$-gradings.
\subsection{Drinfeld realization and coproduct formulas.} We explain that as Hopf superalgebras the quantum affine superalgebra $U_q(\Gaff)$ is not far from the quantum loop superalgebra $U_q(L\Glie)$ defined by Drinfeld generators (such quantum loop superalgebra with $\Glie$ replaced by $\mathfrak{sl}(M,N)$ has been used in \cite{Z} to study finite-dimensional representations). Also some coproduct estimations for the Drinfeld generators are given.
\subsubsection{Ding-Frenkel homomorphism.} \label{sec: Drinfeld}
We review a super analogue of Ding-Frenkel homomorphism between Drinfeld and RTT realizations of the quantum affine algebra $U_q(\widehat{\mathfrak{gl}_n})$ \cite[pp.286]{Ding-Frenkel}, following Yao-Zhong Zhang \cite{Zyz}.
The Gauss decomposition gives uniquely
\begin{displaymath}
e_{ij}^{\pm}(z),\ f_{ji}^{\pm}(z),\ K_l^{\pm}(z) \in U_q(\Gaff)[[z^{\pm 1}]] \quad \textrm{for}\ 1 \leq i < j \leq M+N,\ 1 \leq l \leq M+N
\end{displaymath}
such that in the superalgebra $(U_q(\Gaff) \otimes \End \BV)[[z,z^{-1}]]$
\begin{equation*}
\begin{cases}
S(z) = (\sum\limits_{i<j} f_{ji}^+(z) \otimes E_{ji} + 1 \otimes \Id_{\BV}) (\sum\limits_l K_l^+(z) \otimes E_{ii} )(\sum\limits_{i<j} e_{ij}^+(z) \otimes E_{ij} + 1 \otimes \Id_{\BV}), \\
T(z) = (\sum\limits_{i<j} f_{ji}^-(z) \otimes E_{ji} + 1 \otimes \Id_{\BV}) (\sum\limits_l K_l^-(z) \otimes E_{ii} )(\sum\limits_{i<j} e_{ij}^-(z) \otimes E_{ij} + 1 \otimes \Id_{\BV}).
\end{cases}
\end{equation*}
For example, $K_1^+(z) = s_{11}(z)$ and $K_1^-(z) = t_{11}(z)$. For $i \in I_0 = I \setminus \{M+N\}$, define
\begin{displaymath}
X_i^+(z) = e_{i,i+1}^+(z) - e_{i,i+1}^-(z) = \sum_n X_{i,n}^+ z^n,\quad X_i^-(z) = f_{i+1,i}^-(z) - f_{i+1,i}^+(z) = \sum_{n} X_{i,n}^- z^n.
\end{displaymath}
\begin{thm} \label{thm: Ding-Frenkel} \cite{Ding-Frenkel,Zyz}
The superalgebra $U_q(\Gaff)$ is generated by the coefficients of $X_i^{\pm}(z),K_j^{\pm}(z)$ with $i \in I_0,j \in I$. Moreover,
\begin{align*}
& K_i^{\epsilon}(z) K_j^{\epsilon'}(w) = K_j^{\epsilon'}(w) K_i^{\epsilon}(z), \\
& (\textrm{Cartan}) \begin{cases}
K_i^{\epsilon}(z) X_j^{\epsilon'}(w) = X_j^{\epsilon'}(w) k_i^{\epsilon}(z) \quad \textrm{for}\ i \notin \{j,j+1\}, \\
K_i^{\epsilon}(z) X_i^{\pm}(w) = (\frac{q_i z - q_i^{-1}w}{z-w})^{\mp 1} X_i^{\pm}(w) K_i^{\epsilon}(z), \\
K_{i+1}^{\epsilon}(z) X_i^{\pm}(w) = (\frac{q_{i+1}^{-1} z - q_{i+1} w}{z-w})^{\mp 1} X_i^{\pm}(w) K_{i+1}^{\epsilon}(z),
\end{cases} \\
& (\textrm{Drinfeld}) \begin{cases}
X_i^{\epsilon}(z) X_j^{\epsilon}(w) - X_j^{\epsilon}(w) X_i^{\epsilon}(z) = 0 \quad \textrm{if}\ |i-j| \geq 2, \\
X_M^{\epsilon}(z) X_M^{\epsilon}(w) + X_M^{\epsilon}(w) X_M^{\epsilon}(z) = 0, \\
(q_i^{\mp 1} z - q_i^{\pm 1} w ) X_i^{\pm}(z) X_i^{\pm}(w) = (q_i^{\pm 1} z - q_i^{\mp 1} w) X_i^{\pm}(w) X_i^{\pm}(z) \quad \textrm{if}\ i \neq M, \\
(q_{i+1}z - q_{i+1}^{-1} w) X_i^+(z) X_{i+1}^+(w) = (z-w) X_{i+1}^+(w) X_i^+(z), \\
(z-w) X_{i}^-(z) X_{i+1}^-(w) = (q_{i+1}z - q_{i+1}^{-1} w) X_{i+1}^-(w)X_i^-(z),
\end{cases} \\
&[X_i^+(z), X_j^-(w)] = \delta_{ij}(q_i - q_i^{-1}) \delta(\frac{z}{w}) (K_{i+1}^+(z)K_i^+(z)^{-1} - K_{i+1}^-(w)K_i^-(w)^{-1}), \\
& (\textrm{Serre}) \begin{cases}
[X_i^{\epsilon}(z_1),[X_i^{\epsilon}(z_2), X_j^{\epsilon}(w)]_q]_{q^{-1}} + \{z_1 \leftrightarrow z_2 \} = 0 \quad \textrm{if}\ (i \neq M,\ |j-i|=1), \\
[[[X_{M-1}^{\epsilon}(u),X_M^{\epsilon}(z_1)]_q, X_{M+1}^{\epsilon}(v)]_{q^{-1}}, X_M^{\epsilon}(z_2)] + \{z_1 \leftrightarrow z_2 \} = 0 \quad \textrm{if}\ (M,N > 1).
\end{cases}
\end{align*}
\hfill $\Box$
\end{thm}
\subsubsection{Proof of Proposition \ref{prop: FRT realization of quantum superalgebra}.} \label{sec: DF quantum superalgebra}
As an application of Theorem \ref{thm: Ding-Frenkel} above, let us give a proof of Proposition \ref{prop: FRT realization of quantum superalgebra} which says that the Ding-Frenkel homomorphism restricted to finite type quantum superalgebras is indeed an isomorphism.
First of all, $DF: U_q(\Glie) \longrightarrow \Uc_q(\Glie)$ is a well-define Hopf superalgebra homomorphism thanks to Theorem \ref{thm: Ding-Frenkel}, Proposition \ref{prop: evaluation morphism} and \cite[Theorem 10.5.1]{Yamane1} on defining relations of the quantum superalgebra $U_q(\Glie)$ of type A. It is easy to prove that $DF$ is surjective in view of the relations preceding \S \ref{sec: quantum double}.
Next, let $A$ (resp. $B$) be the subalgebra of $U_q(\Glie)$ generated by the $e_i^+, t_j^{\pm 1}$ (resp. the $e_i^-$ and $t_j^{\pm 1}$) for $i \in I_0,j \in I$. Then $A,B$ are sub-Hopf-superalgebras. Moreover, according to \cite[\S 2.4, Prop.10.4.1]{Yamane1}, there exists a non-degenerate Hopf pairing $\varphi_1: A \times B \longrightarrow \BC$ defined by:
\begin{displaymath}
\varphi_1(t_i,t_j) = q^{-(\epsilon_i,\epsilon_j)},\quad \varphi_1(e_i^+,e_j^-) = \frac{\delta_{ij}}{q_i^{-1}-q_i}.
\end{displaymath}
Furthermore, $U_q(\Glie)$ is the quotient of $\Dc_{\varphi_1}(A,B)$ by the ideal generated by $1 \otimes t_i^{\pm 1} - t_i^{\pm 1} \otimes 1$.
On the other hand, let $A'$ (resp. $B'$) the subalgebra of $\Uc_q(\Glie)$ generated by the $s_{ij},s_{kk}^{-1}$ (resp. the $t_{ji},t_{kk}^{-1}$) for $1 \leq i \leq j \leq M+N$ and $k \in I$. Clearly $A'$ and $B'$ are sub-Hopf-superalgebras. Moreover Propositions \ref{prop: evaluation morphism} and \ref{prop: quantum double construction} say that there exists a Hopf pairing $\varphi_2: A' \times B' \longrightarrow \BC$ given by
\begin{displaymath}
\sum_{a,b,i,j \in I} \varphi_2(s_{ij},t_{ab}) E_{ab} \otimes E_{ij} = R \in \End \BV^{\otimes 2}.
\end{displaymath}
Similarly, $\Uc_q(\Glie)$ is the quotient of $\Dc_{\varphi_2}(A',B')$ by the ideal generated by $1 \otimes s_{ii}^{\pm 1} - s_{ii}^{\pm 1} \otimes 1$.
It is straightforward to show that $DF(A) = A'$ and $DF(B) = B'$. Moreover,
\begin{displaymath}
\varphi_2(DF(a),DF(b)) = \varphi_1(a,b) \quad \textrm{for}\ a \in A, b \in B.
\end{displaymath}
Let $f: A \longrightarrow A'$ (resp. $g: B \longrightarrow B'$) be the Hopf superalgebra morphism induced by $DF$. Then $f,g$ are surjective. Moreover, $DF$ is induced by the Hopf superalgebra morphism
\begin{displaymath}
\mathcal{DF}:= f \otimes g: \Dc_{\varphi_1}(A,B) \longrightarrow \Dc_{\varphi_2}(A',B'),\quad a \otimes b \mapsto f(a) \otimes g(b).
\end{displaymath}
As $DF(t_i) = s_{ii}^{d_i}$ for $i \in I$, we are reduced to show that $\mathcal{DF}$ is injective. Note that
\begin{displaymath}
\ker \mathcal{DF} = \ker (f \otimes g) = \ker f \otimes B + A \otimes \ker g.
\end{displaymath}
The non-degeneracy of $\varphi_1$ implies that the RHS above is zero. \hfill $\Box$
We remark that $\varphi_2$ defined above is non-degenerate. Hence we can write down the universal $R$-matrix of $\Uc_q(\Glie)$ \cite[Theorem 10.6.1]{Yamane1} in terms of the RTT generators. Similar arguments should apply to the affine case, which however requires additional information on some central elements of $U_q(\Gaff)$, the so-called {\it quantum Berezinians}, and their behaviour under the Hopf pairing $\widehat{\varphi}$. We hope to return to these issues in future works.
\subsubsection{Coproduct formulas.} Let us define the Drinfeld generators $K_{i,\pm s}^{\pm}$ for $s \in \BZ_{\geq 0}$ by
\begin{displaymath}
K_i^{\pm}(z) = \sum_{s\in \BZ_{\geq 0}} K_{i,\pm s}^{\pm} z^{\pm s} \in U_q(\Gaff)[[z^{\pm 1}]].
\end{displaymath}
Then $K_{i,0}^{\pm} = (s_{ii}^{(0)})^{\pm 1}$. Moreover Cartan relations in Theorem \ref{thm: Ding-Frenkel} imply that
\begin{displaymath}
|X_{i,n}^{\pm}|_{\BQ} = \pm \alpha_i,\quad |K_{j,\pm s}^{\pm}|_{\BQ} = 0 \quad \textrm{for}\ i \in I_0,j \in I, n \in \BZ, s \in \BZ_{\geq 0}.
\end{displaymath}
\begin{prop} \label{prop: Drinfeld coproduct estimation}
Let $i \in I_0, j \in I, n \in \BZ, s \in \BZ_{\geq 0}$. Then
\begin{eqnarray}
&& \Delta (K_{j,\pm s}^{\pm}) - \sum_{a=0}^s K_{j,\pm a}^{\pm} \otimes K_{j,\pm (s-a)}^{\pm} \in \sum_{\alpha \in \BQ_{\geq 0} \setminus \{0\}} (U_q(\Gaff))_{\alpha} \otimes (U_q(\Gaff))_{-\alpha}, \label{equ: coproduct H} \\
&&\Delta (X_{i,n}^+) - 1 \otimes X_{i,n}^+ \in \sum_{\alpha \in \BQ_{\geq 0} \setminus \{ 0\}} (U_q(\Gaff))_{\alpha} \otimes (U_q(\Gaff))_{\alpha_i-\alpha}, \label{equ: coproduct X} \\
&&\Delta (X_{i,n}^-) - X_{i,n}^- \otimes 1 \in \sum_{\alpha \in \BQ_{\geq 0} \setminus \{ 0\}} (U_q(\Gaff))_{\alpha-\alpha_i} \otimes (U_q(\Gaff))_{-\alpha}. \label{equ: coproduct Y}
\end{eqnarray}
\end{prop}
The proof of this proposition is given in Appendix \ref{sec: app}.
\section{Highest weight representations} \label{sec: main result}
In this section, we state one of the main results in this paper: some tensor products of Kirillov-Reshetikhin modules over $U_q(\Gaff)$ are highest $\ell$-weight modules.
\subsection{Highest $\ell$-weight modules.} \label{sec: highest l weight}
Let $V$ be a $U_q(\Gaff)$-module. A non-zero vector $v \in V \setminus \{0\}$ is called a {\it highest $\ell$-weight vector} if $v$ is $\super$-homogeneous and
\begin{displaymath}
s_{ij}^{(n)} v = 0 = t_{ij}^{(n)}v,\quad s_{kk}^{(n)}v,t_{kk}^{(n)}v \in \BC v \quad (n \in \BZ_{\geq 0},\ i,j,k \in I,\ i < j).
\end{displaymath}
V is called a {\it highest $\ell$-weight module} if $V = U_q(\Gaff)v$ for some highest $\ell$-weight vector. Similarly, the notions of {\it lowest $\ell$-weight vector} and {\it lowest $\ell$-weight module} are defined by replacing the above condition $(i< j)$ with $(i > j)$. Similarly, one can define the notions of highest/lowest $\ell$-weight modules/vectors for representations of the $q$-Yangian $Y_q(\Glie)$ by dropping the $t_{ij}^{(n)}$ above.
Thanks to Proposition \ref{prop: FRT realization of quantum superalgebra}, there is a highest weight representation theory for the quantum superalgebra $\Uc_q(\Glie)$. For example, let $V$ be a $\Uc_q(\Glie)$-module. A non-zero vector $v \in V$ is called a {\it highest weight vector} if $v$ is $\super$-homogeneous and $s_{ij}v = 0,\ s_{kk}v \in \BC v$ for $i,j,k \in I,\ i < j$. In particular, for $\lambda \in \BP$, we have simple $\Uc_q(\Glie)$-module $(DF^{-1})^* L(\lambda)$ which will be written as $L(\lambda)$ by abuse of language. More explicitly, $L(\lambda)$ is the simple $\Uc_q(\Glie)$-module generated by a vector $v_{\lambda}$ such that
\begin{displaymath}
|v_{\lambda}| = |\lambda|,\quad s_{ij} v_{\lambda} = 0, \quad s_{kk} v_{\lambda} = q^{(\epsilon_k,\lambda)} v_{\lambda} \quad (i,j,k \in I, i < j).
\end{displaymath}
\subsubsection{Highest $\ell$-weights and tensor product.} \label{sec: highest weight theory}
Let $V, V'$ be $U_q(\Gaff)$-modules of highest $\ell$-weights with $v,v'$ highest $\ell$-weight vectors respectively. Then $v \otimes v'$ is also a highest $\ell$-weight vector. By definition, there exist $f_i^{\pm}(z),g_i^{\pm}(z) \in (\BC[[z^{\pm 1}]])^{\times}$ for $i \in I$ such that
\begin{displaymath}
s_{ii}(z) v = f_i^+(z) v,\quad t_{ii}(z) v = f_i^-(z) v,\quad s_{ii}(z) v' = g_i^+(z) v',\quad t_{ii}(z) v' = g_i^-(z) v'.
\end{displaymath}
From the Gauss decomposition in \S \ref{sec: Drinfeld}, we see that
\begin{displaymath}
K_i^{\pm}(z) v = f_i^{\pm}(z)v,\quad K_i^{\pm}(z) v' = g_i^{\pm}(z) v'.
\end{displaymath}
On the other hand, from the coproduct formulas of $s_{ii}(z),t_{ii}(z)$ it follows
\begin{displaymath}
s_{ii}(z) (v \otimes v') = f_i^+(z)g_i^+(z) (v \otimes v'),\quad t_{ii}(z) (v \otimes v') = f_i^-(z)g_i^-(z) (v \otimes v').
\end{displaymath}
Henceforth, similar formulas hold for $K_i^{\pm}(z) (v \otimes v')$. This observation will be used in \S \ref{sec: proof of coproduct formulas} to conclude the proof of Proposition \ref{prop: Drinfeld coproduct estimation}.
\subsubsection{Kirillov-Reshetikhin modules.}
For $a \in \BC^{\times}$, define the evaluation morphism $\ev_a := \ev \circ \Phi_a: U_q(\Gaff) \longrightarrow \Uc_q(\Glie)$, here $\ev$ and $\Phi_a$ are given by Proposition \ref{prop: evaluation morphism} and by Formula \eqref{for: automorphisms of Z-graded superalgebras} respectively. We can pull back $\Uc_q(\Glie)$-modules $V$ to get $U_q(\Gaff)$-modules $\ev_a^* V$.
When there is no confusion, we simply write $v = \ev_a^* v$ for $v \in V$.
For example, take $\lambda \in \BP$. Consider $\ev_a^* L(\lambda)$. Let $v_{\lambda}$ be a highest weight vector for the $\Uc_q(\Glie)$-module $L(\lambda)$, then $v_{\lambda}$ is a highest $\ell$-weight vector
\begin{displaymath}
|v_{\lambda}| = |\lambda|,\quad s_{ii}(z) v_{\lambda} = (q^{(\lambda,\epsilon_i)} - z a q^{-(\lambda,\epsilon_i)}) v_{\lambda},\quad t_{ii}(z) v_{\lambda} = (q^{-(\lambda,\epsilon_i)} - z^{-1}a^{-1}q^{(\lambda,\epsilon_i)}) v_{\lambda}.
\end{displaymath}
\begin{defi} \label{def: Kirillov-Reshetikhin modules}
The $U_q(\Gaff)$-modules $\ev_a^*L(k\varpi_r) \otimes \BC_{|k\varpi_r|}$ for $a \in \BC^{\times},r \in I_0, k \in \BZ_{\geq 0}$, are called Kirillov-Reshetikhin modules, denoted by $W_{k,a}^{(r)}$.
\end{defi}
In the above definition, the tensor product by an one-dimensional module is needed to ensure that the highest $\ell$-weight vectors are of $\super$-degree $\even$. The main result of this section is the following.
\begin{thm} \label{thm: cyclicity of tensor product of KR modules}
Let $k \in \BZ_{>0},\ r \in I_0$ and $a \in \BC^{\times}$. Let $x_j \in \BZ$ for $1 \leq j \leq k$. Assume $x_i \geq x_j$ for all $1 \leq i < j \leq k$. Then the $U_q(\Gaff)$-module $\bigotimes_{j=1}^k W_{1,aq_r^{x_j}}^{(r)}$ is of highest $\ell$-weight.
\end{thm}
Large part of the rest of the paper is devoted to the proof of the theorem. The outline is as follows: first we reduce to the case $1 \leq r \leq M$ with the help of a Hopf superalgebra isomorphism (Remark \ref{remark: reduction to even cases})
\begin{displaymath}
U_q(\widehat{\mathfrak{gl}(N,M)})^{\mathrm{cop}} \longrightarrow U_q(\widehat{\mathfrak{gl}(M,N)});
\end{displaymath}
next we study in \S \ref{sec: Yangian} in detail the case $\Glie = \mathfrak{gl}(1,1)$; finally we conclude in \S \ref{sec: proof} the proof by restriction arguments from $\Glie$ to $\mathfrak{gl}(1,1)$. Throughout the proof, a cyclicity result of Chari (Lemma \ref{lem: cyclicity Chari}) is used repeatedly.
\subsection{Reduction to the case $r \leq M$.} \label{sec: reduction}
Let $\Glie' = \mathfrak{gl}(N,M)$. We shall define the quantum affine superalgebra $U_q(\Gafft)$. Recall that $U_q(\Gaff)$ is constructed from the vector superspace $\BV$ and the Perk-Schultz matrix $R_q(z,w)$. We begin with the index set $I$ endowed with $\super$-partition
\begin{displaymath}
I = \{1<2<\cdots <M+N\} = I_{\even} \sqcup I_{\odd},\quad I_{\even} = \{1<2<\cdots < M\}.
\end{displaymath}
$\BV = \bigoplus_{i\in I} \BC v_i$ and $I = I_{\even} \sqcup I_{\odd}$ are linked in the following way: $|v_i| = |i|$. The Perk-Schultz matrix $R(z,w)$ is determined by $I$ as seen from Formula \eqref{for: Perk-Schultz matrix coefficients}, in which the summation is over $I$, and $q_i = q^{(-1)^{|i|}}$.
Now introduce
\begin{displaymath}
J = \{1 < 2 < \cdots < M+N \} = J_{\even} \sqcup J_{\odd},\quad J_{\even} = \{1< 2 < \cdots < N \}.
\end{displaymath}
For $s \in \super$ and $j \in J_s$, write $|j|^J = s$. Let $\BV^J = \bigoplus_{j\in J} \BC w_j$ be the vector superspace
\begin{displaymath}
|w_j| = |j|^J \quad (j \in J).
\end{displaymath}
Let $e_{ij} \in \End \BV^J$ be $w_k \mapsto \delta_{jk} w_i$ for $i,j,k \in J$. Let $R^J(z,w) = R^J_q(z,w)$ be the Perk-Schultz matrix defined by Formula \eqref{for: Perk-Schultz matrix coefficients} with summation over $J$, with the $q_i$ for $i \in I$ replaced by the $q_j^J = q^{(-1)^{|j|^J}}$ for $j \in J$, and with the $E_{ij}$ for $i,j \in I$ replaced by the $e_{ij}$ for $i,j \in J$.
Define the quantum affine superalgebra $U_q(\Gafft)$ in exactly the same way as in Definition \ref{def: quantum affine superalgebras}. For distinction, write the defining generators as $s_{ij;J}^{(n)},\ t_{ij;J}^{(n)}$.
Finally, define $\varepsilon_{ij}^J$ for $i,j \in J$ in the same way as in Formula \eqref{equ: transpose of matrices}, with the $|i|$ for $i \in I$ replaced by the $|i|^J$ for $i \in J$. For $i \in J$, let $\overline{i} = N+M+1-i \in I$.
\begin{prop} \label{prop: from gl(N,M) to gl(M,N)}
The assignment $s_{ij;J}^{(n)} \mapsto \varepsilon_{ji}^J s_{\overline{j}\overline{i}}^{(n)},\ t_{ij;J}^{(n)} \mapsto \varepsilon_{ji}^J t_{\overline{j}\overline{i}}^{(n)}$ extends uniquely to a Hopf superalgebra isomorphism $f_{J,I}: U_q(\Gafft)^{\mathrm{cop}} \longrightarrow U_q(\Gaff)$.
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
Introduce the linear isomorphism $f: \BV \longrightarrow \BV^J,\ v_i \mapsto w_{\overline{i}}$. Let $f_*: \End \BV \longrightarrow \End \BV^J,\ h \mapsto f h f^{-1}$ be the induced map. Then
\begin{displaymath}
f_*: \End \BV \longrightarrow \End \BV^J,\quad E_{ij} \mapsto e_{\overline{i}\overline{j}}
\end{displaymath}
is an isomorphism of superalgebras. Moreover, we have
\begin{displaymath}
f_* \otimes f_* (R_q(z,w)) = c_{\BV^J,\BV^J} R^J_{q^{-1}}(z,w) c_{\BV^J,\BV^J} = (\tau_J \otimes \tau_J) (R^J_q(z,w)^{-1}).
\end{displaymath}
Here $\tau_J: \End \BV^J \longrightarrow \End \BV^J,\ e_{ij} \mapsto \varepsilon_{ij}^J e_{ji}$, and the last equation comes from Proposition \ref{prop: properties of Perk-Schultz matrix} (PS4)-(PS5).
Applying $\Id_{U_q(\Gaff)} \otimes f_* \otimes f_*$ to Relation \eqref{rel: RTT = TTR}, we get
\begin{displaymath}
((\tau_J \otimes \tau_J)(R^J_q(z,w)^{-1}))_{23} \tilde{T}_{12}(z) \tilde{T}_{13}(w) = \tilde{T}_{13}(w) \tilde{T}_{12}(z) ((\tau_J \otimes \tau_J)(R^J_q(z,w)^{-1}))_{23}.
\end{displaymath}
Here $\tilde{T}(z) = (\Id_{U_q(\Gaff)} \otimes f_*)(T(z))$. Next applying $\Id_{U_q(\Gaff)} \otimes \tau_J \otimes \tau_J$ to the above equation,
\begin{displaymath}
\widehat{T}_{12}(z) \widehat{T}_{13}(w)(R^J_q(z,w)^{-1})_{23} = (R^J_q(z,w)^{-1})_{23} \widehat{T}_{13}(w) \widehat{T}_{12}(z).
\end{displaymath}
Here $\widehat{T}(z) = (\Id_{U_q(\Gaff)} \otimes \tau_J) (\tilde{T}(z))$. In other words,
\begin{displaymath}
R^J_{23}(z,w)\widehat{T}_{12}(z) \widehat{T}_{13}(w) = \widehat{T}_{13}(w) \widehat{T}_{12}(z) R^J_{23}(z,w) \in (U_q(\Gaff) \otimes \End \BV^J)((z^{-1},w^{-1})).
\end{displaymath}
The same argument applied to Relations \eqref{rel: RTS = STR}-\eqref{rel: RSS = SSR}, we get a well-defined superalgebra morphism: $f_{J,I}: U_q(\Gafft) \longrightarrow U_q(\Gaff)$ such that
\begin{eqnarray*}
&&(f_{J,I} \otimes \Id_{\End \BV^J}) (S_J(z)) = (\Id_{U_q(\Gaff)} \otimes \tau_J f_*) (S(z)),\\
&& (f_{J,I} \otimes \Id_{\End \BV^J}) (T_J(z)) = (\Id_{U_q(\Gaff)} \otimes \tau_J f_*) (T(z)).
\end{eqnarray*}
The rest is now clear.
\end{proof}
\begin{rem} \label{remark: reduction to even cases}
Let $M+1 \leq r < M+N$. Let $v$ be a highest $\ell$-weight vector for the $U_q(\Gafft)$-module $W_{k,a}^{(r)}$. Then $f_{J,I}^*v$ is a highest $\ell$-weight vector in $f_{J,I}^* W_{k,a}^{(r)}$ with:
\begin{eqnarray*}
&& s_{ii,J}(z) f_{J,I}^* v = f_{J,I}^* v\begin{cases}
q^k - z a q^{-k} & (\textrm{if}\ i \leq N+M-r), \\
1 - z a & (\textrm{if}\ i > N+M-r),
\end{cases} \\
&& t_{ii,J}(z) f_{J,I}^* v = f_{J,I}^* v\begin{cases}
q^{-k} - z^{-1} a^{-1} q^{k} & (\textrm{if}\ i \leq N+M-r), \\
1 - z a & (\textrm{if}\ i > N+M-r).
\end{cases}
\end{eqnarray*}
In other words, $f_{J,I}^* W_{k,a}^{(r)} \cong W_{k,a;J}^{(N+M-r)}$ is a Kirillov-Reshetikhin module for the quantum affine superalgebra $U_q(\widehat{\mathfrak{gl}(N,M)})$, corresponding to the fundamental weight $\varpi_{N+M-r}$. Clearly, $1 \leq N+M-r \leq N-1$. Thus, to prove Theorem \ref{thm: cyclicity of tensor product of KR modules}, we can assume $1 \leq r \leq M$.
\end{rem}
\subsection{A cyclicity result of Chari.} To prove that a tensor product of $U_q(\Gaff)$-modules as in Theorem \ref{thm: cyclicity of tensor product of KR modules} is of highest $\ell$-weight, it is enough to to prove that a certain vector is generated by the highest $\ell$-weight vector, as Chari did in the non-graded case \cite[Lemma 4.2]{Chari}.
\begin{lem} \label{lem: cyclicity Chari}
Let $V_+$ (resp. $V_-$) be a $U_q(\Gaff)$-module of highest $\ell$-weight (resp. of lowest $\ell$-weight). Let $v_+ \in V_+$ (resp. $v_- \in V_-$) be a highest $\ell$-weight vector (resp. lowest $\ell$-weight vector). Then the $U_q(\Gaff)$-module $V_+ \otimes V_-$ (resp. $V_- \otimes V_+$) is generated by $v_+ \otimes v_-$ (resp. $v_- \otimes v_+$).
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
If $v \in V$ is a highest/lowest $\ell$-weight vector for a $U_q(\Gaff)$-module $V$, then according to Proposition \ref{prop: from gl(N,M) to gl(M,N)}, $f_{J,I}^* v$ is a highest/lowest $\ell$-weight vector for the $U_q(\Gafft)$-module $f_{J,I}^* V$. Hence, it is enough to prove the first part: $V_+ \otimes V_- = U_q(\Gaff) (v_+ \otimes v_-)$.
As $V_-$ is a lowest $\ell$-weight $U_q(\Gaff)$-module with lowest $\ell$-weight vector $v_-$, $V_-$ is spanned as a vector superspace by the $X_{i_1,n_1}^+ X_{i_2,n_2}^+ \cdots X_{i_s,n_s}^+ v_-$ for $s \in \BZ_{\geq 0}$ and $i_t \in I_0, n_t \in \BZ$. In particular, with respect to the action of the $s_{ii}^{(0)}$, $V_-$ is endowed with a $\BQ_{\geq 0}$-grading such that $(V_{-})_{\alpha}$ is spanned by the above vectors with $\alpha = \alpha_{i_1} + \cdots + \alpha_{i_s}$. This $\BQ_{\geq 0}$-grading in turn endows $V_-$ with a $\BZ_{\geq 0}$-grading such that $(V_-)_n$ is spanned by the above vectors with $n = s$. We prove by induction on $n \in \BZ_{\geq 0}$ that
\begin{displaymath}
(P_n):\ V_+ \otimes (V_-)_n \subseteq U_q(\Gaff)(v_+ \otimes v_-).
\end{displaymath}
When $n = 0$, $(V_-)_0 = \BC v_-$. For all $v \in V_+$, we have
\begin{displaymath}
X_{i,n}^- (v \otimes v_-) = X_{i,n}^- v \otimes v_-
\end{displaymath}
since $(U_q(\Gaff))_{-\alpha} v_- = 0$ for $\alpha \in \BQ_{\geq 0} \setminus \{0\}$. As $V_+$ is of highest $\ell$-weight generated by the highest $\ell$-weight vector $v_+$, we get $V_+ \otimes v_- \subseteq U_q(\Gaff)(v_+ \otimes v_-)$. Now assume $(P_k)$ for $k \leq n$. Let us prove $(P_{n+1})$. Take $\super$-homogeneous vectors $v_1 \in V_+$ and $v_2 \in (V_-)_{\beta} \subseteq (V_-)_n$. We have
\begin{displaymath}
X_{i,n}^+ (v_1 \otimes v_2) \in (-1)^{|i||v_1|} v_1 \otimes X_{i,n}^+ v_2 + \sum_{\alpha \in \BQ_{\geq 0}\setminus \{0\}} (U_q(\Gaff))_{\alpha} v_1 \otimes (U_q(\Gaff))_{\alpha_i - \alpha}v_2.
\end{displaymath}
On the other hand, for $\alpha \in \BQ_{\geq 0} \setminus \{0\}$, by definition
\begin{displaymath}
(U_q(\Gaff))_{\alpha_i - \alpha}v_2 \subseteq (V_-)_{\beta + \alpha_i - \alpha} \subseteq \sum_{k\leq n} (V_-)_k.
\end{displaymath}
It follows that $v_1 \otimes X_{i,n}^+ v_2 \in U_q(\Gaff) (v_+ \otimes v_-)$. As $(V_-)_{n+1}$ is spanned by the $X_{i,n}^+ v_2$ with $v_2 \in (V_-)_{n}$, we conclude.
\end{proof}
Our proof is slightly different from that of Chari \cite[Lemma 4.2]{Chari} in the sense that we do not use the Drinfeld-Jimbo generators (see the end of \S \ref{sec: proof of coproduct formulas}).
\subsection{Natural representations.} \label{sec: natural representations}
From Lemma \ref{lem: natural representations of Yang-Baxter algebra}, Propositions \ref{prop: dependence of R-matrices} and \ref{prop: properties of Perk-Schultz matrix} (PS4)-(PS5) together with Remark \ref{rem: inverse of R matrices} (PS7) follows a representation $\rho_{(1)}$ of the quantum superalgebra $\Uc_q(\Glie)$ on $\BV$:
\begin{displaymath}
(\rho_{(1)} \otimes \Id_{\End \BV}) (T) = (\Id_{\End \BV} \otimes \tau) (R^{-1}),\quad (\rho_{(1)} \otimes \Id_{\End \BV})(S) = (\Id_{\End \BV} \otimes \tau) ((R')^{-1}).
\end{displaymath}
To be more precise,
\begin{eqnarray*}
&& \rho_{(1)}(s_{ii}) = q_i E_{ii} + \sum_{j \neq i} E_{jj} = \rho_{(1)} (t_{ii}^{-1}) \quad (\textrm{for}\ i \in I), \\
&& \rho_{(1)}(s_{ij}) = (q_i - q_i^{-1}) E_{ij},\quad \rho_{(1)}(t_{ji}) = (q_i^{-1}-q_i) E_{ji}\quad (\textrm{for}\ 1 \leq i < j \leq M+N).
\end{eqnarray*}
From Proposition \ref{prop: FRT realization of quantum superalgebra} and Example \ref{example: natural representation quantum superalgebra} it follows that $\rho_{(0)} = \rho_{(1)} \circ DF$. In other words, the Ding-Frenkel isomorphism $DF: U_q(\Glie) \longrightarrow \Uc_q(\Glie)$ respects the natural representations. We can therefore write $\BV \cong L(\epsilon_1)$ as $\Uc_q(\Glie)$-modules.
For $a \in \BC^{\times}$, define $\rho_a := \rho_{(1)} \circ \ev_a$. The representations $(\BV, \rho_a)$ are called {\it natural representations} of the quantum affine superalgebra $U_q(\Gaff)$. For simplicity, let $\BV(a)$ be the $U_q(\Gaff)$-module corresponding to $(\BV, \rho_a)$. It is clear that $\BV(a) \cong W_{1,a}^{(1)}$ as $U_q(\Gaff)$-modules (assuming $M \neq 0$).
The following lemma says that Perk-Schultz $R$-matrices can be interpreted as intertwining operators, from which comes naturally the Yang-Baxter equation Proposition \ref{prop: properties of Perk-Schultz matrix} (PS1).
\begin{lem}
Let $a, b \in \BC^{\times}$. Then $c_{\BV,\BV} \circ R(z,w)|_{(z,w) = (a,b)}: \BV(a) \otimes \BV(b) \longrightarrow \BV(b) \otimes \BV(a)$ is a morphism of $U_q(\Gaff)$-modules. \hfill $\Box$
\end{lem}
The proof is direct, using properties of the Perk-Schultz $R$-matrix in Proposition \ref{prop: properties of Perk-Schultz matrix}. We shall not use this result in the sequel.
For natural representations, it is possible to determine completely the cyclicity condition.
\begin{prop} \label{prop: tensor product of natural representations}
Let $k \in \BZ_{>0}$ and $a_i \in \BC^{\times}$ for $1 \leq i \leq k$. The $U_q(\Gaff)$-module $\bigotimes_{i=1}^k \BV(a_i)$ is of highest $\ell$-weight if and only if $a_i \neq a_j q_1^{-2}$ for $1 \leq i < j \leq k$. It is of lowest $\ell$-weight if and only if $a_i \neq a_j q_{M+N}^{-2}$ for $1 \leq i < j \leq k$.
\end{prop}
The proof of this proposition is postponed to \S \ref{sec: tensor product of natural modules}.
\section{Representations of the $q$-Yangian $Y_q(\mathfrak{gl}(1,1))$} \label{sec: Yangian}
Fix $M = N = 1$ and $\Glie = \mathfrak{gl}(1,1)$. We study the category $\CF$ finite-dimensional representations of the $q$-Yangian $Y_q(\Glie)$. Up to tensor product by one-dimensional modules, simple objects in $\CF$ are parametrized by rational functions as in \cite[Theorem 3.11]{HJ}. Also, an explicit condition for a tensor product of simple objects to be of highest $\ell$-weight is given in terms of poles and zeros of rational functions (Theorem \ref{thm: web property}).
\subsection{Simple objects in $\CF$.} \label{sec: simple}
Let us first construct some obvious $Y_q(\Glie)$-modules.
\subsubsection{One-dimensional $Y_q(\Glie)$-modules.} Let $D = \BC v$ be an one-dimensional $Y_q(\Glie)$-module. As $v$ is a highest/lowest $\ell$-weight vector, there exist $s \in \super, a,b \in \BC^{\times}$ and $f(z),g(z) \in 1 + z\BC[[z]]$ such that
\begin{displaymath}
|v| = s,\quad s_{11}(z)v = a f(z)v,\quad s_{22}(z) v = b g(z) v,\quad s_{12}(z) v = s_{21}(z) v = 0.
\end{displaymath}
It follows from Theorem \ref{thm: Ding-Frenkel} that $X_{1,n}^+ v = 0 = X_{1,n+1}^- v$. Henceforth $K_1^+(z)(K_2^{+}(z))^{-1} v \in \BC^{\times} v$. In other words, $f(z) = g(z)$. In summary, there are three types of one-dimensional $Y_q(\Glie)$-modules: $\BC_s, \BC_{(a,b)}, \BC_{f}$ where $s \in \super, (a,b) \in (\BC^{\times})^2$ and $f \in 1+z\BC[[z]]$. All one-dimensional $Y_q(\Glie)$-modules factorize uniquely into tensor products $\BC_s \otimes \BC_{(a,b)} \otimes \BC_f$.
\subsubsection{Evaluation modules in $\CF$.} \label{sec: prefundamental modules}
Following \cite{Tsuboi}, let us define $\dot{\Uc}_q(\Glie)$ to be the superalgebra generated by $\dot{s}_{ij},\dot{t}_{ji},\dot{s}_{ii}^{-1}$ for $1 \leq i \leq j \leq 2$, with $\super$-degrees and defining relations the same as those for $\Uc_q(\Glie)$ in \S \ref{sec: evaluation maps} except the last relation which is replaced by
\begin{displaymath}
\dot{s}_{ii}\dot{s}_{ii}^{-1} = 1 = \dot{s}_{ii}^{-1} \dot{s}_{ii}.
\end{displaymath}
In particular, the $\dot{t}_{ii}$ are not required to be invertible. From the proof of Proposition \ref{prop: evaluation morphism}, we see that there are well-defined evaluation morphisms $\ev_a$ for $a \in \BC^{\times}$
\begin{displaymath}
\ev_a: Y_q(\Glie) \longrightarrow \dot{\Uc}_q(\Glie),\quad s_{ij}(z) \mapsto \dot{s}_{ij} - z a \dot{t}_{ij}.
\end{displaymath}
As usual, we understand that $\dot{s}_{ji} = 0 = \dot{t}_{ij}$ when $i < j$. Clearly $\dot{\Uc}_q(\Glie)$ is $\BQ$-graded with respect to the conjugate actions of the $\dot{s}_{ii}$.
Let us write down the defining relations of $\dot{\Uc}_q(\Glie)$:
\begin{align*}
& |\dot{s}_{ii}|_{\BQ} = |\dot{t}_{ii}|_{\BQ} = 0,\quad |\dot{s}_{ij}|_{\BQ} = \epsilon_i - \epsilon_j = - |\dot{t}_{ji}|_{\BQ}, \\
& \dot{s}_{12}^2 = 0 = \dot{t}_{21}^2,\quad \dot{s}_{12}\dot{t}_{21} + \dot{t}_{21}\dot{s}_{12} = (q-q^{-1})(\dot{t}_{11}\dot{s}_{22} - \dot{s}_{11}\dot{t}_{22}).
\end{align*}
From the above presentation of $\dot{\Uc}_q(\Glie)$ and from the evaluation morphisms, it is easy to build up explicit representations for $Y_q(\Glie)$.
Let $a \in \BC^{\times}$. We shall define two evaluation representations $\rho_a^{\pm}$ of $Y_q(\Glie)$ on the vector superspace $\BV = \BC v_1 \oplus \BC v_2$. It is enough to give their generating matrices $[\rho_a^{\pm}] := (\rho_a^{\pm}(s_{ij}(z)))_{1\leq i,j \leq 2}$ with respect to the standard basis $(v_1,v_2)$. More precisely,
\begin{eqnarray*}
[\rho_a^+] &=& \begin{pmatrix}
(1-za)E_{11} + (q^{-1}-zaq) E_{22} & (q-q^{-1})E_{12} \\
-za E_{21} & E_{11}+q^{-1}E_{22}
\end{pmatrix},\\
\left[\rho_a^-\right] &=& \begin{pmatrix}
E_{11} + q^{-1}E_{22} & (q^{-1}-q)E_{12} \\
-zaE_{21} & (1-za)E_{11} + (q^{-1}-zaq)E_{22}
\end{pmatrix}.
\end{eqnarray*}
Let $L_{1,a}^{\pm}$ be the $Y_q(\Glie)$-modules associated with the representations $\rho_a^{\pm}$.
\subsubsection{Classification of simple objects in $\CF$.} Finite-dimensional simple $Y_q(\Glie)$-modules are classified in terms of highest $\ell$-weights in the following way.
\begin{lem} \label{lem: finite-dimensional simples for gl(1,1)}
(1) A finite-dimensional simple $Y_q(\Glie)$-module must be of highest $\ell$-weight.
(2) Let $S$ be a simple $Y_q(\Glie)$-module generated by a highest $\ell$-weight vector $v$ with
\begin{displaymath}
|v| = \even,\quad s_{ii}(z) v = f_i(z) v,\quad f_i(z) \in (\BC[[z]])^{\times}\quad \textrm{for}\ i = 1,2.
\end{displaymath}
Then $S$ is finite-dimensional if and only if $\frac{f_1(z)}{f_2(z)} = \frac{P(z)}{Q(z)}$ for some polynomials $P(z),Q(z) \in \BC[z]$ with non-zero constant terms.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
The proof of Part (1) is the same as that of \cite[Lemma 4.12]{Z}, by considering the action of the $s_{ii}^{(0)},(s_{ii}^{(0)})^{-1}$. For Part (2), \lq\lq only if\rq\rq comes from Theorem \ref{thm: Ding-Frenkel} and \cite[Lemma 3.9]{HJ}. For the \lq\lq if\rq\rq part, write
\begin{displaymath}
P(z) = a \prod_{i=1}^m (1-z c_i),\quad Q(z) = b \prod_{j=1}^n (1 - z d_j),\quad c_i,d_j,a,b \in \BC^{\times}.
\end{displaymath}
Then $S$ is a sub-quotient of the tensor product
\begin{displaymath}
(\bigotimes_{i=1}^m L_{1,c_i}^+) \otimes (\bigotimes_{j=1}^n L_{1,d_j}^-) \otimes \BC_{(f_1(0),f_2(0))} \otimes \BC_{f'},
\end{displaymath}
where $f'(z) = f_1(z) f_1(0)^{-1} \prod_{i=1}^m (1-zc_i)^{-1}$. As the $L_{1,a}^{\pm}$ are always two-dimensional, $S$ must be finite-dimensional.
\end{proof}
Let us define $\CR$ to be the subset of $(\BC[[z]])^{\times}$ consisting of power series of the form $P(z) Q(z)^{-1}$ with $P(z),Q(z) \in 1 + z\BC[z]$. Identically, $\CR$ is the set of rational functions $f(z) \in \BC(z)$ such that $f(0) = 1$. Here we view a rational function as a meromorphic function $\BC \cup \{\infty\} \longrightarrow \BC \cup \{ \infty \}$. For such $f$, let $V(f)$ be the simple $Y_q(\Glie)$-module generated by a highest $\ell$-weight vector $v$ satisfying
\begin{displaymath}
|v| = \even,\quad s_{11}(z) v = f(z) v,\quad s_{22}(z) v = v.
\end{displaymath}
For example, when $a \in \BC^{\times}$,
\begin{displaymath}
V(1-za) \cong L_{1,a}^+,\quad V(\frac{1}{1-za}) \cong L_{1,a}^- \otimes \BC_{\frac{1}{1-za}}.
\end{displaymath}
According to Lemma \ref{lem: finite-dimensional simples for gl(1,1)}, $V(f)$ is finite-dimensional. Moreover, All finite-dimensional simple $Y_q(\Glie)$-modules can be factorized uniquely into $V(f) \otimes D$ with $D$ one-dimensional and $f \in \CR$.
\subsection{Tensor product of simple modules.}For $f \in \CR$, let $Z(f)$ (resp. $P(f)$) be the set of zeros (resp. poles) of the meromorphic function $f$. It is possible that $\infty \in Z(f) \cup P(f)$. The main result of this section can be stated as follows.
\begin{thm} \label{thm: web property}
Let $f_1,f_2,\cdots,f_s \in \CR$. For $1 \leq i \leq s$, let $v_i$ be a highest $\ell$-weight vector in the simple $Y_q(\Glie)$-module $V(f_j)$. Let $V := \bigotimes_{i=1}^s V(f_i)$ and $v := \bigotimes_{i=1}^s v_i \in V$. Then
\begin{itemize}
\item[(a)] $V = Y_q(\Glie) v$ if and only if $P(f_i) \cap Z(f_j) = \emptyset$ for all $1 \leq i < j \leq s$;
\item[(b)] $Y_q(\Glie)v$ is the unique simple sub-$Y_q(\Glie)$-module of $V$ if and only if $Z(f_i) \cap P(f_j) = \emptyset$ for all $1 \leq i < j \leq s$;
\item[(c)] $V$ is simple if and only if $P(f_i) \cap Z(f_j) = \emptyset$ for all $1 \leq i \neq j \leq s$.
\end{itemize}
\end{thm}
\begin{rem}
(1) The theorem above can be viewed as a super analogue of \cite[Theorems 3.4,4.8]{CP1} on classification and construction of finite-dimensional simple $U_q(\widehat{\mathfrak{sl}_2})$-modules in terms of Drinfeld polynomials. See \cite[Theorem 4.6]{Mukhin} for a closer statement involving rational functions instead of Drinfeld polynomials.
(2) Let $a_n \in \BC^{\times}$ be given for $n \in \BZ_{\geq 0}$. Suppose $a_n \neq a_m$ whenever $n \neq m$. Then for $n \in \BZ_{>0}$ the tensor product of $Y_q(\Glie)$-modules
\begin{displaymath}
W_n := (\bigotimes_{i=0}^{n-1} V(\frac{1-za_{i+1}}{1-za_i})) \otimes V(\frac{1}{1-za_n})
\end{displaymath}
is of highest $\ell$-weight, and its simple quotient is isomorphic to $V(\frac{1}{1-za_0})$. Hence given a finite-dimensional simple module $S$, we find infinitely many finite-dimensional highest $\ell$-weight modules whose simple quotients are isomorphic to $S$, and the dimensions of these modules can be arbitrarily large. This gives a clue on the Weyl modules defined in \cite[\S 4.1]{Z} for the quantum loop superalgebra $U_q(L\mathfrak{sl}(M,N))$.
\end{rem}
The proof of Theorem \ref{thm: web property} will be given in \S \ref{sec: proof of web}.
\subsubsection{Factorization into prime simple modules.}
Let $f \in \CR$. Write $f(z) = \frac{N(z)}{D(z)}$ where
\begin{displaymath}
N(z) = \prod_{i=1}^s (1 - z a_i),\quad D(z) = \prod_{i=1}^t (1 - z b_i)
\end{displaymath}
such that $a_i,b_i \in \BC^{\times}$ and $a_i \neq b_j$ for $1 \leq i \leq s, 1 \leq j \leq t$. Then
\begin{eqnarray*}
V(f) & \cong & \bigotimes_{i=1}^s V(\frac{1-za_i}{1-zb_i}) \quad \textrm{if}\ s = t, \\
V(f) & \cong & (\bigotimes_{i=1}^t V(\frac{1-za_i}{1-zb_i})) \otimes (\bigotimes_{j=t+1}^s V(1-za_j)) \quad \textrm{if}\ s > t, \\
V(f) & \cong & (\bigotimes_{i=1}^s V(\frac{1-za_i}{1-zb_i})) \otimes(\bigotimes_{j=s+1}^t V(\frac{1}{1-zb_j})) \quad \textrm{if}\ s < t.
\end{eqnarray*}
According to Theorem \ref{thm: web property}, these are factorizations of simple modules into prime simple modules. Here by a {\it prime} simple module we mean a simple module $S$ which can not be written as $S_1 \otimes S_2$ with $S_i$ being modules of dimension $> 1$ \cite[\S 2.2]{HL}.
\subsubsection{Constructions of prime simple modules.} We have seen in \S \ref{sec: prefundamental modules} the explicit formulas for $V(1-za)$ and $V(\frac{1}{1-za})$. There still remains the third kind of prime simple modules, namely $V(\frac{1-za}{1-zb})$ for $a,b \in \BC^{\times}$ and $a \neq b$. Indeed, it is easy to check the following without using Theorem \ref{thm: web property} (2): the tensor product of highest $\ell$-weight vectors in $V(1-za) \otimes V(\frac{1}{1-zb})$ generates the unique simple sub-$Y_q(\Glie)$-module, which is two-dimensional and isomorphic to $V(\frac{1-za}{1-zb})$. Let $\rho_{a,b}$ be the corresponding representation of $Y_q(\Glie)$ on $\BV$. After some base change the generating matrix becomes
\begin{eqnarray*}
[\rho_{a,b}] &=& \begin{pmatrix}
\frac{1-za}{1-zb}E_{11} + \frac{q^{-1}-zaq}{1-zb} E_{22} & \frac{(q^{-1}-q)(b-a)}{1-zb} E_{12} \\
\frac{-z}{1-zb} E_{21} & E_{11} + \frac{q^{-1}-zbq}{1-zb} E_{22}
\end{pmatrix}.
\end{eqnarray*}
Remark that the matrix $[\rho_{a,b}]$ is well-defined even if $ab = 0$. In particular, for $a \in \BC^{\times}$, $[\rho_{a,0}]$ (resp. $[\rho_{0,a}]$) is a generating matrix for the representation associated to $V(1-za)$ (resp. to $V(\frac{1}{1-za})$). Hence all the prime simple modules are built upon the vector superspace $\BV$.
\subsubsection{Duals of prime simple modules.} Fix $a,b \in \BC$ such that $a \neq b$. Let $\rho_{a,b}$ be the representation of $Y_q(\Glie)$ on $\BV$ as in the preceding paragraph. Let $[\rho_{a,b}]$ be its generating matrix with respect to the standard basis $(v_1,v_2)$. Since $Y_q(\Glie)$ is a Hopf superalgebra, there exists naturally a representation $\rho_{a,b}^*$ of $Y_q(\Glie)$ on $\BV^*$ defined by:
\begin{displaymath}
\rho_{a,b}^* (x) := (\rho_{a,b}(\Sm x))^*\quad \textrm{for}\ x \in Y_q(\Glie).
\end{displaymath}
Here we adopt the notations in the proof of Lemma \ref{lem: transpose of matrices is an anti-automorphism}.
Let $(v_1^*,v_2^*)$ be the dual basis of $\BV^*$ with respect to $(v_1,v_2)$. Let $e_{ij} \in \End \BV^*$ be such that $e_{ij} v_k^* = \delta_{jk} v_i^*$. Then
\begin{displaymath}
E_{ii}^* = e_{ii},\quad E_{12}^* = e_{21},\quad E_{21}^* = - e_{12}.
\end{displaymath}
Let us compute the generating matrix of $\rho_{a,b}^*$ with respect to the basis $(v_2^*,v_1^*)$. By definition, $[\rho_{a,b}^*]_{ij} = \rho_{a,b}(\Sm(s_{ij}(z)))^*$. On the other hand, in view of Equation \eqref{for: antipode for S},
\begin{displaymath}
[\rho_{a,b}(\Sm(s_{ij}(z)))]_{1 \leq i,j \leq 2} = [\rho_{a,b}]^{-1}
\end{displaymath}
The matrices above should be seen as matrices over the superalgebra $\End \BV$. A direct calculation indicates:
\begin{displaymath}
[\rho_{a,b}]^{-1} = \begin{pmatrix}
\frac{q^{-1}-zbq}{q^{-1}-zaq} E_{11} + \frac{1-zb}{q^{-1}-zaq} E_{22} & \frac{(q^{-1}-q)(a-b)}{q^{-1}-zaq} E_{12} \\
\frac{z}{q^{-1}-zaq} E_{21} & E_{11} + \frac{1-za}{q^{-1}-zaq} E_{22}
\end{pmatrix},
\end{displaymath}
from which we obtain the generating matrix of $\rho_{a,b}^*$ with respect to the basis $(v_2^*,v_1^*)$ of $\BV^*$:
\begin{displaymath}
[\rho_{a,b}^*] = \frac{1-za}{q^{-1}-zaq} \begin{pmatrix}
\frac{1-zb}{1-za}e_{22} + \frac{q^{-1}-zbq}{1-za} e_{11} & \frac{(q^{-1}-q)(a-b)}{1-zb} e_{21} \\
\frac{-z}{1-za} e_{12} & e_{22} + \frac{q^{-1}-zaq}{1-za} e_{11}
\end{pmatrix} \approxeq \frac{1-za}{q^{-1}-zaq} [\rho_{b,a}].
\end{displaymath}
In the above equation, $\approxeq$ means that the two matrices on both sides are of the same form. They are by no means in the same superalgebra. In conclusion, as $Y_q(\Glie)$-modules:
\begin{displaymath}
V(\frac{1-za}{1-zb})^* \cong \BC_{\odd} \otimes \BC_{(q,q)} \otimes \BC_{\frac{1-za}{1-zaq^2}} \otimes V(\frac{1-zb}{1-za}).
\end{displaymath}
\subsection{Proof of Theorem \ref{thm: web property}.} \label{sec: proof of web}
Note that (c) follows directly from (a) and (b).
\subsubsection{Tensor products of prime simple modules.} \label{sec: special case}
Let us prove (a) and (b) under the condition that the $f_i \in \CR$ are of the form $f_i(z) = \frac{1-za_i}{1-zb_i}$ where $a_i,b_i \in \BC$ and $a_i \neq b_i$. In this case, $P(f_i) \cap Z(f_j) = \emptyset$ if and only if $b_i \neq a_j$. Moreover, the $V(f_i)$ are always two-dimensional, and $V(f_i)^* \cong V(f_i^{-1}) \otimes D_i$ for some one-dimensional module $D_i$. By definition of the dual modules, (b) is equivalent to the following statement:
\begin{itemize}
\item[(b1)] The tensor product $\bigotimes_{i=1}^s V(f_i)$ is of lowest $\ell$-weight if and only if $a_i \neq b_j$ for $1 \leq i < j \leq s$.
\end{itemize}
Let us prove (a). For $1 \leq i \leq s$, let $u_i^+$ (resp. $u_i^-$) be a highest (resp. lowest) $\ell$-weight vector in $V(f_i)$. Then from the explicit realization of $V(f_i)$ we see that
\begin{displaymath}
|u_i^+| = \even,\quad s_{11}(z) u_i^+ = \frac{1-za_i}{1-zb_i} u_i^+,\quad s_{22}(z) u_i^+ = u_i^+,\quad s_{21}(z) u_i^+ = \frac{z\lambda_i}{1-zb_i} u_i^-
\end{displaymath}
where $\lambda_i \in \BC^{\times}$. We remark that Lemma \ref{lem: cyclicity Chari} still holds when replacing $U_q(\Gaff)$-modules by $Y_q(\Glie)$-modules. Indeed, if $W$ is a highest $\ell$-weight $Y_q(\Glie)$-module with $w$ a highest $\ell$-weight vector, then by Theorem \ref{thm: Ding-Frenkel} we see that $W$ is spanned by vectors of the form $X_{1,n_1}^- \cdots X_{1,n_r}^- v$ where $r \in \BZ_{\geq 0}$ and $n_i \in \BZ_{\geq 1}$ for $1 \leq i \leq r$. Hence the proof of Lemma \ref{lem: cyclicity Chari} goes perfectly for $Y_q(\Glie)$-modules.
Let $V: = \bigotimes_{i=1}^s V(f_i)$ and $u := \bigotimes_{i=1}^s u_i^+$. Via the action of the $s_{ii}^{(0)}$, $V$ and the $V(f_i)$ are $\BQ$-graded:
\begin{displaymath}
(V)_{\lambda}:= \{ x \in V | s_{ii}^{(0)} x = q^{(\epsilon_i,\lambda)} x \quad \textrm{for}\ i = 1,2 \}.
\end{displaymath}
As $|u_i^+|_{\BQ} = 0, |u_i^-|_{\BQ} = -\alpha_1$, we see that: $|u|_{\BQ} = 0$; $(V)_{\lambda} \neq 0$ if and only if $\lambda = -t \alpha_1$ for some $0 \leq t \leq s$; $\dim (V)_{-t\alpha_1} = \bin{s}{t}$. In particular, $(V)_{-\alpha_1}$ is generated by the vectors
\begin{displaymath}
w_j := (\bigotimes_{i=1}^{j-1} u_i^+) \otimes u_i^- \otimes (\bigotimes_{j=i+1}^s u_j^+) \quad \textrm{for}\ 1 \leq j \leq s.
\end{displaymath}
On the other hand, set $V' := Y_q(\Glie) u$. As a highest $\ell$-weight module, $V'$ is $\BQ$-homogeneous. Moreover, from Theorem \ref{thm: Ding-Frenkel} we see that
\begin{displaymath}
(V')_{-\alpha_1} = \sum_{n \in \BZ_{\geq 1}} \BC X_{1,n}^- u = \sum_{n \in \BZ_{\geq 1}} \BC s_{21}^{(n)} u.
\end{displaymath}
In other words, $(V')_{-\alpha_1}$ is generated by the coefficients of $s_{21}(z) u \in V[[z]]$.
Suppose first that $V = V'$ is of highest $\ell$-weight. Then the coefficients of $s_{21}(z) u$ generate an $s$-dimensional subspace.
\begin{eqnarray*}
s_{21}(z) u &=& \sum_{i=1}^s (\prod_{j=1}^{i-1} s_{22}(z) u_j^+) \otimes s_{21}(z) u_i^+ \otimes (\bigotimes_{j=i+1}^s s_{11}(z) u_j^+) \\
&=& \sum_{i=1}^s \frac{z\lambda_i}{1-zb_i} \prod_{j=i+1}^s \frac{1-za_j}{1-zb_j} (\bigotimes_{j=1}^{i-1} u_j^+) \otimes u_i^- \otimes (\bigotimes_{j=i+1}^s u_j^+) \\
&=& \frac{z}{\prod_{l=1}^s (1-zb_l)} \sum_{i=1}^s \lambda_i g_i(z) w_i.
\end{eqnarray*}
Here the $g_i(z) \in \BC[z]$ are defined by
\begin{displaymath}
g_i(z) = \prod_{j=1}^{i-1}(1-zb_j) \prod_{j=i+1}^s (1-za_j).
\end{displaymath}
It follows that the polynomials $g_i(z) \in \BC[z]$ must be linearly independent. In view of Lemma \ref{lem: linear independence of polynomials} below, we must have $b_i \neq a_j$ for $1 \leq i < j \leq s$, as desired.
Next suppose that $b_i \neq a_j$ for $1 \leq i < j \leq s$. We show by induction on $s$ that $V$ is of highest $\ell$-weight. For $s = 1$ this is evident. Assume $s > 1$. Then we can assume furthermore that $\bigotimes_{i=2}^s V(f_i)$ is of highest $\ell$-weight. Now Lemma \ref{lem: cyclicity Chari} says that
\begin{displaymath}
V = Y_q(\Glie) w_1.
\end{displaymath}
Since $b_i \neq a_j$ for $1 \leq i < j \leq s$, the polynomials $g_i(z)$ are linearly independent (Lemma \ref{lem: linear independence of polynomials}). Hence the coefficients of $s_{21}(z) u$ generate an $s$-dimensional subspace. It follows that $w_1 \in V'$. Hence $V = V'$ is of highest $\ell$-weight.
\begin{lem} \label{lem: linear independence of polynomials}
Let $k \in \BZ_{>0}$. Let $a_i,a_i' \in \BC$ be given for $1 \leq i \leq k$. For $1 \leq j \leq k$, define
\begin{displaymath}
f_j(z) := (\prod_{i=1}^{j-1}(1 - z a_i)) (\prod_{i=j+1}^k (1 - z a_i')) \in \BC[z].
\end{displaymath}
Then the $f_j(z)$ are linearly independent if and only if $a_i \neq a_j'$ for all $1 \leq i < j \leq k$.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
The $k$ polynomials $f_j(z)$ are of degree $\leq k-1$. Introduce
\begin{displaymath}
f_1(z) \wedge f_2(z) \wedge \cdots \wedge f_k(z) = \Delta (1 \wedge z \wedge \cdots \wedge z^{k-1}) \in \wedge^k \BC[z].
\end{displaymath}
Then the $f_j(z)$ are linearly independent if and only if $\Delta \neq 0$. For $j+s \leq k$, take
\begin{displaymath}
f_j^{(s)}(z) = (\prod_{i=1}^{j-1}(1-za_i)) (\prod_{i=j+s+1}^k (1 - z a_i')).
\end{displaymath}
Then $f_j^{(0)}(z) = f_j(z)$ and
\begin{displaymath}
f_i^{(s)}(z) - f_{i+1}^{(s)}(z) = (a_i - a_{i+s+1}') z f_i^{(s+1)}(z)
\end{displaymath}
for $i+s+1 \leq k$. Take $\omega = 1 \wedge z \wedge \cdots \wedge z^{k-1}$. We have
\begin{eqnarray*}
\Delta \omega &=& \bigwedge_{i=1}^k f_i^{(0)}(z) = (\bigwedge_{i=1}^{k-1} f_i^{(0)}(z)-f_{i+1}^{(0)}(z)) \wedge f_k(z) = (\bigwedge_{i=1}^{k-1} (a_i - a_{i+1}') z f_i^{(1)}(z)) \wedge f_k^{(0)}(z)\\
& =& (\prod_{i=1}^{k-1}(a_i-a_{i+1}')) (\bigwedge_{i=1}^{k-1} zf_i^{(1)}(z)) \wedge 1\\
&=& (\prod_{i=1}^{k-1}(a_{i+1}'-a_i)) 1 \wedge (\bigwedge_{i=1}^{k-2} z(f_i^{(1)}(z)-f_{i+1}^{(1)}(z))) \wedge z f_{k-1}^{(1)}(z) \\
&=& (\prod_{i=1}^{k-1}(a_{i+1}'-a_{i}))(\prod_{i=1}^{k-2} (a_i - a_{i+2}')) 1 \wedge (\bigwedge_{i=1}^{k-2} z^2 f_i^{(2)}(z)) \wedge z \\
&=& (\prod_{i=1}^{k-1}(a_{i+1}'-a_{i}))(\prod_{i=1}^{k-2} (a_{i+2}' - a_i)) 1 \wedge z \wedge (\bigwedge_{i=1}^{k-2} z^2 f_i^{(2)}(z)) \\
&=& \cdots = \prod_{1 \leq i < j \leq k} (a_j' - a_i) \omega.
\end{eqnarray*}
Clearly $\Delta \neq 0$ if and only if $a_i \neq a_j'$ for $1 \leq i < j \leq k$.
\end{proof}
This ends the proof of Theorem \ref{thm: web property} (a) in the case where the $f_i(z)$ are of the form $\frac{1-za_i}{1-zb_i}$ with $a_i,b_i \in \BC$ and $a_i \neq b_i$. Similar arguments lead to (b1) by considering lowest $\ell$-weight vectors and by developing the series $s_{12}(z)(\bigotimes_{i=1}^s u_i^-) \in V[[z]]$.
\subsubsection{End of proof.} In general, given $f \in \CR$, one can find a decomposition (not necessarily unique) $f = \prod_{i=1}^d f^{(i)} $ such that: $f^{(i)} = \frac{1-za_i}{1-zb_i}$ where $a_i,b_i \in \BC$ and $a_i \neq b_i$; $a_i \neq b_j$ for $1 \leq i \neq j \leq d$. It follows that (\S \ref{sec: special case})
\begin{displaymath}
V(f) \cong \bigotimes_{i=1}^d V(f^{(i)}),\quad P(f) = \bigcup_{i=1}^d P(f^{(i)}),\quad Z(f) = \bigcup_{i=1}^d Z(f^{(i)}).
\end{displaymath}
Hence $V(f)^* \cong V(f^{-1}) \otimes D_f$ with $D_f$ a one-dimensional module. (b) is equivalent to
\begin{itemize}
\item[(b2)] The tensor product $\bigotimes_{i=1}^s V(f_i)$ is of lowest $\ell$-weight if and only if $Z(f_i) \cap P(f_j) = \emptyset$ for all $1 \leq i < j \leq s$.
\end{itemize}
Now (a),(b2) follow easily from the factorization of simple modules and from the special case (\S \ref{sec: special case}) where the $f_i$ are of the form $\frac{1-za_i}{1-zb_i}$. \hfill $\Box$
As we see in Theorem \ref{thm: web property}, the conditions for a tensor product of finite-dimensional simple $Y_q(\Glie)$-modules to be of highest $\ell$-weight and to be of lowest $\ell$-weight respectively are in general different, which is quite contrary to the non-graded case, where these two conditions are the same due to the Weyl group action.
\section{Proof of Theorem \ref{thm: cyclicity of tensor product of KR modules}} \label{sec: proof}
The whole section is devoted to the proof of Theorem \ref{thm: cyclicity of tensor product of KR modules}. The outline is as follows.
In view of Remark \ref{remark: reduction to even cases}, one can assume $1 \leq r \leq M$. In particular, $M > 0$. Next, by the following induction argument from $U_q(\widehat{\mathfrak{gl}(M,N)})$-modules to $U_q(\widehat{\mathfrak{gl}(M,N+1)})$-modules, we can assume furthermore $N > 0$. Then we shall prove the theorem by induction on $r$. For the initial step $r = 1$, Theorem \ref{thm: cyclicity of tensor product of KR modules} is a special case of Proposition \ref{prop: tensor product of natural representations}.
Throughout the proof, we use the following convention. Let $f: A \longrightarrow B$ be a morphism of superalgebras. Let $V$ be a $B$-module. Suppose that $W$ is a sub-vector-superspace of $V$ stable under the action of $f(A)$. We write $f^{\bullet} W$ as the sub-$A$-module of $f^*V$ induced by the action of $f(A)$ on $W$. ($f^* W$ has no sense!)
\subsection{Induction.} Let $\Glie' = \mathfrak{gl}(M,N)$ and $\Glie'' = \mathfrak{gl}(M,N+1)$.
Let $h: U_q(\widehat{\Glie'}) \longrightarrow U_q(\widehat{\Glie''})$ be the superalgebra morphism defined by $s_{ij}(z) \mapsto s_{ij}(z),t_{ij}(z) \mapsto t_{ij}(z)$ for $1 \leq i,j \leq M+N$. Let $1 \leq r \leq M, k \in \BZ_{>0}$ and $a_j \in \BC^{\times}$ for $1 \leq j \leq k$. For $1 \leq j \leq k$, let $v_j$ be a highest $\ell$-weight vector in $\ev_{a_j}^* L(\varpi_r;\Glie'')$. Here we view $\varpi_r$ as a weight associated to the Lie superalgebra $\Glie''$ and $L(\varpi_r;\Glie'')$ as a simple highest weight $\Uc_q(\Glie'')$-module of highest weight $\varpi_r$. Define
\begin{displaymath}
K(a_j) := h(U_q(\widehat{\Glie'})) v_j \subseteq \ev_a^* L(\varpi_r;\Glie'').
\end{displaymath}
Then $\bigotimes_{j=1}^k K(a_j)$ is a sub-$U_q(\widehat{\Glie'})$-module of $h^* (\bigotimes_{j=1}^k \ev_{a_j}^* L(\varpi_r;\Glie''))$. Moreover
\begin{displaymath}
h^{\bullet}(\bigotimes_{j=1}^k K(a_j)) \cong \bigotimes_{j=1}^k \ev_{a_j}^* L(\varpi_r;\Glie')
\end{displaymath}
as $U_q(\widehat{\Glie'})$-modules. If the tensor product $\bigotimes_{j=1}^k \ev_{a_j}^* L(\varpi_r;\Glie'')$ of $U_q(\widehat{\Glie''})$-modules is of highest $\ell$-weight, then so is the corresponding tensor product of $U_q(\widehat{\Glie'})$-modules.
Assume in the rest of the section $N > 0$. Let $U$ be the $q$-Yangian $Y_q(\mathfrak{gl}(1,1))$ as in \S \ref{sec: Yangian}.
\subsection{Proof of Proposition \ref{prop: tensor product of natural representations}.} \label{sec: tensor product of natural modules} The idea is the same as that of the proof of Theorem \ref{thm: web property}. As before, we prove only the highest $\ell$-weight part.
We adopt the notations of \S \ref{sec: natural representations}. Let $V := \bigotimes_{j=1}^k \BV(a_j)$. Let $v := v_1^{\otimes k} \in V$. As in \S \ref{sec: special case}, $V$ is $\BP$-graded via the action of the $s_{ii}^{(0)}$.
First suppose that $V $ is of highest $\ell$-weight. Then from Theorem \ref{thm: Ding-Frenkel} it follows that
\begin{displaymath}
(V)_{k\epsilon_1 - \alpha_1} = \sum_{n\geq 1} \BC s_{21}^{(n)} v.
\end{displaymath}
As in the proof of Theorem \ref{thm: web property}, we get an explicit expression of $s_{21}(z) v$, which implies that the following polynomials
\begin{displaymath}
f_j(z) = (\prod_{i=1}^{j-1}(1-za_i))(\prod_{i=j+1}^k (1 - z a_i q^{-2}))
\end{displaymath}
for $1 \leq j \leq k$ are linearly independent. In view of Lemma \ref{lem: linear independence of polynomials}, this says that $a_i \neq a_j q^{-2}$ for $1 \leq i < j \leq k$.
Next, assume that $a_i \neq a_j q^{-2}$ for $1 \leq i < j \leq k$. By induction on $k$, one can suppose that $\bigotimes_{i=2}^k \BV(a_i)$ is of highest $\ell$-weight. Note that $\BV(a_1)$ is a lowest $\ell$-weight $U_q(\Gaff)$-module with $v_{M+N}$ a lowest $\ell$-weight vector. It is enough to verify that (Lemma \ref{lem: cyclicity Chari})
\begin{displaymath}
v_{M+N} \otimes v_1^{\otimes k-1} \in U_q(\Gaff) v.
\end{displaymath}
For $1 \leq j \leq k$, let $K(a_j)$ be the subspace of $\BV(a_j)$ spanned by $v_1,v_{M+N}$. According to the ice rule Proposition \ref{prop: properties of Perk-Schultz matrix} (PS3), there exists a morphism of superalgebras $f: U \longrightarrow U_q(\Gaff)$
\begin{displaymath}
s_{11}(z) \mapsto s_{11}(z),\quad s_{12}(z) \mapsto s_{1,M+N}(z),\quad s_{21}(z) \mapsto s_{M+N,1}(z),\quad s_{22}(z) \mapsto s_{M+N,M+N}(z),
\end{displaymath}
From weight gradings on $\BV(a_j)$ and $V$, it follows that: the $K(a_j)$ are stable by $U$; the tensor product $\bigotimes_{j=1}^k K(a_j)$ is stable by $U$; as $U$-modules
\begin{displaymath}
f^{\bullet} (\bigotimes_{j=1}^k K(a_j)) \cong \bigotimes_{j=1}^k f^{\bullet}(K(a_j)).
\end{displaymath}
Here the RHS should be understood as a tensor product of $U$-modules. From the explicit formula of the action of the $s_{ij}(z)$ on $\BV(a)$ defined in \S \ref{sec: natural representations}, we see that
\begin{displaymath}
f^{\bullet}(K(a_j)) \cong \BC_{(q,1)} \otimes \BC_{1-za_j} \otimes V(\frac{1-za_jq^{-2}}{1-za_j})
\end{displaymath}
as $U$-modules. Now Theorem \ref{thm: web property} (a) implies immediately that $\bigotimes_{j=1}^k f^{\bullet}(K(a_j))$ is of highest $\ell$-weight. In particular,
\begin{displaymath}
v_{M+N} \otimes v_1^{\otimes k-1} \in U f^{\bullet}(v_1^{\otimes k}) \subseteq U_q(\Gaff) v.
\end{displaymath}
Hence, $V$ is of highest $\ell$-weight, as desired. \hfill $\Box$
The initial step $r = 1$ for the induction argument on $1 \leq r \leq M$ has been established. Now suppose that $r > 1$. Let us consider the $U_q(\Gaff)$-module $W_{1,a}^{(r)}$.
\subsection{Weight grading on $W_{1,a}^{(r)}$.}
Fix $a \in \BC^{\times}$. The $U_q(\Gaff)$-module $W_{1,a}^{(r)} = \ev_a^* L(\varpi_r)$ is $\BP$-graded under the action of the $s_{ii}^{(0)}$. By Theorem \ref{thm: BKK Schur-Weyl duality}, $(W_{1,a}^{(r)})_{\lambda}$ is non-zero if and only if
\begin{displaymath}
\lambda = \epsilon_{i_1} + \epsilon_{i_2} + \cdots + \epsilon_{i_r}
\end{displaymath}
where $1 \leq i_1 \leq i_2 \leq \cdots \leq i_r \leq M+N$ and $i_s < i_{s+1}$ if $i_s \leq M$. Moreover, for such $\lambda$, $(W_{1,a}^{(r)})_{\lambda}$ is always one-dimensional, and for $x \in (W_{1,a}^{(r)})_{\lambda}$,
\begin{displaymath}
s_{ii}(z) x = (q^{(\lambda,\epsilon_i)} - z a q^{-(\lambda,\epsilon_i)}) x,\quad t_{ii}(z) x = (q^{-(\lambda,\epsilon_i)} - z^{-1}a^{-1}q^{(\lambda,\epsilon_i)}) x.
\end{displaymath}
Let $v_a^+$ (resp. $v_a^-$) be a highest (resp. lowest) $\ell$-weight vector in $W_{1,a}^{(r)}$. Then
\begin{displaymath}
v_a^+ \in (W_{1,a}^{(r)})_{\varpi_r},\quad v_a^- \in (W_{1,a}^{(r)})_{r \epsilon_{M+N}}.
\end{displaymath}
Introduce $u_a^{\pm} \in W_{1,a}^{(r)}$
\begin{displaymath}
u_a^+ = s_{1,M+N}^{(0)} v_a^-,\quad u_a^- = t_{M+N,1}^{(0)} v_a^+.
\end{displaymath}
Then from the following Chevalley relation we get $u_a^{\pm} \neq 0$,
\begin{displaymath}
s_{1,M+N}^{(0)} t_{M+N,1}^{(0)} + t_{M+N,1}^{(0)} s_{1,M+N}^{(0)} = (q-q^{-1}) (t_{11}^{(0)} s_{M+N,M+N}^{(0)} - s_{11}^{(0)} t_{M+N,M+N}^{(0)}).
\end{displaymath}
Here we used the assumption that $N > 0$. In particular,
\begin{displaymath}
\BC u_a^+ = (W_{1,a}^{(r)})_{\epsilon_1 + (r-1)\epsilon_{M+N}},\quad \BC u_a^- = (W_{1,a}^{(r)})_{\epsilon_2 + \cdots + \epsilon_r + \epsilon_{M+N}}.
\end{displaymath}
Introduce vector subspaces $K^+(a) = \BC v_a^+ + \BC u_a^-,\ K^-(a) = \BC v_a^- + \BC u_a^+ \subseteq W_{1,a}^{(r)}$. The $\BP$-grading on $W_{1,a}^{(r)}$ says that the subspaces $K^{\pm}(a)$ are both sub-$U$-module of $f^* W_{1,a}^{(r)}$. Let $f^{\bullet} K^{\pm}(a)$ be the $U$-modules thus obtained.
\noindent {\bf Claim.} Let $k \in \BZ_{>1}$ and $a_j \in \BC^{\times}$ for $1 \leq j \leq k$. Then we have the following:
\begin{itemize}
\item[(1)] $\bigotimes_{j=2}^k K^+(a_j)$ is a sub-$U$-module of $f^* (\bigotimes_{j=2}^k W_{1,a_j}^{(r)})$;
\item[(2)] $K^-(a_1) \otimes (\bigotimes_{j=2}^k K^+(a_j))$ is a sub-$U$-module of $f^* (\bigotimes_{j=1}^k W_{1,a_j}^{(r)})$;
\item[(3)] as $U$-modules, there exists a canonical isomorphism
\begin{displaymath}
f^{\bullet} (K^-(a_1) \otimes (\bigotimes_{j=2}^k K^+(a_j))) \cong f^{\bullet} K^-(a_1) \otimes (\bigotimes_{j=2}^k f^{\bullet}K^+(a_j)).
\end{displaymath}
\end{itemize}
The proof of the claim relies on the following facts:
\begin{itemize}
\item[(4)] if $s_{li}(z) K^+(a) \neq 0$ and $(i \in \{1,M+N\}, 1 < l < M+N)$, then $r < l < M+N$;
\item[(5)] if $i \neq l$ and $r < l < M+N$, then $s_{il}(z) K^{\pm}(a) = 0$.
\end{itemize}
These are checked directly using the $\BP$-grading on $W_{1,a}^{(r)}$.
Next, as $U$-modules, using notations in \S \ref{sec: simple} we get
\begin{align*}
& f^{\bullet} K^-(a) \cong \BC_{(r-1)\odd} \otimes \BC_{(q,q^{1-r})} \otimes \BC_{1-zaq^{2r-2}} \otimes V(\frac{1-zaq^{-2}}{1-zaq^{2r-2}}), \\
& f^{\bullet} K^+(a) \cong \BC_{(q,1)} \otimes \BC_{\frac{1}{1-za}} \otimes V(\frac{1 - zaq^{-2}}{1-za}).
\end{align*}
\subsection{End of proof.} Let us be in the situation of Theorem \ref{thm: cyclicity of tensor product of KR modules} with $1 \leq r \leq M$. Write $a_j = a q^{x_j}$. We prove by induction on $k$ that the tensor product $V = \bigotimes_{j=1}^k W_{1,a_j}^{(r)}$ is of highest $\ell$-weight. Assume that the $U_q(\Gaff)$-module $\bigotimes_{j=2}^k W_{1,a_j}^{(r)}$ is of highest $\ell$-weight. Then it is enough to ensure (Lemma \ref{lem: cyclicity Chari})
\begin{displaymath}
x := v_{a_1}^- \otimes (\bigotimes_{j=2}^k v_{a_j}^+) \in U_q(\Gaff) (\bigotimes_{j=1}^k v_{a_j}^+).
\end{displaymath}
Remark that by definition
\begin{displaymath}
x = v_{a_1}^- \otimes (\bigotimes_{j=2}^k v_{a_j}^+) \in K^-(a_1) \otimes (\bigotimes_{j=2}^k K^+(a_j)) =: L_1.
\end{displaymath}
The claim above says that $L_1$ is a sub-$U$-module of $V$. Moreover, as $U$-modules,
\begin{align*}
& f^{\bullet}L_1 \cong D \otimes V(\frac{1-za_1q^{-2}}{1-za_1q^{2r-2}}) \otimes (\bigotimes_{j=2}^k V(\frac{1-za_jq^{-2}}{1-za_j})), \\
& D \cong \BC_{(r-1)\odd} \otimes \BC_{(q^k,q^{1-r})} \otimes \BC_{(1-za_1q^{2r-2})\prod_{j=2}^k(1-za_j)}.
\end{align*}
The RHS of the first equation above is of highest $\ell$-weight in view of Theorem \ref{thm: web property} as $a_1 q^{2r-2} \neq a_j q^{-2}$ for $2 \leq j \leq k$ and $a_j \neq a_lq^{-2}$ for $2 \leq j < l \leq k$. It follows that
\begin{displaymath}
x \in f(U) (u_{a_1}^+ \otimes (\bigotimes_{j=2}^k v_{a_j}^+)) \subseteq U_q(\Gaff)(u_{a_1}^+ \otimes (\bigotimes_{j=2}^k v_{a_j}^+)).
\end{displaymath}
We are left to verify in turn that
\begin{displaymath}
y := u_{a_1}^+ \otimes (\bigotimes_{j=2}^k v_{a_j}^+) \in U_q(\Gaff) (\bigotimes_{j=1}^k v_{a_j}^+).
\end{displaymath}
Take $U'$ to be the quantum affine superalgebra $U_q(\widehat{\mathfrak{gl}(M-1,N)})$. From the ice rule, we get a superalgebra morphism $g: U' \longrightarrow U_q(\Gaff)$ defined by
\begin{displaymath}
s_{ij}(z) \mapsto s_{i+1,j+1}(z),\quad t_{ij}(z) \mapsto t_{i+1,j+1}(z).
\end{displaymath}
For $b \in \BC^{\times}$, let $K(b) = g(U') v_{b}^+ \subseteq W_{1,b}^{(r)}$. Clearly, $K(b)$ is a sub-$U'$-module of $g^{*}W_{1,b}^{(r)}$. Moreover,
\begin{displaymath}
g^{\bullet} K(b) \cong \ev_b^* L(\varpi_{r-1}; \mathfrak{gl}(M-1,N)),\quad u_b^+ \in K(b).
\end{displaymath}
Now it is straightforward to verify: $\bigotimes_{j=1}^k K(a_j)$ is a sub-$U'$-module of $g^*(\bigotimes_{j=1}^k W_{1,a_j}^{(r)})$; there exist canonical isomorphisms of $U'$-modules
\begin{displaymath}
g^{\bullet} (\bigotimes_{j=1}^k K(a_j)) \cong \bigotimes_{j=1}^k g^{\bullet} K(a_j) \cong \bigotimes_{j=1}^k \ev_{a_j}^* L(\varpi_{r-1};\mathfrak{gl}(M-1,N)).
\end{displaymath}
The induction hypothesis on $r$ (which keeps $N$ unchanged) shows that the RHS above is of highest $\ell$-weight. Hence
\begin{displaymath}
y = u_{a_1}^+ \otimes (\bigotimes_{j=2}^k v_{a_j}^+) \in g(U') (\bigotimes_{j=1}^k v_{a_j}^+) \subseteq U_q(\Gaff)(\bigotimes_{j=1}^k v_{a_j}^+).
\end{displaymath}
This concludes the proof of Theorem \ref{thm: cyclicity of tensor product of KR modules}. \hfill $\Box$
\begin{rem}
Let $1 \leq r \leq M, k \in \BZ_{>0}$ and $a_j \in \BC^{\times}$ for $1 \leq j \leq k$. From the proof of Theorem \ref{thm: cyclicity of tensor product of KR modules} we see that the $U_q(\Gaff)$-module $\bigotimes_{j=1}^k W^{(r)}_{1,a_j}$ is of highest $\ell$-weight provided that $\frac{a_i}{a_j} \notin \{ q^{-2l} : 1 \leq l \leq r \}$ for all $1 \leq i < j \leq k$.
More general cyclicity results on tensor products of Kirillov-Reshetikhin modules of the form $\bigotimes_{j=1}^k W_{l_j,a_j}^{(r_j)}$ can be hopefully obtained in this way. For this purpose, it is necessary to determine first of all the zeros and poles of $R$-matrices between $W_{l_1,a_1}^{(r_1)}$ and $W_{l_2,a_2}^{(r_2)}$, in view of Kashiwara's cyclicity results in the non-graded case \cite{Kashiwara}. In type A, this should be possible after a fusion procedure \cite{Date, Poulain}.
\end{rem}
|
\section{Introduction}
Special type of plastic scintillator can be used for gamma ray spectroscopy \cite{BLR12}. Normal plastic scintillator detector, used for triggering particle in high energy physics experiments can also be used for gamma ray spectroscopy. A simple and new technique has been introduced with plastic scintillator paddle for gamma ray and cosmic ray spectroscopy without using single channel analyzer (SCA) or multi channel analyzer (MCA). In this technique only a Leading Edge Discriminator (LED) and scaler have been used. Using this technique $\gamma$~-~ray spectrum has been obtained for Co$^{60}$ and Cs$^{137}$ sources. Cosmic ray muon pulse height spectrum i.e. the spectrum for minimum ionizing particle (MIP) has also been obtained. The experimental technique and the data analysis technique have been described in Section~\ref{ex_tech} and Section~\ref{ana_tech} respectively, the experimental results have been described in Section~\ref{result}. Finally in Section~\ref{con} we have presented the conclusion of the study and a brief future outlook on the work.
\section{Experimental technique}\label{ex_tech}
A new technique has been developed for the gamma ray spectrum and cosmic ray pulse height spectrum without using single channel analyzer (SCA) or multi channel analyzer (MCA). Only a leading edge discriminator and scaler have been used. In the measurements two plastic scintillator paddles of dimension 7~cm $\times$ 7~cm and 10~cm $\times$ 10~cm with 1~cm thick plastic have been used. The scintillator detectors are named as Sc-01 and Sc-02 respectively in this article.
For the gamma ray spectroscopy the source (Co$^{60}$ and Cs$^{137}$) has been placed on the scintillator material. Constant voltage of -~1500~V has been applied to the photo multiplier tube (PMT) of Sc-01 for signal collection. In a separate study we have observed that the efficiency of the detectors reaches a constant (plateau) value close to 100\% at high voltage beyond -~1450~V. The signals from the scintillator have been fed to the discriminator. The discriminator threshold has been increased in equal interval of 0.5~mV from an initial threshold value of 7.5~mV. For each discriminator threshold setting the count rate has been measured with the source and also without source, taking the total counts in the scaler in a particular time.
For the cosmic ray muon detection a constant voltage of -~1500~V has been applied to the photo multiplier tube (PMT) attached to the Scintillator Sc-01 but the discriminator threshold has been increased in equal interval of 2~mV from an initial threshold value of 12~mV. In this case no source is used and the data is analyzed in a different way (as explained in Section~\ref{ana_tech}) the measurent has been started from an initial threshold value of 12~mV as lower than this value the singles count rate was very high due to noise effect. The interval is taken 2~mV as for the cosmic ray spectrum 0.5~mV is very small to get a reasonable difference betwwn two consecutive values. In this case also the count rate has been measured for each discriminator threshold settings. Data for each discriminator threshold settings has been taken for 30 minutes or more for the cosmic ray.
\section{Data analysis technique}\label{ana_tech}
All the data analysis has been performed using ROOT, a data analysis framework developed by CERN \cite{ROOT}. In the case of gamma ray spectrum the difference of the count rate with and without the gamma ray source for a particular threshold setting gives the gamma ray count rate (say C$_{1}$) at that threshold. Likewise the gamma ray count rate (say C$_{2}$) has been measured for the next threshold setting. The difference of gamma count rate for two consecutive threshold settings gives the gamma ray signal count rate (say C=C$_{1}$-C$_{2}$) with pulse height between those consecutive threshold values. The average of these two threshold values have been taken and the C has been said to be gamma ray count rate of pulse height at that average value. The count rate has been plotted as a function of the discriminator threshold i.e. as a function of the pulse height (shown in Fig.~\ref{co60} and Fig.~\ref{cs137} and discussed in detail later).
The cosmic ray muon pulse height spectrum has been obtained in the same way as described above. In this case also the difference of count rates for two consecutive threshold settings have been calculated (say C=C$_{1}$-C$_{2}$) and assigned to pulse height with the average of these two threshold values. Here only one assumption has been taken that the noise level are same for the two consecutive threshold settings, which is not true at the lower threshold value. This is the reason of a noise peak in the MIP spectra al low pulse height region, which will be described in detail in the Section~\ref{result}.
\section{Result}\label{result}
\begin{figure}[htb!]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=0.4]{co60_spectrum.eps}
\caption{\label{co60}Co$^{60}$ spectrum, a curve of count per minute as a function of pulse height.} \label{co60}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[htb!]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=0.4]{cs137_spectrum.eps}
\caption{\label{cs137}Cs$^{137}$ spectrum, a curve of count per minute as a function of pulse height.}\label{cs137}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[htb!]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=0.4]{reso_sqrt_E.eps}
\caption{\label{reso}Energy resolution as a function of $\frac {1}{\sqrt E}$.} \label{reso}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[htb!]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=0.4]{calibration_curve.eps}
\caption{\label{calib}Calibration curve, the linear relationship between the energy and the experimentally measured pulse height.} \label{calib}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
For the gamma ray spectroscopy Co$^{60}$ and Cs$^{137}$ sources have been used. Gamma ray spectrum for Co$^{60}$ source has been plotted in Figure~\ref{co60}. The characteristic energy for Co$^{60}$ gamma source, 1.17~MeV and 1.33~MeV have been identified and the corresponding pulse heights have been measured fitting those peaks with Gaussian function. The corresponding pulse heights have been found to be 21.25~mV and 25.08~mV respectively. The energy resolution for the detector in \% defined as, ${\sigma \times 2.355\over pulse~height}{\times 100}$ \%, has been found to be 9.3\% and 7.6\% for the 1.17~MeV and 1.33~MeV peak respectively. Here $\sigma$s and the pulse heights have been found by fitting the 1.17~MeV and 1.33~MeV gamma ray peaks for Co$^{60}$ source by Gaussian function. For Gaussian function the $\sigma$ and full width at half maxima (FWHM) are related by FWHM = $\sigma$ $\times$ 2.355. Gamma ray spectrum for the Cs$^{137}$ source has been obtained by the same method as described above and plotted in Figure~\ref{cs137}. The characteristic 662~keV peak has been fitted with Gaussian curve and the peak pulse height has been determined. The peak pulse height for the Cs$^{137}$ gamma source has been found to be 12.45~mV. In this case the energy resolution value has been found to be 10.2\%. Energy resolution obtained for the two peaks of Co$^{60}$ and one peak of Cs$^{137}$, as a function of $\frac {1}{\sqrt E}$ is plotted in Figure~\ref{reso}. The points are fitted with a straight line. An energy calibration curve has been drawn for Sc-01 at -~1500~V operating voltage, taking two points obtained from Co$^{60}$ spectrum and one point obtained from Cs$^{137}$ spectrum \cite{ERS08}. The calibration curve has been fitted with a straight line. The calibration curve has been shown in Figure~\ref{calib}. From the fit parameters it is clear that the curve nearly passes through the origin and the calibration factor is 0.054~MeV/mV. The linear relationship between the energy and the experimentally measured pulse height has been observed.
\begin{figure}[htb!]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=0.4]{mip_sc01.eps}
\caption{\label{mip1}Cosmic ray (MIP) spectrum fitted with Landau function from detector Sc-01.}\label{mip1}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[htb!]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=0.4]{mpv_v_sc01.eps}
\caption{\label{mpv1}MPV as a function of the applied voltage detector Sc-01.}\label{mpv1}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
Cosmic ray muon pulse height spectrum has also been obtained in this set-up as described in Section~\ref{ex_tech} and Section~\ref{ana_tech}. The The cosmic ray induced pulse height spectra have been obtained for two detectors Sc-01 and Sc-02 and is shown in Figure~\ref{mip1} for Sc-01. Same type of spectrum has also been observed for Sc-02. The plot has been fitted with Landau distribution; as for the cosmic ray there is a large fluctuation of energy deposition in the detector material as revealed from the $\chi^2$ per degrees of freedom. This plot has been obtained keeping the PMT voltage constant at -~1500~V. MIP peak seems to have developed around $\sim$~30~mV but large noise peak (below 20~mV) masks it. This peak come due to our assumption that the noise level are nearly same for the two consecutive threshold settings, which is not true for the very low threshold. From the cosmic ray spectra obtained from Sc-01 and Sc-02 it is also clear that at most probable value (MPV) of the count rate is nearly double for the Sc-02 relative to Sc-01 as the area of the Sc-02 (area 100 cm$^2$) which is nearly double of that of the Sc-01 (area 49 cm$^2$). As the calibration curve has been drawn for the Sc-01 at -~1500~V and the Sc-01 has been operated at -~1500~V during the cosmic ray study it is seen from Figure~\ref{mip1} that the most probable energy deposition in 1~cm thick plastic scintillator is $\sim$~1.4~MeV. The cosmic ray spectra for these two scintillators have also been obtained varying the applied voltage and the MPVs are plotted as a function of the applied voltage in Figure~\ref{mpv1} for Sc-01. Similar plot has also been obtained for Sc-02. Both the plots are fitted with the exponential function MPV = $p_{0}e^{p_{1}.voltage}$, where the parameters are $p_{0}$ and $p_{1}$. $p_{1}$ for both the scintillators have been found to be $\sim$~0.004$\pm$0.0008.
\section{Conclusions and outlook}\label{con}
A simple and new technique has been developed for gamma ray and cosmic ray muon pulse height spectroscopy without using SCA or MCA. Only scintillator detector, a leading edge discriminator and a NIM scaler have been used in this technique. Gamma ray spectrum has been obtained for Co$^{60}$ and Cs$^{137}$ sources. Proportionality in energy and pulse height has been observed. The energy resolution for the detector has been found to be 9.3\% and 7.6\% for the Co$^{60}$ 1.17~MeV and 1.33~MeV peak respectively and 10.2\% for 662~keV peak of Cs$^{137}$. Cosmic ray muon pulse height spectrum has been obtained for two scintillators and fitted with Landau distribution. The most probable energy deposition in 1~cm thick plastic material has been found to be $\sim$ 1.4~MeV. Although the energy resolution is not so good but still using plastic scintillator detector gamma spectroscopy and cosmic ray muon pulse height spectroscopy can be done. Main drawback of this technique is that this process is time consumable and may not be useful for real experiment; however, this process is very useful and can be applied for laboratory measurement where MCA or SCA are not available.
\vspace{1 cm}
\section{Acknowledgements}
We acknowledge Mr. Subasha Rout of Utkal University, Dr. Sudakshina Prusty, Dr. Gunda Santosh Babu, Dr. Lokesh Kumar and Mr. Rudranarayan Mohanty of NISER for helping during this study. S. Biswas acknowledges the support of DST-SERB Ramanujan Fellowship (D.O. No. SR/S2/RJN-02/2012). XII$^{th}$ Plan DAE project Experimental High Energy Physics at NISER-ALICE is also acknowledged.
|
\section{Introduction}
The rotation curves observed in galaxies are generally explained
by a dominating contribution of dark matter \citep[see e.g. the review
by][]{2001ARA&A..39..137S}, but the nature of dark matter is still
not known.
Several ideas have been proposed in the literature that the
Lorentz force could support the rotation of the gas and hence reduce
the need for dark matter
\citep{2000FCPh...21....1B,2010ApJ...723L..44R,2012ApJ...755L..23R,%
2012MNRAS.427.393J,2013MNRAS.433.2172S}. This however requires
Alfv\'en speeds of the order of $100\kms$, and moreover a large radial
extent of the magnetic field. Observed motions of stars or stellar clusters
also favour gravitation for the support of gas rotation \citep{1993MNRAS.261L..21P}.
The increased amount and quality of radio continuum data enables a
re-investigation of the role of magnetic fields for the rotation of
gas in galaxies. From the radial scale lengths of synchrotron
emission and the gas density scale length, the Alfv\'en speed and its
radial profile can be computed. The contribution of magnetic forces to
the gas rotation can be estimated for various profiles of the radial
distribution of the magnetic field.
Magnetic fields in galaxies are mostly turbulent and are closely
related to star-forming activity \citep{2013A&A...552A..19T}. The
weaker regular fields show a coherent structure over kpc scales,
which may be due to a mean-field $\alpha\Omega$ dynamo
\citep{1996ARA&A..34..155B,2008AN....329..619G,2008A&A...486L..35G}.
There is observational evidence that regular fields have larger radial
scale lengths than turbulent fields because their amplification is not
restricted to energy input from star formation. The action of the
magneto-rotational instability (MRI) may be responsible for the field
amplification in the outer parts \citep{1999ApJ...511..660S}. The
field may appear more ordered because of a highly anti-parallel field
connected to the channel modes \citep{2009IAUS..259..467E}. As a
consequence, the azimuthal and radial components of the regular field
may contribute to magnetic forces in the outer parts of a galaxy.
The general concept is presented in Sect.~2.
From radial profiles of the total and polarised synchrotron intensity
we derive the magnetic field strength of the turbulent and regular
magnetic components (Sect.~3). Together with gas density profiles we estimate
the influence of the Lorentz force on the gas rotation (Sect.~4). Moreover, we
use recent results from a \emph{hybrid} dynamo simulation for
a Milky Way-type galaxy \citep*{2013A&A...560A..93G} to test our
findings (Sect.~5). In this simulation, the classical $\alpha\Omega$ description
of the mean-field dynamo is complemented with a dynamically evolving
disc model. This treatment allows for the development of magnetic
instabilities, which occur on scales large enough not to be
affected immediately by turbulent diffusion. One outcome of the
simulation is a radial reversal in the magnetic field strength, which
we show to be associated with a local modulation of the galactic
rotation curve.
\section{The Lorentz force in galactic discs }
The radial component of the stationary momentum equation in
cylindrical geometry is
\begin{multline}
\rho \left( \vv_r \partial_{r} \vv_r + \frac{\vv_\varphi}{r}
\partial_\varphi \vv_r + \vv_z \partial_z \vv_r -
\frac{\vv_\varphi^2}{r} \right) \\ = - \partial_r p + \rho g_r +
j_\varphi B_z - j_z B_\varphi\,,
\label{eq0}
\end{multline}
where the last two terms represent the Lorentz force, ${\,\mathbf
j}\times{\mathbf B}$ and $\rho g_r$ the gravitational force.
Neglecting the radial velocity in the above
equation yields
\begin{equation}
\vv_\varphi^2 = - r\,g_r + \frac{r}{\rho} \partial_r p -
\frac{r}{\rho}\left(j_\varphi B_z - j_z B_\varphi\right)\,.
\label{eq0a}
\end{equation}
In order to discuss the influence of the magnetic field on the
circular rotation we define the magnetic rotation velocity as
\begin{equation}
\vv_{\rm mag}^{ 2 }=\frac { 1 }{ \mu \rho } \left[ \left(
\partial_{r} rB_{ \varphi } - \partial _{ \varphi }B_{ r } \right) B_{
\varphi } - r \left( \partial _{ z }B_{ r }- \partial _{ r }B_{ z
} \right) B_{ z } \right]\,,
\label{eq1}
\end{equation}
and the gravitational part, also including the small contribution of
gas pressure
\begin{equation}
\vv_{\rm grav}^2= - r g_r + \frac{r}{\rho} \partial_r p\,.
\label{eq1a}
\end{equation}
The gravitationally balanced rotation velocity is usually split into
contributions from stellar and gaseous disc, bulge and dark matter,
but we will not discuss the details of the individual gravitational
effects here. The total circular velocity of the gas is given by
\begin{equation}
\vv_{ \varphi }=\sqrt{\vv_{\rm grav}^2+\vv_{\rm mag}^2}.
\label{eq3}
\end{equation}
We first consider a large-scale axisymmetric field with a
negligible vertical field component, as typical for the
regular magnetic field in the midplane of nearby galaxies
\citep{2013pss5.book..641B}. Then only the first term of the right-hand side of
Eq.~(\ref{eq1}) has to be considered. For a power-law distribution of
the magnetic field strength $ B_{ \varphi }=B_{0}r^{ n }$, we get
\begin{equation}
\vv_{\rm mag}^{ 2 }(r) = \frac { B_{ 0 }^{ 2 } }{ \mu \rho }
\left( \left( n+1 \right) r^{ 2n } \right) = (n+1)\,\vv_{\rm A}^2(r)
\label{eq2}
\end{equation}
with the Alfv\'en speed $\vv_{\rm A} \equiv B_{\varphi}\,(\mu
\rho)^{-1/2}$.
For a radial profile of the azimuthal field decaying slower than
$r^{-1}$, the Lorentz force acts inwards and needs to be balanced
by the centrifugal force of the gas rotation, hence reducing the need
for gravitational pull from dark matter. For a decay profile of the
magnetic field steeper than $r^{-1}$ the right hand side of
Eq.~(\ref{eq2}) becomes negative, leading to a slower rotation than
predicted by the balance of the centrifugal force with the
gravitational force only, with the consequence that even more dark
matter is needed than in the non-magnetic case.
The singularity of the $r^{-1}$ profile at the origin can be avoided
by an ansatz
\begin{equation}
B_{ \varphi }=B_{0} \left( 1+\frac{r}{r_{\rm m}} \right)^{-1}
\label{eq3aa}
\end{equation}
as used by \citet{2012ApJ...755L..23R}, leading to a magnetic velocity
\begin{equation}
\vv_{\rm mag}^{ 2 }(r) = \left(1- \frac{r}{r_{\rm m}+r} \right) {\rm
v}_{\rm A}^2(r)\,.
\label{eq3ab}
\end{equation}
This more or less artificial approach always yields an inward directed
force, because it is always flatter than a $1/r$ profile, which is
unlikely because it corresponds to a vertical current with a single
sign through the whole galactic disc. Dynamo-excited magnetic fields
never show such configurations \citep{2013A&A...560A..93G}.
The Alfv\'en velocity is an upper limit for the change of the rotation by the magnetic force
for the above defined profiles.
Typical values of 30$\kms$ in the thin disc may affect the circular
velocity of 200$\kms$ only by 1\%. The situation may be different in
the very outer disc or in the halo where the Alfv\'en speed may be
150$\kms$ or higher because of the density decrease in gas density.
However, if the generally observed relation $B \propto \rho^{0.5}$
\citep{2010ApJ...725..466C,1997A&A...320...54N}
also holds for the
large-scale field in the outer disc, a constant Alfv\'en speed follows
(see Sect.~\ref{obs}).
In accordance with exponential profiles of synchrotron emission, we assume
an exponential profile for the regular magnetic field with scale
length $r_{\rm m}$ (see Sect.~\ref{obs}). Here we find
\begin{equation}
\vv_{\rm mag}^{ 2 }(r) = \frac { B_{ 0 }^{ 2 } }{ \mu \rho }
\left(1-r/r_{\rm m} \right) \exp(-2r/r_{\rm m})
= \left(1-r/r_{\rm m} \right){\rm v}_{\rm A}^2(r)\,.
\label{eq3a}
\end{equation}
Now the magnetic force is directed inwards (positive $\vv_{mag}^2$)
only in the inner part $r < r_{\rm m}$. In the outer parts it acts
outwards against the gravitational force. We note that the absolute
value of the magnetic force increases already for a constant Alfv\'en speed. In this
case the vertical current associated with the azimuthal magnetic field
changes its sign at the scale length. The situation is quite similar
for a Gaussian profile,
\begin{eqnarray}
\vv_{\rm mag}^{ 2 }(r) &=& \frac { B_{ 0 }^{ 2 } }{ \mu \rho }
\left(1-2 (r/r_{\rm m})^2 \right) \exp(-2(r/r_{\rm m})^2) \nonumber \\ &=&
\left(1-2 (r/r_{\rm m})^2 \right)\vv_{\rm A}^2(r) \, ,
\label{eq3b}
\end{eqnarray}
where the sign of the magnetic force changes at $r=r_{\rm m}/\sqrt{2}$.
We now consider magnetic fields also including radial and vertical
fields. Rewriting Eq.~(\ref{eq1}) using ${\rm div}(B)=0$, we obtain
\begin{eqnarray}
\vv_{\rm mag}^{ 2 }&=&\frac { 1 }{ \mu \rho }
\left( B_{\varphi}\partial _{r} rB_{\varphi}
- B_{ r }\partial _{r}rB_{r} + rB_{z}\partial_{r}B_{z}
\right.\nonumber \\
& & \left. - \partial_{\varphi} (B_{r}B_{\varphi}) -
r\partial_{z}(B_{r}B_{z})\right)\,.
\label{eq40}
\end{eqnarray}
Because we are interested in a mean radial dependence,
we apply the
average $\avg{\,} \equiv \frac{1}{4\pi h} \int_{0}^{2\pi}{
\int_{-h}^{h}{ dz\, d\varphi } }$ to Eq.~(\ref{eq40}) to yield
%
\begin{eqnarray}
\avg{\rho \vv_{\rm mag}^{ 2 }} &=&\frac { 1 }{ \mu }
\left[\,
\left( \avg{B_{\varphi}^2}
+ \frac{r}{2}\partial _{ r } \avg{B_{\varphi}^2} \right)
- \left( \avg{B_{r}^2}
+ \frac{r}{2}\partial_{r} \avg{B_{r}^2} \right) \right.
\nonumber \\ &
&- \frac{r}{4\pi h} \int_{0}^{2\pi}{ \left(\, B_r(h) B_z(h) - B_r(-h)
B_z(-h)\,\right) d\varphi} \nonumber \\ & &
\left. + \frac{r}{2}\partial_{r}\avg{B_{z}^2}
\,\right]\,.
\label{eq4a}
\end{eqnarray}
The term in the second line vanishes for periodic boundary
conditions, which may be true for the turbulent field. For a
symmetric or an antisymmetric field with respect to the galaxy's plane,
we have $ - 2 r
\int_{0}^{2\pi}{B_r(h) B_z(h)d\varphi}$ which always contributes with
a negative sign for an X-shaped structure as is seen in many
edge-on galaxies \citep{2014arXiv1401.1317K}.
We note that $B_z=0$ implies $B_r \propto r^{-1}$ in the axisymmetric case and
Eq.~(\ref{eq4a}) agrees with Eq.~(\ref{eq1}). For a given radial
distribution of an axisymmetric $B_r$, the radial distribution of the
vertical flux from the disc is fixed by ${\rm div} B= 0$.
Consequently, we can set the vertical field at the disc surface
\begin{equation}
B_z(h)=-B_z(-h)=-\frac{h}{r}
\partial_r \left(\,r \avg{B_r}\,\right)\,.
\end{equation}
Here we consider only a symmetric field with respect to the plane. For an antisymmetric field $B_z$ is an independent
variable.
The left-hand side of Equation~(\ref{eq4a})
refers to the total magnetic energy of the three
field components, which can be estimated from the synchrotron emission
under the assumption of equipartition with cosmic rays. For the cross
correlation term at least the sign is known. A flat radial profile of
the azimuthal field contributes to an inward-directed Lorentz
force, but radial magnetic fields are not negligible in galaxies.
For a constant pitch angle, the magnetic force from the azimuthal field
will be reduced by the contribution of the radial component. For
pitch angles at about 20$^\circ$, the force will be reduced by 14\% ;
for an angle of 35$^\circ$, the effect will amount to about 50\%.
This effect only occurs for anti-parallel fields, in contrast to a
uniform regular field, where the radial component has no influence.
The turbulent magnetic field also contributes to the Lorentz force as
a pressure term to the momentum equation for isotropic fields
(cf. Eq.~\ref{eq5}). For anisotropic turbulence (i.e.
$\avg{B_{\varphi}^2} \not= \avg{B_{r}^2}$), we may also get tension
effects similar to the regular fields.
\noindent Defining
\begin{eqnarray}
\vv_{M}^{ 2 } & = &\frac { 1 }{ \mu \avg{\rho}} \left[\;
\left( \avg{B_{\varphi}^2}
+ \frac{r}{2}\partial _{ r }\avg{B_{\varphi}^2} \right) \right.
- \left( \avg{B_{r}^2} + \frac{r}{2}\partial _{ r }\avg{B_{r}^2} \right)
\nonumber \\
& &- \frac{r}{4\pi h} \int_{0}^{2\pi}{
\left(\, B_r(h) B_z(h) - B_r(-h) B_z(-h)
\,\right)\,d\varphi} \nonumber \\
& & \left. + \frac{r}{2}\partial _{r}\avg{B_{z}^2} \;\right]
\label{eq5}
\end{eqnarray}
and the rotation velocity $\vv_G$ balancing the gravitational force we
get the circular velocity
\begin{equation}
\!\avg{\vv} = \sqrt{\frac{\avg{\rho'\vvp}^2}{\avg{\rho}^2}
+ \vv_G^2 + \vv_M^2 - \avg{\vvp^2}
- \frac{\avg{\rho'\vvp^2}}{\avg{\rho}}}
- \frac{\avg{\rho'\vvp}}{\avg{\rho}}
\label{eq6}
\end{equation}
by applying Reynolds rules to the term $\avg{\rho \vv^2}$.
Here we neglect all effects of velocity and density fluctuations
including the asymmetric drift term $\avg{\vvp^2}$. We finally obtain
the circular velocity supported by gravitation and magnetic fields,
\begin{equation}
\avg{\vv} = \sqrt{\vv_G^2 + \vv_{M}^2}\,.
\label{eq7}
\end{equation}
It is easy to see that $\vv_M$ coincides with the magnetic velocity
$\vv_{\rm mag}$ defined in Eq.~(\ref{eq1}). In contrast,
Equation~(\ref{eq5}) serves as an alternative formulation for the
magnetic velocity with energy densities of the total magnetic field
components, which allows a better interpretation of the observed data.
\section{Observed radial profiles of magnetic fields and gas in galaxies}
\label{obs}
The radial profiles of the total and linearly polarised radio synchrotron
intensities in nearby galaxies can be well fitted by exponential distributions.
The exponential scale lengths for grand-design spirals are
typically $5\kpc$ for the polarised and about $4\kpc$ for the total
synchrotron emission, for instance in NGC~6946 \citep[see][]{2002A&A...388....7W}.
The scale length of the total magnetic field $B_{\rm tot}$ follows from that of
the total synchrotron emission, assuming equipartition between the total magnetic
and cosmic ray energy densities (see below).
The scale length of the regular magnetic field $B_{\rm reg}$ follows from that of
the total synchrotron emission and the degree of linear polarisation. As the degree of
polarisation generally increases with increasing radius, the scale length of $B_{\rm reg}$
is larger than that of $B_{\rm tot}$, but has a larger uncertainty.
We note that the \emph{anisotropic} field component also
contributes to the polarised intensity, but it would affect the
magnetic velocity in a similar way to the turbulent field, where the
effect of the azimuthal field is reduced for non-zero pitch angles
(cf. Eq.~(\ref{eq5})).
Under the equipartition assumption and assuming a radio synchrotron spectral index of about $-1$,
\begin{equation}
{\rm PI} \;\propto\; N_{\rm CR} B_{\rm reg}^2
\;\propto\; B_{\rm tot}^2 B_{\rm reg}^2
\;{\propto}\; B_{\rm reg}^4\,,
\end{equation}
and hence $I \propto N_{\rm CR} B_{\rm tot}^2 \propto B_{\rm tot}^4$
\citep{2007A&A...470..539B}, the scale length of the {\bf total} magnetic field is
about four times larger than that of the {\bf total} synchrotron emission.
The profile of the regular field is described as $B_{\rm reg} = B_{\rm
reg,0} \exp(-r/R_{B\,{\rm reg}})$ and that of the turbulent field
$B_{\rm tur} = B_{\rm tur,0} \exp(-r/R_{B\,{\rm tur}})$. The observed
synchrotron scale lengths correspond to a typical scale length of the
regular field of $R_{B{\rm reg}}\simeq 20\kpc$ and a scale length of
the total field of $R_{B{\rm tot}}\simeq 16\kpc$. These values vary
with the size of the galaxies and do strongly scatter. Synchrotron
scale lengths for M83 \citep{1987MNRAS.227..887H,1993A&A...274..687N}
and the Milky Way are about $2.5\kpc$ and may reach $7\kpc$ for
M101 \citep{1990ASSL..160..141H}
and NGC~6753 \citep{1987MNRAS.227..887H}.
Mean-field $\alpha\Omega$ dynamo models also show an exponential radial profile of
the magnetic field, but mostly with shorter scale lengths of the order
of $5\kpc$ for grand design spirals \citep{2013A&A...560A..93G}. In
the cosmological simulations of \cite{2012MNRAS.422.2152B}, the field
strength in protogalactic halos approximately follows a $1/r$ profile.
The total field has two components: regular and turbulent. The
turbulent field may be anisotropic, where the extreme case of a
vanishing radial and vertical component would still contribute to
polarised emission. Hence, the exponential scale length of the total
field is a weighted mean of the individual field components. As the
turbulent field dominates
\citep{2007A&A...470..539B,2013A&A...552A..19T}, we assume a typical
scale length of the turbulent field of $R_{B{\rm tur}} \simeq 15\kpc$
for spiral galaxies.
The synchrotron scale lengths of dwarf galaxies are smaller than in
spirals, for instance $0.6\kpc$ in NGC~4214
\citep{2011ApJ...736..139K}. The corresponding scale length of the
total and turbulent fields is about $3\kpc$. Polarised emission has
been detected only for dwarf galaxies with a high star formation rate,
like NGC~4449 \citep{2000A&A...355..128C}, for which we assume a typical scale
length of the regular field of $R_{B{\rm reg}}\simeq 4\kpc$.
The strength of the turbulent field $B_{\rm tur}$ depends on the
star formation rate. At $r=0$, $B_{\rm tur,0}\simeq 20\muG$ is typical
for a grand-design spiral like NGC~6946 \citep{2007A&A...470..539B},
while for galaxies with lower star formation rates we assume
$B_{\rm tur,0}\simeq 10\muG$. The strongly star-forming dwarf galaxy
NGC~4449 has $B_{\rm tur,0}\simeq 15\muG$ \citep{2000A&A...355..128C},
while weakly star-forming dwarfs reveal $B_{\rm tur,0}\simeq 3\muG$
\citep{2011A&A...529A..94C}.
The strength of the regular field $B_{\rm reg}$ does not show a clear
dependence on a single parameter of the host galaxy. We assume a
ratio of $B_{\rm reg,0} / B_{\rm tur,0} = 0.4$ for spiral galaxies,
corresponding to a mean degree of polarisation of $p = p_i \, B_{\rm
reg,0}^2 / (B_{\rm reg,0}^2 + B_{\rm tur,0}^2) \simeq 10\%$. This
value increases with radius $R$ because of the larger scale length of
$B_{\rm reg}$. Dwarf galaxies have weaker regular fields even if the
star formation rate is high ($B_{\rm reg,0}\simeq 3\muG$). No regular
fields have been detected so far in dwarf galaxies with a low
star formation rate.
Typical parameters of the magnetic field strengths near the centre
($r=0$) and the magnetic scale lengths are given in
Table~\ref{tab1} for different galaxy types. We also include values
for the Milky Way \citep{2008A&A...487..951K,1998ApJ...497..759F,%
1985ApJ...295..422C,1978A&A....63....7B}, NGC~6946
\citep{2002A&A...388....7W,2008A&A...490..555B} and M31 \citep{1982A&A...105..192B}.
In the last column we give estimates for the Alfv\'en velocity of the total field near the centre.
\begin{table*}[tdp]
\caption{Observational parameters for typical spiral and dwarf
galaxies (see text for details). The Milky Way, NGC~6946 and M31 are included
because these are the cases with the most complete observations.}
\begin{tabular}{lcccccccc}
\hline
Galaxy & $\!\!B_{\rm reg,0\!}$ & $\!B_{\rm tur,0\!}$
& $\!\!R_{B\,{\rm reg}}\!$ & $\!R_{B\,{\rm tur}}\!$
& $R_{\rm gas}$ & $\!R_\Omega\!$ & $\Omega_0$ & $V_a$\\[1pt]
& $\![\mu{\rm G}]\!$ & $\![\mu{\rm G}]\!$
&$\![\rm kpc]\!$ & $\![\rm kpc]\!$ & $\![\rm kpc]\!$
& $\!\![\rm kpc]\!\!$ & $\![{\rm Gyr}^{-1}]\!$ & km/s \\[3pt]
\hline
\\[-6pt]
Spiral, high~SF & 8 & 20 & 20 & 15 & 5-10 & 1 & $\!\!\!\!$200-250$\!$ & 12 \\
Spiral, low~SF & 4 & 10 & 20 & 15 & 5-10 & 1 & $\!\!\!\!$200-250$\!$ & 6 \\
Flocculent & 4 & 10 & 20 & 15 & 5-10 & 3 & 50-70 & 6 \\
Dwarf, high~SF & 3 & 15 & 4 & 3 & 5 & 1 & 40-70 & 7 \\
Dwarf, low~SF & 0 & 5 & 0 & 3 & 5 & 1 & 10-30 & 2 \\
Large, stripped$^a$ & 8 & 20 & 20 & 15 & 2 & 1 & 200 & 45 \\
Milky Way & 5 & 11 & 10 & 10 & 3.1 & .5 & 400 & 6.6 \\
NGC~6946 & 8 & 20 & 20 & 15 & 8.7 & 1 & 180 & 12 \\
M31, $R\!>\!10\kpc$ & 5 & 6 & 20 & 15 & 10 & 1 & 200 & 5 \\[3pt]
\hline
\end{tabular}\\[3pt]
$^a$ central gas density, $\rho_{\rm gas}=1\perccm$, otherwise
$\rho_{\rm gas}=15\perccm$.\vspace{-1.5ex}
\label{tab1}
\end{table*}%
All non-magnetic effects like gravitational forces (stellar disc, gas
disc, dark matter, etc.) or thermal and turbulent gas pressure are
represented by the circular velocity which we prescribe by a Brandt
law
\begin{equation}
\vv_{\rm grav}(r) = \Omega_0 r/ (1+(r/R_\Omega)^2)^{0.5}
\end{equation}
with the inner circular frequency $\Omega_0$ and the turnover radius
$R_\Omega$ where the rotation becomes flat. This simple approximation
does not really reflect the universal rotation law of galaxies \citep{2007MNRAS.378...41S},
but will be sufficient for a comparison with the magnetic influence on the rotation.
The ionisation fraction in the neutral gas component is still high
enough to treat the total gas as a single fluid.
\cite{2012ApJ...756..183B} found a universal exponential
radial scaling of the total gas surface density for nearby,
non-interacting disc galaxies, with a scale length of about $R_{\rm
gas} \simeq 0.6 \, r_{25} \simeq 10\kpc$. Furthermore we add a constant
value of $10^{-29}\,{\rm g\,cm}^{-3}$ for the intergalactic medium.
Typical parameters of the scale length $R_{\rm gas}$ are given in
Table~\ref{tab1} for different galaxy types. With the exception of
gas-stripped galaxies with a much reduced central density of
$\rho_{\rm gas}=1\perccm$, the density is $\rho_{\rm gas}=15\perccm$
at {\bf $r=0$}. We include the case of a spiral galaxy for which the gas has
been stripped by tidal interaction, but the magnetic field is still
unchanged. Such a scenario may occur in the early phase of
interaction \citep{2012A&A...537A.143V}.
The scale length of the total gas density is in many cases similar to
half of the scale length for the regular field, in accordance with a
constant Alfv\'en velocity, but again with a large scatter. The
most extreme deviation could be M101 with $28\kpc$ scale length for the
total field and $7\kpc$ for the gas scale length
\citep{1990ASSL..160..141H,2010AJ....140.1194B}.
Here the Alfv\'en velocity is exponentially but slowly increasing with a huge scale length
of $28\kpc$. So far there is no evidence that the magnetic field strength follows such a law
even at distances of more than $28\kpc$.
For M83 we have
$R_{\rm gas}=7\,{\rm kpc}$ and $R_{B\,{\rm total}}=10\kpc$
\citep{2010AJ....140.1194B,1993A&A...274..687N}.
There is not always a single scale length, in particular for interacting
galaxies, such as M51, with about $R_{\rm gas}=5.5\kpc$
and $R_{B\,{\rm total}}=18\kpc$ (derived from radio data at 151\,MHz, assuming equipartition)
between $2-10\kpc$ radius; these values change in the outer disc to become about $R_{\rm gas}=2\kpc$
and $R_{B\,{\rm total}} = 8\kpc$ in the range $10-18\kpc$
\citep{2010AJ....140.1194B,2014arXiv1407.1312M}.
Here we have the case for a slowly growing Alfv\'en velocity reaching about $100\kms$ at a distance of $40\kpc$,
but the small exponential scale in the outer part allows only an outward directed Lorentz force.
\citet{2013A&A...552A..19T} found $B_{tot}\propto\Sigma_{gas}^{0.23\pm0.01}$
in NGC~6946 (where $\Sigma_{gas}$ is the gas surface density), based on
many small regions within the bright star-forming regions of the galaxy.
The magnetic field distribution was derived via the equipartition assumption from that
of the synchrotron intensity, which is known to be smoother than that of the gas,
due to diffusion of cosmic-ray electrons \citep{2013MNRAS.435.1598B}.
Hence, the exponent of the above relation should be regarded as a lower limit and does not
question our assumption of a constant Alfv\'en velocity on large scales.
A scaling of $B_{reg}\propto\rho^{0.5}$ is also
in agreement with an equipartition field strength for the more
or less constant velocity dispersion. For the typical field strength
of several $\mu$G and a density of $1\perccm$, the Alfv\'en velocity
is of the order of $10-20\kms$, which is too small to cause a significant
change of a $200\kms$ circular velocity.
The estimates for the
density are derived from observations of surface densities. For a
constant vertical scale height of the gas disc, the scale length is
the same for the midplane densities. For a flaring disc such as in
the Milky Way, the scale length for the midplane density will be
smaller. In the case that the magnetic field extends with the same scale
length outside the optical radius (which is still not observed) the
Lorentz force would not be negligible anymore.
Grand-design spiral galaxies usually have a regular field strengths between
$4\muG$ and $8\muG$ for low and high star formation rates,
respectively \citep{2010ASPC..438..197F}.
The exponential scale length for the regular magnetic
field turns out to be twice the scale length of the HI density, which
means a constant Alfv\'en speed of around $10\kms$ up to the outer
parts of the gaseous disc. This value can be lower in the central
region because of high molecular gas density. Therefore the magnetic
energy is roughly in equipartition with the turbulent energy of the
gas in the midplane. With such low values of the Alfv\'en velocity,
we exclude any influence of the magnetic field on the gas rotation
independent of the radial magnetic field distribution. A similar
situation is found for flocculent galaxies. For extensively
star-forming dwarf galaxies, the magnetic scale is only slightly
larger than the density scale length, which leads to a radially
decreasing Alfv\'en velocity of at most 10\% of the rotational
velocity.
\section{Effect on rotation for idealised radial profiles}
We model the total magnetic field as the sum of the regular and
turbulent field. Because of the unknown contribution of the
anisotropic turbulent field to the polarised emission, we model that
part of the field as a regular field only. We assume instead some
anisotropy for the turbulent field. Prescribing the radial profile of
the regular $B_\varphi$ and the radial profile of the pitch angle
fixes the components $B_r$ and $B_z$ for a symmetric regular field. For the
turbulent field we prescribe the radial profile of $B_\varphi^{\rm
tur}$ and the degree of anisotropy ( $B_r^{\rm tur}=B_z^{\rm tur}=
q_{\rm iso} B_\varphi^{\rm tur}$). The third term of the right-hand side in
Eq.~(\ref{eq5}) vanishes for the turbulent field. Under the
assumptions for the radial profiles of density, regular, and turbulent
magnetic field for a typical spiral (cf. Tab.~\ref{tab1}) we plot the
circular velocity modified by the magnetic field in
Fig.~\ref{fig1}. The reduction of the magnetic velocity outside
$20\kpc$ is mainly caused by the pressure of the vertical component of
the turbulent field. The anisotropy of the turbulent field appears to
be negligible. For an antisymmetric regular field the result is
similar for a negligible magnetic flux through the disc.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{fig1.eps}
\caption{Typical spiral including a turbulent field. In the upper-left panel
the contributions to the magnetic velocity (solid) are
from the total field of $B_\varphi$ (dotted), $B_r$ (dashed),
$B_z$ (dash dot dot), and the $B_r B_z$ term (dash dot) of the
regular field only. Upper-right panel shows the radial dependence
of the pitch angle for the regular field (solid) and the
anisotropy $q_{\rm iso}$ of the turbulent field (dotted).
Lower-left panel: radial profiles of total magnetic field components
$B_\varphi$ (solid), $B_r$ (dotted), and $B_z$ (dashed)
(the last two components are almost identical).
Lower-right panel: rotation modified by the Lorentz force (solid) and
from the gravitation only (dotted). }
\label{fig1}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Large spirals}
Some large galaxies (like M51) have a truncated gas disc, where a much
smaller scale of the density is observed in the outer disc. The corresponding
truncation in the radio continuum disc may be ascribed to a lack of star formation
and hence of cosmic-ray electrons in the outer disc,
while the magnetic field may extend beyond the truncation radius with a constant
scale length. In such a case,
the Lorentz force may be influential in the outer parts.
Neglecting the turbulent field leads to an increase of the rotation
velocity by about $20\kms$ at $10\kpc$, where the Alfv\'en speed is
$130\kms$. The situation changes if we also consider the turbulent
magnetic field acting as a pressure term only. Now the outward
pressure force would be in equilibrium with the gravitation at a
radius of $10\kpc$, but our assumption of equipartition between magnetic
and cosmic-ray energies gives an additional pressure
truncating the gaseous disc at a smaller radius.
Assuming a polytropic index of
$\gamma=4/3$ for the cosmic-ray gas, the cosmic-ray pressure is
$P_{\rm CR}=(1/3) P_{\rm mag}$, which reduces the truncation to 9kpc.
We now consider two more or less constrained cases for typical spirals.
For NGC~6946 all parameters can be taken from
\cite{2002A&A...388....7W,2007A&A...470..539B}; and \cite{2008A&A...490..555B} ,
which will be an example of a large spiral with moderate star formation.
Despite the exponential growth of the Alfv\'en speed in
Figure~\ref{fig2} we see only a weak reduction of the rotation velocity as a result
of the Lorentz force. This effect stems from the turbulent magnetic
field, which is included here only as a pressure term.
This galaxy is one of the extreme cases were the magnetic energy is larger than the turbulent kinetic energy.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{fig2.eps}
\caption{NGC~6946: Dotted lines in the upper panels denote the
turbulent magnetic field and dashed lines the regular field. The
magnetic velocity $\vv_{\rm mag}$ for the total field (solid line) in
the upper right panel. In the lower right panel the resulting
total circular velocity is plotted (solid). The dashed line indicates
the rotation velocity neglecting the turbulent field.}
\label{fig2}
\end{figure}
\subsection{The Milky Way}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{fig3.eps}
\caption{Milky Way: Circular velocity for a distribution of the
regular magnetic field with an exponential profile (solid), compared to the profile given by
Eq.~(\ref{eq3aa}). The exponential scale length is $10\kpc$, and
$r_{\rm m}=7\kpc$. One cannot distinguish the two
profile shapes from a measurement of the (normalised) polarised
intensity in the inner $10\kpc$. The density distribution of
\cite{2008A&A...487..951K} is marked with crosses.}
\label{mw1}
\end{figure}
Observations of the radial profile of the polarised intensity for the
Milky Way are less constrained than observations for external
galaxies. Estimates for the radial magnetic profile often rely on
models for the magnetic field
\citep{2008A&A...477..573S,2000ApJ...537..763S}. The scale length
of the magnetic field is nearly three times as big as the scale
length of the gas density, which gives an increase of the Alfv\'en velocity
(cf. Table~\ref{tab1}). Here we compare the two basic assumptions for
the radial profile of the magnetic field. The first model relies on
the assumption of equipartition between magnetic field and cosmic ray
energies. The density profile is taken from
\cite{2008A&A...487..951K}. For the second model, we used a magnetic
field profile according to Eq.~(\ref{eq3aa}), approximating a $1/r$
profile at infinity. Assuming equipartition, this would lead to clear
contradiction with an exponential law for the polarised emission. On the other hand,
for an exponential cosmic ray distribution $\rho_{cr}=\exp(-r/r_{cr})$
with a scale length of $r_{cr}=6\kpc$, a nearly exponential
distribution of the polarised intensity is obtained. Figure \ref{mw1} shows the magnetic disturbance
of the rotation for both assumptions. This leads to an increase in gas rotation
for the model of \cite{2012ApJ...755L..23R}, but a decrease in the
exponential magnetic field distribution. However, the effect is still
below $10\kms$ at $20\kpc$ radius in agreement with
\cite{2013MNRAS.433.2172S}, who used an exponential law.
\subsection{Field reversals}
For the Milky Way, a reversal of the regular magnetic field is a
possible interpretation of the data \citep[see][for example]{2011ApJ...728...97V}.
For the parameters of a typical
spiral (cf. Table~\ref{tab1}) with a low star formation rate, we
modelled a reversal of the regular field. A sharp field reversal on a
length scale below $1\kpc$ can lead to strong modulations in the rotation
curve. For a dominant {\bf azimuthal} field (i.e., a small pitch angle), the
effect leads first to a reduction and then to an increase of the
circular velocity (cf. Fig.~\ref{rev1}) when moving radially
outwards. For larger pitch angles, the reversal of an axisymmetric
field also implies a strong vertical field, which results in a local
increase of the magnetic pressure. As a consequence, the deviation
from the unperturbed rotation curve starts with super-rotation and
ends with a weaker rotation (cf. Fig.~\ref{rev2}) when moving from
smaller to larger radii. For a broader transition zone, the effect
becomes negligible.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{fig4.eps}
\caption{Milky Way: Reversal within 1\,kpc and a small pitch angle.
Upper-left: regular $B\varphi$ (solid), $B_r$ (dotted), $B_z$
(dashed); lower-left: total $B\varphi$ (solid), $B_r$ (dotted),
$B_z$ (dashed); upper-right: regular $B_r/B_\varphi$ (solid);
lower-right: circular velocity with magnetic force (solid),
gravitation only (dotted).}
\label{rev1}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{fig5.eps}
\caption{Milky Way: Reversal within 3\,kpc and a large pitch angle.
Upper left: regular $B\varphi$ (solid) $B_r$ (dotted) $B_z$
(dashed), lower left: total $B\varphi$ (solid) $B_r$ (dotted)
$B_z$ (dashed), upper right: regular $B_r/B_\varphi$ (solid),
lower right: circular velocity with magnetic force (solid),
gravitation only (dotted).}
\label{rev2}
\end{figure}
\section{Dynamo model}
In this section, we aim to confront the theoretical expectations
derived above with a full-blown global simulation of a Milky Way-type
galaxy \citep*{2013A&A...560A..93G}, where we modelled a mean-field
dynamo in a dynamical fashion by additionally solving the momentum
equation in a prescribed static gravitational potential. In this
model, we found the action of the supernova-driven
$\alpha\Omega$~dynamo to be limited to the inner $10-15\kpc$. In the
outer part, the magnetic field was maintained by the magnetorotational
instability. The final magnetic field had a radial exponential scale
length of about $10\kpc$ and a modestly varying Alfv\'en speed of
$10-30\kms$. Consistent with our preceding estimates, we found only a
very weak influence of the Lorentz force on the rotational velocity.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{dtv_mag}\\[6pt]
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{dtv_sim}
\caption{Results from a dynamical dynamo simulation including
mean-field effects. Colour-coded lag in the rotation velocity
$\vv_\phi(r,z)$ averaged over azimuth. Values $|\delta \vv| >
30\kms$ have been clipped for clarity. \emph{Top:} Predicted
deviation from the initial rotation profile based on the effect of
the Lorentz force. \emph{Bottom:} the actual deviation seen in the
simulation, which appears more washed out owing to the effect of
the turbulent viscosity but otherwise agrees markedly well
(see also the lower panel of Fig.~9 in
Gressel et al. 2013
for the actual field distribution).}
\label{fig:sim}
\end{figure}
The deviation in rotation after the magnetic field has grown into
saturation is shown in the lower panel of Fig.~\ref{fig:sim}. Here and
in the following figure, we plot azimuthally averaged rotation
velocities. The colour coding is such that super-rotation is indicated
by red hues, sub-rotation corresponds to green hues, and neutral
rotation appears in yellow. For reasons of clarity, the data range has
been limited to $\pm 30\kms$, with values exceeding this level being
confined to high-latitude regions near the domain
boundary.
\footnote{The departures there are related to strong vertical
fields in the disc halo, and simulations with an extended domain
should be performed to exclude a spurious origin related to the
chosen boundary conditions.}
Apart from being of more diffuse
appearance, the structure seen in this panel agrees very well with the
prediction obtained via Eq.~(\ref{eq3}), which is displayed in the
upper panel of the same figure, and which is based on computing
$\vv_{\rm mag}^2$ from the Lorentz force encountered in the
simulation. It is thus fair to say that the resulting deviations of
the rotational velocities in our MHD model can be explained by the
acting of magnetic forces.
The most pronounced difference between the two panels of
Fig.~\ref{fig:sim} is that the effect of the Lorentz force (seen in
the upper panel) appears negligible in the disc midplane, something
that is owed to the higher gas density there and which reduces the
relative importance of magnetic forces. This trend is moreover
reinforced when going radially inward, where the disc surface density
is higher. In contrast to this, the actual rotation profile seen in
the simulations shows some local deviations even in the midplane. This
may be explained by a coupling of overlying magnetically-affected
layers via a viscous drag force mediated by the turbulent viscosity
caused by SNe. A potential example for this can be seen around
$r=17\kpc$, where the rotation appears to be coupled over an extended
vertical patch of the disc.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{dtv_mag_b1}\\[6pt]
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{dtv_mag_b2}
\caption{Same as the upper panel in Fig.~\ref{fig:sim} above, but
comparing the contributions from different field
components. \emph{Top:} effect of the poloidal field
$B_z(r,z)\,\zz+B_r(r,z)\,\rr$, which predominantly affects
high-latitude layers presumably via magnetic pressure
gradients. \emph{Bottom:} effect of the azimuthal field
$B_\varphi(r,z)$ component, contributing to super-rotation outside
the reversal at $r=10\kpc$ and providing weak pressure-support in
the outer disc away from the midplane.}
\label{fig:sim2}
\end{figure}
To facilitate a more detailed interpretation of the various features
seen in the rotation cross-section of the disc, we now turn to
Fig.~\ref{fig:sim2}, where we plot the contributions to $\vv_{\rm
mag}^2$ stemming from the poloidal field $B_z\,\zz+B_r\,\rr$ (upper
panel), and the azimuthal field component $B_\varphi$ (lower
panel). It can be seen that the poloidal field only affects the very
upper layers of the disc. Given the limited vertical extend of our
model, we should express some caution in interpreting these features
as they may be partly affected by the chosen boundary conditions.
Still, the characteristic patches seen near the field reversal
at $r=10\kpc$ actually serve as a nice example that vertical fields
enter the force balance via magnetic pressure gradients. Here, a
localised region of strong vertical field leads to a pressure support
(and hence sub-rotation, green) on its outside, and the opposite
effect (red) on the inside. Similar effects are seen farther out in
the disc but show a more complex structure. These features outside
$10\kpc$ may be related to the Parker instability also seen in
the simulations of \cite{2013ApJ...764...81M}.
As can be seen in the lower panel of Fig.~\ref{fig:sim2}, the more
large-scale variations in $\vv_{\rm rot}$ are clearly caused by the
azimuthal disc field $B_\varphi$. Only the asymmetric rotation of the
upper and lower disc inside $6\kpc$ is due to the combined
symmetric radial component of the dynamo and a vertical field
going through the disc. This mixed parity of the field is the reason
for the antisymmetric change of the rotational velocity arising from
the term $B_z \partial_z B_r$ in Eq.~\ref{eq1}. The strongest effect
causing super-rotation (red) is related to the dynamo mode with A0
parity residing between $8\kpc$ and $10\kpc$, and the combined dynamo and
MRI mode located between $10\kpc$ and $13\kpc$. At the interfaces between
these modes, the azimuthal field $B_\varphi$ vanishes, which leads to
local gradients in the Lorentz force. Both of the red regions have
green regions adjacent on the outside and the overall picture is again
consistent with the dominant effect stemming from magnetic
forces. Even though these features appear fairly washed-out in the
actual simulation, they are tied to particular field reversals and
their character is clearly local.
Because of the A0 parity, the super-rotation near the field reversal
(at $10\kpc$) does not affect the disc midplane. With the midplane
harbouring the peak in the gas density on one hand, and $B_\phi=0$ on
the other hand, this does seem a little surprising. In contrast to the
picture based on the ${\,\mathbf j}\times{\mathbf B}$ alone, the
simulation (cf. the lower panel of Fig.~\ref{fig:sim}) does show some
weak sub-rotation around $(r,z)=(12,0)\kpc$. Given the long-wavelength
vertical modulation, one may be tempted to interpret these
fluctuations as low-wavenumber MRI channels, where the effect of
field-line tension is complemented by inertial forces. The global
tendency of sub-rotation around the midplane outside $10\kpc$ is
consistent with the scale length of $10\kpc$ for the exponential fit
to the magnetic field strength in the model.
The variation of the rotation of the Milky Way, as is shown in
Fig.~2 of \cite{2012ApJ...755L..23R}, may be due to a field reversal
between $10\kpc$ and $15\kpc$, mainly caused by the azimuthal field, although
the details of the reversal differ in our model. We should remark
that the magnetic field strength of the dynamo may still be
underestimated and the contribution of the small-scale turbulent field
is neglected in this type of model. Therefore one could have slightly
stronger changes of the rotation by the action of the Lorentz force in
real galaxies.
\section{Discussion}
From Eq.~(\ref{eq5}) we obtain the effect of the Lorentz force from
the total field strength, supposing we know the fraction of the
different components and the vertical field on the surface of the
disc. For the regular or an anisotropic field, we can estimate the
fraction of radial to azimuthal field by the pitch angle. The vertical
component of the regular field near the disc plane is
negligible, as seen from polarised emission of edge-on galaxies
(e.g. \citet{2011A&A...531A.127S}). The surface term ($B_r(h)B_z(h)$) reduces
the magnetic velocity for observed X-shaped geometries. For a
typical pitch angle of 20$^\circ$, the field contributing to the
polarised emission only acts like an azimuthal field. The
other part of the field contributing to the total intensity will act
like isotropic turbulence. Therefore the profile of the polarised intensity
should be flatter than $r^{-2}$ for a centripetal force action.
It is observationally unclear how far one can extrapolate the
exponential law of the magnetic field strength and how reliable the
assumption of energy equipartition between magnetic field and cosmic rays
is in the outer disc. In the case of a valid exponential law
of the regular magnetic field in the outer disc, a reduction of the
circular velocity occurs outside the scale length, that is, where the
tension force is dominated by the pressure force of the azimuthal
field. Apart from ram pressure stripping, this may be another source for truncations
of the gaseous disc. Dynamical simulations of ram pressure stripping suggest this
\citep{2014ApJ...784...75R}. Stars formed within the slower rotating
gas will decouple from the magnetic force and migrate inwards.
With the present data we do not find any support
for the possibility of attributing flat
rotation curves to magnetic forces. This has been claimed previously
with the intention of reducing the required dark matter content of
galaxies. On the contrary, at large radii the observed flat gas rotation
may demand even more extended
dark matter profiles because of an additional magnetic pressure support.
This is, however, speculative because the observations of extended disc
rotation are mainly done for extended gaseous discs, where the Alfv\'en
velocity is still small compared to the rotation velocity. Additional
direct measurements of radio emission in the outer discs in the low-frequency range or
of Faraday rotation of background radio sources \citep{2013AN....334..548B} will
give better constraints than our simple extrapolation of the scale
length.
Our dynamo model exhibits nearly no influence of the magnetic field on
the rotation in the disc, with a weak sub-rotation outside the radial
scale length of the field. Outside the midplane of the disc,
variations of the order of 10\% of the rotation velocity may be caused by magnetic field
reversals. The super-rotation appearing at the outer vertical
boundaries caused by the flat radial profile of the azimuthal field may be due
to boundary effects and no proper modelling of the halo gas. Another
interesting feature seen in our dynamo model is the antisymmetric
disturbance of the circular velocity away from the midplane by a
symmetric disc field, together with a vertical field threading the
disc.
\section{Summary}
We estimated the effects of the Lorentz force onto the gas rotation of galaxies assuming
equipartition of the magnetic field with cosmic ray energy.
The scale length of the regular magnetic field is rather large compared to the optical disc size.
The scale for the gas density varies between a quarter and a half of the magnetic scale length.
This translates into a constant or slowly growing Alfv\'en velocity along the disc.
Stripped galaxies may be an exception.
An exponential distribution of the magnetic field leads always to a centrifugal force (reduction of
the rotational velocity) outside one exponential scale length.
The centripetal force (increase of the rotational velocity) inside one exponential scale length is too weak
because of the low Alfv\'en velocity in the disc.
A strong turbulent field in the inner region will further reduce the centripetal force.
Reversals of the large scale magnetic field on scales below $1\kpc$ may cause variations
of the rotation velocity.
Recent dynamic dynamo models confirm the above findings, independent of the equipartition argument.
\begin{acknowledgements}
Part of this work was supported by the German \emph{Deut\-sche
For\-schungs\-ge\-mein\-schaft (DFG)\/}, project numbers FOR1254
and FG1257. We thank Marita Krause for carefully reading the manuscript
and the referee Eduardo Battaner for useful comments.
\end{acknowledgements}
\bibliographystyle{aa}
|
\section{Introduction}\label{sec:introduction}}
\IEEEPARstart{I}{nter-vehicle} communications based on wireless technologies pave the way for innovative applications in traffic safety,
driver-assistance, traffic control and other advanced services which will make up future Intelligent Transportation Systems
(ITS) \cite{VanetBook}. Communications for Vehicular Ad-Hoc Networks (VANET) have been developed and standardized in the last years. At the moment, a dedicated short range communication (DSRC) bandwidth has been allocated to vehicular communications at 5.9 GHz and both American and European standards \cite{EtsiPhy} have adopted IEEE 802.11p \cite{802.11p} as physical and medium access control layers, based on carrier-sense multiple access with collision avoidance (CSMA/CA). These networks are characterized by a highly dynamic environment where short-life connections between vehicles are expected as well as adverse propagation conditions leading to severe or moderate fading effects \cite{Survey}.
Cooperative inter-vehicular applications usually rely on the exchange of broadcast single-hop status messages among vehicles on a single control channel, which provide detailed information about vehicles position, speed, heading, acceleration, curvature and other data of interest \cite{EtsiCAM}. These messages are called \textit{beacons} and are transmitted periodically, at a fixed or variable \textit{beaconing rate}.
Beacons provide very rich information about the vehicular environment and so are relatively long messages, between 250 and 800 bytes, even more if security-related overhead is added \cite{Awareness}. In addition, vehicles
exchange other messages on the control channel: \textit{service announcements} and \textit{event-driven messages} as a result of certain events. For instance, \textit{emergency} messages are transmitted only when a dangerous situation is detected.
The aggregated load on the wireless channel due to periodic beacons can rise to a point where it can limit or prevent the transmission of other types of messages, what is called \textit{channel congestion due to beaconing activity}. Control schemes are required to prevent this situation and several alternatives are available: adapting either the beaconing rate, the transmission range, the transmission data rate, the carrier sense threshold or a combination of some of them \cite{Awareness}. In this paper we focus on the control of the beaconing rate of each vehicle.
The goal is to limit the channel bandwidth used by beacons to ensure that the remaining capacity is available to event-based messages.
The practical implementation of the system impose two strong requirements on the control scheme, in addition to keep the channel load under a desired level: first, to be \textit{distributed} and, second,
to grant beaconing rates to each vehicle in a \textit{fair} way. Being distributed means that vehicles should control their rate making use only of the signaling information exchanged with their neighbor vehicles and without relying on any centralized infrastructure. Besides, to reduce the signal overhead, the exchanged information should be kept to a minimum.
The control scheme should also provide quick and effective adaptation to changes in the environment, such as the channel conditions and the number of vehicles in range. The limits on such capabilities are captured by the \textit{convergence properties} of the algorithm in use.
\textit{Fairness} must be guaranteed as a safety requirement since beacons are used to provide vehicles with an accurate estimate of the state of their neighbors \cite{Awareness}.
Consequently, the fairness goal implies that no vehicle should be allocated arbitrarily less resources than its neighbors, under the constraints imposed by the available capacity.
However, even starting from the previous principle,
several notions of fairness can be defined, and in most of them there is a trade-off between fairness and efficiency \cite{ChiangFair}: more fairness results usually in a less efficient use of the shared resource.
But less efficiency is detrimental to safety, since in general, the higher the beaconing rate, the higher the quality of the state information \cite{Awareness}.
Thus, using an inadequate notion of fairness implies not simply wasting resources but also has a negative influence on the safety of the users.
In conclusion, in vehicular networks it is necessary not only to provide fairness but also to be able to select the \textit{appropriate fairness notion}.
This ability is a distinguishing feature of the algorithm put forward in this paper with respect to other proposals \cite{Limeric, Pulsar, Fallah, Tielert, Intern}.
Several beaconing rate control schemes have been proposed in the literature \cite{Limeric, Pulsar, Fallah}. Although most of them are able to bring the channel load to the desired level, none of them is able to meet all the aforementioned requirements. In particular, all of them consider a very basic approach to fair allocation of beaconing rates,
without a formal definition and rigorous convergence support. In some cases, the combination of a basic notion and its particular implementation may result in an unnecessarily low rate and so a decrease in safety as
we discuss later with an example.
In summary, the issue of fairness is not completely addressed yet. There are two questions related to this issue. One is which is the appropriate notion of fairness in vehicular networks and
whether different scenarios require different notions of fairness. Another one is how to enforce a particular fairness notion and control it dynamically. In this paper we focus on the latter one, which has already been
considered in other contexts as we discuss next.
Distributed rate control has been extensively studied in other contexts. In particular, \textit{Network Utility Maximization (NUM)} has received much attention in the field of congestion control in packet switched data networks since the seminal work of Kelly \cite{Kelly99}, and the connection found by Mo and Walrand \cite{MoWal} with fairness in bandwidth allocation. Surprisingly and in spite of the similarities, such an
approach has not been adopted for congestion control in vehicular networks.
Therefore, in this paper we describe a new approach to the problem of beaconing rate control in vehicular networks, modeling it as a NUM rate allocation problem, where each vehicle is associated a so-called \textit{utility function},
such that the problem objective becomes the maximization of the sum of utilities of each vehicle. Applying the NUM theory allows us to design a broad family of decentralized and simple algorithms, with proved convergence guarantees to a fair allocation solution, supported by the rigorous developments of NUM theory. In addition, thanks to the work in \cite{MoWal}, the notion of fairness of a beacon rate allocation in vehicular networks can be formally defined and generalized. The particular (concave) shape of the utility function of the vehicles is related to the different notions of fairness induced globally, the so-called $(\alpha,\omega)$-fairness allocations. As a result, different control schemes can be designed in order to enforce a particular type of fairness, such as proportional fairness ($\alpha = 1$), or max-min fairness ($\alpha \rightarrow \infty$).
As we will show, NUM modeling allows us to design beaconing rate control algorithms with all the discussed requirements: they are distributed, they require the exchange of a small amount of control information and they can be
configured to obtain different notions of global fairness, well-defined and with guaranteed convergence properties.
We propose a particular algorithm
and validate it with extensive simulations in static and dynamic scenarios. Its performance is evaluated and compared to one
of the alternative state-of-the-art proposals.
In the remainder of this paper we first review related works in section \ref{Related}. In section \ref{Background} we provide a background on the classical NUM approach for rate allocation in packet switched networks and its connection with fairness. Afterwards, the beaconing congestion control problem for vehicular networks is formulated as a NUM rate allocation problem in section \ref{Model}, where we also propose a particular algorithm. In section \ref{Validate},
it is validated and compared with other proposals in static scenarios. In section \ref{Results} we extend the comparison and evaluation in different dynamic scenarios. Finally, conclusions and future work are discussed in section \ref{Conclusions}.
\section{Related Work}
\label{Related}
Transmissions in vehicular networks are broadcast in nature and use a CSMA-based medium access control (MAC) with constant contention window and no acknowledgment or retransmission. ETSI standards define a 10 MHz control channel for vehicular communications at 5.9 GHz \cite{EtsiPhy}. Periodic beaconing over one-hop broadcast communications supports cooperative inter-vehicular applications by disseminating status and environmental information to vehicles on the control channel \cite{EtsiCAM}.
The rate of beacons has an influence on the quality of service of the applications. In fact, some applications may require a certain \textit{beaconing reception frequency}, which is dependent on
propagation losses, the number of contending nodes and other considerations, although standards \cite{EtsiCAM} specify the required \textit{beaconing generation rate}.
A framework for decentralized congestion control (DCC) in the control
channel has been published by ETSI \cite{EtsiDCC}, which can accommodate a variety of controls such as transmit power, message rate or receiver sensitivity, though the currently suggested mechanisms are very basic, and extensions are being discussed.
Regarding pure beaconing rate control proposals, \cite{Limeric, Pulsar} propose rate control algorithms that comply with a global generic beaconing rate goal.
The former, called LIMERIC, uses a linear control based on continuous feedback (beaconing rate in use) from the local neighbors, whereas the latter, called PULSAR, uses an additive increase multiplicative decrease (AIMD) iteration with binary feedback (congested or not) from one and two-hop neighbors. Both of them, however, show limitations.
Regarding fairness none of them define this formally: PULSAR claims targeting a ``best-effort'' approach to max-min fairness allocation by the use of AIMD,
whereas LIMERIC aims to ``achieve fairness such that all the nodes converge to the same message rate''.
LIMERIC is shown to converge to a unique equal rate for every vehicle, which is below the optimal proportional fairness rate by design. In fact, there is a trade-off between the convergence speed and the distance to the optimal value.
And, in any case, the convergence is only proved when all the vehicles are in range of each other, not for multihop scenarios.
Regarding PULSAR, it requires synchronized updates and piggybacking congestion information from vehicles at a two hops.
Authors of LIMERIC propose to combine the LIMERIC rate adaptation mechanism with the PULSAR piggybacking of two-hop congestion information to achieve global fairness \cite{Limeric}, but it is not proved neither discussed in detail.
Finally, a recent work \cite{Kim} also shows that both LIMERIC and PULSAR separately actually may fall into unfair configurations. The authors of \cite{Kim} propose as a solution heuristic techniques that ensure that two neighbor vehicles cannot diverge in their allocated rate. As we
show later, it may actually prevent the algorithm to achieve an optimal fair allocation in some scenarios.
In summary, these and other techniques proposed to date do not ensure correct convergence to a well-defined fair configuration and have no theoretical support for global convergence.
Transmit power control (TPC) has been investigated in
recent proposals \cite{SBCC, Awareness}, which show that TPC can be prone to instabilities, and its accuracy relies on the quality of the propagation model.
There is a related concept called awareness control: the techniques to adapt the communications
parameters, such as transmit power or beaconing rate, to the requirements of an application, whose goal may be safety or any other such as tracking.
Joint transmit power and rate control
to enforce particular application quality of service requirements has been studied in \cite{Awareness, Fallah, EMBARC, Intern}.
In \cite{Fallah}
the beaconing rate is set by the requirements of a particular tracking application and authors propose to control
the transmission range in order to keep the channel occupancy within the desired levels.
EMBARC \cite{EMBARC} is a combination of LIMERIC with a dynamic tracking error control, letting vehicles with higher dynamics transmit with higher rates, while using LIMERIC to adjust the remaining
capacity to the desired goal. INTERN \cite{Intern} lets the application set the minimum power and rate which requires and uses LIMERIC to equally share the excess of capacity.
Let us note that these proposals do not actually attempt to jointly control both transmission variables, but let the application on top set the minima required and then control the excess of capacity by adjusting one
of them. Our proposal is also actually compatible with this approach. Each vehicle can dynamically set its transmit power according to its requirements and each vehicle can independently set a minimum beaconing rate
as required by an application and, since it is included in the constraints of the optimization problem, it is enforced by the algorithm. In all the proposals this approach obviously prioritizes
application requirements over strict congestion control, since violations of the desired level of channel utilization may occur in some scenarios \cite{Intern}.
This may be counterproductive in some cases, since the channel might become congested to the point few beacons can be transmitted, and deserves further study which is out of the scope of this paper.
In \cite{Tielert} authors do discuss joint control of power and rate, but no concrete algorithm is provided and fairness is not considered.
Finally, differentiated quality of service levels can also be
provided using beaconing rate control: with our approach
different behaviors can be assigned to certain subsets of vehicles by either enforcing \textit{weighted} fairness by selecting appropriate weights ($\omega$) for each vehicle utility function,
or even by using totally different utility functions for each vehicle. In both cases vehicles do not need to know the
weights or utility functions used by other vehicles.
This combined with the dynamical setting of minimum and maximum rate parameters can be used to implement \textit{prioritized beaconing allocation and congestion control}.
A vehicle with special needs, such as a platoon leader, can simply increase the weight of its utility function or minimum and maximum rate parameters.
Our algorithm will allocate it higher rates, while reducing the rates of other vehicles if needed to comply with the congestion constraint and still keeping the fairness of the allocation.
The study of these matters is left as future work and we focus here on homogeneous utility functions.
\section{Background}
\label{Background}
In this section we describe the key ideas on the NUM modeling for rate allocation in packet switched networks, that lay the foundations of our work in vehicular networks. For more detailed information we refer to \cite{Kelly99,MoWal}. For a deeper background in convex optimization, problem decomposition and its applications to communication networks we refer to \cite{Boyd, Bertsekas, Chiang}, and references therein.
\subsection{The NUM problem for rate allocation in packet switched networks}
Let $G(N,E)$ be a packet switched network, being $N$ the set of nodes and $E$ the set of links. Let $D$ be a set of traffic sources. For each traffic source $d$, we denote $r_d$ the unknown bandwidth to be allocated to $d$. We denote as $D(e)$ the subset of demands whose traffic traverses link $e$. The \textit{basic} NUM modeling of the rate allocation problem is:
\begin{subequations}
\begin{align}
\max_{r_d} & \sum_d U_d(r_d) \quad \text{subject to: } \\
& \sum_{d \in D(e)} r_d \leq u_e \quad \forall e \in E \\
& r_d \geq 0 \quad \forall d \in D
\end{align}
\label{eq_num_1}
\end{subequations}
The objective function (\ref{eq_num_1}a) maximizes the sum of the utility functions $U_d$ of each source. Constraints (\ref{eq_num_1}b) mean that the sum of the traffic traversing a link $e$, should not exceed link capacity $u_e$. Finally, constraints (\ref{eq_num_1}c) prohibit assigning a negative amount of bandwidth to a source.
Functions $U_d$ for each demand $d$ are strictly increasing and strictly concave twice-differentiable functions of the rate $r_d$ of that demand. Being $U_d$ an increasing function means that sources always perceive more bandwidth as more useful,
and are always willing to transmit more traffic if allowed. Being concave means that a sort of \textit{diminishing returns} effect occurs in rate allocation, i.e. increasing the bandwidth of a source from $r$ to $r+1$ means a higher increase in utility, than increasing a unit of bandwidth from $r+1$ to $r+2$. The objective function (\ref{eq_num_1}a) is strictly concave, and problem (\ref{eq_num_1}) is a convex program with a unique optimum solution.
Several problem decomposition strategies allow to find decentralized implementations of gradient-based algorithms with convergence guarantees to solve problem (\ref{eq_num_1}). Interested readers can find a surveyed view in \cite{Sri2014} and references therein. In section \ref{Model}, we will use as starting point of our proposal for vehicular networks the dual decomposition of problem (\ref{eq_num_1}), adapting the technique in \cite{Low}.
\subsection{Connection with fairness}
\label{FairnessSect}
As in every resource allocation problem, the optimum rate allocation in a network should balance two competing efforts: maximizing the total network throughput $\left( \sum_d r_d \right)$ and the fairness of
the allocation.
In this context, \textit{fair} means avoiding those allocations where some demands are granted a high amount of bandwidth while others suffer starvation.
Capturing the essence of what a fair resource allocation is not an easy task, and fairness has been defined in a number of different ways. One of the most common fairness notions is \textit{max-min fairness}. A rate allocation $r$ is said to be max-min fair if the rate of any demand $d_1$ cannot be increased without decreasing the rate of some other demand $d_2$ which in $r$ received less bandwidth ($r_{d_2} \leq r_{d_1}$). Kelly \cite{Kelly99} proposed the concept of proportional fairness. A vector $r^*$ is proportionally fair if for any other feasible rate allocation $r$, the aggregate of the proportional change of $r$ respect to $r^*$ is negative:
\begin{align*}
\sum_d \frac{r_d - r_d^*}{r_d^*} \leq 0, \quad \forall r \text{ feasible}
\end{align*}
That is, the percentages of increases/decreases respect to any other allocation should sum negative. In \cite{MoWal}, Mo and Walrand
extended the notion of proportional fairness. Let $w = (w_d, d \in D)$ be a vector of positive weight coefficients, $\alpha \geq 0$. A rate allocation $r^*$ is said to be $(\alpha , w)$-proportionally fair if for any other feasible allocation $r$ it holds that:
\begin{align}
\sum_d w_d \frac{r_d - r_d^*}{{r_d^*}^\alpha} \leq 0, \quad \forall r \text{ feasible}
\label{eq_def_alphafairness}
\end{align}
The importance of the previous definition of fairness is that, if the following utility functions $U_d$ are used, the optimal solutions of NUM rate allocation problems are also $(w,\alpha)$-fair.
\begin{align}
U_d (r_d) = \begin{cases} w_d r_d \quad \text{if $\alpha = 0$} \\
w_d \log r_d \quad \text{if $\alpha = 1$} \\
w_d \frac{r_d^{1-\alpha}}{1-\alpha} \quad \text{if $\alpha > 0, \alpha \not = 1$}
\end{cases}
\label{eq_num_4}
\end{align}
This connection was shown in \cite{MoWal}, for the basic NUM rate allocation problem (\ref{eq_num_1}) and extends to a much more general class of problems.
The $w_d$ values can be used to give more importance to the rates allocated to some demands, that is, to achieve weighted fairness. If all demands are equal for the system $(w_d = 1, \forall d \in D)$, classical fairness notions are produced for some $\alpha$ values. In particular, 0-proportional fair solutions ($\alpha = 0$) are those which maximize the throughput $\sum_d r_d$. Actually, these solutions can be arbitrarily unfair, granting all the link bandwidth to some demands, and zero to others. If $\alpha = 1$ we have the Kelly notion of proportional fairness. In addition, it can be shown that max-min fairness solutions are obtained when $\alpha \rightarrow \infty$ \cite{MoWal}.
There is no consensus on which particular value of $\alpha$ is best suited for being ``fair enough'' in a resource allocation context. Actually, this decision is clearly application dependent. Lower values of $\alpha$ tend to produce solutions where the amount of traffic carried $\sum_d r_d$ is higher, but with larger differences between the rates allocated to different demands (more ``unfair''). In its turn, higher $\alpha$ values reduce the difference between demands, commonly at the cost of a lower aggregated throughput \cite{ChiangFair}.
In any case, \textit{control algorithms can enforce the notion of fairness by setting the $\alpha$ parameter}.
\section{NUM modeling of the beaconing rate control problem in vehicular networks}
\label{Model}
In the previous section we described the classical NUM approach to congestion control in multihop end-to-end transmissions in wired packet switching networks.
Although the vehicular context, that is, one hop broadcast transmissions, may seem very different at first sight, in this section
we show that it is still a valid approach, describe its application and discuss similarities and differences.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{num-fig}
\caption{Three vehicles transmitting $r_0$, $r_1$ and $r_2$ beacons/s respectively. Dashed lines show transmission ranges: vehicle 1 is in transmission range of vehicles 0 and 2, whereas vehicles 1 and 2 are only in
range of vehicle 1. }
\label{num-fig}
\end{figure}
As previous considerations, let us remark that the goal in both cases is to prevent congestion, that is, to keep the usage of resources at a desired level. Now, in our case the resource involved is the wireless channel, which is
spatially shared by different nodes, whereas in the classical case the shared resources are network links. Let us also remark that alternative goals may have been defined, such as the maximization of throughput or
the \textit{reception beaconing rate}, that is, the frequency of correctly received beacons.
We focus in this paper solely on the
control of the transmission beaconing rates, which is also the customary approach in other proposals \cite{Limeric, Pulsar}, because: first, to take into account the reception rate we need to
bring into consideration MAC behavior, which in most practical situations is out of effective control by the user, and propagation models which require to control the transmit power usually.
We leave them as future work.
Second, as pointed out also in \cite{Limeric, Pulsar}, good performance at reception can be indirectly obtained by keeping the beaconing channel load at a certain level. For instance,
the information dissemination rate, a performance metric that includes MAC, hidden-node and physical losses, is maximized when the fraction of channel capacity used is kept at 0.6 to 0.7 \cite{Fallah}.
A value of 0.6 to 0.7 is also found as the optimum channel load with respect to packet reception in recent works \cite{Subramanian}.
Before formally defining the problem, we provide an informal description of the problem illustrated in Fig. \ref{num-fig}. The key idea is to notice that every vehicle acts as a source, transmitting beacons which use
a fraction of the wireless channel of their neighbors; and as a resource, defining a wireless channel that is shared with the vehicles in range. That is, we can assign every vehicle a virtual resource, a virtual link $l_v$,
which has a
given capacity which is shared by all sources that are in range, including its own beacons. As can be seen in Fig. \ref{num-fig}, vehicle 1 is transmitting beacons at a rate $r_1$ beacons/s which are
using the spatially shared channel of both
neighbors, that is, virtual links $l_0$ and $l_2$ as well as its own virtual link $l_1$.
Thus, an analogy with packet switching networks would be that the rate $r_1$ is traversing the three links to get to its destination. Conversely
the total load of resource $l_1$ is the sum of the three rates using it, $r_0+r_1+r_2$.
So the goal is to assign rates such as the total load of the links they are using is below a certain limit.
In the following, we formally pose the NUM problem for vehicular networks. Let us note that, although useful to get an informal idea,
we do not use the concept of virtual link for the moment to avoid introducing potentially confusing terms.
Let $V$ be a set of vehicles in a vehicular network. Each vehicle $v \in V$ transmits beacons at a rate $r_v$ beacons/sec, with a constant transmit power. Beacons are broadcast and are received by neighbor vehicles in
reception range. Let $n(v)$ denote the set of neighbor vehicles of $v$, which includes $v$. The total rate received by each vehicle is the sum of the rates in its set of neighbors and we are interested in limiting this amount to a
maximum $C$, that is, a \textit{Maximum Beaconing Load} (MBL), to avoid channel congestion.
The NUM version of the beaconing rate allocation problem is given by:
\begin{subequations}
\begin{align}
\max_{r_v} & \sum_v U_v(r_v) \quad \text{subject to: } \\
& \sum_{v' \in n(v)} r_{v'} \leq C \quad \forall v \in V \\
& R_v^{min} \leq r_v \leq R_v^{max} \quad \forall v \in V
\end{align}
\label{eq_numbeacon_1}
\end{subequations}
The objective function (\ref{eq_numbeacon_1}a) is the sum of the utility $U_v(r_v)$ for each vehicle, which depends on the rate $r_v$ allocated to it.
In order to enforce different fairness notions we take vehicle utility functions as the ones in (\ref{eq_num_4}).
This way we ensure that a rate allocation to the vehicles is $\alpha$-fair if, and only if, it is the optimum solution of (\ref{eq_numbeacon_1}). Constraints (\ref{eq_numbeacon_1}b) mean that the beaconing load at a given vehicle, which is the one generated by the neighboring vehicles plus its own load ($\sum_{v' \in n(v)} r_{v'}$), must be below the MBL ($C$).
Finally, constraints (\ref{eq_numbeacon_1}c) force the vehicle rates to be within a minimum ($R_v^{min}$) and maximum ($R_v^{max}$) value. Let us remark that each vehicle can independently set
its own minimum and maximum rates, which can be used by an application to guarantee a minimum reliability.
In summary, problem (\ref{eq_numbeacon_1}) reflects our two goals: (1) to control the congestion while (2) maximizing the allocated rates in a controllable fair way.
\subsection{Dual decomposition}
\label{DualSect}
In order to find a decentralized algorithm
solving (\ref{eq_numbeacon_1}) we use a dual decomposition of the problem. We first form the Lagrangian function $L$ of (\ref{eq_numbeacon_1}) relaxing the constraints (\ref{eq_numbeacon_1}b):
\begin{align}
L(r,\pi) & = \sum_v U_v(r_v) + \sum_v \pi_v \left(C - \sum_{v' \in n(v)} r_{v'} \right) = \\\nonumber
& = \sum_v \left( U_v(r_v) - r_v \sum_{v' \in n(v)} \pi_{v'} \right) + C \sum_v \pi_v
\end{align}
where $\pi_v \geq 0$ are the Lagrange multipliers (prices) associated with the relaxed constraints.
Multiplier $\pi_v$ is usually interpreted as the price per transmitted traffic unit that other vehicles need to
pay for occupying the (shared) channel of vehicle $v$, the shared resource. In our particular case, the prices actually reflect the congestion state of the
link associated to a vehicle, as we discuss later. The Lagrange dual is the maximum value of the Lagrangian over the domain of the rates.
That is, given a set of non-negative prices $\pi$, the optimal rate allocation solving the Lagrange dual is:
\begin{align}
r_v^*(\pi) = \argmax_{R_v^{min} \leq r_v \leq R_v^{max}} \lbrace U_v(r_v) - r_v \sum_{v' \in n(v)} \pi_{v'} \rbrace
\label{eq_num_21}
\end{align}
We see that, to compute its rate, each vehicle $v$ needs to know just its own utility function $U_v$ and the set of prices $\pi_{v'}$ of its \textit{neighbor vehicles} and use them to solve problem (\ref{eq_num_21}). Since the original problem is convex with linear constraints, it has the \textit{strong duality property} \cite{Boyd} and the Karush-Kuhn-Tucker (KKT) conditions characterize its optimum solution. Then, it can be shown that there are a set of optimum link prices $\pi^*$ such that the associated rates according to (\ref{eq_num_21}) are the optimal solution of the original problem (\ref{eq_numbeacon_1}).
In other words, if we obtain the optimum prices, then we can compute the optimal rates with (\ref{eq_num_21}).
The problem of finding such optimum prices is called the dual problem, which can be defined as:
\begin{align}
\min_{\pi \geq 0}g(\pi)=\min_{\pi \geq 0} & \lbrace \max_{R_{min} \leq r \leq R_{max}} L(r,\pi) \rbrace
\label{eq_dualProblem}
\end{align}
In our case, it can be shown that the objective function in (\ref{eq_dualProblem}), called the dual function, is strictly convex and differentiable, since the objective function in (\ref{eq_numbeacon_1}) is strictly concave. Thus, the dual problem (\ref{eq_dualProblem}) has a unique set of optimum prices $\pi^*$.
The classical dual approach for solving the rate allocation problem consists of finding the dual optimal link prices $\pi^*$ using a gradient-based algorithm, as a mean to (in parallel) obtain the optimum rate allocation $r^*$.
To summarize, in order to find the optimal beaconing rate allocation, vehicles have to exchange their prices $\pi$ with their one-hop neighbors and use them as input to the optimization problem (\ref{eq_num_21}) which can
be solved autonomously by each vehicle with its local information.
In Algorithm 1 we sketch this scheme for vehicular networks, applying a constant-step gradient method, %
noticing that for the utility functions in (\ref{eq_num_4}) the solution to (\ref{eq_num_21}) becomes:
\begin{align}
r_v^* (\pi) =\left[ \frac{1}{(\sum_{v' \in n(v)} \pi_{v'})^{\frac{1}{\alpha}}} \right]_{R_v^{min}}^{R_v^{max}}
\label{r_eq}
\end{align}
And that, given a set of prices $\pi$, the gradient of the dual function $g$ evaluated at $\pi$ is given by:
\begin{align}
\frac{\partial g}{\partial \pi_v} (\pi) = C - \sum_{v' \in n(v)} r_{v'} (\pi), \quad \forall v
\label{subg}
\end{align}
\vspace{1mm}
\hrule
\vspace{1mm}
\textbf{Algorithm 1}. Beaconing rate control with constant gradient step
\hrule
\begin{algorithmic}[1] %
\STATE {At $k=0$, set initial vehicle prices $\pi_v^0$ and rates $r_v^0$}
\STATE {At each time $k$: }
\STATE { Each vehicle $v$ receives the prices of neighbor vehicles $\pi_{v'}^k , v' \in n(v)$.
Then: $r_v^k = \left[ \frac{1}{(\sum_{v' \in n(v)} \pi_{v'})^{\frac{1}{\alpha}}} \right]_{R_v^{min}}^{R_v^{max}}$}
\STATE{ Each vehicle $v$ updates $\pi_v^{k+1}$ according to: }
\STATE{ $\quad \pi_v^{k+1} = \left[ \pi_v^k - \beta \left( C - \sum_{v' \in n(v)} r^k_{v'} \right) \right]_0$ }
\end{algorithmic}
\hrule
\vspace{1mm}
We finish this section by discussing and clarifying relevant aspects of the algorithm and its practical implementation.
We start with aspects related to the \textit{algorithm and physical meaning of its parameters}.
\begin{itemize}
\item The price ($\pi_v$) reflects the congestion state of the wireless channel of a vehicle and can be thought of as the cost to use the vehicle shared channel.
Each vehicle measures its own perceived congestion relative to the MBL when the gradient is computed at each iteration $k$ (step 4 of Algorithm 1): The price increases when the channel is congested and
the other way round.
\item Note that the implementation of this algorithm is decentralized.
At each step a vehicle updates and broadcasts its price $\pi_v^k$ to its neighbors. Then, each vehicle updates its rate using only the information from its one-hop neighboring vehicles.
It is not necessary to disseminate every price to
all the vehicles.
Hence, unlike in packet switching networks \cite{Low}, where the communication of the path prices to the sources may be problematic in a realistic scenario,
in the case of a vehicular network this solution can be implemented in practice with little effort
since the link processing is done by the vehicles themselves, that is each vehicle acts as source and link.
From another point of view: since transmissions are mainly single-hop broadcast ones due to periodic beaconing,
congestion is due to the saturation of the spatially shared wireless channel \textit{only} in the neighborhood of sources (vehicles).
Therefore, vehicles simply have to broadcast their feedback (prices) to inform all the involved sources of the congestion state of the links they use.
That is, the sources of congestion of any vehicle are within one-hop distance.
\item Just by selecting the $\alpha$ parameter different notions of fair allocations are obtained. Moreover, problem (\ref{eq_numbeacon_1}) can be used
to achieve not only different classes of fairness but also to incorporate heterogeneous utility functions and
constraints for different vehicles. The criteria for selecting a particular fairness
notion are application or even scenario dependent. We show and discuss its effect with examples in the following sections but a deeper discussion
on the criteria to select $\alpha$ is left as future work.
\item Convergence of Algorithm 1 can be guaranteed even for asynchronous operation of the vehicles, for a sufficiently small $\beta$, adapting the sufficient convergence conditions in \cite{Low} to our scenario.
To see it, we formally recover the concept of virtual link. Let us assign a virtual link $l \in L$ to each vehicle, $L={1,\dots,V}$, with capacity $C$. Then consider that each virtual link $l_v$ is used by every vehicle which
has vehicle $v$ is in reception range with a rate $r_j$, $j \in n(v)$, plus is own rate $r_v$. That is, we assume that each vehicle virtual link is used by its own rate plus the rates of all the neighbors in range.
Now, problem (\ref{eq_numbeacon_1}) is equivalent to problem $\mathbf{P}$ in \cite{Low}, where its convergence to the optimal allocation is proved.
\item The parameter $\beta$ controls the convergence speed of the algorithm, a high value increases speed but a too high one may cause oscillations. An upper bound can be found in \cite{Low}. Since the algorithm converges any
initial price $\pi_v^0$ is valid. The values we use for our simulations in next sections have been selected by experimentation.
\end{itemize}
Next we discuss \textit{implementation and practical aspects}.
\begin{itemize}
\item The procedure is robust against errors such as packet losses due to fading, collisions or hidden-node interferences.
We have simulated it with realistic MAC and propagation models and the results show convergence to the close vicinity of
the optimal allocation in spite of packet losses.
\item Each algorithm step $k$ is executed periodically. Vehicles spend a sample period $T_s$ collecting feedback from one hop neighbors and then update their prices and rates according to Algorithm 1.
The duration of the sample period can be configured and so the absolute convergence time depends on this parameter. We have set $T_s=200$ ms in our simulations.
\end{itemize}
Algorithm 1 can directly solve problem (\ref{eq_numbeacon_1}),
and its convergence is guaranteed for a sufficiently small value of $\beta$.
Unfortunately, the theoretical $\beta$ bounds are usually too pessimistic (too small) and in practice much higher values of $\beta$ still result in convergence.
Since small $\beta$ values mean slower convergence, it is important to have the largest possible step sizes, but it usually results in oscillations.
Moreover, the gradient update is actually a random process, since gradients are subject to noisy observations and messages can be lost.
Then, we think it may be advisable to have a conservative approach that do not overreacts to congestion signals,
and in the next section we present one possible variation, where we introduce some modifications and discuss practical considerations.
\subsection{Fair Adaptive Beaconing Rate for Intervehicular Communications (FABRIC)}
\label{FABRICAlg}
In this section, we propose FABRIC (Fair Adaptive Beaconing Rate for Intervehicular Communications), a variation of Algorithm 1, where the prices of the links (Step 2) are updated in a different form:
\begin{align}
\pi_v^{k+1} = \left[ \pi_v^k - \beta sign \left( C - \sum_{v' \in n(v)} r_{v'} \right) \right]_{0}
\end{align}
where $sign(x)$ returns the sign (positive, negative or zero) of the argument. That is, in this case the vehicle price is increased by a constant $\beta$ when the channel is congested and decreased by $\beta$ otherwise,
but never below zero.
Even though it is not a gradient projection, this variation also converges to the optimal value. In fact, let us note that it can be equivalently considered a scaled gradient
projection algorithm \cite[Sec. 3.3.3]{Bertsekas}, where the price update is done
by $\pi_v^{k+1} = \left[ \pi_v^k - \beta M(k)^{-1} \left( C - \sum_{v' \in n(v)} r^k_{v'} \right) \right]_{0} $, and the sequence of symmetric positive definite diagonal matrices $M(k)$ is given by
\begin{align}
\left[ M(k) \right]_{ii} = \begin{cases} \left| sg_i(k) \right| & \quad \text{if $\left| sg_i(k) \right| > 0$} \\ 1 & \quad \text{if $\left| sg(k) \right| = 0$} \end{cases}
\end{align}
with $sg_i(k)= C - \sum_{v' \in n(i)} r^k_{i'} $. Therefore, the algorithm meets the conditions given in \cite{Bertsekas2} for convergence to a point arbitrarily close to the optimum, for $\beta$ small enough.
FABRIC aims to have a reasonably fast convergence compared to that of a standard gradient algorithm (Algorithm 1) while limiting the maximum variation of the rates using the sign function.
This is a conservative approach, to smooth out wide variations of beaconing rate that may occur because of the noisy observations in which we base the gradient updates.
In any case, since there are multiple possibilities \cite{Bertsekas}, we think that it should be considered a useful one among other alternatives, whose evaluation we leave as a future work.
Let us now discuss implementation details. The perceived congestion, that is, the difference between channel capacity and the fraction used can be obtained in several ways, either by monitoring the channel, that is, measuring the \textit{Channel Busy Time} (CBT), or by counting the number of correctly received beacons.
In both cases, the result is an estimate of the real channel occupation, since it depends on channel conditions and collisions. Another possibility is to let vehicles inform others of their current beaconing rate by piggybacking it in the beacon. This is our choice and in our opinion
the more reliable option with regard to the accuracy of the rate control, since it informs about the actual offered load of the channel in absence of errors, such as fading or interference.
Moreover, when packets are lost, it provides additional robustness against noisy measurements. Even though some beacons may get lost, receiving at least one beacon during the sampling period is enough to recover
the actual price and rate used by a neighbor.
On the other hand, the algorithm requires each vehicle $v$ to store and send a non-negative real number, its price $\pi_v$. So, regarding \textit{overhead}, vehicles should broadcast at most their current beaconing rate plus the price, both piggybacked in a beacon, which adds little overhead to the current procedures, for instance, two 32-bit extra fields, around 1\% for 500-byte beacons. To compare,
LIMERIC combined with PULSAR requires to piggyback in a beacon the locally measured CBT and the maximum CBT reported by the one-hop neighbors, that is, two real numbers, so the overhead is exactly the same as the FABRIC one.
Second, we consider \textit{synchronous or asynchronous} implementations. In the first case, all the vehicles update their rates at the same instant with the received prices. This is possible in practice for vehicles equipped with a GPS device. In that case, all the neighbor prices are available prior to the beaconing rate update. In the second case, each vehicle may update its rate at different instants. Thus, some vehicles may not have all the updated prices from their neighbors and oscillations may occur, which are called flapping.
To avoid them, we propose to use an \textit{anti-flapping parameter}, $f$, so that we consider that a gradient coordinate is 0 when its absolute value is below a fraction $f$ of the capacity. This way vehicles lock their prices when they are close to the MBL, and rate oscillations are prevented. In Section \ref{Validate} we preliminary validate this procedure experimentally, but leave a more detailed study for a future work.
\section{Validation}
\label{Validate}
In this section we test the validity of our algorithm and assumptions, in a static scenario where vehicles do not move which allows us an accurate control of the vehicles interactions. The results of FABRIC are compared with
those of LIMERIC \cite{Limeric}. However, LIMERIC properties have only been proved so far
for single hop scenarios and, in fact, our simulations show that unfair allocations are obtained in multihop scenarios. Thus, in order to provide a
fair comparison, we have simulated LIMERIC combined with PULSAR (referred to as LIMERIC+PULSAR when used together) as the authors of LIMERIC suggest \cite{Limeric}, according to the details of \cite{itsworkshop}.
\textit{Simulations setup}. We summarize first the simulation parameters that are common to the simulations studies in this and the following section.
The simulations have been implemented with the OMNET++ framework and its inetmanet-2.2 extension \cite{omnetpp}, which implements the 802.11p standard. This library also implements a realistic propagation and interference model for computing the Signal to Interference-plus-Noise Ratio (SINR) and determining the packet reception probabilities, considering also capture effect.
\begin{table}[!t]
\caption{Common Parameters for Simulations }
\label{tcbt}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{ |c | c | }
\hline
Parameter & Value \\
\hline
Data rate ($V_t$) & 6 Mbps \\
Sensitivity (S) & -92 dBm \\
Frequency & 5.9 GHz\\
Power & 251 mW \\
Noise & -110 dBm \\
SNIR threshold ($T$) & 4 dB \\
Neighbor Table update time & 1 s \\
Sample period $T_s$ & 200 ms \\
Beacon size ($b_s$) & 500 bytes \\
Maximum Beaconing rate ($R_v^{max}$) & 10 beacons/s \\
Minimum Beaconing rate ($R_v^{min}$) & 1 beacons/s \\
$\beta$ & $2.8\times10^{-5}$\\
$\pi_v^0$ & $1.252\times10^{-3}$ \\
$ f$ & $0.22$ \\
$\alpha_L$ (LIMERIC) & $0.1$ \\
$\beta_L $ (LIMERIC) & $1/150$ \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\end{table}
In our tests, vehicles are located on a straight single lane road and their positions are either \textit{deterministic}, that is equally spaced with distance $d$ m or randomly positioned according to a \textit{Poisson} distribution of average density $\rho$ vehicles/m.
Both \textit{free space} and \textit{Nakagami-m} propagation models have been used. In both cases, the path loss exponent has been set to 2 or 2.5 depending on the scenario. These are slightly lower values than those reported by \cite{ChanJSAC}, measured in suburban scenarios. Higher values result in shorter transmission range and so congestion is more unlikely and its effects milder. Thus, our values model a worst case scenario.
Nakagami-m shape parameter has been set to $m=1$ or $m=3$, to model severe (Rayleigh) or moderate fading conditions.
The MBL has been set to 3.6 Mbps, which is 60\% of the available data rate of 6 Mbps. We use a beacon size of 500 bytes plus 76 bytes of
MAC and physical headers, which results in a maximum channel capacity of $C=781.25$ beacons/s. Table \ref{tcbt} summarizes the rest of common parameters, used unless another value is explicitly mentioned in the text.
All the simulations have been replicated 10 times with different seeds. %
\begin{figure}[!t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{onehop-s.pdf}
\caption{Selected beaconing rate in a one-hop scenario for FABRIC and LIMERIC with 100 and 200 vehicles and with and without anti-flapping
($f$) parameters. LIMERIC parameters have been set to $\alpha_L=0.01$ and $\beta_L=1/150$. Optimal values shown with a straight line. }
\label{basic}
\end{figure}
\subsection{ All vehicles in range of each other}
\label{AllInRange}
In the first scenario vehicles are positioned along a 1000 m long line with a Poisson distribution of average density $\rho=0.1$ and $\rho=0.2$ vehicles/m, with $N=100$ and $N=200$ vehicles respectively. The propagation model is a deterministic free space model, with path loss exponent of 2 and vehicles using 1000 mW of transmit power, which makes all of them to be in range of each other.
The optimum value for the beaconing rate is $r^*=C/N$, that is $r^*=7.8125$ and $r^*=3.906$ beacons/s respectively. In Fig. \ref{basic} we show the evolution of the beaconing rate with time, in algorithm steps. Vehicles update their beaconing rate every $T_s=1$ s in this scenario. In the synchronous case all the vehicles perform their updates at the same time instant, whereas in the asynchronous one the instant is uniformly distributed along the period. As can be seen, FABRIC quickly converges to the optimum value without oscillations in the synchronous case, whereas in the asynchronous some oscillations can occur, that are corrected with the use of the anti-flapping technique described in the previous section. The amplitude of the oscillations decreases with the number of vehicles since the relative weight of the outdated prices is lower in the updates.
Regarding LIMERIC, Fig. \ref{basic} shows that, although it assigns the same fraction of the bandwidth to all vehicles, such fraction is 15\% below and 7\% below the optimal one respectively. It is noticeable that LIMERIC does not achieve the optimal value \cite{Limeric} even in an ideal scenario like this one. The reason is that the LIMERIC operation is controlled by two parameters $\alpha_L$ and $\beta_L$, such that by design the rate allocation uses a fraction of the available channel capacity equal to $\frac{N \beta_L}{\alpha_L + N \beta_L}$. Better utilizations result when $\alpha_L$ is small respect to $\beta_L N$, but this also results in slower convergence times.
The values used in this paper are the ones suggested by the authors in \cite{Limeric}.
\subsection{ Multihop ideal scenarios and differences between fairness notions}
\label{MultihopSect}
\begin{figure*}[!t]
\centering
\subfloat[Ideal multi-hop scenario. Top: exact optimal values computed by JOM. Bottom: FABRIC and LIMERIC+PULSAR]{
\includegraphics[width=0.96\columnwidth]{mhidsub2.pdf}%
\label{ideal-lin-cbt}
}
\hfill
\subfloat[Two clusters of vehicles approaching a traffic jam. Cluster B is in range of all the vehicles in Cluster A and a fraction of the vehicles in the traffic jam. A schematic diagram is shown below.]{
\includegraphics[width=0.96\columnwidth]{xc.pdf}%
\label{ideal-clust}
}
\caption{Beaconing rate versus position in an ideal multi-hop scenario and traffic jam scenario for FABRIC and LIMERIC+PULSAR.}
\label{ideal-multi}
\end{figure*}
In these tests, we evaluate two more demanding scenarios where not all vehicles have the same number of neighbors. In addition, we compare and discuss how the fairness parameter $\alpha$ results in different allocations.
An ideal channel is considered and packets are not lost.
In the first one, vehicles are positioned along a 1500 m long line, with a Poisson distribution of average density $\rho=0.14$ vehicles/m.
In Fig. \ref{ideal-lin-cbt} we plot the results for the beaconing rate selected versus the position on the road of the vehicles.
We also plot the exact optimal allocations calculated by solving the NUM problem (\ref{eq_numbeacon_1}) with a numerical optimization solver, provided by JOM \cite{JOM}.
Proportional fairness is obtained with $\alpha=1$ and as $\alpha$ is increased the allocation tends to max-min fairness. We plot results for $\alpha=2$ and $\alpha=6$.
\textit{Beaconing rates}. Results show that FABRIC converges to a solution close to the optimal value in all cases, being better as $\alpha$ decreases.
The reason is that when the optimal allocation shows pronounced differences between the rates of neighbor vehicles at some points, as occurs with proportional fairness here, the algorithm needs more steps to converge.
The solution in Fig. \ref{ideal-lin-cbt} has been achieved after 100 steps (20 s) of the algorithm.
Note that an scenario like the one shown, in which the optimal proportional fairness allocation has sharp differences between neighbor rates, is a counter-example to the proposal of \cite{Kim},
which suggests enforcing fairness by limiting the differences in the rate allocations of neighbor vehicles.
The convergence to the \textit{exact} optimal allocation may be long, specially if the optimal allocation shows a jagged shape, but
from a practical point of view, for randomly positioned scenarios and realistic propagation models, it is not necessary truly maximize the utility function
to obtain acceptable results. That is, even though the allocation is not yet optimal the CBT is already below the MBL and the allocation is close to the optimal,
for instance, as shown in next sections, for $\alpha=1$ the root-mean-square error between the rates and the optimal allocation is 1.4951 beacons/s after 20 steps (4 s)
and 80\% of the vehicles measure a CBT below the MBL.
LIMERIC+PULSAR assigns all the vehicles exactly the same rate. In fact, this is the expected behavior in any scenario, since, with PULSAR, the maximum CBT experienced by both one and two-hop neighbors is used as a
feedback signal by LIMERIC. In the particular scenario of Fig. \ref{ideal-lin-cbt} this behavior can be consistent with achieving max-min fairness.
\textit{Fairness}.
As $\alpha$ increases, the optimal allocation tends to assign the same rate to
all vehicles, trading efficiency by fairness \cite{ChiangFair}. Fig. \ref{ideal-lin-cbt} clearly shows how the allocation becomes flatter as it tends to max-min fairness.
It also shows that the fairness degree of the allocation can be effectively controlled by FABRIC.
Whether is preferable to set proportional, max-min or any other $\alpha$-fairness is a matter of discussion and possibly application or scenario dependent. For instance, an scenario like this one may model a traffic jam.
Since vehicles at the edges of the jam may be more exposed to other vehicles approaching at high speed, it may be desirable to use proportional fairness since it assigns a higher beaconing rate at the border vehicles
In any case, the key advantage of FABRIC is that it can be configured with the $\alpha$ parameter to achieve any of the fairness notions. Moreover, vehicles can use different fairness goals simultaneously and the parameters can even be dynamically set.
To emphasize the importance of an adequate selection of the fairness notion in vehicular networks and its influence on the safety of users we provide the
scenario shown in Fig. \ref{ideal-clust} as a simple but illustrating example.
We have a traffic jam with a high density of vehicles and two clusters of vehicles approaching it, separated by a distance of 900 m
With a transmission range of 1000 mW, the three vehicles of cluster B are in range of both the first 14 vehicles in the jam and of all the 20 vehicles in cluster A.
There are 150 vehicles in the traffic jam, all in range, resulting in a high congested channel.
Here the basic approach to fairness of LIMERIC, that is assigning all vehicles an equal rate, combined with the PULSAR implementation which uses the maximum CBT observed within two hops, makes that
vehicles in cluster A, 2000 m away and with no congestion in the channel, use the same beaconing rate of 2.35 beacons/s that vehicles in the traffic jam. Hence, it unnecessarily reduces the
beaconing rate, which may affect the safety if those vehicles are driving at high speeds.
On the contrary, with FABRIC, vehicles in cluster A correctly use the maximum beaconing rate of 10 beacons/s, since their channel is not congested at all. Moreover, the
rates used by cluster B vehicles depend on the choice of $\alpha$, that is, the fairness notion selected. With $\alpha=1$ the maximum rate is used and as it increases, the rate is decreased, being equal to
the one in the traffic jam (2.608 beacons/s) only when max-min fairness ($\alpha=6$) is selected as expected, and only for the first vehicle in the cluster.
Except for the distances used in the example, it is not an unlikely scenario which shows the need for mechanisms that provide well-defined fairness control in vehicular networks.
FABRIC provides this control as a first step but a study on the proper applicability of the fairness alternatives and its dynamical setting is left as future work.
\subsection{ Realistic scenario with hidden nodes and packet losses}
\label{mhsimscenario}
\begin{figure*}[!t]
\centering
\subfloat[Allocated beaconing rate and CBT versus vehicle position. ]{
\includegraphics[width=0.96\columnwidth]{mhsimbrcbt.pdf}%
\label{brmulti}
}
\hfill
\subfloat[Effective beaconing rate delivered at 250 m, $\hat{r}_v(250)$, and average IRT versus vehicle position.]{
\includegraphics[width=0.96\columnwidth]{mhsimbrirt.pdf}%
\label{efbrmulti}
}
\caption{Realistic multi-hop scenario at $t=18$ s, with Free Space and Nakagami m=3, for FABRIC asynchronous
and LIMERIC+PULSAR. }
\label{multihop}
\end{figure*}
In this scenario vehicles we use the same positioning as in Scenario 2 and test the effects of a realistic environment. The propagation models have been set to free space and Nakagami-m with path loss exponent equal to 2.5. In both cases, the transmit power has been set to 251 mW which results in a transmit range of 531.5 m for free space and an average of 510.5 m for Nakagami-m \cite{SBCC}.
Let us remark that, with this setting, there are interferences due to hidden nodes. In fact, in this scenario we can see the effects of MAC and hidden collisions as well as fading and channel errors in our model, since it
has been simulated with an accurate 802.11p and propagation model, including SINR evaluation and capture effect.
\textit{Beaconing rate}. In Fig. \ref{brmulti} we show the allocated beaconing rate for each algorithm. Confidence intervals at 95\% have been computed but, since the maximum radius of the confidence interval does not exceed 0.05 and 0.3
beacons/s for free space and Nakagami-m respectively, they are not shown to avoid cluttering the figure.
Again, as $\alpha$ increases the optimal allocation tends to become flat.
With free space propagation, after 18 s asynchronous FABRIC approximately tracks the optimal allocations (shown in Fig. \ref{ideal-lin-cbt}, previous section) for $\alpha=1$ and $\alpha=2$
and the realistic environment tends to smooth the allocation.
LIMERIC+PULSAR again removes almost all
the differences between node rates. In both cases, FABRIC works properly in spite of hidden node collisions and interferences.
\textit{Fading effects}. With fading (Nakagami-m), FABRIC reduces the beaconing rate globally, whereas LIMERIC+PULSAR increases it. This opposite behavior is due to the different feedback signals used. LIMERIC+PULSAR uses directly the measured CBT.
In this case, fading results in a decrease of the measured CBT and hence LIMERIC increases linearly the rate, 5\% on average consistent with an equal lost of packets due to fading \cite{SBCC}. On
the contrary, FABRIC uses the price piggybacked in received beacons. There is now a chance of receiving beacons from far away nodes and all received prices are used to compute the next rate in step 3 of Algorithm 1.
In fact, we have measured an average increase of 10\% in the time-averaged number of neighbors for the fading scenario. Consequently, the allocated rate is reduced, particularly on the borders, whereas in the middle nodes, whose number of neighbors change less, is kept equal.
\textit{CBT}. The MBL constraint is met for all vehicles and cases at t=18 s, as shown in Fig. \ref{brmulti}. In fact, we show in next sections that CBT is below the MBL for most of the vehicles
only after a few seconds. As expected, proportional fairness ($\alpha=1$) provides the more efficient allocation, closer to the maximum allowable use of the channel, at the cost of less fairness. LIMERIC+PULSAR is
driven by CBT and hence the reduction due to fading (Nakagami-m) is compensated by an increase in rates (Fig. \ref{brmulti}), keeping the CBT at the same level. On the contrary, the effect of fading on FABRIC, as discussed before,
reducing the rates results in a global reduction of CBT. If necessary, this behavior can be corrected in the implementation of FABRIC by filtering unreliable links: using only the reported prices from
neighbors whose beacons are received a certain number of times, for instance. Testing it has been left as future work.
\textit{Performance}. To better
measure the effectiveness of the algorithms in a lossy scenario, we define the \textit{effective delivery ratio at distance $d$}, $D_v(d)=\frac{c_v(d)}{n^S_v(d)} $, where $c_v(d)$ is
the total number of correctly received copies of a beacon up to a distance $d$ of the transmitter $v$ and $n^S_v(d)$ is the total number of copies of a beacon whose power is above the sensitivity up to that distance.
That is, $D_v(d)$ indicates how many copies of a broadcast beacon are correctly received at a distance no greater than $d$ from the transmitter.
We then define \textit{effective beaconing rate at distance $d$}, as $\hat{r}_v(d)=r_v \bar{D}_v(d)$,
that is, a measure of the actually received beaconing rate at a certain distance of the transmitter. Thus, $\hat{r}_v$ is a performance metric from the point of view of the transmitter.
From the point of view of the receiver we show the average Inter-Beacon Reception Time (IRT) measured by the vehicles.
From Fig. \ref{efbrmulti} we see a reduction around 20\% to 25\% at 250 m, $\bar{D}_v(250)$. The losses are mainly caused by collisions and
so the reduction in delivered beacons is more pronounced for the border nodes, whose receivers have more potential hidden nodes, and is almost equal for
all the proposals evaluated. It reflects that the higher rates allocated by FABRIC at the border nodes are balanced by the lower ones at the middle nodes in terms of causing hidden-node collisions.
For comparison, the same scenario with no beaconing control, all vehicles transmitting at 10 beacons/s results in a CBT of 0.9 and 30\% of collided packet in the middle section.
The IRT for LIMERIC+PULSAR, since all the vehicles use practically the same rate, directly shows the losses due to collisions with Free Space and a mixture of collisions
and fading with Nakagami-m. With FABRIC, it includes all those effects and adittionally averages the different rates used for vehicles at different positions.
FABRIC actually outperforms the measured IRT of LIMERIC+PULSAR, except for $\alpha=2$ and Nakagami in the midle part of
the scenario. The allocation of FABRIC with high rates at the borders and low ones in the middle results in fewer collisions and a lower average IRT.
\section{Dynamic Scenarios}
\label{Results}
\begin{figure*}[!t]
\centering
\subfloat[Beaconing rate versus time for a single vehicle approaching the cluster of vehicles at 32 m/s. ]{
\includegraphics[width=0.98\columnwidth]{brjam.pdf}%
\label{onramp}
}
\hfill
\subfloat[CBT versus time and vehicle number in the cluster. FABRIC with $\alpha=1$ and Free Space propagation. A horizontal plane at z=0.6 has been plotted to mark
the MBL. A schematic diagram is shown below. ]{
\includegraphics[width=0.96\columnwidth]{jamfull.pdf}%
\label{cbtonramp}
}
\caption{Vehicle approaching a cluster of 200 motionless nodes. FABRIC asynchronous and LIMERIC+PULSAR.}
\label{Ramp}
\end{figure*}
In this section we investigate the FABRIC performance in dynamic configurations, where vehicles move. We look mainly at the time evolution of the selected beaconing rate and CBT.
Our goal is to test the ability of FABRIC to perform smooth transitions from low to high congestion situations and whether it results in oscillations.
\subsection{ Single vehicle and traffic jam}
The first scenario involves (i) a cluster of statically positioned vehicles along a 1500 m road segment, using the same random Poisson positioning of
Section \ref{mhsimscenario}, and (ii) a single vehicle approaching the cluster, starting 1320 m away from the last cluster car, and moving at a constant speed of 32 m/s until it passes the cluster. This configuration can model different real scenarios such a highway with a traffic jam in one direction and a single vehicle moving in the opposite direction.
The goal of this configuration is to show the dynamics of FABRIC in an extreme case where a vehicle switches from no or very few neighbors to a congested state, and back again. Let us note that, with the selected parameters shown in Table \ref{tcbt},
a channel can accommodate approximately 78 vehicles in range at the maximum rate. The case of a congested cluster approaching another one is considered in the next configuration.
Finally, let us remark again that MAC collisions, hidden node interference and propagation errors are present in these scenarios.
Since we are interested in the time evolution of the variables we plot only the results of one replication (all of them show a similar evolution).
\textit{Beaconing rates}. In Fig. \ref{onramp} we show the time evolution of the beaconing rate of the moving vehicle for FABRIC and LIMERIC+PULSAR.
Beaconing rates of the cluster vehicles are not shown since the effect of the single moving vehicle in their rate is negligible.
With both fairness notions FABRIC can keep the single vehicle at the maximum rate until the vehicle is in range of at least
78 neighbors, at $t=40.8$ s. Afterwards, it reduces its rate according to the state of the channel in practically the same way as its neighbors (compare with Fig \ref{brmulti}). This happens both in
free-space and Nakagami-m configurations. In the latter, variations are smoother in the middle,
showing that some earlier pike effects of packet losses caused by fading are compensated in the presence of a large number of neighbors (e.g. in congested areas),
and at the same time convergence is faster since the feedback (number of received prices) is higher.
The effective beaconing rate $\hat r_v(250)$ shows the same trend that as in the previous section, with an average drop of 20\% at 250 m.
In its turn, the moving LIMERIC vehicle reduces the rate earlier than necessary and recovers it later, even with free space propagation.
Actually it does not recover the maximum rate until it is completely out of range at $t=105.8$ s. It also shows a characteristic oscillatory behavior of LIMERIC+PULSAR \cite{Pulsar}.
\textit{CBT}. Finally, Fig. \ref{cbtonramp} shows the CBT of all the vehicles for FABRIC with $\alpha=1$ . Interestingly, FABRIC quickly moves rates out of congestion at the beginning.
Moreover, these results which are the time
evolution of those in Fig. \ref{brmulti} bottom confirm
that it is not necessary to achieve the optimal allocation to meet the MBL constraint, showing that after only a few steps at t=4 s, 80\% of the vehicles measure a load below the MBL. In fact, as $\alpha$ increases both
beaconing rate and CBT (not shown in the figure) show a steeper reaction to congestion, that is, in a congested state vehicles quickly and abruptly reduce their rates and then increase them until convergence is
achieved.
\subsection{ Bridge over highway}
\begin{figure*}[!t]
\centering
\subfloat[Beaconing rates versus time for the cluster of 100 vehicles crossing the bridge at 32 m/s. Top: FABRIC. Bottom: LIMERIC+PULSAR ] {
\includegraphics[width=0.96\columnwidth]{bridge-br-up-m1-3d-sub.pdf}%
\label{bridgeUpRate}
}
\hfill
\subfloat[CBT versus time for the cluster of 100 vehicles crossing the bridge. Top: FABRIC. Bottom: LIMERIC+PULSAR ]{
\includegraphics[width=0.96\columnwidth]{bridge-cbt-up-m1-3d-sub.pdf}%
\label{bridgeUpCBT}
}
\caption{Beaconing rates and CBT versus time for a cluster of 100 nodes crossing a bridge over a highway at 32 m/s. Nakagami m=3 propagation.
FABRIC asynchronous and LIMERIC+PULSAR.}
\label{FSBridge}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure*}[!t]
\centering
\subfloat[Beaconing rates versus time for the cluster of 200 static vehicles on the highway. Top: FABRIC. Bottom: LIMERIC+PULSAR ]{
\includegraphics[width=0.96\columnwidth]{bridge-br-down-m1-3d-sub.pdf}%
\label{bridgeDownRate}
}
\hfill
\subfloat[CBT versus time for the cluster of 200 static vehicles on the highway. Top: FABRIC. Bottom: LIMERIC+PULSAR]{
\includegraphics[width=0.96\columnwidth]{bridge-cbt-down-m1-3d-sub.pdf}%
\label{bridgeDownCBT}
}
\caption{Beaconing rates and CBT versus time for a cluster of 200 static vehicles on the highway.
Nakagami m=3 propagation.
FABRIC asynchronous and LIMERIC+PULSAR.}
\label{FSBridgeDown}
\end{figure*}
Finally, we examine a extreme scenario, where a static cluster of approximately 200 vehicles is set along a 1500 m highway segment oriented north-south ($y$ axis), and it is
crossed at the middle position by another highway west-east oriented ($x$ axis).
A bridge is situated at the crossing, so that the west-east highway passes over the north-south highway.
A moving cluster of 100 vehicles, stretching over 600 m, moves from west to east at a constant speed of 32 m/s, starting 1500 m away from the bridge. The moving cluster approaches the static cluster, crosses the bridge, and
moves away. For both clusters, the initial position and propagation configurations have been set as in the previous scenarios: Poisson and free space and Nakagami-m and again the transmission range results in hidden nodes. Due to lack of space, only the Nakagami-m results are shown, yielding to the same conclusions as the ones for free-space.
In Fig. \ref{FSBridge} and \ref{FSBridgeDown} we show the time evolution of the beaconing rates and CBT for all the vehicles in both clusters. In both cases, FABRIC reduces
the rate of the vehicles as the transmission ranges overlap, but never below 3 beacons/s in any cluster.
Fig. \ref{bridgeUpRate} illustrates the evolution of the rate allocations in the moving cluster. With FABRIC, vehicles at the rear increase at the beginning their rates,
as the front ones reduce theirs when they are entering the range of the highway vehicles, and conversely as they move away from the bridge. The time evolution of the rates of the static vehicles plotted in Fig. \ref{bridgeDownRate} shows how the
central vehicles reduce their rates when the cluster passes and recover them later. The rate variations are small at the center and higher at the vehicles on the edges, since the feedback from their neighbors is weaker.
As shown in Fig. \ref{bridgeUpCBT} and Fig. \ref{bridgeDownCBT}, FABRIC also succeeds in keeping the channel at an allowable utilization (approx. 50\%). Results for LIMERIC+PULSAR show again
that it tends to assign the same rate to all the vehicles and exhibits an oscillatory behavior in
both rates and CBT when both clusters are in range of each other.
\subsection{Traffic queue }
\label{Queue}
\begin{figure}[!t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{queue.pdf}
\caption{Vehicles arrive at a traffic jam in batches, building up a queue. Beaconing rate time evolution for FABRIC (top) and LIMERIC+PULSAR (bottom). A schematic drawing is shown below. }
\label{queue-fig}
\end{figure}
In the previous subsections we have shown worst case scenarios, where either a large group of vehicles start simultaneously from an highly congested state or merge together. In this last scenario we
look at a more likely situation, where the congestion is building up progressively. Our goal is to examine the behavior and convergence time of the algorithms.
In Fig. \ref{queue-fig} we show the time evolution of the beaconing rates in an scenario where there is a static cluster of 76 vehicles all in range of each other. There is no congestion, since
it is below the 78 vehicles transmitting at maximum rate that allows the MBL. Batches of 3 new vehicles are added at the origin 700 m away and move at 32 m/s until they reach the end of the queue and then stop.
A new batch is created every 5 s. This scenario may model an on-ramp where vehicles join a jammed highway.
As can be seen, with FABRIC both vehicles in the jam and vehicles in the batches keep the maximum rate until they actually contribute to congestion, when they are in range of each other after 18 s.
On the contrary, with LIMERIC+PULSAR
vehicles again start reducing the rate earlier because of the two-hop congested state they are receiving as feedback from the preceding batch.
Regarding convergence time of the vehicles in the batches, defined as the time interval elapsed since a vehicle start to reduce the
rate until it has reached the value of the queue, FABRIC shows an average of 1.73 s compared to 5.45 s of LIMERIC+PULSAR.
\section{Conclusion and future work}
\label{Conclusions}
In this paper we model for the first time, to the best of our knowledge, the problem of beaconing rate control in vehicular networks as a NUM rate allocation problem.
This modeling opens the door to formally define and apply fairness notions to beaconing rate allocations in vehicles.
In addition, it provides a mathematical framework to develop decentralized and simple algorithms with proved convergence guarantees to a \textit{fair} allocation solution.
In this respect, we have presented a family of algorithms based on the gradient optimization of the dual of the rate allocation problem. Within this family,
we have proposed the Fair Adaptive Beaconing Rate for Intervehicular Communications (FABRIC) algorithm. FABRIC, is a decentralized rate allocation algorithm with
theoretical and empirical convergence properties, which requires limited signaling overhead between vehicles.
We have validated FABRIC by exhaustive simulations in both static and dynamic scenarios, for different position distributions and propagation models.
Results show that FABRIC effectively generates fair beaconing rates allocations. Moreover, only in a few steps, the algorithm is able to move the rates out of the congestion state
and close to the optimal allocation.
Simulations also confirm that the algorithm is robust against packet losses due to collisions or fading.
Our results have been compared with LIMERIC+PULSAR, a relevant rate allocation scheme in vehicular networks.
There are still a number of practical considerations and implementation alternatives that can be evaluated in order to tune the algorithm. First, the $\beta$ parameter controls the
convergence speed and the amplitude of fluctuations and there is a wide range of possible values meeting the convergence condition to test.
Second, filtering of unreliable links
may provide a more accurate measurement of congestion (gradient computation) in fading scenarios. Even the use of alternative congestion measurements such as the measured CBT can be tested.
We intend to carry out an extensive evaluation of these matters in a future work.
Additionally, from a more general perspective, we have shown how
different values of the fairness parameter $\alpha$ result in different allocations, which may be more adequate depending on the intended application or scenario.
As we discussed with a particular example, a too basic fairness notion may directly influence the safety of the vehicles. Therefore, it is necessary to study which is the appropriate notion of fairness in vehicular networks and
whether different scenarios require different notions of fairness. This is an open question left as future work but a positive answer implies that
it is also necessary a mechanism to dynamically control fairness.
In this sense, one of the key advantages of FABRIC and our approach is that the fairness allocations can be controlled with this single parameter. Moreover, this approach allows to use different values
for each vehicle or even to use totally different utility functions, which can be both dynamically changed. And vehicles do not need to know the functions or values used by other vehicles.
Therefore, in addition to the practical utility of our proposal, in our opinion, one of the main contributions of this paper is the establishment of the NUM model as an effective and rich framework for developing
beaconing rate control schemes in vehicular networks.
Consequently, as a future work, we intend to further explore variations of the discussed problem in the context of vehicular networks. In particular, a comparative application and evaluation of alternative
fairness notions and the introduction of heterogeneous utility functions and constraints in the problem.
Finally, our model also provide support for the quality of service needs of the applications, which usually require to control additional variables such as transmit power. In fact, many recent proposal let
the application freely set minimum values for one or severals variables and then apply a distributed control for the rest of them
over the remaining capacity, which might results in violations of the MBL.
It is interesting to have a more integrated approach and so we are working on a reformulation of the problem to jointly control power and beaconing rate.
\ifCLASSOPTIONcompsoc
\section*{Acknowledgments}
\else
\section*{Acknowledgment}
\fi
This research has been supported by the MINECO/FEDER project grant TEC2013-47016-C2-2-R (COINS) and
partially supported by the Spanish project grants TEC2014- 53071-C3-1-P (ONOFRE) and TEC2015-71932-REDT (ElasticNetworks)
\ifCLASSOPTIONcaptionsoff
\newpage
\fi
|
\section{Introduction and the main result}
\label{sec:intro}
In this article, we consider a semi-discrete model for the evolution of a driven interface subject to line tension in a random, heterogeneous, quenched environment. We prove that if the driving force is large enough then such an interface propagates with a positive velocity---even if the random environment contains obstacles of arbitrarily large strength.
Let $(\Omega,\mathcal{B},\P)$ be a probability space and consider the following lattice differential equation for the height $u_i \colon [0,\infty)\times\Omega \to \mathbf{R}$ of the $d\in\mathbf{N}$ dimensional interface in an ambient space of dimension $d+1$,
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:semidiscrete}
\dot{u}_i(t,\omega) = \Laplace_1 u_i(t,\omega) - f_i(u_i(t,\omega),\omega) + F,
\end{equation}
where $i\in \mathbf{Z}^d$, $t\ge0$, and $\omega \in \Omega$, $F\ge 0$. The initial condition is $u_i(0) = 0$. The operator $\Laplace_1$ denotes the discrete $d$-dimensional Laplacian operator, namely $\Laplace_1 u_i = \sum_{k\in\mathbf{Z}^d:\norm{k-i}_1 =1} (u_k - u_i)$, where $\norm{\cdot}_1$ denotes the discrete 1-norm. The one-dimensional setting was discussed in~\cite{Dondl:2011wo}, in this note we generalize our results to arbitrary dimension, albeit only for the (semi-)discrete evolution.
We assume that $f_i:\mathbf{R} \times \Omega \to [0,\infty)$, $i \in \mathbf{Z}^d$ are independent and identically distributed functions such that the map $(y,\omega) \mapsto f_0(y,\omega)$ is measurable with respect to the product of the Borel-$\sigma$ algebra on $\mathbf{R}$ and $\mathcal{B}$ and the map $y \mapsto f_0(y,\omega)$ is locally Lipschitz for almost all $\omega \in \Omega$. Furthermore, we assume that $f_i(0,\omega) = 0$.
\begin{remark}
Disregarding infinitely fast growing unphysical solutions, these assumptions guarantee that equation~\eqref{eq:semidiscrete} above admits a unique solution with non-negative velocity for every $i$ and that the solution depends measurably on $\omega$ for each $t \ge 0$. The solution furthermore admits a comparison principle.
\end{remark}
The main further assumption on the $f_i$ is that they admit a finite exponential moment. As opposed to some other requirements, like independence, this assumption is central to our proof. Under these conditions, we can prove our main result.
\begin{theorem}\label{thm:main}
Assume in addition to the above requirements that there exists $\lambda>0$ such that
$$
\beta:=\sup_{j \in \mathbf{N}_0} \mathbf{E} \exp\big\{\lambda \ceil{\sup_{j-.5 \le y \le j+.5} f_0(y,\omega)}\big\} < \infty,
$$
where $\ceil{\cdot}$ denotes taking the integer ceiling of the argument.
Then there exists a non-decreasing function $V:[0,\infty) \to [0,\infty)$ which is not identically zero and
which depends on $\lambda$ and $\beta$ only, such that for all $t>0$ we have
$$
\mathbf{E} \dot{u}_0(t) \ge V(F)
$$
and therefore
$$
\mathbf{E} \frac{u_0(t)}{t} \ge V(F).
$$
Specifically, we can choose
$$
V(F)= \sup_{\mu>\lambda} \frac{1}{\mu}\left(\lambda (\floor{F} -2d) -\log \beta - \max\Big\{\log\frac{2}{\mu-\lambda}, \log 2e \Big\}\right),
$$
where $\floor{\cdot}$ denotes taking the integer floor of the argument.
\end{theorem}
The proof is split in two parts, first a discrete result arguing that there can be no discretized interface whose average velocity is small. The second part is an application of this result to the coupled systems of ODEs.
\begin{remark}
Taking $\mu$ large for small values of $F$, one can see that $V(F) \ge 0$ for all $F>0$. Furthermore, as $F$ becomes large, one can take $\mu$ closer to $\lambda$ to see that there exists a constant $C$, depending only on $\lambda$, $\beta$, and $d$, such that $V(F) \ge F -\frac{1}{\lambda}\log F -C$ for all $F>1$.
\end{remark}
The main theorem also implies the following almost sure result for the point-wise velocity, excluding the existence of stationary solutions.
\begin{corollary} \label{thm:limsup}
Under the conditions of Theorem~\ref{thm:main} we also have
$$
\limsup_{n \to \infty} \frac{u_0(t_n)}{t_n} \ge V(F) \quad \mbox{almost surely}
$$
along any deterministic sequence of times $t_n \to \infty$ as $n\to \infty$.
\end{corollary}
A model very similar to the one considered here was recently discussed in~\cite{Bodineau:2013ur}. As opposed to our model, they use a fully discrete evolution, where in each time-step the system advances by one unit at every point where the total force is positive. While some of their results are comparable to ours, they use a rigorous renormalization group approach to prove that in their model (assuming also uniformly bounded obstacles), an interface is either completely blocked (in the sense that a non-negative stationary solution exists) or that it propagates ballistically, i.e., there is no intermediate regime of sub-ballistic propagation. In more general models, like the one here, this question remains open. In particular, for the present model, we can only prove that there exist two critical values for the driving force: if the driving force is below the first value, the interface becomes stuck for all times. If, on the other hand, the driving force is above the second value the interface propagates with finite velocity. The first result is a simple adaptation of our methods in~\cite{Dirr:2009uw,Dirr:2010wb} and the second part is proved here.
Generally, problems of the present form (whether fully discrete, partially discrete, or fully continuous) have received considerable interest in the physics community (see for example~\cite{Kardar:1998vq,Nattermann:1992we,Narayan:1993vp,Brazovskii:2004vf}). Many connections to questions arising from physics are discussed in the aforementioned article by Bodineau and Teixeira~\cite{Bodineau:2013ur}, as well as in~\cite{Coville:2009uv}, where the first rigorous result on non-existence of stationary states was derived.
The article is organized as follows. In section~\ref{sec:discrete}, we show non-existence of states whose velocity is too small. In the following section~\ref{sec:cont}, we apply this result to prove our theorem. We finish with some conclusions and an outlook in section~\ref{sec:conc}.
\section{Nonexistence of slow paths}
\label{sec:discrete}
In this section, we prove the central lemma stating that in a fully discrete version of our model, one can with probability one not find any function whose average velocity is too small. Let thus now $\bar{f}_{i}(j,\omega) := \ceil{\sup_{j-.5 \le y \le j+.5} f_i(y,\omega)}$ defined for all $j\in\mathbf{Z}, i\in\mathbf{Z}^d$. For convenience, we begin by introducing some notation.
\begin{notation}
We use the following abbreviations.
\begin{itemize}
\item $Q_k := \{-k+1, \dots, k-1\}^d$, the $d$-dimensional cube of sites in $\mathbf{Z}^d$ of side-length $2k-1$,
\item $\mathcal{B}_k := \sigma(\{\bar{f}_{i} : i\in Q_k\})$, the $\sigma$-algebra generated by the random functions in $Q_k$,
\item $A\in \mathbf{N}$, any fixed number, later to be taken as the integer ceiling of an \textit{a priori} bound on the maximal value the functions $u_i$, solutions of~\eqref{eq:semidiscrete} can take at time $t$,
\item $P(\omega) := \{w\colon \mathbf{Z}^d \to \{0, \dots, A\}, \textrm{ such that } \Laplace_1 w_i - \bar{f}_i(w_i,\omega) +F \ge 0 \textrm{ for all } i\in Z^d\}$, the set of admissible functions,
\item $P_k(\omega) := \{w\colon Q_{k+1} \to \{0, \dots, A\}, \textrm{ such that } \Laplace_1 w_i - \bar{f}_i(w_i,\omega) +F \ge 0 \textrm{ for all } i\in Q_k\}$, the set of admissible functions within a cube $Q_{k+1}$,
\item $c_{k,d} = |Q_{k+1}\setminus Q_{k}| = (2k+1)^d-(2k-1)^d$, the size of the boundary layer around $Q_k$,
\item $N_{m,j} = \binom{j+m-1}{m-1}$, the number of ways $j\in \mathbf{N}_0$ can be represented as the sum of $m$ (ordered) non-negative integers.
\end{itemize}
\end{notation}
\begin{lemma}
\label{lem:discrete}
For each $F\in\mathbf{N}_0$, there exists a set $\Omega_0$ of full measure such that for any $\omega \in \Omega_0$ and any function $w\in P(\omega)$ we have
\begin{equation}\label{ineq}
\liminf_{k \to \infty} \frac {1}{\abs{Q_k}}\sum_{i\in Q_k} \left(\Laplace_1 w_i - \bar{f}_i(w_i,\omega)+F \right) \ge \overline{V}(F),
$$
where $\overline{V}$ can be taken as
$$
\overline{V}(F) = \sup_{\mu>\lambda} \frac{1}{\mu}\left(\lambda F -\log \beta - \max\Big\{\log\frac{2}{\mu-\lambda}, \log 2e \Big\}\right),
\end{equation}
and $\beta$ and $\lambda$ are defined in Theorem~\ref{thm:main}.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Fix $\mu > \lambda$ and consider for $k\ge 1$ the sequence of random variables
$$
Y_k := \sum_{w\in P_k} \exp\big\{ \lambda \sum_{\substack{i\in Q_k \\ r\notin Q_k \\ \norm{i-r}_1 =1}}(w_r-w_i) - \mu \sum_{i\in Q_k} \left(\Laplace_1 w_i -\bar{f}_i(w_i,\omega) +F\right) \big\}.
$$
The basic underlying idea in this definition is the following. We will show, using a martingale argument, that for sufficiently large $F$ the sequence $Y_k$ almost surely vanishes exponentially in the size of the box $Q_k$. For this decrease we can also establish a rate. Such a decrease, however, implies that as we look at larger and larger boxes around the origin, either the sum of the normal derivatives at the boundary of the box (the first term in the exponential) has to become large and negative quickly, or the sum of the velocities (the second term in the exponential) in $Q_k$ has to increase with a rate related to the one with which $Y_k$ vanishes. The first option is excluded by the non-negativity of $w$. The second option yields the average velocity (with a negative sign), after taking a logarithm and using the sum over all paths as an estimate for the supremum over all possible paths.
The first step in the proof is to relate the change in normal derivatives as $k$ increases to the addition of terms in the sum over the Laplcian. We use a discrete version of the divergence theorem, namely that
$$
\sum_{\substack{i\in Q_k \\ r\notin Q_k \\ \norm{i-r}_1 =1}}(w_r-w_i) =
\sum_{i\in Q_k} \Laplace_1 w_i,
$$
and thus
$$
Y_k = \sum_{w\in P_k} \exp\big\{ (\lambda-\mu) \sum_{i\in Q_k} \Laplace_1 w_i - \mu \sum_{i\in Q_k} \left(-\bar{f}_i(w_i,\omega) +F\right) \big\}.
$$
A calculation now yields
\begin{align*}
&\mathbf{E}(Y_{k+1} | \mathcal{B}_k) = \sum_{w\in P_k}\Bigg( \exp\big\{ (\lambda-\mu) \sum_{i\in Q_k} \Laplace_1 w_i - \mu \sum_{i\in Q_k} \left(-\bar{f}_i(w_i,\omega) +F\right)\}\cdot \\
&\quad\mathbf{E}\sum_{\substack{\textrm{extensions}\\ \textrm{of $w$ to $P_{k+1}$}}} \exp\big\{ \lambda \sum_{i\in Q_{k+1} \setminus Q_k} \Laplace_1 w_i -
\mu \sum_{i\in Q_{k+1} \setminus Q_k} (\Laplace_1 w_i - \bar{f}_i(w_i) +F) \big\} \Bigg),
\end{align*}
where the sum in the second line is taken over all admissible extensions of $w$ to functions in $P_{k+1}$. Taking now
\begin{equation} \label{eq:defgamma}
\gamma_k := \sup_{w\in P_k} \mathbf{E}\sum_{\substack{\textrm{extensions}\\ \textrm{of $w$ to $P_{k+1}$}}} \exp\big\{ \lambda \sum_{i\in Q_{k+1} \setminus Q_k} \Laplace_1 w_i -
\mu \sum_{i\in Q_{k+1} \setminus Q_k} (\Laplace_1 w_i - \bar{f}_i(w_i) +F) \big\},
\end{equation}
with the sum as above over all possible extensions, we get
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:mart}
\mathbf{E}(Y_{k+1} | \mathcal{B}_k) \le \gamma_k Y_k, \quad \textrm{for $k\ge 1$}.
\end{equation}
In order to estimate $\gamma_k$ further, we need to rearrange and count the number of possible extensions. In the sum over all admissible extensions we thus first take all extensions such that $\sum_{i\in Q_{k+1} \setminus Q_k} (\Laplace_1 w_i - \bar{f}_i(w_i) +F) = j \in \mathbf{N}_0$, calling these ``admissible extensions with velocity $j$'' and then sum over all $j\ge 0$. In the case that there does not exist an admissible extension with velocity $j$, we take the sum to be zero. This yields
\begin{align*}
\gamma_k &= \sup_{w\in P_k}\mathbf{E}\sum_{j=0}^\infty \sum_{\substack{\textrm{adm.~ext.}\\ \textrm{with vel.~$j$}}}\exp\big\{ \lambda \sum_{i\in Q_{k+1} \setminus Q_k} \Laplace_1 w_i - \\
&\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad\quad\;\; \mu \sum_{i\in Q_{k+1} \setminus Q_k} \left(\Laplace_1 w_i - \bar{f}_i(w_i) +F\right) \big\} \\
&= \sup_{w\in P_k}\sum_{j=0}^\infty \mathrm{e}^{-j(\mu-\lambda)}\mathrm{e}^{-\lambda c_{k,d} F} \;
\mathbf{E} \sum_{\substack{\textrm{adm.~ext.}\\ \textrm{with vel.~$j$}}}\exp\big\{\lambda\sum_{i\in Q_{k+1} \setminus Q_k} \bar{f}_i(w_i) \big\} \\
&\le \sup_{w\in P_k} \sum_{j=0}^\infty\mathrm{e}^{-j(\mu-\lambda)}\mathrm{e}^{-\lambda c_{k,d} F} \beta^{c_{k,d}} \sup_{\omega\in\Omega} M_{j,k,d}(\omega, w|_{Q_{k+1}}),
\end{align*}
where $M_{j,k,d}(\omega, w|_{Q_{k+1}})$ is the of the number of admissible extensions with velocity $j$, depending on the realization of the random field $f$ and on $w$ from the previous step. We also note that $w_i$ for $i \in Q_{k+1} \setminus Q_k$ is a fixed value inside the supremum, which allows us to use the assumption on the exponential moment of $f$.
The idea for estimating $M_{j,k,d}$ now is the following: given $j$, there are no more than $N_{c_{k,d},j}$ possibilities to distribute these velocities on the $c_{k,d}$ sites. With all velocities fixed, for most sites in $Q_{k+2} \setminus Q_{k+1}$ where the extension lives, the function value is determined due to the fact that $\omega$ and the velocity can be used to calculate the discrete Laplacian (if such a choice exists at all). The number of sites where we still have freedom is $\mathcal{O}(d-2)$. We thus aim for an estimate of the type $\sup M_{j,k,d} \le N_{c_{k,d},j}\cdot 1 \cdot (A+1)^{C^{d-2}}$.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{extension}
\caption{Illustration of the extension process and the points where there is a freedom to choose the function value of the extension when the Laplacian is fixed.} \label{fig:extension}
\end{figure}
First notice that in dimension $d=1$, there is no freedom to choose any additional values for the extension if the Laplacian at the boundaries is given. Consider thus the case $d\ge 2$. Each given function value and the Laplacian on the site can be used to write one independent linear equation for the function values on the extension, therefore the remaining number of sites with freedom is $c_{k+1,d}-c_{k,d} =: \xi_{k,d}$. See the illustration in Figure~\ref{fig:extension} for the two-dimensional case.
Note that the number of choices for each of those nodes is limited to at most $A+1$, and that $\xi_{k,d} = \mathcal{O}(k^{d-2})$.
Since the above estimate was independent of $w \in P_k$ and on $\omega\in \Omega$, this yields
$$
\gamma_k \le \sum_{j=0}^\infty\mathrm{e}^{-j(\mu-\lambda)}\mathrm{e}^{-\lambda c_{k,d} F} \beta^{c_{k,d}} N_{c_{k,d},j} (A+1)^{\xi_{k,d}}.
$$
Using the estimate $N_{m,j}\le \frac{(j+m-1)^{m-1}}{(m-1)!}\le \frac{2^{m-2}}{(m-1)!}\left(j^{m-1}+(m-1)^{m-1}\right)$, the sum can be bounded as follows. We have
$$
\sum_{j=0}^\infty N_{c_{k,d},j}\mathrm{e}^{-(\mu-\lambda)j} \le \frac{2^{c_{k,d}-2}}{(c_{k,d}-1)!}
\left(\sum_{j=0}^\infty j^{c_{k,d}-1}\mathrm{e}^{-(\mu-\lambda)j} + (c_{k,d}-1)^{c_{k,d}-1}\frac{1}{1-\mathrm{e}^{-(\mu-\lambda)}}\right),
$$
which, using
\begin{align*}
\sum_{j=0}^\infty j^{c_{k,d}-1}\mathrm{e}^{-(\mu-\lambda)j} &\le \sum_{j=0}^\infty \int_j^{j+1} x^{c_{k,d}-1} \mathrm{e}^{-(\mu-\lambda)(x-1)}\,\mathrm{d}x \\
&=\frac{\mathrm{e}^{\mu-\lambda}}{(\mu-\lambda)^{c_{k,d}}}\Gamma(c_{k,d}) \\
&= \frac{\mathrm{e}^{\mu-\lambda}}{(\mu-\lambda)^{c_{k,d}}}(c_{k,d}-1)!
\end{align*}
yields
$$
\sum_{j=0}^\infty N_{c_{k,d},j}\mathrm{e}^{-(\mu-\lambda)j} \le \max\left\{\frac{2^{c_{k,d}}\mathrm{e}^{\mu-\lambda}}{(\mu-\lambda)^{c_{k,d}}}, \frac{(2c_{k,d}-2)^{c_{k,d}-1}}{(c_{k,d}-1)!}\frac{1}{1-\mathrm{e}^{-(\mu-\lambda)}} \right\}
$$
We thus have
\begin{align*}
\log \gamma_k &\le \xi_{k,d}\log(A+1) + c_{k,d}(\log \beta-\lambda F)+ \\
&\quad +
\max\Big\{\mu-\lambda+c_{k,d}\log\frac{2}{\mu-\lambda},\\
& \quad\quad\quad (c_{k,d}-1) \log 2\mathrm{e} + \log C - \log\left(1-\mathrm{e}^{-(\mu-\lambda)}\right) \Big\}
\end{align*}
for some constant $C$.
Equation~\eqref{eq:mart} together with the boundedness of $\gamma_k$ and the almost sure finiteness of $Y_1$ establishes that $ \frac{Y_k}{\prod_{j=1}^{k-1}\gamma_j}$ for $k\ge 2$ is a non-negative supermartingale. From Doob's martingale convergence theorem we therefore find that
$$
\lim_{k\to\infty} \frac{Y_k}{\prod_{j=1}^{k-1}\gamma_j} = C(\omega) < \infty
$$
on a set $\Omega_0 \subset \Omega$ of full measure. Note furthermore that
$$
\frac{\log Y_k}{\mu \abs{Q_k}} \ge \sup_{w\in P_k} \Big\{\frac{\lambda}{\mu\abs{Q_k}} \sum_{\substack{i\in Q_k \\ r\notin Q_k \\ \norm{i-r}_1 =1}}(w_r-w_i) - \frac{1}{\abs{Q_k}}\sum_{i\in Q_k} \left(\Laplace_1 w_i -\bar{f}_i(w_i,\omega) +F\right) \Big\}
$$
and thus
\begin{align*}
& \inf_{w \in P(\omega)}\liminf_{k\to\infty} \frac {1}{\abs{Q_k}}\sum_{i\in Q_k} \left(\Laplace_1 w_i - \bar{f}_i(w_i,\omega)+F \right) \\
&\quad \ge \liminf_{k\to \infty} \frac{-1}{\mu \abs{Q_k}} \sum_{i=1}^k \log \gamma_j \\
&\quad \ge \frac{1}{\mu} \left(\lambda F - \log \beta- \max\Big\{\log\frac{2}{\mu-\lambda}, \log 2\mathrm{e} \Big\}\right)
\end{align*}
where we have used that $\abs{Q_k} = \sum_{i=1}^k c_{i,d}$ and dropped all terms that are of lower order than $\abs{Q_k}$. In particular, these are the terms in $\gamma_i$ that are of lower order than $c_{i,d}$ as well as $C(\omega)$ and the first sum inside the exponent in $Y_k$, which vanishes in the limit due to the boundedness of $w$. This proves the lemma.
\end{proof}
\section{Application to the continuous evolution problem} \label{sec:cont}
The lemma from the above section allows us to complete the proof of the main theorem.
\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem~\ref{thm:main}]
Assume that the statement in the theorem is untrue. Then there exist $F \ge 0$ and some $t_0$
such that $\mathbf{E}\dot u_0(t_0) < V(F)$. By our independence assumptions on the field $f$, the processes
$u_i(t_0)$, $\dot u_i(t_0)$, $i \in \mathbf{Z}^d$ are stationary and ergodic and take values in $[0,\infty)$.
We write $u_i$ instead of $u_i(t_0)$. By Birkhoff's ergodic theorem, we have
$$
\mathbf{E}\dot u_0 = \lim_{k \to \infty} \frac {1}{\abs{Q_k}}\sum_{i\in Q_k} \left(\Laplace_1 u_i - f_i(u_i,\omega)+F \right)
$$
almost surely. However, taking $w_i$ to be $u_i$ rounded to the closest integer, we find
\begin{align*}
&\lim_{k \to \infty} \frac {1}{\abs{Q_k}}\sum_{i\in Q_k} \left(\Laplace_1 u_i - f_i(u_i,\omega)+F \right) \ge \\
&\quad\liminf_{k \to \infty} \frac {1}{\abs{Q_k}}\sum_{i\in Q_k} \left(\Laplace_1 w_i -2d - \bar{f}_i(w_i,\omega)+\floor{F} \right) \ge \overline{V}(\floor{F}-2d) = V(F)
\end{align*}
by Lemma~\ref{lem:discrete}.
\end{proof}
The almost sure statement about the velocities can be derived by the following argument.
\begin{proof}[Proof of Corollary~\ref{thm:limsup}]
Consider, for a fixed sequence of times $t_n \to \infty$, the random variables
$$
A_i(\omega) := \limsup_{n\to\infty} \frac{u_i(t_n)}{t_n}, \quad i \in \mathbf{Z}^d,
$$
noting that $A_i$ is stationary, ergodic and bounded from above and below by $F$ and $0$, respectively. Furthermore, we have $\mathbf{E}(A_i) \ge V(F)$, by Fatou's lemma. By the non-negativity of the velocity and $f_i$, it follows that $\Laplace_1 u_i(t,\omega) \ge -F$ for all $t\ge 0$ and almost all $\omega$, and therefore $\Laplace_1 A_i(\omega) \ge 0$ for almost all $\omega$.
Now let $\xi_i:=\mathbf{E}\Laplace_1 A_i$. By stationarity, $\xi_i$ is constant in $i$ and we write $\xi := \xi_0$. By the discrete divergence theorem, boundedness of $A_i$ and ergodicity of $\Laplace_1 A_i$ imply that $\xi = 0$ and since $\Laplace_1 A_i(\omega) \ge 0$ for almost all $\omega$ we have $\Laplace_1 A_i(\omega) = 0$ almost surely and for all $i \in \mathbf{Z}^d$. This yields that $A_i(\omega)$ is a bounded, ergodic, and stationary process whose realizations are almost surely harmonic. Thus, $A_i(\omega)$ is almost surely constant in $i$ and therefore $A_0(\omega)$ is almost surely equal to its expected value. The desired result follows.
\end{proof}
\section{Conclusions} \label{sec:conc}
In this note, we have extended our depinning result from~\cite{Dondl:2011wo} to the case of arbitrary dimension in a semi-discrete model of coupled ordinary differential equations. A careful inspection of the proof shows that one can furthermore extend our results to obstacle strengths coupled over a finite distance: if there exists $L>0$ such that sets of obstacles are independent if their distance (in the first $d$-dimensions) is above $L$, one can still obtain similar estimates for the velocity.
The case of the fully continuous model on $\mathbf{R}^d$, however, remains open. Further unresolved issues are whether we have $\liminf_{t\to\infty} \frac{u_0(t)}{t} > 0$ almost surely for sufficiently large $F$, the relaxation of the result to obstacles with fat tails, as well as whether a regime of sub-ballistic propagation (i.e., vanishing velocity, but propagation of the interface to $+\infty$ everywhere) can exist in our models. As mentioned above, for a specific fully discrete evolution model this last question was answered recently~\cite{Bodineau:2013ur}.
|
\section{Introduction}
The problem of synchronization in a network of identical oscillators was first introduced by Wiener \cite{Wiener65,Arenas08}. Pursuit of the idea by Winfree in his pioneering work \cite{Winfree67} led to this problem being recognized as being important and relevant in many fields of research including biology, physics, and engineering \cite{Newman10}. More recently, the introduction of the framework of master stability function by Pecora and Carroll \cite{Pecora98}, enabled the investigation of the impacts of network structure and the dynamical properties of individual nodes on the stability of the synchronization state \cite{Pecora98,Motter07}. Following the idea of using master stability function to study the network of oscillators, most efforts have been concentrated on the impact of the topology (structure) of different types of networks on the stability of the synchronization state: In \cite{Pecora98}, the short and long wavelength bifurcation phenomena have been studied on regular networks (lattices). Other works look at linking the topological properties such as minimum, maximum and average node degrees, to the stability of the synchronization state in networks \cite{Motter07,Wang02,Manaffam13,Zhou06}. Due to the interesting properties of small-world networks, which have been introduced in the seminal work of Watts and Strogatz \cite{Watts98,Newman99}, most of the following studies were focused on the small-world and scale-free networks. It has been shown that due to better dynamical flow (efficient communications), the synchronization can be stabilized more easily in small-world networks compared to regular networks \cite{Arenas08,Manaffam13,Wu08}. It has also been shown that the synchronizability of networks improves in homogeneous networks in contrast to heterogeneous ones \cite{Nishikawa03}.
Although the study of the synchronization of networks of the identical nodes appears to be matured, few attempts have been made to study networks with nonidentical nodes or couplings. The experiments reported in \cite{Restrepo04} suggest that in the networks where the oscillator dynamics and their couplings vary slightly from each other, the oscillators can be nearly synchronized. That is, the states converge to the vicinity of a certain trajectory (synchronization manifold). In \cite{Sun09} and \cite{Sorrentino11}, a sensitivity analysis of synchronization have been performed for a network of mismatched oscillators. It has been shown that near-synchronization behavior can occur in a network of mismatched oscillators using master stability function. The general stability of the synchronization in network of dynamical systems with nonidentical dynamics for each node is studied in \cite{Xiang07} and \cite{Zhao12} using the Lyapunov direct method. In \cite{Acharyya12}, an approximate master stability function is proposed and the coupling strength is optimized to achieve ``best synchronization properties''.
In this paper, we investigate the synchronization of a network of mismatched oscillators with mismatched couplings. Our formulation also allows the consideration of uncertainties in network link weights, thus generalizing \cite{Sorrentino11} in addition to its main contributions. Since in presence of mismatch there is no unique synchronization state in the network, we use the concept of $\varepsilon$-synchronization \cite{Sun09}, where the steady states of the nodes in the network fall into an $\varepsilon$-neighborhood of a certain trajectory (synchronization manifold). We then use a generalized master stability function to study the behavior of the network around the synchronization state. The proposed generalized master stability function bounds the oscillator states to a neighborhood of average synchronization trajectory as a function of Lyapunov exponents of the dynamical network. These Lyapunov exponents, in turn, are related to eigenvalues of the Laplacian matrix of the network. We then provide a probabilistic treatment of synchronization behavior in terms of mismatch parameters for regular and random network models. We calculate probability of stability of synchronization, and use it to investigate phase transitions of the synchronization in the network as the network and node parameters vary. Finally, we verify our analytical results by a numerical example for a network of van der Pol oscillators \cite{Poland94} with mismatched oscillators and couplings.
\section{Notation and Main Variables}
The set of real (column) $n$-vectors is denoted by $\mathbb{{R}}^{n}$ and the set of real $m\times n$ matrices is denoted by $\mathbb{{R}}^{m\times n}$. We refer to the set of non-negative real numbers by $\mathbb{{R}}_{+}$. Matrices and vectors are denoted by capital and lower-case bold letters, respectively. Identity matrix is shown by \mbox{{\bf I}}. The Euclidean ($\mathcal{L}_{2}$) vector norm is represented by $\lVert\cdot\rVert $. When applied to a matrix, $\lVert\cdot\rVert $ denotes the $\mathcal{L}_{2}$ induced matrix norm, $\lVert\mbox{{\bf A}}\rVert =\sqrt{\lambda_{\max}(\mbox{{\bf A}}^{T}\mbox{{\bf A}})}$. Table \ref{tab:var} summarizes the main variables used.
\begin{table}[!h]
\begin{center}\caption{Main variables}\label{tab:var}
\begin{tabular}{ll}
\hline
\bf{Variable} & \bf{Description}\\
\hline\hline
$\mbox{{\bf x}}_{i}$& State vector of node $i$\\\hline
$\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\gamma}$}_{i}$& Parameters vector of node $i$\\\hline
$\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}_{ji}$& Parameter vector of coupling from node $j$ to node $i$\\\hline
$\mathbf{f}(\mbox{{\bf x}}_{i},\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\gamma}$}_{i})$& Dynamics function of node $i$ \\\hline
$\mbox{{\bf h}}(\mbox{{\bf x}}_{j},\mbox{{\bf x}}_{i},\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}_{ji})$& Coupling function from node $j$ to node $i$ \\\hline
$\mbox{{\bf u}}_{i}$&Input vector for node $i$\\\hline
$\mbox{{\bf F}}_{\mbox{{\bf x}}}$&Jacobian of vector $\mbox{{\bf f}}$ with respect to $\mbox{{\bf x}}$\\\hline
$\mbox{{\bf F}}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\gamma}$}}$&Jacobian of vector $\mbox{{\bf f}}$ with respect to $\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\gamma}$}$\\\hline
$\mbox{{\bf H}}_{\mbox{{\bf x}}}$&Jacobian of coupling vector $\mbox{{\bf h}}$ with respect to $\mbox{{\bf x}}$\\\hline
$\mbox{{\bf H}}_{\mbox{{\bf y}}}$&Jacobian of coupling vector $\mbox{{\bf h}}$ with respect to $\mbox{{\bf y}}$\\\hline
$\mbox{{\bf H}}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}}$&Jacobian of coupling vector $\mbox{{\bf h}}$ with respect to $\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}$\\\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\end{table}%
\section{System Description}
Consider a network of $N$ oscillators, indexed by $\mbox{${\mathcal{N}}$} = \{1~ \cdots ~N\}$. Assume that the dynamics of each isolated oscillator is governed by
\begin{align}
\mbox{$\dot{\mbox{\bf x}}$}_{i}=\mbox{{\bf f}}(\mbox{{\bf x}}_{i},\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\gamma}$}_{i}), \nonumber
\end{align}
where $\mbox{{\bf x}}_{i}\in\mathbb{{R}}^{n}$ and $\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\gamma}$}_{i}\in\mbox{${\mathcal{P}}$}\subseteq \mathbb{{R}}^{p}$ are the state and parameter vectors of local dynamics of node $i$, respectively. $\mbox{${\mathcal{P}}$}$ denotes the set of possible parameter vectors, and $\mbox{{\bf f}}:\mathbb{{R}}^{n+p}\rightarrow\mathbb{{R}}^{n}$ describes the local dynamics of an isolated node.
The dynamics of coupled oscillators are given as
\begin{eqnarray}
\mbox{$\dot{\mbox{\bf x}}$}_{i}&=&\mbox{{\bf f}}(\mbox{{\bf x}}_{i},\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\gamma}$}_{i})+\sum_{i,j\in \,\mbox{${\mathcal{N}}$}}a_{ij}\mbox{{\bf h}}(\mbox{{\bf x}}_{j},\,\mbox{{\bf x}}_{i},\,\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}_{ij}), \label{eq: NetworkDynamics}
\end{eqnarray}
where $\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}_{ij}\in\mbox{${\mathcal{Q}}$}\subseteq\mathbb{{R}}^q$ is the parameter vector of coupling dynamics from node $j$ to node $i$, $\mbox{${\mathcal{Q}}$}$ denotes the set of possible parameter values for couplings. The adjacency matrix of the network is $\mbox{{\bf A}}=[a_{ij}]$, where $a_{ij}\in\mathbb{{R}}_{+}$ is the weight of the link from node $j$ to node $i$. There is no connection if $a_{ij}=0$. Note that we allow the more general case of directed and wighted networks. Moreover, $\mbox{{\bf h}}:\mathbb{{R}}^{2n+q}\rightarrow\mathbb{{R}}^{n}$ models the coupling from node $j$ to node $i$. We assume that $\mbox{{\bf h}}(\mbox{{\bf x}},\mbox{{\bf y}},\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$})$ is Hamiltonian. That is, we assume that $\mbox{{\bf H}}_{\mbox{{\bf x}}}=-\mbox{{\bf H}}_{\mbox{{\bf y}}}$, where $\mbox{{\bf H}}_{\mbox{{\bf x}}}$ and $\mbox{{\bf H}}_{\mbox{{\bf y}}}$ denotes the Jacobians of $\mbox{{\bf h}}(\mbox{{\bf x}},\mbox{{\bf y}},\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$})$ with respect to $\mbox{{\bf x}}$ and $\mbox{{\bf y}}$, respectively. This is a very general assumption and encompasses the {\em diffusive coupling} model predominantly used in the literature \cite{Nishikawa03,Sorrentino11,Acharyya12}, where it is assumed that $\mbox{{\bf h}}(\mbox{{\bf x}}_1,\mbox{{\bf x}}_2,[\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}_1~\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}_2])=\tilde{\mbox{{\bf h}}}(\mbox{{\bf x}}_1,\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}_1)-\tilde{\mbox{{\bf h}}}(\mbox{{\bf x}}_2,\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}_2)$.
Note that this generalized model also incorporates uncertainties in the adjacency matrix of the network, $\mbox{{\bf A}}=[a_{ij}]+[\delta a_{ij}]$, considered in \cite{Sorrentino11}, by absorbing $\delta a_{ij}$ into $\theta_{ij}$, i.e., $\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}'_{ij}=[\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}_{ij}^T~\delta a_{ij}]^T$.
\section{Invariant Synchronization Manifold}
Let $\mbox{{\bf s}}$ be a weighted average of the trajectories of all oscillators
\begin{eqnarray}
\mbox{{\bf s}}&=&\sum_{i\in\,\mbox{${\mathcal{N}}$}}\alpha_{i}\mbox{{\bf x}}_{i},\label{eq: bs}
\end{eqnarray}
where $\sum_{i\in\,\mbox{${\mathcal{N}}$}}\alpha_{i}=1$. Define the deviation of the trajectory of oscillator $i$ from \mbox{{\bf s}}~as
\begin{eqnarray}
\mbox{{\bf e}}_{i}&=&\mbox{{\bf x}}_{i}-\mbox{{\bf s}}.\label{eq: error}
\end{eqnarray}
Moreover, let $\mbox{{\bf L}}=[l_{ij}]$ be the Laplacian matrix of the network \cite{Mohar91},
\begin{equation}
\mbox{{\bf L}}=\mbox{diag}([d^{\scriptsize\mbox{in}}_{1} \cdots d^{\scriptsize\mbox{in}}_{N}])-\mbox{{\bf A}},\nonumber
\end{equation}
where $d_{i}^{\scriptsize\mbox{in}}=\sum_{j\,\in\,\mbox{${\mathcal{N}}$}}a_{ij}$ is the in-degree of node $i$.
\begin{lemma}
$\mbox{{\bf s}}=\sum_{i\in\,\mbox{${\mathcal{N}}$}}\alpha_{i}\mbox{{\bf x}}_{i}$ is an invariant synchronization manifold of the network if $\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\alpha}$}=[\alpha_1\cdots\alpha_N]^T$ is a null vector of $\mbox{{\bf L}}^T$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Taking derivative of \eqref{eq: bs} yields
\begin{eqnarray} \label{TrajectoryS}
\mbox{$\dot{\mbox{\bf s}}$}&=&\sum_{i\,\in\,\mbox{${\mathcal{N}}$}}\alpha_{i}\mbox{$\dot{\mbox{\bf x}}$}_{i}\nonumber\\
&=&\sum_{i\,\in\,\mbox{${\mathcal{N}}$}}\alpha_{i}\mbox{{\bf f}}(\mbox{{\bf s}}+\mbox{{\bf e}}_{i},\,\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\bar{\gamma}}$}+\delta\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\gamma}$}_{i})\nonumber\\
&&+\sum_{i,j\in\,\mbox{${\mathcal{N}}$}}a_{ij}\alpha_{i}\mbox{{\bf h}}(\mbox{{\bf s}}+\mbox{{\bf e}}_{j},\,\mbox{{\bf s}}+\mbox{{\bf e}}_{i},\,\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\bar{\theta}}$}+\delta\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}_{ij}),
\end{eqnarray}
where $\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\bar{\gamma}}$}=\sum_{i\,\in\,\mbox{${\mathcal{N}}$}}\alpha_{i}\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\gamma}$}_{i}$, $\delta\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\gamma}$}_{i}=\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\gamma}$}_{i}-\bar{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\gamma}$}}$, $\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\bar{\theta}}$}=\frac{1}{\bar{d}_{\scriptsize\mbox{in}}}\sum_{i,j\,\in\,\mbox{${\mathcal{N}}$}}\alpha_{i}a_{ij}\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}_{ij}$, $\delta\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}_{ij}=\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}_{ij}-\bar{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}}$, and $\bar{d}_{\scriptsize\mbox{in}}=\sum_{i\in\mbox{${\mathcal{N}}$}}\alpha_i d^{\scriptsize\mbox{in}}_i$ is the weighted average in-degree of the network. Linearization of \eqref{TrajectoryS} around $(\mbox{{\bf s}},\,\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\bar{\gamma}}$},\,\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\bar{\theta}}$})$ results in
\begin{eqnarray}
\mbox{$\dot{\mbox{\bf s}}$}&=&\sum_{i\,\in\,\mbox{${\mathcal{N}}$}}\alpha_{i}\mbox{{\bf f}}(\mbox{{\bf s}},\,\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\bar{\gamma}}$})+\mbox{{\bf F}}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\gamma}$}}\sum_{i\,\in\mbox{${\mathcal{N}}$}}\alpha_{i}\delta\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\gamma}$}_{i}\nonumber\\
&&+\sum_{i,\,j\in\,\mbox{${\mathcal{N}}$}}a_{ij}\alpha_{i}\mbox{{\bf h}}(\mbox{{\bf s}},\,\mbox{{\bf s}},\,\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\bar{\theta}}$})+\mbox{{\bf H}}_{\mbox{{\bf x}}}\sum_{i,\,j\in\,\mbox{${\mathcal{N}}$}}a_{ij}\alpha_{i}(\mbox{{\bf e}}_{j}-\mbox{{\bf e}}_{i})\nonumber\\
&&+\mbox{{\bf H}}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}}\sum_{i,\,j\in\,\mbox{${\mathcal{N}}$}}a_{ij}\alpha_{i}\delta\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}_{ji},\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
where $\mbox{{\bf H}}_{\mbox{{\bf x}}}$ and $\mbox{{\bf H}}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}}$ are Jacobians of $\mbox{{\bf h}}$ with respect to its first and third variable, respectively. Recalling that $\sum_{i\in\,\mbox{${\mathcal{N}}$}}\alpha_{i}=1$, we have
\begin{eqnarray}
\mbox{$\dot{\mbox{\bf s}}$}&=&\mbox{{\bf f}}(\mbox{{\bf s}},\,\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\bar{\gamma}}$})+\mbox{{\bf h}}(\mbox{{\bf s}},\,\mbox{{\bf s}},\,\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\bar{\theta}}$})\sum_{i\,\in\,\mbox{${\mathcal{N}}$}}d^{\scriptsize\mbox{in}}_{i}\alpha_{i}\nonumber\\
&&+\mbox{{\bf H}}_{\mbox{{\bf x}}}\sum_{i,j\in\,\mbox{${\mathcal{N}}$}}a_{ij}\alpha_{i}(\mbox{{\bf e}}_{j}-\mbox{{\bf e}}_{i}).\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
For $\mbox{{\bf s}}$ to be an invariant manifold, the last term in the above equation must be zero. This is achieved if $\alpha_{i}$ are chosen to satisfy
\begin{eqnarray}
\sum_{i,\,j\in\,\mbox{${\mathcal{N}}$}}a_{ij}\alpha_{i}(\mbox{{\bf e}}_{j}-\mbox{{\bf e}}_{i})&=&\sum_{i\,\in\,\mbox{${\mathcal{N}}$}}\left[\sum_{j\,\in\,\mbox{${\mathcal{N}}$}} (a_{ji}\alpha_{j}-a_{ij}\alpha_{i})\right] \mbox{{\bf e}}_{i}\nonumber\\
&=&\mbox{{\bf 0}}.\label{AlphaEq}
\end{eqnarray}
Equation \eqref{AlphaEq}, in turn, will be satisfied if $\sum_{j\,\in\,\mbox{${\mathcal{N}}$}} (a_{ij}\alpha_{j}-a_{ij}\alpha_{i})=0$ for all $i\,\in\,\mbox{${\mathcal{N}}$}$, which in matrix form can be represented as
\begin{equation}
\mbox{{\bf A}}^T\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\alpha}$}=\mbox{diag}([d^{\scriptsize\mbox{in}}_{1} \cdots d^{\scriptsize\mbox{in}}_{N}])\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\alpha}$},\nonumber
\end{equation}
where $\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\alpha}$}=[\alpha_{1}\cdots\alpha_{N}]$, or
\begin{equation}
\left[\mbox{{\bf A}}^T-\mbox{diag}([d^{\scriptsize\mbox{in}}_{1} \cdots d^{\scriptsize\mbox{in}}_{N}])\right]\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\alpha}$}=\mbox{{\bf 0}}=\mbox{{\bf L}}^T\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\alpha}$}.\nonumber
\end{equation}
That is, $\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\alpha}$}$ is a null vector of $\mbox{{\bf L}}^T$.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}
We note that, by definition, $\mbox{{\bf L}}$ has zero row sum. Thus, it is singular. Consequently, $\mbox{{\bf L}}^T$ always has a null vector, $\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\alpha}$}$. This means that any network has at least one invariant manifold.
\end{remark}
\begin{remark}
If the the network is connected, the invariant synchronization manifold is unique. This is due to the fact that for connected networks the nullity of $\mbox{{\bf L}}$ is one. Thus, $\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\alpha}$}$ and, therefore, $\mbox{{\bf s}}$ are unique.
\end{remark}
\begin{remark} In the special case where the network is undirected, $\mbox{{\bf L}}$ is symmetric. Thus, it also has zero column-sum. Consequently, $\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\alpha}$} = \frac{1}{N}[1~ \cdots~1]$ is its null vector, and the invariant manifold, $\mbox{{\bf s}}$, is the simple average of the trajectories.
\end{remark}
With $\alpha_{i}$ chosen such that $\mbox{{\bf s}}$ is an invariant manifold, we have
\begin{eqnarray}\label{eq: Trajectory}
\mbox{$\dot{\mbox{\bf s}}$}&=&\mbox{{\bf f}}(\mbox{{\bf s}},\,\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\bar{\gamma}}$})+\bar{d}_{\scriptsize\mbox{in}}\,\mbox{{\bf h}}(\mbox{{\bf s}},\,\mbox{{\bf s}},\,\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\bar{\theta}}$}),\\
\mbox{{\bf s}}({0})&=&\sum_{i\,\in\,\mbox{${\mathcal{N}}$}}\alpha_i\mbox{{\bf x}}_{i}({0}),\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
where $\mbox{{\bf s}}(0)$ and $\mbox{{\bf x}}({0})$ are initial states.
\section{Generalized Master Stability Function}
In this section we introduce a master stability function which generalizes those in \cite{Sun09} and \cite{Sorrentino11} by taking into account the parameter mismatch in the links and applies to directed and weighted networks.
As it has been shown in previous section, every connected network has a unique invariant manifold. Hence, we can define $\varepsilon$-synchronization as
\begin{mydef} A network of oscillators is $\varepsilon$-synchronized if there exists $\varepsilon>0$ such that
\begin{align}
\limsup_{t\to\infty} \lVert\mbox{{\bf e}}\rVert \le \varepsilon,\nonumber
\end{align}
where $\mbox{{\bf e}} = [\mbox{{\bf e}}_1~...~\mbox{{\bf e}}_N]^T$.
\end{mydef}
This definition means that the error from the manifold is contained in a ball of radius $\varepsilon$.
We note that our definition is different but closely related to that given in \cite{Zhao12}.
Substituting \eqref{eq: NetworkDynamics} and \eqref{eq: bs} in \eqref{eq: error}, and using Taylor series, the dynamics of the error with respect to the synchronization manifold, $\mbox{{\bf e}}_i$, is given by
\begin{eqnarray}\label{eq: ErrorDynamics}
\mbox{$\dot{\mbox{\bf e}}$}_{i}&=&\mbox{{\bf F}}_{\mbox{{\bf x}}}\mbox{{\bf e}}_{i}-\sum_{j=1}^{N}l_{ij}\mbox{{\bf H}}_{\mbox{{\bf x}}}\mbox{{\bf e}}_{j}+ \mbox{{\bf F}}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\gamma}$}}\delta\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\gamma}$}_{i}+\sum_{j=1}^{N}\mathbbm{1}_{i\ne j}l_{ij}\mbox{{\bf H}}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}} \delta\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}_{ij}\nonumber\\
&&+(d_i^{\scriptsize\mbox{in}}-\bar{d}_{\scriptsize\mbox{in}})\mbox{{\bf h}}(\mbox{{\bf s}},\,\mbox{{\bf s}},\,\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\bar{\theta}}$}),
\end{eqnarray}
where $\mathbbm{1}_{X}$ is the indicator function of $X$. Stacking (\ref{eq: ErrorDynamics}) for all $i$ yields the dynamics of the deviation of node trajectories from $\mbox{{\bf s}}$:
\begin{eqnarray}\label{eq: ErrorDynamicsNonDiag}
\dot{\mbox{{\bf e}}}&=&\left(\mbox{{\bf I}}\otimes\mbox{{\bf F}}_{\mbox{{\bf x}}}-\mbox{{\bf L}}\otimes \mbox{{\bf H}}_{\mbox{{\bf x}}}\right)\delta\mbox{{\bf x}}+\left(\mbox{{\bf I}}\otimes\mbox{{\bf F}}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\gamma}$}}\right)\delta\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\gamma}$}\nonumber\\
&&+\left(\boldsymbol{\mathcal{A}}\otimes\mbox{{\bf H}}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}}\right)\delta \mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}+(\mbox{{\bf d}}^{\scriptsize\mbox{in}}-\bar{d}_{\scriptsize\mbox{in}}\mathbf{1}^T_N)\otimes\mbox{{\bf h}}(\mbox{{\bf s}},\,\mbox{{\bf s}},\,\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\bar{\theta}}$}),
\end{eqnarray}
where
\begin{eqnarray}
{\delta \mbox{$\boldsymbol{\gamma}$}}&=&[\delta\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\gamma}$}_{1}^{T} \cdots \delta\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\gamma}$}_{N}^{T}]^{T},\nonumber\\
{\delta \mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}}& = & [\delta\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}_{11}^{T}\cdots\delta\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}_{1N}^{T}~\delta\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}_{21}^T\cdots\delta\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}_{2N}^T~\cdots~\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}_{N1}^T\cdots\delta\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}_{NN}^T]^{T},\nonumber\\
\mbox{{\bf d}}^{\scriptsize\mbox{in}}&=&[d_1^{\scriptsize\mbox{in}} \cdots d_N^{\scriptsize\mbox{in}}]^T,\nonumber\\
\boldsymbol{\mathcal{A}}&=&\mbox{diag}([\mbox{{\bf a}}_1 \cdots \mbox{{\bf a}}_N]),\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
and $\mbox{{\bf a}}_i$ is the $i$th row of $\mbox{{\bf A}}$.
Let $\mbox{{\bf L}}=\mbox{{\bf P}}\mbox{{\bf J}}\mbox{{\bf P}}^{-1}$ be the Jordan decomposition of $\mbox{{\bf L}}$, where $\mbox{{\bf P}}=[p_{ij}]$ is a similarity transform and $\mbox{{\bf J}}$ is in Jordan form. Then, \eqref{eq: ErrorDynamicsNonDiag} can be rewritten as
\begin{eqnarray}\label{eq: NetDiag1}
\dot{\mbox{{\bf e}}}&=&\left(\mbox{{\bf P}}\otimes\mbox{{\bf I}}\right)\left(\mbox{{\bf I}}\otimes\mbox{{\bf F}}_{\mbox{{\bf x}}}-\mbox{{\bf J}}\otimes \mbox{{\bf H}}_{\mbox{{\bf x}}}\right)\left(\mbox{{\bf P}}^{-1}\otimes\mbox{{\bf I}}\right)\mbox{{\bf e}}+\left(\mbox{{\bf I}}\otimes\mbox{{\bf F}}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\gamma}$}}\right){\delta \mbox{$\boldsymbol{\gamma}$}}\nonumber\\
&&+\left(\boldsymbol{\mathcal{A}}\otimes\mbox{{\bf H}}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}}\right){\delta \mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}}+(\mbox{{\bf d}}^{\scriptsize\mbox{in}}-\bar{d}_{\scriptsize\mbox{in}}\mathbf{1}_N^T)\otimes\mbox{{\bf h}}(\mbox{{\bf s}},\,\mbox{{\bf s}},\,\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\bar{\theta}}$}).\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
Using the similarity transform
\begin{equation}
\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\eta}$}=\left(\mbox{{\bf P}}^{-1}\otimes\mbox{{\bf I}}\right)\mbox{{\bf e}},\nonumber
\end{equation}
where $\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\eta}$}=[\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\eta}$}^T_1\cdots\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\eta}$}_N^T]^T$, we obtain
\begin{eqnarray}\label{eq: NetDiag2}
\dot{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\eta}$}}&=&\left(\mbox{{\bf I}}\otimes\mbox{{\bf F}}_{\mbox{{\bf x}}}-\mbox{{\bf J}}\otimes \mbox{{\bf H}}_{\mbox{{\bf x}}}\right)\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\eta}$}+\left(\mbox{{\bf P}}^{-1}\otimes\mbox{{\bf I}}\right)\left(\mbox{{\bf I}}\otimes\mbox{{\bf F}}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\gamma}$}}\right){\delta \mbox{$\boldsymbol{\gamma}$}}\nonumber\\
&&+\left(\mbox{{\bf P}}^{-1}\otimes\mbox{{\bf I}}\right)\left(\boldsymbol{\mathcal{A}}\otimes\mbox{{\bf H}}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}}\right){\delta \mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}}\nonumber\\
&&+\left(\mbox{{\bf P}}^{-1}\otimes\mbox{{\bf I}}\right)\left((\mbox{{\bf d}}-\bar{d}_{\scriptsize\mbox{in}}\mathbf{1}_N^T)\otimes\mbox{{\bf h}}(\mbox{{\bf s}},\,\mbox{{\bf s}},\,\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\bar{\theta}}$})\right)\nonumber\\
&=&\left(\mbox{{\bf I}}\otimes\mbox{{\bf F}}_{\mbox{{\bf x}}}-\mbox{{\bf J}}\otimes\mbox{{\bf H}}_{\mbox{{\bf x}}}\right)\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\eta}$}+\left(\mbox{{\bf P}}^{-1}\otimes\mbox{{\bf F}}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\gamma}$}}\right){\delta \mbox{$\boldsymbol{\gamma}$}}\nonumber\\
&&+\left(\mbox{{\bf P}}^{-1}\boldsymbol{\mathcal{A}}\otimes\mbox{{\bf H}}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}}\right){\delta \mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}}\nonumber\\
&&+\left(\mbox{{\bf P}}^{-1}(\mbox{{\bf d}}-\bar{d}_{\scriptsize\mbox{in}}\mathbf{1}^T_N)\right)\otimes\mbox{{\bf h}}(\mbox{{\bf s}},\,\mbox{{\bf s}},\,\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\bar{\theta}}$}).\nonumber\\
&=&\left(\mbox{{\bf I}}\otimes\mbox{{\bf F}}_{\mbox{{\bf x}}}-\mbox{{\bf J}}\otimes\mbox{{\bf H}}_{\mbox{{\bf x}}}\right)\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\eta}$}+\mbox{{\bf v}},
\end{eqnarray}
where $\mbox{{\bf v}}=[\mbox{{\bf v}}_1\cdots\mbox{{\bf v}}_N]$,
\begin{eqnarray}
\mbox{{\bf v}}_{i}&=&\sum_{j\,\in\,\mbox{${\mathcal{N}}$}}q_{ij}\Bigg[\mbox{{\bf F}}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\gamma}$}}\delta \mbox{$\boldsymbol{\gamma}$}_{j}+\sum_{k=1,k\ne j}^{N} a_{jk}\mbox{{\bf H}}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}}\delta\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}_{jk}\nonumber\\
&&+\mbox{{\bf h}}(\mbox{{\bf s}},\,\mbox{{\bf s}},\,\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\bar{\theta}}$})(d_i^{\scriptsize\mbox{in}}-\bar{d}_{\scriptsize\mbox{in}})\Bigg],\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
and $q_{ij}$ are the elements of $\mbox{{\bf Q}}=\mbox{{\bf P}}^{-1}$. It is clear that stability of $\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\eta}$}$ and $\mbox{{\bf e}}$ are equivalent.
To study the stability of \eqref{eq: NetDiag2}, let us first consider the simpler case where $\mbox{{\bf J}}$ consists of a single Jordan block, i.e.
\begin{eqnarray}
\mbox{{\bf J}}=\mbox{{\bf J}}_{N}(\mu)=\left[\begin{array}{cccccc}
\mu& 1&0&\cdots&0& 0\\
0&\mu&1&\cdots & 0 & 0\\
0&0 &\mu&\cdots & 0 & 0\\
\vdots&\vdots&\vdots&\ddots&\vdots&\vdots\\
0&0&0&\cdots&\mu & 1\\
0&0&0&\cdots&0 & \mu
\end{array}\right].\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
\begin{lemma}\label{boundlemma}
For system
\begin{eqnarray*}
\dot{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\eta}$}}=\left(\mbox{{\bf I}}\otimes\mbox{{\bf F}}_{\mbox{{\bf x}}}-\mbox{{\bf J}}_N(\mu)\otimes\mbox{{\bf H}}_{\mbox{{\bf x}}}\right)\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\eta}$}+\mbox{{\bf v}},
\end{eqnarray*}
there exists $\phi>0$ such that
\begin{eqnarray}
\limsup_{t\to\infty}\lVert\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\eta}$}_i\rVert\le\sum_{j=i}^N \left(\frac{\phi}{\lambda}\right)^{N-j+1}\limsup_{t\to\infty}\lVert\mbox{{\bf F}}_{\mbox{{\bf x}}}-\mbox{{\bf H}}_{\mbox{{\bf x}}}\rVert^{N-j} \nonumber\\
\times \limsup_{t\to\infty}\lVert\mbox{{\bf v}}_j\rVert,\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
for all $i$, if $\lambda>0$, where $\lambda=\mbox{MLE}(\mbox{{\bf F}}_{\mbox{{\bf x}}}-\mu\mbox{{\bf H}}_{\mbox{{\bf x}}})$, and $\mbox{MLE}(.)$ returns the maximum Lyapunov exponent of the argument.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
See Appendix \ref{NonDiag}.
\end{proof}
Now, let us assume that $\mbox{{\bf J}}$ consists of $M$ Jordan blocks with eigenvalues $\mu_m$ and sizes $n_m,~m\in\{1,\cdots,M\}$, where $\sum_{m=1}^M n_m=N$. Then $N_m=\sum_{m=1}^j n_m$ will be the index of the last row of the $m$th Jordan block. Define $J(i)$ to be the index of the Jordan block that contains the $i$th row of $\mbox{{\bf J}}$. In other words, $J(i)=m$, if $N_{m-1}<i\le N_m$.
\begin{theo}\label{Theo-E-bound}
A network of oscillators is $\varepsilon$-synchronized if $\lambda_m=\mbox{MLE}(\mbox{{\bf F}}_{\mbox{{\bf x}}}-\mu_m\mbox{{\bf H}}_{\mbox{{\bf x}}})>0$ and
\begin{align}
\|\mbox{{\bf P}}\|^2\sum_{j=1}^{N-1}\Bigg(\sum_{k=1}^{n_{J(j)}} \left(\frac{\phi_{J(j)}}{\lambda_{J(j)}}\right)^{n_{J(j)}-k+1} \quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\nonumber\\
\times \limsup_{t\to\infty}\lVert\mbox{{\bf F}}_{\mbox{{\bf x}}}-\mbox{{\bf H}}_{\mbox{{\bf x}}}\rVert^{n_{\scriptsize J(j)}-k}\limsup_{t\to\infty}\lVert\mbox{{\bf v}}_{j}\rVert\bigg)^2 \leq{\varepsilon}^2,\label{eq: theo1}
\end{align}
where $\phi_m$ satisfies
\begin{eqnarray}
\forall t,\tau,\quad\|\mathbf{\Phi}_m(t,\tau)\| \le \phi_me^{-\lambda_m(t-\tau)}.\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
and $\mathbf{\Phi}_m(t,\tau)$ is the state transition matrix of $\mbox{{\bf F}}_{\mbox{{\bf x}}}-\mu_m\mbox{{\bf H}}_{\mbox{{\bf x}}}$.
\end{theo}
\begin{proof} We have
\begin{eqnarray}
\limsup_{t\rightarrow\infty}\lVert\mbox{{\bf e}}\rVert^2 & = & \limsup_{t\to\infty}\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\eta}$}^T(\mbox{{\bf P}}^T\otimes\mbox{{\bf I}})(\mbox{{\bf P}}\otimes\mbox{{\bf I}})\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\eta}$}\nonumber\\
&\le & \|\mbox{{\bf P}}^T\mbox{{\bf P}}\| \limsup_{t\to\infty}\|\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\eta}$}\|^2\nonumber\\
&=&\|\mbox{{\bf P}}\|^2\limsup_{t\to\infty} \|\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\eta}$}\|^2.\label{eq: GeneralInequality}
\end{eqnarray}
For any Laplacian matrix, we have $\mu_M=0$. If the network is connected, we further have $n_M=1$. Thus,
\begin{eqnarray}
\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\eta}$}_N=\sum_{j=1}^N \alpha_j\mbox{{\bf e}}_j=\sum_{j=1}^N \alpha_j(\mbox{{\bf x}}_j-\mbox{{\bf s}})=\left(\sum_{j=1}^N \alpha_j\mbox{{\bf x}}_j\right) -\mbox{{\bf s}}=\mbox{{\bf 0}},\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
which together with \eqref{eq: GeneralInequality} yields
\begin{eqnarray}
\limsup_{t\rightarrow\infty}\lVert\mbox{{\bf e}}\rVert^2 & \le & \|\mbox{{\bf P}}\|^2\sum_{i=1}^{N-1}\limsup_{t\to\infty}\|\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\eta}$}_i\|^2.\label{eq: inequalityTheo1}
\end{eqnarray}
Lemma \ref{boundlemma} upper bounds the right hand side of \eqref{eq: inequalityTheo1} by the left hand side of \eqref{eq: theo1}.
\end{proof}
\begin{corollary}\label{LemmaSymmetricBound}
A symmetric network of oscillators is $\varepsilon$-synchronized if $\lambda_j=\mbox{MLE}(\mbox{{\bf F}}_{\mbox{{\bf x}}}-\mu_j\mbox{{\bf H}}_{\mbox{{\bf x}}})>0$ and
\begin{equation}\label{eq: coro1}
\sum_{j=1}^{N-1}\left(\frac {\phi_j}{\lambda_j}\right)^2\limsup_{t\rightarrow\infty}\lVert\mbox{{\bf v}}_j(t)\rVert^2 \leq{\varepsilon^2},
\end{equation}
where $\phi_j$ satisfies
\begin{eqnarray}
\forall t,\tau,\quad\|\mathbf{\Phi}_j(t,\tau)\| \le \phi_je^{-\lambda_j(t-\tau)},\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
and $\mathbf{\Phi}_j(t,\tau)$ is the state transition matrix of $\mbox{{\bf F}}_{\mbox{{\bf x}}}-\mu_j\mbox{{\bf H}}_{\mbox{{\bf x}}}$.
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}
Since $\mbox{{\bf L}}$ is symmetric, it can be diagonalized by unitary matrix $\mbox{{\bf P}}=\mbox{{\bf U}}=[u_{ij}]$, where $\mbox{{\bf U}}^H\mbox{{\bf U}}=\mbox{{\bf I}}$. Thus, each Jordan block will be of size 1. This means that $M=N$, $n_m=1$, and $J(i)=i$. Thus, \eqref{eq: theo1} reduces to
\begin{align}
\sum_{j=1}^{N-1}\left(\frac{\phi_{j}}{\lambda_{j}}\right)^2 \limsup_{t\to\infty}\lVert\mbox{{\bf v}}_{j} \rVert^2 \leq{\varepsilon}^2.\nonumber
\end{align}
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}
In proof of Corollary \ref{LemmaSymmetricBound}, since unitary transformation preserves Euclidean norm, \eqref{eq: inequalityTheo1} holds with equality. Thus, Corollary \ref{LemmaSymmetricBound} is relatively less conservative than Theorem \ref{Theo-E-bound}.
\end{remark}
\section{Probability of Stability}
In the remaining of the paper, we make the following assumptions:
\begin{ass} \label{ass:Symmetric}
The network is symmetric.
\end{ass}
This implies that $\mbox{{\bf L}}$ is diagonalizable by a unitary matrix, $\mbox{{\bf U}}=[u_{ij}]$.
\begin{ass} \label{ass:Gaussian}
Mismatch parameters, $\delta \mbox{$\boldsymbol{\gamma}$}_{i}$ and $\delta\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}_{ij}$, are independent zero mean Gaussian random vectors with covariance matrices, $\boldsymbol{\Sigma}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\gamma}$}}=E[(\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\gamma}$}_{i}-\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\bar{\gamma}}$})(\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\gamma}$}_{i}-\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\bar{\gamma}}$})^{T}]$ and $\boldsymbol{\Sigma}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}}=E[(\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}_{ij}-\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\bar{\theta}}$})(\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}_{ij}-\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\bar{\theta}}$})^{T}]$, respectively.
\end{ass}
Under Assumption \ref{ass:Gaussian}, $\mbox{{\bf v}}_i$ are linear combination of independent Gaussian random variables. Thus, they are jointly Gaussian. To calculate the probability of \eqref{eq: coro1} being satisfied, we need to find the probability density function of $\mbox{{\bf v}}=[\mbox{{\bf v}}_1^T \cdots \mbox{{\bf v}}_{N}^T]^T$.
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma: Covariance}
The covariance matrix of $\mbox{{\bf v}}$ is $\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\Sigma}$}_{\mbox{{\bf v}}}=[\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\Sigma}$}_{ij}]$ where
\begin{align}
\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\Sigma}$}_{ij}=\mbox{{\bf F}}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\gamma}$}} \mbox{$\boldsymbol{\Sigma}$}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\gamma}$}} \mbox{{\bf F}}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\gamma}$}}^T \mathbbm{1}_{i=j}+\sum_{l=1}^N u_{il}u_{jl}^* \sum_{k=1}^N a^2_{lk} \mbox{{\bf H}}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}} \mbox{$\boldsymbol{\Sigma}$}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}} \mbox{{\bf H}}^T_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}}.\nonumber
\end{align}
\end{lemma}
\textit{Proof:} See Appendix \ref{covariance}.
We now provide upper bounds on the probability of stable synchronization for unweighted regular, Erd\"os-R\'enyi, and Newman-Watts networks.
\begin{theo}\label{TheoremRing}
Under Assumptions \ref{ass:Symmetric} and \ref{ass:Gaussian}, the probability of stable synchronization of an unweighted $K$-regular network of oscillators is lower bounded by
\begin{align}\label{eq: Pstab}
P_{\mbox{\scriptsize stab}}^{\mbox{\scriptsize LB}}(\varepsilon)=&\left[\prod_{i=2}^{N-1}\left(\frac{\phi_1~\lambda_i}{\lambda_1~\phi_i}\right)^{n}\right]\nonumber\\
&\times \sum_{j=0}^\infty a^{(N-1)}_jP\left(\frac{(N-1) n}{2}+j,\frac{\lambda_1^2\varepsilon^2}{\phi_1^2\sigma^2}\right),
\end{align}
where $P(\cdot,\cdot)$ is the regularized gamma function,
\begin{eqnarray*}
a_j^{(i)} & = & \sum_{k=0}^j a_k^{(i-1)}\frac{n_{j-k}}{(j-k)!}(1-\frac{\phi_1^2~\lambda_i^2}{\lambda_1^2~\phi_i^2})^{j-k},\\
a_k^{(2)} & = & \frac{n_k}{k!}\left(1-\frac{\phi_1^2~\lambda_2^2}{\lambda_1^2~\phi_2^2}\right)^k,\\
n_k & = & \prod_{l=0}^{k-1} \left(\frac{n}{2}+l\right),
\end{eqnarray*}
and
\begin{align}
\sigma=\limsup_{t\to\infty}\| \mbox{{\bf F}}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\gamma}$}} \Sigma_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\gamma}$}} \mbox{{\bf F}}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\gamma}$}}^T+ K\mbox{{\bf H}}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}}\Sigma_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}}\mbox{{\bf H}}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}}^T\|^{1/2}.\label{eq: normSigma}
\end{align}
\end{theo}
\begin{proof}
Since the network is unweighted and $K$-regular, we have $d_i=\sum_{k=1}^Na^2_{ik}=K$. According to Lemma \ref{lemma: Covariance} the blocks of the covariance matrix, $\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\Sigma}$}_{\mbox{{\bf v}}}$, are
\begin{eqnarray}
\boldsymbol{\Sigma}_{{i}{j}} & =& \mbox{{\bf F}}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\gamma}$}}{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\Sigma}$}}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\gamma}$}}\mbox{{\bf F}}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\gamma}$}}^{T}\mathbbm{1}_{i=j}+K\mbox{{\bf H}}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}}~{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\Sigma}$}}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}}\mbox{{\bf H}}^{T}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}}\sum_{l=1}^N u_{il}u_{jl}^*.\nonumber\\
& =& (\mbox{{\bf F}}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\gamma}$}}{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\Sigma}$}}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\gamma}$}}\mbox{{\bf F}}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\gamma}$}}^{T}+K\mbox{{\bf H}}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}}{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\Sigma}$}}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}}\mbox{{\bf H}}^{T}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}})\mathbbm{1}_{i=j}.\label{eq: Cov. Regular}
\end{eqnarray}
Hence, $\mbox{{\bf v}}_i$ are uncorrelated. The mean value of $\mbox{{\bf v}}_i$ can be computed as
\begin{eqnarray}
E[\mbox{{\bf v}}_{i}]&=&\sum_{j\,\in\,\mbox{${\mathcal{N}}$}}q_{ij}\Bigg(\mbox{{\bf F}}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\gamma}$}}E[\delta \mbox{$\boldsymbol{\gamma}$}_{j}]+\sum_{k=1,k\ne j}^{N} a_{jk}\mbox{{\bf H}}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}}E[\delta\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}_{jk}]\nonumber\\
&&+\mbox{{\bf h}}(\mbox{{\bf s}},\,\mbox{{\bf s}},\,\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\bar{\theta}}$})(K-\bar{d}_{\scriptsize\mbox{in}})\Bigg)=\mathbf{0},\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
which follows noting that $\delta\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\gamma}$}_{i}$ and $\delta\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}_{ij}$ have zero mean and $\bar{d}_{\scriptsize\mbox{in}}=K$. Since $\mbox{{\bf v}}_i$ are jointly Gaussian, uncorrelated, and have zero mean, they are independent.
Now, let us define the whitened Gaussian random vectors
\begin{align}
\mbox{{\bf z}}_i=\mathbf{\boldsymbol{\Sigma}}_{ii}^{-\frac{1}{2}}\mbox{{\bf v}}_{i}.\nonumber
\end{align}
Since Euclidean norm is sub-multiplicative, we have
\begin{eqnarray}\label{eq: supB}
\lVert\mbox{{\bf v}}_{i}\rVert & \leq & \lVert\mbox{{\bf z}}_{i}\rVert \left\|\mathbf{\boldsymbol{\Sigma}}_{ii}^{\frac{1}{2}}\right\|.\nonumber\\
\limsup_{t\to\infty}\lVert\mbox{{\bf v}}_{i}\rVert & \leq & \limsup_{t\to \infty} \left(\lVert\mbox{{\bf z}}_{i}\rVert \left\|\mathbf{\boldsymbol{\Sigma}}_{ii}^{\frac{1}{2}}\right\|\right).\nonumber\\
& \leq & \limsup_{t\to \infty} \lVert\mbox{{\bf z}}_{i}\rVert \limsup_{t\to \infty}\left\|\mathbf{\boldsymbol{\Sigma}}_{ii}^{\frac{1}{2}}\right\|.\nonumber\\
& = & \lVert\mbox{{\bf z}}_{i}\rVert \limsup_{t\to \infty}\left\|\mathbf{\boldsymbol{\Sigma}}_{ii}^{\frac{1}{2}}\right\|,\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
The last equality is due to the fact that with the whitening of $\|\mbox{{\bf v}}_i\|$, $\|\mbox{{\bf z}}_i\|$ is no longer time variable. In other words, $\|\mbox{{\bf z}}_i\|$ is a random variable (not a random process). Since $\lVert\mbox{{\bf z}}_{i}\rVert^2$ is the norm squared of a white Gaussian $n$-vector, it has a chi-squared distribution with $n$ degrees of freedom. Applying the result of Corollary \ref{LemmaSymmetricBound},
\begin{eqnarray}
\lVert\mbox{{\bf e}}\rVert^2&=&\sum_{i=1}^{N-1}\lVert\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\eta}$}_i\rVert^2\nonumber\\
&\le&\sum_{i=1}^{N-1}\left(\frac{\phi_i}{\lambda_i}\right)^2\limsup_{t\to\infty}\lVert\mbox{{\bf v}}_i\rVert^2\nonumber\\
&\le& \sum_{i=1}^{N-1}\left(\frac{\phi_i\sigma}{\lambda_i}\right)^2\lVert\mbox{{\bf z}}_i\rVert^2.\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
where $\sigma$ is defined in \eqref{eq: normSigma}.
Now we have
\begin{eqnarray}
\mbox{Pr}\left(\limsup_{t\to\infty}\|\mbox{{\bf e}}\|<\varepsilon\right) & = & \mbox{Pr}\left(\limsup_{t\to\infty}\|\mbox{{\bf e}}\|^2<\varepsilon^2\right)\nonumber\\
& \ge & \mbox{Pr}\left(\sum_{i=1}^{N-1}\left(\frac{\phi_i\sigma}{\lambda_i}\right)^2\lVert\mbox{{\bf z}}_i\rVert^2\le\varepsilon^2\right)\nonumber\\
& = & \left[\prod_{i=2}^{N-1}\left(\frac{\phi_1~\lambda_i}{\lambda_1~\phi_i}\right)^{n}\right]\nonumber\\
&&\times \sum_{j=0}^\infty a^{(N-1)}_j\int_0^{\varepsilon^2}f_j(y)dy,\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
where
\[f_j(y)=\left(\frac{\lambda_1^2}{2\phi_1^2\sigma^2}\right)^{\frac{(N-1)n}{2}+j}\frac{y^{\frac{(N-1) n}{2}+j-1}}{\Gamma\left(\frac{(N-1)n}{2}+j\right)}e^{-\frac{\lambda_1^2}{2\phi_1^2\sigma^2}y}.
\]
which using the results in \cite{Moschopoulos84} yields \eqref{eq: Pstab}.
\end{proof}
\begin{theo}\label{TheoremER}
Under Assumptions \ref{ass:Symmetric} and \ref{ass:Gaussian}, the limiting probability of stable synchronization of an unweighted Erd\"os-R\'enyi (ER) network of oscillators, with parameter $p$, as $N\to\infty$, is lower bounded by
\begin{align}\label{eq: Pstab2}
P_{\mbox{\scriptsize stab}}^{\mbox{\scriptsize LB}}(\varepsilon|\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\lambda}$})=&\left[\prod_{i=2}^{N-1}\left(\frac{\phi_1~\lambda_i}{\lambda_1~\phi_i}\right)^{n}\right]\nonumber\\
&\times\sum_{j=0}^\infty a^{(N-1)}_jP\left(\frac{(N-1) n}{2}+j,\frac{\lambda_1^2\varepsilon^2}{\phi_1^2\sigma^2}\right),
\end{align}
where $\sigma=\limsup_{t\to\infty}~\|\mbox{{\bf F}}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\gamma}$}} \mbox{$\boldsymbol{\Sigma}$}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\gamma}$}} \mbox{{\bf F}}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\gamma}$}}^T+pN \mbox{{\bf H}}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}} \mbox{$\boldsymbol{\Sigma}$}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}} \mbox{{\bf H}}^T_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}}\|^{1/2}$ and $\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\lambda}$}=[\lambda_1 \cdots \lambda_{N-1}]$.
\end{theo}
\begin{proof} The largest eigenvalue of the Laplacian matrix of any symmetric network is bounded below by the maximum degree of the network. For large ER networks ($N\to\infty$), it is also bounded above by $Np+\sqrt{Np(1-p)}$ \cite{Manaffam13}. Thus
\[d_{\max}\le\mu_{\max}\le Np+\sqrt{Np(1-p)}.\]
Similarly, the smallest non-zero eigenvalue of ER network can be bounded as
\[d_{\min}\ge\mu_{\min}\ge Np-\sqrt{Np(1-p)}.\]
According to Lemma \ref{lemma: Covariance}, the diagonal blocks of covariance matrix of $\mbox{{\bf v}}$ are
\begin{eqnarray}
\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\Sigma}$}_{ii} & = & \mbox{{\bf F}}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\gamma}$}} \mbox{$\boldsymbol{\Sigma}$}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\gamma}$}} \mbox{{\bf F}}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\gamma}$}}^T+\mbox{{\bf H}}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}} \mbox{$\boldsymbol{\Sigma}$}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}} \mbox{{\bf H}}^T_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}} \sum_{l=1}^N|u_{il}|^2 d_l\nonumber\\
& = & \mbox{{\bf F}}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\gamma}$}} \mbox{$\boldsymbol{\Sigma}$}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\gamma}$}} \mbox{{\bf F}}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\gamma}$}}^T+Np\mbox{{\bf H}}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}} \mbox{$\boldsymbol{\Sigma}$}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}} \mbox{{\bf H}}^T_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}},\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
as $N\to\infty$, and the off diagonal entries are
\begin{align*}
\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\Sigma}$}_{ij}&=\mbox{{\bf H}}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}} \mbox{$\boldsymbol{\Sigma}$}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}} \mbox{{\bf H}}^T_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}} \sum_{l=1}^N u_{il}u_{jl}^* d_l\\
&=\mbox{{\bf H}}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}} \mbox{$\boldsymbol{\Sigma}$}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}} \mbox{{\bf H}}^T_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}}\sum_{l=1}^N u_{il}u_{jl}^* (d_l-Np)\\
&\le\sqrt{Np(1-p)}\mbox{{\bf H}}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}} \mbox{$\boldsymbol{\Sigma}$}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}} \mbox{{\bf H}}^T_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}}.
\end{align*}
Therefore,
\[\lim_{N\to\infty}\frac{\lVert\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\Sigma}$}_{ij}\rVert}{\lVert\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\Sigma}$}_{ii}\rVert}=0.\]
Consequently, as $N\to\infty$, $\mbox{{\bf v}}_i$ become independent. The remaining of the proof is similar to that of Theorem \ref{TheoremRing} and is omitted in the interest of brevity.
\end{proof}
To study the synchronization in small-world networks, we consider the Newman-Watts model \cite{Newman99}. This model constructs a small-world network by starting from a $K$-regular ring network (Fig. \ref{fig: Ring}) as substrate, then randomly adds new links with probability $p$.
\begin{figure}[!t]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=1.5in]{Ring.pdf}
\caption{A 4-regular ring network.}
\label{fig: Ring}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\begin{theo}
Under assumptions \ref{ass:Symmetric} and \ref{ass:Gaussian}, the limiting probability of stable synchronization of an unweighted Newman-Watts small-world network of oscillators, with parameters $p$ and $K$, as $N\to\infty$, is lower bounded by
\begin{align}\label{eq: Pstab2}
P_{\mbox{\scriptsize stab}}^{\mbox{\scriptsize LB}}(\varepsilon|\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\lambda}$})=&\left[\prod_{i=2}^{N-1}\left(\frac{\phi_1~\lambda_i}{\lambda_1~\phi_i}\right)^{n}\right]\nonumber\\
&\times\sum_{j=0}^\infty a^{(N-1)}_jP\left(\frac{(N-1) n}{2}+j,\frac{\lambda_1^2\varepsilon^2}{\phi_1^2\sigma^2}\right),
\end{align}
where
\begin{eqnarray}
\sigma=\limsup_{t\to\infty}~\|\mbox{{\bf F}}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\gamma}$}} \mbox{$\boldsymbol{\Sigma}$}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\gamma}$}} \mbox{{\bf F}}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\gamma}$}}^T+(K+Np) \mbox{{\bf H}}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}} \mbox{$\boldsymbol{\Sigma}$}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}} \mbox{{\bf H}}^T_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}}\|^{1/2}.\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
\end{theo}
\begin{proof} The Laplacian matrix of a Newman-Watts small world network is
\[\mbox{{\bf L}}_{\mbox{\scriptsize NW}}=\mbox{{\bf L}}_{\mbox{\scriptsize Ring}}+\mbox{{\bf L}}_{\mbox{\scriptsize ER}},\]
where $\mbox{{\bf L}}_{\mbox{\scriptsize Ring}}$ and $\mbox{{\bf L}}_{\mbox{\scriptsize ER}}$ are the laplacians of a $K$-regular ring and an Erd\"os-R\'enyi network with parameter $p$. Using Weyl's inequalities we can bound the minimum and maximum eigenvalues of the small-world \cite{Mohar91}
\begin{eqnarray*}
\max\{\mu^{\mbox{\scriptsize Ring}}_{\min},\mu^{\mbox{\scriptsize ER}}_{\min}\}\le\mu_{\min}^{\mbox{\scriptsize NW}}\le d_{\min},\\
\mu^{\mbox{\scriptsize Ring}}_{\max}+\mu^{\mbox{\scriptsize ER}}_{\max}\ge\mu_{\max}^{\mbox{\scriptsize NW}}\ge d_{\max},
\end{eqnarray*}
where the eigenvalues of a $K$-regular ring is \cite{Mohar91}
\begin{eqnarray}
\mu^{\mbox{\scriptsize Ring}}_i & = & K-2\frac{\sin\frac{iK\pi}{2N}\cos\frac{(K+2)i\pi}{2N}}{\sin\frac{i\pi}{N}},\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
and subscripts $\min$ and $\max$ refer to smallest non-zero and maximum eigenvalue of $\mbox{{\bf L}}$ in corresponding configurations, respectively. The remaining of the proof is similar to that of Theorem \ref{TheoremER} and is omitted in the interest of brevity.
\end{proof}
\section{Numerical Example}
In this section we verify our analytical results using numerical examples. We consider the van der Pol oscillator \cite{Poland94} which has the following dynamics
\begin{align}\label{eq: osc}
\mbox{{\bf f}}(\mbox{{\bf x}}_{i},\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\gamma}$}_{i})=\left[\begin{array}{c}x_{i2}\\
-x_{1i}-\gamma_i (x^2_{i1}-1)x_{i2}\end{array}\right].\nonumber
\end{align}
We note that since the van der Pol oscillator has a limit cycle, as $t\to\infty$, $\mbox{{\bf s}}$ is a periodic trajectory. Hence, the Jacobians are also periodic. We can, therefore, solve \eqref{eq: Trajectory} analytically using Fourier series \cite{Poland94}.
We assume that the nodes are coupled through their first states by
\[\mbox{{\bf h}}(\mbox{{\bf x}}_{j},\mbox{{\bf x}}_{i},\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}_{ij})=\left[\begin{array}{c}\theta_{ij1}(x_{1j}-x_{1i})+\theta_{ij2}\\0\end{array}\right].\]
Thus, the Jacobians of $\mbox{{\bf f}}(.)$and $\mbox{{\bf h}}(.)$ around $(\mbox{{\bf s}},\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\bar{\gamma}}$},\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\bar{\theta}}$})$ are
\begin{eqnarray*}
\mbox{{\bf F}}_{\mbox{{\bf x}}}&=&\left[
\begin{array}{cc}
0 & 1 \\
-1-2\bar{\gamma} s_{1}s_{2} &\bar{\gamma}(1-s_{1}^2) \\
\end{array}
\right],\label{eq: F}\\
\mbox{{\bf H}}_{\mbox{{\bf x}}}&=&\left[
\begin{array}{cc}
\bar{\theta}_{1} & 0 \\
0 & 0 \\
\end{array}
\right],\label{eq: H}\\
\mbox{{\bf F}}_{\gamma}&=&\left[
\begin{array}{c}
0 \\
(1-s_{1}^2)s_{2} \\
\end{array}
\right],\label{eq: R}\\
\mbox{{\bf H}}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}}&=&\left[
\begin{array}{cc}
0&1 \\
0&0\\ \end{array}
\right]\label{eq: P},
\end{eqnarray*}
where $\mbox{{\bf s}}=[s_1~s_2]^T$. Fig. \ref{fig: MLE} depicts the maximum Lyapunov exponent of $\mbox{{\bf F}}_{\mbox{{\bf x}}}-\mu\mbox{{\bf H}}_{\mbox{{\bf x}}}$ as a function of $\mu$, where $\mu$ is the eigenvalue of Laplacian matrix of the network.
\begin{figure}[t]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=3.3in]{MLE.pdf}
\caption{Maximum Lyapunov Exponent (MLE) as a function of eigenvalues of Laplacian matrix of the network, $\mu$.}
\label{fig: MLE}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
Furthermore,
\begin{align}
\mbox{{\bf v}}_{i}&=\left[ \begin{array}{c}
\sum_{j=1}^{N}u_{ji}^{*}\sum_{k=1}^{N}a_{jk}\delta \theta_{kj2}\\
(1-s_{1}^2)s_{2}\sum_{j=1}^{N}u_{ji}^{*}\delta\gamma_{j}\\
\end{array}\right].\nonumber
\end{align}
It is clear that $\mbox{{\bf v}}_{i}$ are independent of $\delta\theta_{ij1}$.
\begin{figure}[t]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=3.3in]{Trajectory.pdf}
\caption{Synchronization manifold, $\mbox{{\bf s}}$, and a sample trajectory, $\mbox{{\bf x}}_1$, for a ring network of van der Pol oscillators.}
\label{fig: Trajectory}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
Also, covariance matrix of $\mbox{{\bf v}}_i$ of a $K$-regular ring network for $\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\bar{\gamma}}$}=1$ can be calculated from \eqref{eq: Cov. Regular} as
\begin{eqnarray}
\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\Sigma}$}_{ii}=\left[\begin{array}{cc}K{\bar{\theta}}_1^2\sigma_{\theta 2}^2& 0\\0 & \sigma_\gamma^2((1-s_1^2)s_2)^2\end{array}\right],\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
and
\begin{eqnarray}
\sup \mbox{$\boldsymbol{\Sigma}$}_{ii}=\left[\begin{array}{cc}K\bar{\theta}_1^2\sigma_{\theta 2}^2& 0\\0 & 9.93\sigma_\gamma^2\end{array}\right],\label{eq:supSigma}
\end{eqnarray}
where $\sup((1-s_1^2)s_2)^2$ is determined by simulation to be $9.93$ and the supremums are calculated over one period of the limit cycle.
Hence, $\sigma=\max(\sqrt{K}\bar{\theta}_1\sigma_{\theta_2},3.15\sigma_\gamma)$.
Now, consider a $6$-regular ring network of size $N=100$, where $\gamma\sim\mbox{${\mathcal{N}}$}(1,0.01)$ and $\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}\sim\mbox{${\mathcal{N}}$}([1~0]^T,0.01\mbox{{\bf I}})$. Fig. \ref{fig: Trajectory} depicts the synchronization manifold, $\mbox{{\bf s}}$, and a sample trajectory, $\mbox{{\bf x}}_1$, converging to $\mbox{{\bf s}}$. Fig. \ref{fig: PstabParameters} presents the analytical lower bound on the probability of stable $\varepsilon$-synchronization in the considered ring network, as a function of $\sigma_{\theta_2}$ and $\sigma_{\gamma}$ for $\varepsilon=0.40$. As it can be seen, the probability of synchronization falls sharply as the variances of mismatches increase. Moreover, we observe that the range of $\sigma_\gamma$ and $\sigma_{\theta_2}$ for which the network is stable with high probability is rectangular. This is explained by noting that $\sigma$ is related to the maximum of $\sigma_\gamma$ and $\sigma_{\theta_2}$, as it can be seen in \eqref{eq:supSigma}. Another observation from Fig. \ref{fig: PstabParameters} is that even small mismatches leads to instability of the synchronization state even with a relatively large tolerance of $\varepsilon=0.40$.
We now proceed to compare a ring network, an Erd\"os-R\'enyi network and a Newman-Watts (small-world) network. For a fair comparison, we choose the network parameters such that all networks have the same number of nodes and the same average node degree. That is, we consider a $N=100$ node, $10$-regular ring, an Erd\"os-R\'enyi network with $N=100$ and randomness parameter $p=0.1$, and a Newman-Watts network generated from a $N=100$ node, $6$-regular ring and link addition probability $p=0.4\times 100/94=0.4167$. Fig. \ref{fig: PstabN} presents the probability of stability versus network size, $N$, for these three networks with $\varepsilon=0.4$. As it can be seen for the Ring network (Fig. \ref{fig: PstabN} (a)), as $N$ increases, even though the variance of the mismatch input is constant, $\sigma=3.15\sigma_\gamma$, the $\varepsilon$-synchronization of the network deteriorates. This is because as the degree of the nodes are kept constant and network size increases, the algebraic connectivity\footnote{Algebraic connectivity is defined as the second smallest eigenvalue of the Laplacian matrix of a network.\cite{Mohar91}.} of the network,
\[\mu^{\scriptsize\mbox{ring}}_{N-1}=k-2\frac{\sin(k\pi/2N)\cos((k+2)\pi/2N)}{\sin(\pi/N)},\]
decreases. For large $N$, in our example, smaller algebraic connectivity means smaller MLE (See Fig. \ref{fig: MLE}), hence the probability of $\varepsilon$-synchronization falls sharply.
\begin{figure}[t]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=3.3in]{P_stab_mismatches.pdf}
\caption{$P^{\mbox{\scriptsize LB}}_{\mbox{\scriptsize stab}}$ in the ring network as a function of $\sigma_{\theta_2}$ and $\sigma_{\gamma}$ for $\varepsilon=0.4$.}
\vspace{-0.1in}
\label{fig: PstabParameters}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
Fig. \ref{fig: PstabN} (b) presents the probability of $\varepsilon$-stability of the Erd\"os-R\'enyi network. It is interesting to note that since the network is disconnected for smaller network sizes, the network is not synchronized. As network size continues to grow, the network becomes connected and synchronization behavior emerges. This behavior continues until the growth in the network size, increases the variance of the mismatch input, $\mbox{{\bf v}}$, to the extent that the network falls out of $\varepsilon$-stability.
Fig. \ref{fig: PstabN} (c) presents the probability of $\varepsilon$-stability for the Newman-Watts network. It is interesting to note the mechanisms at work as $N$ increases: At first, when $N$ is small there are very few added links given a small value of $p$. Thus, the network has not yet transitioned into a small-world and its algebraic connectivity is still quite close to that of the ring topology. Thus, as the size of the network increases its second smallest eigenvalue decreases. Since the variance of mismatch, $\mbox{{\bf v}}$, is constant ($\sigma_b=3.15\sigma_\gamma$), the probability of stability decreases. As $N$ continues to increase, by adding links in random, sufficient number of long range connections are established and the small-world transition is achieved. Consequently, algebraic connectivity of the network starts to grow rapidly. Hence, $\lambda_i$ increase and, therefore, $P^{\mbox{\scriptsize LB}}_{\mbox{\scriptsize stab}}$ improves. As $N$ continues to increases $\sqrt{K+Np}\sigma_{\theta_2}$ overtakes $3.15\sigma_\gamma$ in the variance of mismatch and its destructive effect surpasses the improvement caused by transition to small-world. Consequently, we observe that $P^{\mbox{\scriptsize LB}}_{\mbox{\scriptsize stab}}$ begins to drop.
\begin{figure}[!t]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{c}
\includegraphics[width=3.3in]{ProbvsNAveD10Ring.pdf}\\(a)\\
\includegraphics[width=3.3in]{ProbvsNAveD10ER.pdf}\\(b)\\
\includegraphics[width=3.3in]{ProbvsNAveD10SW.pdf}\\(c)
\end{tabular}
\caption{Probability of stability as a function $N$, for (a) ring, (b) Erd\"os-R\'enyi, and (c) Newman-Watts networks.}
\label{fig: PstabN}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[!t]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{c}
\includegraphics[width=3.3in]{ProbvsEpsilon100AveD10.pdf}\\(a)\\
\includegraphics[width=3.3in]{ProbvsEpsilon200AveD10.pdf}\\(b)\\
\includegraphics[width=3.3in]{ProbvsEpsilonAveD20.pdf}\\(c)
\end{tabular}
\caption{$P_{\mbox{\scriptsize stab}}$ as a function of $\varepsilon$ for the ring, NW and Erd\"{o}s-R\'enyi networks: (a) $N=100, \bar{d}=10$, (b) $N=200, \bar{d}=10$, and $N=200, \bar{d}=20$.}\label{fig: Pe}
\vspace{-0.2in}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
Figs. \ref{fig: Pe} (a) through (c) depict the probability of $\varepsilon$-stability as a function of $\varepsilon$ in the considered Ring, Erd\"os-R\'eyni, and Newman-Watts networks for different $N$ and $\bar{d}$: (a) $N=100, \bar{d}=10$, (b) $N=200, \bar{d}=10$, and $N=200, \bar{d}=20$. As it can be seen, the analytical lower bound and the simulation result for the ring network are reasonably close. This is due to the homogeneity of its node degrees, i.e. $d_i=K$, which holds true for the other networks as $N$ approaches infinity. The other point directly observed from these figures is that the rise in the probability of the stability is much sharper in the Erd\"os-R\'eyni and Newman-Watts networks, this is because the spread of the spectrum, [$\mu_{\min},\mu_{\max}$], for these networks are smaller than that of ring topology. This, in fact, causes the Lyapunov exponents of the traverse modes to be closer to each other and hence the networks become easily and rapidly synchronized. Other interesting observation is that the results for the Erd\"os-R\'eyni and Newman-Watts networks are similar. The reason can be sought in the effectiveness of communication in both networks to each other. As it has been shown in \cite{Watts98}, even though small-worlds are strongly locally connected (due to ring substrate), they have almost the same average shortest path length of Erd\"os-R\'eyni networks. This results in almost the same communication efficiency in small-worlds as Erd\"os-R\'eyni network. Hence, the synchronizability of both types of networks are similar.
\section{Conclusion}
We had seen that mismatch in either couplings or the local dynamics does not allow perfect synchronization. Rather, the network can only be synchronized to a neighborhood of the synchronization manifold. Considering this relaxed notion of synchronization we have provided a generalized master stability function that takes the mismatches into account. We then used this master stability function to derive lower bounds on the probability of synchronization in regular, Erd\"os-R\'enyi, and Newman-Watts networks. We verified our results using numerical examples involving networks of van der Pol oscillators. These examples clearly shows the different phase transition behavior of the different network models.
\appendices
\section{Proof of Lemma 2}\label{NonDiag}
\begin{proof}
The state space equation for the $\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\eta}$}_i$ can be written as
\begin{eqnarray}\label{eq: NodeDiag1}
\dot{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\eta}$}_{i}}&=&
\left(\mbox{{\bf F}}_{\mbox{{\bf x}}}-\mu \mbox{{\bf H}}_{\mbox{{\bf x}}}\right)\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\eta}$}_{i}+(\mbox{{\bf F}}_{\mbox{{\bf x}}}-\mbox{{\bf H}}_{\mbox{{\bf x}}} )\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\eta}$}_{i+1}+\mbox{{\bf v}}_i(t),
\end{eqnarray}
for $i\ne N$, and
\begin{eqnarray}\label{eq: NodeDiag2}
\dot{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\eta}$}_N}&=&
\left(\mbox{{\bf F}}_{\mbox{{\bf x}}}-\mu \mbox{{\bf H}}_{\mbox{{\bf x}}}\right)\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\eta}$}_N+\mbox{{\bf v}}_N(t).
\end{eqnarray}
The solution of \eqref{eq: NodeDiag1} and \eqref{eq: NodeDiag2} are
\begin{eqnarray}\label{eq: Solution}
\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\eta}$}_{i}(t)&=&\mathbf{\Phi}(t,0)\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\eta}$}_{i}(0)+\int_{0}^{t}\mathbf{\Phi}(t,\tau)\mbox{{\bf v}}_{i}(\tau)d\tau\nonumber\\
&&+\int_{0}^{t}\mathbf{\Phi}(t,\tau)(\mbox{{\bf F}}_{\mbox{{\bf x}}}-\mbox{{\bf H}}_{\mbox{{\bf x}}})\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\eta}$}_{i+1}(\tau)d\tau, \nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
for $i\ne N$ and
\begin{eqnarray}\label{eq: Solution}
\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\eta}$}_N(t)&=&\mathbf{\Phi}(t,0)\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\eta}$}_N(0)+\int_{0}^{t}\mathbf{\Phi}(t,\tau)\mbox{{\bf v}}_N(\tau)d\tau,\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
where $\mathbf{\Phi}(t,\tau)=\mathbf{Z}(t)\mathbf{Z}^{-1}(\tau)$, and $\mathbf{Z}$ is the normal fundamental matrix of $\mbox{{\bf F}}_{\mbox{{\bf x}}}-\mu\mbox{{\bf H}}_{\mbox{{\bf x}}}$ \cite{Daleckii74}.
Applying triangle inequality yields
\begin{eqnarray}
\lVert\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\eta}$}_{i}(t)\rVert &\leq& \lVert\mathbf{\Phi}(t,0)\rVert \lVert\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\eta}$}_{i}(0)\rVert\nonumber\\
&&+ \int_{0}^{t}\lVert(\mbox{{\bf F}}_{\mbox{{\bf x}}}-\mbox{{\bf H}}_{\mbox{{\bf x}}})\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\eta}$}_{i+1}(\tau)
+\mbox{{\bf v}}_{i}(\tau)\rVert\lVert\mathbf{\Phi}(t,\tau)\rVert d\tau,\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
for $i\in\{1,...,N-1\}$, and
\begin{eqnarray}
\lVert\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\eta}$}_{N}(t)\rVert &\leq&\lVert\mathbf{\Phi}(t,0)\rVert \lVert\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\eta}$}_N(0)\rVert + \int_{0}^{t}\lVert\mbox{{\bf v}}_N(\tau)\rVert\lVert\mathbf{\Phi}(t,\tau)\rVert d\tau,\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
which, as $t\to\infty$, yields
\begin{eqnarray}
\limsup_{t\to\infty}\lVert\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\eta}$}_{i}\rVert & \leq & \lVert\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\eta}$}_{i}(0)\rVert\limsup_{t\to\infty}\lVert\mathbf{\Phi}(t,0)\rVert\nonumber\\
&&+\limsup_{t\to\infty}\lVert\mbox{{\bf v}}_{i}\rVert \limsup_{t\to\infty}\int_{0}^{t}\lVert\mathbf{\Phi}(t,\tau))\rVert d\tau\nonumber\\
&&+\limsup_{t\to\infty}\lVert\mbox{{\bf F}}_{\mbox{{\bf x}}}-\mbox{{\bf H}}_{\mbox{{\bf x}}}\rVert\limsup_{t\to\infty}\lVert\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\eta}$}_{i+1}\rVert\nonumber\\
&&\quad\quad\quad\quad\times\limsup_{t\to\infty}\int_{0}^{t}\lVert\mathbf{\Phi}(t,\tau)\rVert d\tau,\label{Norm Error1}
\end{eqnarray}
and
\begin{align}
\limsup_{t\to\infty}\lVert\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\eta}$}_{N}\rVert \leq & \lVert\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\eta}$}_N(0)\rVert \limsup_{t\to\infty}\lVert\mathbf{\Phi}(t,0)\rVert \nonumber\\
&+\limsup_{t\to\infty}\lVert\mbox{{\bf v}}_{N}\rVert\limsup_{t\to\infty}\int_{0}^{t}\lVert\mathbf{\Phi}(t,\tau)\rVert d\tau.\label{Norm Error2}
\end{align}
We know that there exists positive real $\phi$ such that \cite{Daleckii74}
\begin{align*}
\lVert\mathbf{\Phi}(t,\tau)\rVert \leq \phi e^{-\lambda(t-\tau)},
\end{align*}
where $\lambda$ is the maximum Lyapunov exponent of $\mbox{{\bf F}}_{\mbox{{\bf x}}}-\mu\mbox{{\bf H}}_{\mbox{{\bf x}}}$. If $\lambda>0$ this yields
\begin{eqnarray}
\limsup_{t\to\infty}\lVert\mathbf{\Phi}(t,0))\rVert & = & 0,\nonumber \\
\limsup_{t\to\infty}\int_{0}^{t}\lVert\mathbf{\Phi}(t,\tau))\rVert d\tau & \le & \frac{\phi}{\lambda}.\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
Substituting in \eqref{Norm Error1} and \eqref{Norm Error2} yields,
\begin{eqnarray}
\limsup_{t\to\infty}\lVert\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\eta}$}_{i}\rVert & \leq & \frac{\phi}{\lambda} \limsup_{t\to\infty}\lVert\mbox{{\bf F}}_{\mbox{{\bf x}}}-\mbox{{\bf H}}_{\mbox{{\bf x}}}\rVert\lVert\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\eta}$}_{i+1}\rVert\nonumber\\
&&+\frac{\phi}{\lambda}\limsup_{t\to\infty}\lVert\mbox{{\bf v}}_{i}\rVert,\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
and
\begin{eqnarray}
\limsup_{t\to\infty}\lVert\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\eta}$}_{N}\rVert & \leq & \frac{\phi}{\lambda} \limsup_{t\to\infty}\lVert\mbox{{\bf v}}_{N}\rVert.\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
Solving the recursive inequalities we get
\begin{eqnarray}
\limsup_{t\to\infty}\lVert\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\eta}$}_{i}\rVert & \leq & \sum_{j=i}^{N} \left(\frac{\phi}{\lambda}\right)^{N-j+1}\limsup_{t\to\infty}\lVert\mbox{{\bf F}}_{\mbox{{\bf x}}}+\mbox{{\bf H}}_{\mbox{{\bf x}}}\rVert^{N-j}\nonumber\\
&&\quad\quad\quad\quad\times\limsup_{t\to\infty}\lVert\mbox{{\bf v}}_{j}\rVert.\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
\end{proof}
\section{Covariance of $\mbox{{\bf v}}$}\label{covariance}
The covariance of $\mbox{{\bf v}}$ is
\begin{align}\label{correlation1}
\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\Sigma}$}_{\mbox{{\bf v}}}={E}[(\mbox{{\bf v}}-\bar{\mbox{{\bf v}}})(\mbox{{\bf v}}-\bar{\mbox{{\bf v}}})^{T}]= [\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\Sigma}$}_{ij}],\nonumber
\end{align}
where $\bar{\mbox{{\bf v}}}=\mbox{{\bf h}}(\mbox{{\bf s}},\mbox{{\bf s}},\bar{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}})\otimes(\mbox{{\bf D}}^{\scriptsize\mbox{in}}-\bar{d}_{\scriptsize\mbox{in}}\mbox{{\bf I}})$ and $\mbox{{\bf D}}^{\scriptsize\mbox{in}}=\mbox{diag}([d_{1}^{\scriptsize\mbox{in}} \cdots d_{N}^{\scriptsize\mbox{in}}])$. Thus, the $ij$th block of $\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\Sigma}$}_{\mbox{{\bf v}}}$ is
\begin{eqnarray}
\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\Sigma}$}_{ij}&=&\sum_{k,l\in\mbox{${\mathcal{N}}$}}u_{ik}u_{jl}^{\star}E\left[\left(\mbox{{\bf F}}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\gamma}$}}\delta\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\gamma}$}_{k}+\sum_{m\in\mbox{${\mathcal{N}}$}}a_{mk}\mbox{{\bf H}}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}}\delta\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}_{mk}\right)\right.\nonumber\\
&&\times \left.\left(\mbox{{\bf F}}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\gamma}$}}\delta\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\gamma}$}_{l}+\sum_{n\in\mbox{${\mathcal{N}}$}}a_{ln}\mbox{{\bf H}}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}}\delta\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}_{nl}\right)^{T}\right]\nonumber\\
&=&\sum_{k,l\in\mbox{${\mathcal{N}}$}}u_{ik}u_{jl}^{\star}\mbox{{\bf F}}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\gamma}$}}\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\Sigma}$}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\gamma}$}}\mbox{{\bf F}}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\gamma}$}}^{T}\nonumber\\
&&+\sum_{k,l,m,n\in\mbox{${\mathcal{N}}$}}u_{ik}u_{jl}^{\star}a_{km}a_{ln}\mbox{{\bf H}}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}}\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\Sigma}$}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}}\mbox{{\bf H}}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}}^{T}\mathbbm{1}_{k=l}\mathbbm{1}_{m=n}\nonumber\\
&=&\mbox{{\bf F}}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\gamma}$}}\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\Sigma}$}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\gamma}$}}\mbox{{\bf F}}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\gamma}$}}^{T}1_{i=j}+\sum_{k,m\in\mbox{${\mathcal{N}}$}}u_{ik}u_{jk}^{\star}\lvert a_{km}\rvert^{2}\mbox{{\bf H}}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}}\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\Sigma}$}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}}\mbox{{\bf H}}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}}^{T}.\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
\section{Introduction}
The problem of synchronization in a network of identical oscillators was first introduced by Wiener \cite{Wiener65,Arenas08}. Pursuit of the idea by Winfree in his pioneering work \cite{Winfree67} led to this problem being recognized as being important and relevant in many fields of research including biology, physics, and engineering \cite{Newman10}. More recently, the introduction of the framework of master stability function by Pecora and Carroll \cite{Pecora98}, enabled the investigation of the impacts of network structure and the dynamical properties of individual nodes on the stability of the synchronization state \cite{Pecora98,Motter07}. Following the idea of using master stability function to study the network of oscillators, most efforts have been concentrated on the impact of the topology (structure) of different types of networks on the stability of the synchronization state: In \cite{Pecora98}, the short and long wavelength bifurcation phenomena have been studied on regular networks (lattices). Other works look at linking the topological properties such as minimum, maximum and average node degrees, to the stability of the synchronization state in networks \cite{Motter07,Wang02,Manaffam13,Zhou06}. Due to the interesting properties of small-world networks, which have been introduced in the seminal work of Watts and Strogatz \cite{Watts98,Newman99}, most of the following studies were focused on the small-world and scale-free networks. It has been shown that due to better dynamical flow (efficient communications), the synchronization can be stabilized more easily in small-world networks compared to regular networks \cite{Arenas08,Manaffam13,Wu08}. It has also been shown that the synchronizability of networks improves in homogeneous networks in contrast to heterogeneous ones \cite{Nishikawa03}.
Although the study of the synchronization of networks of the identical nodes appears to be matured, few attempts have been made to study networks with nonidentical nodes or couplings. The experiments reported in \cite{Restrepo04} suggest that in the networks where the oscillator dynamics and their couplings vary slightly from each other, the oscillators can be nearly synchronized. That is, the states converge to the vicinity of a certain trajectory (synchronization manifold). In \cite{Sun09} and \cite{Sorrentino11}, a sensitivity analysis of synchronization have been performed for a network of mismatched oscillators. It has been shown that near-synchronization behavior can occur in a network of mismatched oscillators using master stability function. The general stability of the synchronization in network of dynamical systems with nonidentical dynamics for each node is studied in \cite{Xiang07} and \cite{Zhao12} using the Lyapunov direct method. In \cite{Acharyya12}, an approximate master stability function is proposed and the coupling strength is optimized to achieve ``best synchronization properties''.
In this paper, we investigate the synchronization of a network of mismatched oscillators with mismatched couplings. Our formulation also allows the consideration of uncertainties in network link weights, thus generalizing \cite{Sorrentino11} in addition to its main contributions. Since in presence of mismatch there is no unique synchronization state in the network, we use the concept of $\varepsilon$-synchronization \cite{Sun09}, where the steady states of the nodes in the network fall into an $\varepsilon$-neighborhood of a certain trajectory (synchronization manifold). We then use a generalized master stability function to study the behavior of the network around the synchronization state. The proposed generalized master stability function bounds the oscillator states to a neighborhood of average synchronization trajectory as a function of Lyapunov exponents of the dynamical network. These Lyapunov exponents, in turn, are related to eigenvalues of the Laplacian matrix of the network. We then provide a probabilistic treatment of synchronization behavior in terms of mismatch parameters for regular and random network models. We calculate probability of stability of synchronization, and use it to investigate phase transitions of the synchronization in the network as the network and node parameters vary. Finally, we verify our analytical results by a numerical example for a network of van der Pol oscillators \cite{Poland94} with mismatched oscillators and couplings.
\section{Notation and Main Variables}
The set of real (column) $n$-vectors is denoted by $\mathbb{{R}}^{n}$ and the set of real $m\times n$ matrices is denoted by $\mathbb{{R}}^{m\times n}$. We refer to the set of non-negative real numbers by $\mathbb{{R}}_{+}$. Matrices and vectors are denoted by capital and lower-case bold letters, respectively. Identity matrix is shown by \mbox{{\bf I}}. The Euclidean ($\mathcal{L}_{2}$) vector norm is represented by $\lVert\cdot\rVert $. When applied to a matrix, $\lVert\cdot\rVert $ denotes the $\mathcal{L}_{2}$ induced matrix norm, $\lVert\mbox{{\bf A}}\rVert =\sqrt{\lambda_{\max}(\mbox{{\bf A}}^{T}\mbox{{\bf A}})}$. Table \ref{tab:var} summarizes the main variables used.
\begin{table}[!h]
\begin{center}\caption{Main variables}\label{tab:var}
\begin{tabular}{ll}
\hline
\bf{Variable} & \bf{Description}\\
\hline\hline
$\mbox{{\bf x}}_{i}$& State vector of node $i$\\\hline
$\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\gamma}$}_{i}$& Parameters vector of node $i$\\\hline
$\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}_{ji}$& Parameter vector of coupling from node $j$ to node $i$\\\hline
$\mathbf{f}(\mbox{{\bf x}}_{i},\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\gamma}$}_{i})$& Dynamics function of node $i$ \\\hline
$\mbox{{\bf h}}(\mbox{{\bf x}}_{j},\mbox{{\bf x}}_{i},\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}_{ji})$& Coupling function from node $j$ to node $i$ \\\hline
$\mbox{{\bf u}}_{i}$&Input vector for node $i$\\\hline
$\mbox{{\bf F}}_{\mbox{{\bf x}}}$&Jacobian of vector $\mbox{{\bf f}}$ with respect to $\mbox{{\bf x}}$\\\hline
$\mbox{{\bf F}}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\gamma}$}}$&Jacobian of vector $\mbox{{\bf f}}$ with respect to $\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\gamma}$}$\\\hline
$\mbox{{\bf H}}_{\mbox{{\bf x}}}$&Jacobian of coupling vector $\mbox{{\bf h}}$ with respect to $\mbox{{\bf x}}$\\\hline
$\mbox{{\bf H}}_{\mbox{{\bf y}}}$&Jacobian of coupling vector $\mbox{{\bf h}}$ with respect to $\mbox{{\bf y}}$\\\hline
$\mbox{{\bf H}}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}}$&Jacobian of coupling vector $\mbox{{\bf h}}$ with respect to $\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}$\\\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\end{table}%
\section{System Description}
Consider a network of $N$ oscillators, indexed by $\mbox{${\mathcal{N}}$} = \{1~ \cdots ~N\}$. Assume that the dynamics of each isolated oscillator is governed by
\begin{align}
\mbox{$\dot{\mbox{\bf x}}$}_{i}=\mbox{{\bf f}}(\mbox{{\bf x}}_{i},\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\gamma}$}_{i}), \nonumber
\end{align}
where $\mbox{{\bf x}}_{i}\in\mathbb{{R}}^{n}$ and $\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\gamma}$}_{i}\in\mbox{${\mathcal{P}}$}\subseteq \mathbb{{R}}^{p}$ are the state and parameter vectors of local dynamics of node $i$, respectively. $\mbox{${\mathcal{P}}$}$ denotes the set of possible parameter vectors, and $\mbox{{\bf f}}:\mathbb{{R}}^{n+p}\rightarrow\mathbb{{R}}^{n}$ describes the local dynamics of an isolated node.
The dynamics of coupled oscillators are given as
\begin{eqnarray}
\mbox{$\dot{\mbox{\bf x}}$}_{i}&=&\mbox{{\bf f}}(\mbox{{\bf x}}_{i},\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\gamma}$}_{i})+\sum_{i,j\in \,\mbox{${\mathcal{N}}$}}a_{ij}\mbox{{\bf h}}(\mbox{{\bf x}}_{j},\,\mbox{{\bf x}}_{i},\,\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}_{ij}), \label{eq: NetworkDynamics}
\end{eqnarray}
where $\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}_{ij}\in\mbox{${\mathcal{Q}}$}\subseteq\mathbb{{R}}^q$ is the parameter vector of coupling dynamics from node $j$ to node $i$, $\mbox{${\mathcal{Q}}$}$ denotes the set of possible parameter values for couplings. The adjacency matrix of the network is $\mbox{{\bf A}}=[a_{ij}]$, where $a_{ij}\in\mathbb{{R}}_{+}$ is the weight of the link from node $j$ to node $i$. There is no connection if $a_{ij}=0$. Note that we allow the more general case of directed and wighted networks. Moreover, $\mbox{{\bf h}}:\mathbb{{R}}^{2n+q}\rightarrow\mathbb{{R}}^{n}$ models the coupling from node $j$ to node $i$. We assume that $\mbox{{\bf h}}(\mbox{{\bf x}},\mbox{{\bf y}},\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$})$ is Hamiltonian. That is, we assume that $\mbox{{\bf H}}_{\mbox{{\bf x}}}=-\mbox{{\bf H}}_{\mbox{{\bf y}}}$, where $\mbox{{\bf H}}_{\mbox{{\bf x}}}$ and $\mbox{{\bf H}}_{\mbox{{\bf y}}}$ denotes the Jacobians of $\mbox{{\bf h}}(\mbox{{\bf x}},\mbox{{\bf y}},\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$})$ with respect to $\mbox{{\bf x}}$ and $\mbox{{\bf y}}$, respectively. This is a very general assumption and encompasses the {\em diffusive coupling} model predominantly used in the literature \cite{Nishikawa03,Sorrentino11,Acharyya12}, where it is assumed that $\mbox{{\bf h}}(\mbox{{\bf x}}_1,\mbox{{\bf x}}_2,[\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}_1~\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}_2])=\tilde{\mbox{{\bf h}}}(\mbox{{\bf x}}_1,\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}_1)-\tilde{\mbox{{\bf h}}}(\mbox{{\bf x}}_2,\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}_2)$.
Note that this generalized model also incorporates uncertainties in the adjacency matrix of the network, $\mbox{{\bf A}}=[a_{ij}]+[\delta a_{ij}]$, considered in \cite{Sorrentino11}, by absorbing $\delta a_{ij}$ into $\theta_{ij}$, i.e., $\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}'_{ij}=[\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}_{ij}^T~\delta a_{ij}]^T$.
\section{Invariant Synchronization Manifold}
Let $\mbox{{\bf s}}$ be a weighted average of the trajectories of all oscillators
\begin{eqnarray}
\mbox{{\bf s}}&=&\sum_{i\in\,\mbox{${\mathcal{N}}$}}\alpha_{i}\mbox{{\bf x}}_{i},\label{eq: bs}
\end{eqnarray}
where $\sum_{i\in\,\mbox{${\mathcal{N}}$}}\alpha_{i}=1$. Define the deviation of the trajectory of oscillator $i$ from \mbox{{\bf s}}~as
\begin{eqnarray}
\mbox{{\bf e}}_{i}&=&\mbox{{\bf x}}_{i}-\mbox{{\bf s}}.\label{eq: error}
\end{eqnarray}
Moreover, let $\mbox{{\bf L}}=[l_{ij}]$ be the Laplacian matrix of the network \cite{Mohar91},
\begin{equation}
\mbox{{\bf L}}=\mbox{diag}([d^{\scriptsize\mbox{in}}_{1} \cdots d^{\scriptsize\mbox{in}}_{N}])-\mbox{{\bf A}},\nonumber
\end{equation}
where $d_{i}^{\scriptsize\mbox{in}}=\sum_{j\,\in\,\mbox{${\mathcal{N}}$}}a_{ij}$ is the in-degree of node $i$.
\begin{lemma}
$\mbox{{\bf s}}=\sum_{i\in\,\mbox{${\mathcal{N}}$}}\alpha_{i}\mbox{{\bf x}}_{i}$ is an invariant synchronization manifold of the network if $\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\alpha}$}=[\alpha_1\cdots\alpha_N]^T$ is a null vector of $\mbox{{\bf L}}^T$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Taking derivative of \eqref{eq: bs} yields
\begin{eqnarray} \label{TrajectoryS}
\mbox{$\dot{\mbox{\bf s}}$}&=&\sum_{i\,\in\,\mbox{${\mathcal{N}}$}}\alpha_{i}\mbox{$\dot{\mbox{\bf x}}$}_{i}\nonumber\\
&=&\sum_{i\,\in\,\mbox{${\mathcal{N}}$}}\alpha_{i}\mbox{{\bf f}}(\mbox{{\bf s}}+\mbox{{\bf e}}_{i},\,\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\bar{\gamma}}$}+\delta\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\gamma}$}_{i})\nonumber\\
&&+\sum_{i,j\in\,\mbox{${\mathcal{N}}$}}a_{ij}\alpha_{i}\mbox{{\bf h}}(\mbox{{\bf s}}+\mbox{{\bf e}}_{j},\,\mbox{{\bf s}}+\mbox{{\bf e}}_{i},\,\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\bar{\theta}}$}+\delta\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}_{ij}),
\end{eqnarray}
where $\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\bar{\gamma}}$}=\sum_{i\,\in\,\mbox{${\mathcal{N}}$}}\alpha_{i}\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\gamma}$}_{i}$, $\delta\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\gamma}$}_{i}=\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\gamma}$}_{i}-\bar{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\gamma}$}}$, $\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\bar{\theta}}$}=\frac{1}{\bar{d}_{\scriptsize\mbox{in}}}\sum_{i,j\,\in\,\mbox{${\mathcal{N}}$}}\alpha_{i}a_{ij}\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}_{ij}$, $\delta\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}_{ij}=\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}_{ij}-\bar{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}}$, and $\bar{d}_{\scriptsize\mbox{in}}=\sum_{i\in\mbox{${\mathcal{N}}$}}\alpha_i d^{\scriptsize\mbox{in}}_i$ is the weighted average in-degree of the network. Linearization of \eqref{TrajectoryS} around $(\mbox{{\bf s}},\,\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\bar{\gamma}}$},\,\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\bar{\theta}}$})$ results in
\begin{eqnarray}
\mbox{$\dot{\mbox{\bf s}}$}&=&\sum_{i\,\in\,\mbox{${\mathcal{N}}$}}\alpha_{i}\mbox{{\bf f}}(\mbox{{\bf s}},\,\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\bar{\gamma}}$})+\mbox{{\bf F}}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\gamma}$}}\sum_{i\,\in\mbox{${\mathcal{N}}$}}\alpha_{i}\delta\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\gamma}$}_{i}\nonumber\\
&&+\sum_{i,\,j\in\,\mbox{${\mathcal{N}}$}}a_{ij}\alpha_{i}\mbox{{\bf h}}(\mbox{{\bf s}},\,\mbox{{\bf s}},\,\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\bar{\theta}}$})+\mbox{{\bf H}}_{\mbox{{\bf x}}}\sum_{i,\,j\in\,\mbox{${\mathcal{N}}$}}a_{ij}\alpha_{i}(\mbox{{\bf e}}_{j}-\mbox{{\bf e}}_{i})\nonumber\\
&&+\mbox{{\bf H}}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}}\sum_{i,\,j\in\,\mbox{${\mathcal{N}}$}}a_{ij}\alpha_{i}\delta\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}_{ji},\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
where $\mbox{{\bf H}}_{\mbox{{\bf x}}}$ and $\mbox{{\bf H}}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}}$ are Jacobians of $\mbox{{\bf h}}$ with respect to its first and third variable, respectively. Recalling that $\sum_{i\in\,\mbox{${\mathcal{N}}$}}\alpha_{i}=1$, we have
\begin{eqnarray}
\mbox{$\dot{\mbox{\bf s}}$}&=&\mbox{{\bf f}}(\mbox{{\bf s}},\,\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\bar{\gamma}}$})+\mbox{{\bf h}}(\mbox{{\bf s}},\,\mbox{{\bf s}},\,\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\bar{\theta}}$})\sum_{i\,\in\,\mbox{${\mathcal{N}}$}}d^{\scriptsize\mbox{in}}_{i}\alpha_{i}\nonumber\\
&&+\mbox{{\bf H}}_{\mbox{{\bf x}}}\sum_{i,j\in\,\mbox{${\mathcal{N}}$}}a_{ij}\alpha_{i}(\mbox{{\bf e}}_{j}-\mbox{{\bf e}}_{i}).\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
For $\mbox{{\bf s}}$ to be an invariant manifold, the last term in the above equation must be zero. This is achieved if $\alpha_{i}$ are chosen to satisfy
\begin{eqnarray}
\sum_{i,\,j\in\,\mbox{${\mathcal{N}}$}}a_{ij}\alpha_{i}(\mbox{{\bf e}}_{j}-\mbox{{\bf e}}_{i})&=&\sum_{i\,\in\,\mbox{${\mathcal{N}}$}}\left[\sum_{j\,\in\,\mbox{${\mathcal{N}}$}} (a_{ji}\alpha_{j}-a_{ij}\alpha_{i})\right] \mbox{{\bf e}}_{i}\nonumber\\
&=&\mbox{{\bf 0}}.\label{AlphaEq}
\end{eqnarray}
Equation \eqref{AlphaEq}, in turn, will be satisfied if $\sum_{j\,\in\,\mbox{${\mathcal{N}}$}} (a_{ij}\alpha_{j}-a_{ij}\alpha_{i})=0$ for all $i\,\in\,\mbox{${\mathcal{N}}$}$, which in matrix form can be represented as
\begin{equation}
\mbox{{\bf A}}^T\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\alpha}$}=\mbox{diag}([d^{\scriptsize\mbox{in}}_{1} \cdots d^{\scriptsize\mbox{in}}_{N}])\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\alpha}$},\nonumber
\end{equation}
where $\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\alpha}$}=[\alpha_{1}\cdots\alpha_{N}]$, or
\begin{equation}
\left[\mbox{{\bf A}}^T-\mbox{diag}([d^{\scriptsize\mbox{in}}_{1} \cdots d^{\scriptsize\mbox{in}}_{N}])\right]\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\alpha}$}=\mbox{{\bf 0}}=\mbox{{\bf L}}^T\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\alpha}$}.\nonumber
\end{equation}
That is, $\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\alpha}$}$ is a null vector of $\mbox{{\bf L}}^T$.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}
We note that, by definition, $\mbox{{\bf L}}$ has zero row sum. Thus, it is singular. Consequently, $\mbox{{\bf L}}^T$ always has a null vector, $\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\alpha}$}$. This means that any network has at least one invariant manifold.
\end{remark}
\begin{remark}
If the the network is connected, the invariant synchronization manifold is unique. This is due to the fact that for connected networks the nullity of $\mbox{{\bf L}}$ is one. Thus, $\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\alpha}$}$ and, therefore, $\mbox{{\bf s}}$ are unique.
\end{remark}
\begin{remark} In the special case where the network is undirected, $\mbox{{\bf L}}$ is symmetric. Thus, it also has zero column-sum. Consequently, $\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\alpha}$} = \frac{1}{N}[1~ \cdots~1]$ is its null vector, and the invariant manifold, $\mbox{{\bf s}}$, is the simple average of the trajectories.
\end{remark}
With $\alpha_{i}$ chosen such that $\mbox{{\bf s}}$ is an invariant manifold, we have
\begin{eqnarray}\label{eq: Trajectory}
\mbox{$\dot{\mbox{\bf s}}$}&=&\mbox{{\bf f}}(\mbox{{\bf s}},\,\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\bar{\gamma}}$})+\bar{d}_{\scriptsize\mbox{in}}\,\mbox{{\bf h}}(\mbox{{\bf s}},\,\mbox{{\bf s}},\,\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\bar{\theta}}$}),\\
\mbox{{\bf s}}({0})&=&\sum_{i\,\in\,\mbox{${\mathcal{N}}$}}\alpha_i\mbox{{\bf x}}_{i}({0}),\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
where $\mbox{{\bf s}}(0)$ and $\mbox{{\bf x}}({0})$ are initial states.
\section{Generalized Master Stability Function}
In this section we introduce a master stability function which generalizes those in \cite{Sun09} and \cite{Sorrentino11} by taking into account the parameter mismatch in the links and applies to directed and weighted networks.
As it has been shown in previous section, every connected network has a unique invariant manifold. Hence, we can define $\varepsilon$-synchronization as
\begin{mydef} A network of oscillators is $\varepsilon$-synchronized if there exists $\varepsilon>0$ such that
\begin{align}
\limsup_{t\to\infty} \lVert\mbox{{\bf e}}\rVert \le \varepsilon,\nonumber
\end{align}
where $\mbox{{\bf e}} = [\mbox{{\bf e}}_1~...~\mbox{{\bf e}}_N]^T$.
\end{mydef}
This definition means that the error from the manifold is contained in a ball of radius $\varepsilon$.
We note that our definition is different but closely related to that given in \cite{Zhao12}.
Substituting \eqref{eq: NetworkDynamics} and \eqref{eq: bs} in \eqref{eq: error}, and using Taylor series, the dynamics of the error with respect to the synchronization manifold, $\mbox{{\bf e}}_i$, is given by
\begin{eqnarray}\label{eq: ErrorDynamics}
\mbox{$\dot{\mbox{\bf e}}$}_{i}&=&\mbox{{\bf F}}_{\mbox{{\bf x}}}\mbox{{\bf e}}_{i}-\sum_{j=1}^{N}l_{ij}\mbox{{\bf H}}_{\mbox{{\bf x}}}\mbox{{\bf e}}_{j}+ \mbox{{\bf F}}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\gamma}$}}\delta\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\gamma}$}_{i}+\sum_{j=1}^{N}\mathbbm{1}_{i\ne j}l_{ij}\mbox{{\bf H}}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}} \delta\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}_{ij}\nonumber\\
&&+(d_i^{\scriptsize\mbox{in}}-\bar{d}_{\scriptsize\mbox{in}})\mbox{{\bf h}}(\mbox{{\bf s}},\,\mbox{{\bf s}},\,\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\bar{\theta}}$}),
\end{eqnarray}
where $\mathbbm{1}_{X}$ is the indicator function of $X$. Stacking (\ref{eq: ErrorDynamics}) for all $i$ yields the dynamics of the deviation of node trajectories from $\mbox{{\bf s}}$:
\begin{eqnarray}\label{eq: ErrorDynamicsNonDiag}
\dot{\mbox{{\bf e}}}&=&\left(\mbox{{\bf I}}\otimes\mbox{{\bf F}}_{\mbox{{\bf x}}}-\mbox{{\bf L}}\otimes \mbox{{\bf H}}_{\mbox{{\bf x}}}\right)\delta\mbox{{\bf x}}+\left(\mbox{{\bf I}}\otimes\mbox{{\bf F}}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\gamma}$}}\right)\delta\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\gamma}$}\nonumber\\
&&+\left(\boldsymbol{\mathcal{A}}\otimes\mbox{{\bf H}}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}}\right)\delta \mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}+(\mbox{{\bf d}}^{\scriptsize\mbox{in}}-\bar{d}_{\scriptsize\mbox{in}}\mathbf{1}^T_N)\otimes\mbox{{\bf h}}(\mbox{{\bf s}},\,\mbox{{\bf s}},\,\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\bar{\theta}}$}),
\end{eqnarray}
where
\begin{eqnarray}
{\delta \mbox{$\boldsymbol{\gamma}$}}&=&[\delta\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\gamma}$}_{1}^{T} \cdots \delta\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\gamma}$}_{N}^{T}]^{T},\nonumber\\
{\delta \mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}}& = & [\delta\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}_{11}^{T}\cdots\delta\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}_{1N}^{T}~\delta\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}_{21}^T\cdots\delta\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}_{2N}^T~\cdots~\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}_{N1}^T\cdots\delta\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}_{NN}^T]^{T},\nonumber\\
\mbox{{\bf d}}^{\scriptsize\mbox{in}}&=&[d_1^{\scriptsize\mbox{in}} \cdots d_N^{\scriptsize\mbox{in}}]^T,\nonumber\\
\boldsymbol{\mathcal{A}}&=&\mbox{diag}([\mbox{{\bf a}}_1 \cdots \mbox{{\bf a}}_N]),\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
and $\mbox{{\bf a}}_i$ is the $i$th row of $\mbox{{\bf A}}$.
Let $\mbox{{\bf L}}=\mbox{{\bf P}}\mbox{{\bf J}}\mbox{{\bf P}}^{-1}$ be the Jordan decomposition of $\mbox{{\bf L}}$, where $\mbox{{\bf P}}=[p_{ij}]$ is a similarity transform and $\mbox{{\bf J}}$ is in Jordan form. Then, \eqref{eq: ErrorDynamicsNonDiag} can be rewritten as
\begin{eqnarray}\label{eq: NetDiag1}
\dot{\mbox{{\bf e}}}&=&\left(\mbox{{\bf P}}\otimes\mbox{{\bf I}}\right)\left(\mbox{{\bf I}}\otimes\mbox{{\bf F}}_{\mbox{{\bf x}}}-\mbox{{\bf J}}\otimes \mbox{{\bf H}}_{\mbox{{\bf x}}}\right)\left(\mbox{{\bf P}}^{-1}\otimes\mbox{{\bf I}}\right)\mbox{{\bf e}}+\left(\mbox{{\bf I}}\otimes\mbox{{\bf F}}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\gamma}$}}\right){\delta \mbox{$\boldsymbol{\gamma}$}}\nonumber\\
&&+\left(\boldsymbol{\mathcal{A}}\otimes\mbox{{\bf H}}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}}\right){\delta \mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}}+(\mbox{{\bf d}}^{\scriptsize\mbox{in}}-\bar{d}_{\scriptsize\mbox{in}}\mathbf{1}_N^T)\otimes\mbox{{\bf h}}(\mbox{{\bf s}},\,\mbox{{\bf s}},\,\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\bar{\theta}}$}).\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
Using the similarity transform
\begin{equation}
\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\eta}$}=\left(\mbox{{\bf P}}^{-1}\otimes\mbox{{\bf I}}\right)\mbox{{\bf e}},\nonumber
\end{equation}
where $\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\eta}$}=[\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\eta}$}^T_1\cdots\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\eta}$}_N^T]^T$, we obtain
\begin{eqnarray}\label{eq: NetDiag2}
\dot{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\eta}$}}&=&\left(\mbox{{\bf I}}\otimes\mbox{{\bf F}}_{\mbox{{\bf x}}}-\mbox{{\bf J}}\otimes \mbox{{\bf H}}_{\mbox{{\bf x}}}\right)\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\eta}$}+\left(\mbox{{\bf P}}^{-1}\otimes\mbox{{\bf I}}\right)\left(\mbox{{\bf I}}\otimes\mbox{{\bf F}}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\gamma}$}}\right){\delta \mbox{$\boldsymbol{\gamma}$}}\nonumber\\
&&+\left(\mbox{{\bf P}}^{-1}\otimes\mbox{{\bf I}}\right)\left(\boldsymbol{\mathcal{A}}\otimes\mbox{{\bf H}}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}}\right){\delta \mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}}\nonumber\\
&&+\left(\mbox{{\bf P}}^{-1}\otimes\mbox{{\bf I}}\right)\left((\mbox{{\bf d}}-\bar{d}_{\scriptsize\mbox{in}}\mathbf{1}_N^T)\otimes\mbox{{\bf h}}(\mbox{{\bf s}},\,\mbox{{\bf s}},\,\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\bar{\theta}}$})\right)\nonumber\\
&=&\left(\mbox{{\bf I}}\otimes\mbox{{\bf F}}_{\mbox{{\bf x}}}-\mbox{{\bf J}}\otimes\mbox{{\bf H}}_{\mbox{{\bf x}}}\right)\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\eta}$}+\left(\mbox{{\bf P}}^{-1}\otimes\mbox{{\bf F}}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\gamma}$}}\right){\delta \mbox{$\boldsymbol{\gamma}$}}\nonumber\\
&&+\left(\mbox{{\bf P}}^{-1}\boldsymbol{\mathcal{A}}\otimes\mbox{{\bf H}}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}}\right){\delta \mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}}\nonumber\\
&&+\left(\mbox{{\bf P}}^{-1}(\mbox{{\bf d}}-\bar{d}_{\scriptsize\mbox{in}}\mathbf{1}^T_N)\right)\otimes\mbox{{\bf h}}(\mbox{{\bf s}},\,\mbox{{\bf s}},\,\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\bar{\theta}}$}).\nonumber\\
&=&\left(\mbox{{\bf I}}\otimes\mbox{{\bf F}}_{\mbox{{\bf x}}}-\mbox{{\bf J}}\otimes\mbox{{\bf H}}_{\mbox{{\bf x}}}\right)\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\eta}$}+\mbox{{\bf v}},
\end{eqnarray}
where $\mbox{{\bf v}}=[\mbox{{\bf v}}_1\cdots\mbox{{\bf v}}_N]$,
\begin{eqnarray}
\mbox{{\bf v}}_{i}&=&\sum_{j\,\in\,\mbox{${\mathcal{N}}$}}q_{ij}\Bigg[\mbox{{\bf F}}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\gamma}$}}\delta \mbox{$\boldsymbol{\gamma}$}_{j}+\sum_{k=1,k\ne j}^{N} a_{jk}\mbox{{\bf H}}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}}\delta\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}_{jk}\nonumber\\
&&+\mbox{{\bf h}}(\mbox{{\bf s}},\,\mbox{{\bf s}},\,\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\bar{\theta}}$})(d_i^{\scriptsize\mbox{in}}-\bar{d}_{\scriptsize\mbox{in}})\Bigg],\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
and $q_{ij}$ are the elements of $\mbox{{\bf Q}}=\mbox{{\bf P}}^{-1}$. It is clear that stability of $\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\eta}$}$ and $\mbox{{\bf e}}$ are equivalent.
To study the stability of \eqref{eq: NetDiag2}, let us first consider the simpler case where $\mbox{{\bf J}}$ consists of a single Jordan block, i.e.
\begin{eqnarray}
\mbox{{\bf J}}=\mbox{{\bf J}}_{N}(\mu)=\left[\begin{array}{cccccc}
\mu& 1&0&\cdots&0& 0\\
0&\mu&1&\cdots & 0 & 0\\
0&0 &\mu&\cdots & 0 & 0\\
\vdots&\vdots&\vdots&\ddots&\vdots&\vdots\\
0&0&0&\cdots&\mu & 1\\
0&0&0&\cdots&0 & \mu
\end{array}\right].\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
\begin{lemma}\label{boundlemma}
For system
\begin{eqnarray*}
\dot{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\eta}$}}=\left(\mbox{{\bf I}}\otimes\mbox{{\bf F}}_{\mbox{{\bf x}}}-\mbox{{\bf J}}_N(\mu)\otimes\mbox{{\bf H}}_{\mbox{{\bf x}}}\right)\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\eta}$}+\mbox{{\bf v}},
\end{eqnarray*}
there exists $\phi>0$ such that
\begin{eqnarray}
\limsup_{t\to\infty}\lVert\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\eta}$}_i\rVert\le\sum_{j=i}^N \left(\frac{\phi}{\lambda}\right)^{N-j+1}\limsup_{t\to\infty}\lVert\mbox{{\bf F}}_{\mbox{{\bf x}}}-\mbox{{\bf H}}_{\mbox{{\bf x}}}\rVert^{N-j} \nonumber\\
\times \limsup_{t\to\infty}\lVert\mbox{{\bf v}}_j\rVert,\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
for all $i$, if $\lambda>0$, where $\lambda=\mbox{MLE}(\mbox{{\bf F}}_{\mbox{{\bf x}}}-\mu\mbox{{\bf H}}_{\mbox{{\bf x}}})$, and $\mbox{MLE}(.)$ returns the maximum Lyapunov exponent of the argument.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
See Appendix \ref{NonDiag}.
\end{proof}
Now, let us assume that $\mbox{{\bf J}}$ consists of $M$ Jordan blocks with eigenvalues $\mu_m$ and sizes $n_m,~m\in\{1,\cdots,M\}$, where $\sum_{m=1}^M n_m=N$. Then $N_m=\sum_{m=1}^j n_m$ will be the index of the last row of the $m$th Jordan block. Define $J(i)$ to be the index of the Jordan block that contains the $i$th row of $\mbox{{\bf J}}$. In other words, $J(i)=m$, if $N_{m-1}<i\le N_m$.
\begin{theo}\label{Theo-E-bound}
A network of oscillators is $\varepsilon$-synchronized if $\lambda_m=\mbox{MLE}(\mbox{{\bf F}}_{\mbox{{\bf x}}}-\mu_m\mbox{{\bf H}}_{\mbox{{\bf x}}})>0$ and
\begin{align}
\|\mbox{{\bf P}}\|^2\sum_{j=1}^{N-1}\Bigg(\sum_{k=1}^{n_{J(j)}} \left(\frac{\phi_{J(j)}}{\lambda_{J(j)}}\right)^{n_{J(j)}-k+1} \quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\nonumber\\
\times \limsup_{t\to\infty}\lVert\mbox{{\bf F}}_{\mbox{{\bf x}}}-\mbox{{\bf H}}_{\mbox{{\bf x}}}\rVert^{n_{\scriptsize J(j)}-k}\limsup_{t\to\infty}\lVert\mbox{{\bf v}}_{j}\rVert\bigg)^2 \leq{\varepsilon}^2,\label{eq: theo1}
\end{align}
where $\phi_m$ satisfies
\begin{eqnarray}
\forall t,\tau,\quad\|\mathbf{\Phi}_m(t,\tau)\| \le \phi_me^{-\lambda_m(t-\tau)}.\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
and $\mathbf{\Phi}_m(t,\tau)$ is the state transition matrix of $\mbox{{\bf F}}_{\mbox{{\bf x}}}-\mu_m\mbox{{\bf H}}_{\mbox{{\bf x}}}$.
\end{theo}
\begin{proof} We have
\begin{eqnarray}
\limsup_{t\rightarrow\infty}\lVert\mbox{{\bf e}}\rVert^2 & = & \limsup_{t\to\infty}\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\eta}$}^T(\mbox{{\bf P}}^T\otimes\mbox{{\bf I}})(\mbox{{\bf P}}\otimes\mbox{{\bf I}})\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\eta}$}\nonumber\\
&\le & \|\mbox{{\bf P}}^T\mbox{{\bf P}}\| \limsup_{t\to\infty}\|\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\eta}$}\|^2\nonumber\\
&=&\|\mbox{{\bf P}}\|^2\limsup_{t\to\infty} \|\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\eta}$}\|^2.\label{eq: GeneralInequality}
\end{eqnarray}
For any Laplacian matrix, we have $\mu_M=0$. If the network is connected, we further have $n_M=1$. Thus,
\begin{eqnarray}
\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\eta}$}_N=\sum_{j=1}^N \alpha_j\mbox{{\bf e}}_j=\sum_{j=1}^N \alpha_j(\mbox{{\bf x}}_j-\mbox{{\bf s}})=\left(\sum_{j=1}^N \alpha_j\mbox{{\bf x}}_j\right) -\mbox{{\bf s}}=\mbox{{\bf 0}},\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
which together with \eqref{eq: GeneralInequality} yields
\begin{eqnarray}
\limsup_{t\rightarrow\infty}\lVert\mbox{{\bf e}}\rVert^2 & \le & \|\mbox{{\bf P}}\|^2\sum_{i=1}^{N-1}\limsup_{t\to\infty}\|\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\eta}$}_i\|^2.\label{eq: inequalityTheo1}
\end{eqnarray}
Lemma \ref{boundlemma} upper bounds the right hand side of \eqref{eq: inequalityTheo1} by the left hand side of \eqref{eq: theo1}.
\end{proof}
\begin{corollary}\label{LemmaSymmetricBound}
A symmetric network of oscillators is $\varepsilon$-synchronized if $\lambda_j=\mbox{MLE}(\mbox{{\bf F}}_{\mbox{{\bf x}}}-\mu_j\mbox{{\bf H}}_{\mbox{{\bf x}}})>0$ and
\begin{equation}\label{eq: coro1}
\sum_{j=1}^{N-1}\left(\frac {\phi_j}{\lambda_j}\right)^2\limsup_{t\rightarrow\infty}\lVert\mbox{{\bf v}}_j(t)\rVert^2 \leq{\varepsilon^2},
\end{equation}
where $\phi_j$ satisfies
\begin{eqnarray}
\forall t,\tau,\quad\|\mathbf{\Phi}_j(t,\tau)\| \le \phi_je^{-\lambda_j(t-\tau)},\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
and $\mathbf{\Phi}_j(t,\tau)$ is the state transition matrix of $\mbox{{\bf F}}_{\mbox{{\bf x}}}-\mu_j\mbox{{\bf H}}_{\mbox{{\bf x}}}$.
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}
Since $\mbox{{\bf L}}$ is symmetric, it can be diagonalized by unitary matrix $\mbox{{\bf P}}=\mbox{{\bf U}}=[u_{ij}]$, where $\mbox{{\bf U}}^H\mbox{{\bf U}}=\mbox{{\bf I}}$. Thus, each Jordan block will be of size 1. This means that $M=N$, $n_m=1$, and $J(i)=i$. Thus, \eqref{eq: theo1} reduces to
\begin{align}
\sum_{j=1}^{N-1}\left(\frac{\phi_{j}}{\lambda_{j}}\right)^2 \limsup_{t\to\infty}\lVert\mbox{{\bf v}}_{j} \rVert^2 \leq{\varepsilon}^2.\nonumber
\end{align}
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}
In proof of Corollary \ref{LemmaSymmetricBound}, since unitary transformation preserves Euclidean norm, \eqref{eq: inequalityTheo1} holds with equality. Thus, Corollary \ref{LemmaSymmetricBound} is relatively less conservative than Theorem \ref{Theo-E-bound}.
\end{remark}
\section{Probability of Stability}
In the remaining of the paper, we make the following assumptions:
\begin{ass} \label{ass:Symmetric}
The network is symmetric.
\end{ass}
This implies that $\mbox{{\bf L}}$ is diagonalizable by a unitary matrix, $\mbox{{\bf U}}=[u_{ij}]$.
\begin{ass} \label{ass:Gaussian}
Mismatch parameters, $\delta \mbox{$\boldsymbol{\gamma}$}_{i}$ and $\delta\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}_{ij}$, are independent zero mean Gaussian random vectors with covariance matrices, $\boldsymbol{\Sigma}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\gamma}$}}=E[(\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\gamma}$}_{i}-\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\bar{\gamma}}$})(\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\gamma}$}_{i}-\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\bar{\gamma}}$})^{T}]$ and $\boldsymbol{\Sigma}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}}=E[(\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}_{ij}-\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\bar{\theta}}$})(\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}_{ij}-\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\bar{\theta}}$})^{T}]$, respectively.
\end{ass}
Under Assumption \ref{ass:Gaussian}, $\mbox{{\bf v}}_i$ are linear combination of independent Gaussian random variables. Thus, they are jointly Gaussian. To calculate the probability of \eqref{eq: coro1} being satisfied, we need to find the probability density function of $\mbox{{\bf v}}=[\mbox{{\bf v}}_1^T \cdots \mbox{{\bf v}}_{N}^T]^T$.
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma: Covariance}
The covariance matrix of $\mbox{{\bf v}}$ is $\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\Sigma}$}_{\mbox{{\bf v}}}=[\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\Sigma}$}_{ij}]$ where
\begin{align}
\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\Sigma}$}_{ij}=\mbox{{\bf F}}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\gamma}$}} \mbox{$\boldsymbol{\Sigma}$}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\gamma}$}} \mbox{{\bf F}}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\gamma}$}}^T \mathbbm{1}_{i=j}+\sum_{l=1}^N u_{il}u_{jl}^* \sum_{k=1}^N a^2_{lk} \mbox{{\bf H}}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}} \mbox{$\boldsymbol{\Sigma}$}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}} \mbox{{\bf H}}^T_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}}.\nonumber
\end{align}
\end{lemma}
\textit{Proof:} See Appendix \ref{covariance}.
We now provide upper bounds on the probability of stable synchronization for unweighted regular, Erd\"os-R\'enyi, and Newman-Watts networks.
\begin{theo}\label{TheoremRing}
Under Assumptions \ref{ass:Symmetric} and \ref{ass:Gaussian}, the probability of stable synchronization of an unweighted $K$-regular network of oscillators is lower bounded by
\begin{align}\label{eq: Pstab}
P_{\mbox{\scriptsize stab}}^{\mbox{\scriptsize LB}}(\varepsilon)=&\left[\prod_{i=2}^{N-1}\left(\frac{\phi_1~\lambda_i}{\lambda_1~\phi_i}\right)^{n}\right]\nonumber\\
&\times \sum_{j=0}^\infty a^{(N-1)}_jP\left(\frac{(N-1) n}{2}+j,\frac{\lambda_1^2\varepsilon^2}{\phi_1^2\sigma^2}\right),
\end{align}
where $P(\cdot,\cdot)$ is the regularized gamma function,
\begin{eqnarray*}
a_j^{(i)} & = & \sum_{k=0}^j a_k^{(i-1)}\frac{n_{j-k}}{(j-k)!}(1-\frac{\phi_1^2~\lambda_i^2}{\lambda_1^2~\phi_i^2})^{j-k},\\
a_k^{(2)} & = & \frac{n_k}{k!}\left(1-\frac{\phi_1^2~\lambda_2^2}{\lambda_1^2~\phi_2^2}\right)^k,\\
n_k & = & \prod_{l=0}^{k-1} \left(\frac{n}{2}+l\right),
\end{eqnarray*}
and
\begin{align}
\sigma=\limsup_{t\to\infty}\| \mbox{{\bf F}}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\gamma}$}} \Sigma_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\gamma}$}} \mbox{{\bf F}}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\gamma}$}}^T+ K\mbox{{\bf H}}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}}\Sigma_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}}\mbox{{\bf H}}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}}^T\|^{1/2}.\label{eq: normSigma}
\end{align}
\end{theo}
\begin{proof}
Since the network is unweighted and $K$-regular, we have $d_i=\sum_{k=1}^Na^2_{ik}=K$. According to Lemma \ref{lemma: Covariance} the blocks of the covariance matrix, $\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\Sigma}$}_{\mbox{{\bf v}}}$, are
\begin{eqnarray}
\boldsymbol{\Sigma}_{{i}{j}} & =& \mbox{{\bf F}}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\gamma}$}}{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\Sigma}$}}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\gamma}$}}\mbox{{\bf F}}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\gamma}$}}^{T}\mathbbm{1}_{i=j}+K\mbox{{\bf H}}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}}~{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\Sigma}$}}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}}\mbox{{\bf H}}^{T}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}}\sum_{l=1}^N u_{il}u_{jl}^*.\nonumber\\
& =& (\mbox{{\bf F}}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\gamma}$}}{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\Sigma}$}}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\gamma}$}}\mbox{{\bf F}}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\gamma}$}}^{T}+K\mbox{{\bf H}}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}}{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\Sigma}$}}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}}\mbox{{\bf H}}^{T}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}})\mathbbm{1}_{i=j}.\label{eq: Cov. Regular}
\end{eqnarray}
Hence, $\mbox{{\bf v}}_i$ are uncorrelated. The mean value of $\mbox{{\bf v}}_i$ can be computed as
\begin{eqnarray}
E[\mbox{{\bf v}}_{i}]&=&\sum_{j\,\in\,\mbox{${\mathcal{N}}$}}q_{ij}\Bigg(\mbox{{\bf F}}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\gamma}$}}E[\delta \mbox{$\boldsymbol{\gamma}$}_{j}]+\sum_{k=1,k\ne j}^{N} a_{jk}\mbox{{\bf H}}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}}E[\delta\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}_{jk}]\nonumber\\
&&+\mbox{{\bf h}}(\mbox{{\bf s}},\,\mbox{{\bf s}},\,\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\bar{\theta}}$})(K-\bar{d}_{\scriptsize\mbox{in}})\Bigg)=\mathbf{0},\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
which follows noting that $\delta\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\gamma}$}_{i}$ and $\delta\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}_{ij}$ have zero mean and $\bar{d}_{\scriptsize\mbox{in}}=K$. Since $\mbox{{\bf v}}_i$ are jointly Gaussian, uncorrelated, and have zero mean, they are independent.
Now, let us define the whitened Gaussian random vectors
\begin{align}
\mbox{{\bf z}}_i=\mathbf{\boldsymbol{\Sigma}}_{ii}^{-\frac{1}{2}}\mbox{{\bf v}}_{i}.\nonumber
\end{align}
Since Euclidean norm is sub-multiplicative, we have
\begin{eqnarray}\label{eq: supB}
\lVert\mbox{{\bf v}}_{i}\rVert & \leq & \lVert\mbox{{\bf z}}_{i}\rVert \left\|\mathbf{\boldsymbol{\Sigma}}_{ii}^{\frac{1}{2}}\right\|.\nonumber\\
\limsup_{t\to\infty}\lVert\mbox{{\bf v}}_{i}\rVert & \leq & \limsup_{t\to \infty} \left(\lVert\mbox{{\bf z}}_{i}\rVert \left\|\mathbf{\boldsymbol{\Sigma}}_{ii}^{\frac{1}{2}}\right\|\right).\nonumber\\
& \leq & \limsup_{t\to \infty} \lVert\mbox{{\bf z}}_{i}\rVert \limsup_{t\to \infty}\left\|\mathbf{\boldsymbol{\Sigma}}_{ii}^{\frac{1}{2}}\right\|.\nonumber\\
& = & \lVert\mbox{{\bf z}}_{i}\rVert \limsup_{t\to \infty}\left\|\mathbf{\boldsymbol{\Sigma}}_{ii}^{\frac{1}{2}}\right\|,\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
The last equality is due to the fact that with the whitening of $\|\mbox{{\bf v}}_i\|$, $\|\mbox{{\bf z}}_i\|$ is no longer time variable. In other words, $\|\mbox{{\bf z}}_i\|$ is a random variable (not a random process). Since $\lVert\mbox{{\bf z}}_{i}\rVert^2$ is the norm squared of a white Gaussian $n$-vector, it has a chi-squared distribution with $n$ degrees of freedom. Applying the result of Corollary \ref{LemmaSymmetricBound},
\begin{eqnarray}
\lVert\mbox{{\bf e}}\rVert^2&=&\sum_{i=1}^{N-1}\lVert\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\eta}$}_i\rVert^2\nonumber\\
&\le&\sum_{i=1}^{N-1}\left(\frac{\phi_i}{\lambda_i}\right)^2\limsup_{t\to\infty}\lVert\mbox{{\bf v}}_i\rVert^2\nonumber\\
&\le& \sum_{i=1}^{N-1}\left(\frac{\phi_i\sigma}{\lambda_i}\right)^2\lVert\mbox{{\bf z}}_i\rVert^2.\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
where $\sigma$ is defined in \eqref{eq: normSigma}.
Now we have
\begin{eqnarray}
\mbox{Pr}\left(\limsup_{t\to\infty}\|\mbox{{\bf e}}\|<\varepsilon\right) & = & \mbox{Pr}\left(\limsup_{t\to\infty}\|\mbox{{\bf e}}\|^2<\varepsilon^2\right)\nonumber\\
& \ge & \mbox{Pr}\left(\sum_{i=1}^{N-1}\left(\frac{\phi_i\sigma}{\lambda_i}\right)^2\lVert\mbox{{\bf z}}_i\rVert^2\le\varepsilon^2\right)\nonumber\\
& = & \left[\prod_{i=2}^{N-1}\left(\frac{\phi_1~\lambda_i}{\lambda_1~\phi_i}\right)^{n}\right]\nonumber\\
&&\times \sum_{j=0}^\infty a^{(N-1)}_j\int_0^{\varepsilon^2}f_j(y)dy,\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
where
\[f_j(y)=\left(\frac{\lambda_1^2}{2\phi_1^2\sigma^2}\right)^{\frac{(N-1)n}{2}+j}\frac{y^{\frac{(N-1) n}{2}+j-1}}{\Gamma\left(\frac{(N-1)n}{2}+j\right)}e^{-\frac{\lambda_1^2}{2\phi_1^2\sigma^2}y}.
\]
which using the results in \cite{Moschopoulos84} yields \eqref{eq: Pstab}.
\end{proof}
\begin{theo}\label{TheoremER}
Under Assumptions \ref{ass:Symmetric} and \ref{ass:Gaussian}, the limiting probability of stable synchronization of an unweighted Erd\"os-R\'enyi (ER) network of oscillators, with parameter $p$, as $N\to\infty$, is lower bounded by
\begin{align}\label{eq: Pstab2}
P_{\mbox{\scriptsize stab}}^{\mbox{\scriptsize LB}}(\varepsilon|\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\lambda}$})=&\left[\prod_{i=2}^{N-1}\left(\frac{\phi_1~\lambda_i}{\lambda_1~\phi_i}\right)^{n}\right]\nonumber\\
&\times\sum_{j=0}^\infty a^{(N-1)}_jP\left(\frac{(N-1) n}{2}+j,\frac{\lambda_1^2\varepsilon^2}{\phi_1^2\sigma^2}\right),
\end{align}
where $\sigma=\limsup_{t\to\infty}~\|\mbox{{\bf F}}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\gamma}$}} \mbox{$\boldsymbol{\Sigma}$}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\gamma}$}} \mbox{{\bf F}}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\gamma}$}}^T+pN \mbox{{\bf H}}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}} \mbox{$\boldsymbol{\Sigma}$}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}} \mbox{{\bf H}}^T_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}}\|^{1/2}$ and $\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\lambda}$}=[\lambda_1 \cdots \lambda_{N-1}]$.
\end{theo}
\begin{proof} The largest eigenvalue of the Laplacian matrix of any symmetric network is bounded below by the maximum degree of the network. For large ER networks ($N\to\infty$), it is also bounded above by $Np+\sqrt{Np(1-p)}$ \cite{Manaffam13}. Thus
\[d_{\max}\le\mu_{\max}\le Np+\sqrt{Np(1-p)}.\]
Similarly, the smallest non-zero eigenvalue of ER network can be bounded as
\[d_{\min}\ge\mu_{\min}\ge Np-\sqrt{Np(1-p)}.\]
According to Lemma \ref{lemma: Covariance}, the diagonal blocks of covariance matrix of $\mbox{{\bf v}}$ are
\begin{eqnarray}
\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\Sigma}$}_{ii} & = & \mbox{{\bf F}}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\gamma}$}} \mbox{$\boldsymbol{\Sigma}$}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\gamma}$}} \mbox{{\bf F}}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\gamma}$}}^T+\mbox{{\bf H}}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}} \mbox{$\boldsymbol{\Sigma}$}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}} \mbox{{\bf H}}^T_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}} \sum_{l=1}^N|u_{il}|^2 d_l\nonumber\\
& = & \mbox{{\bf F}}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\gamma}$}} \mbox{$\boldsymbol{\Sigma}$}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\gamma}$}} \mbox{{\bf F}}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\gamma}$}}^T+Np\mbox{{\bf H}}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}} \mbox{$\boldsymbol{\Sigma}$}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}} \mbox{{\bf H}}^T_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}},\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
as $N\to\infty$, and the off diagonal entries are
\begin{align*}
\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\Sigma}$}_{ij}&=\mbox{{\bf H}}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}} \mbox{$\boldsymbol{\Sigma}$}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}} \mbox{{\bf H}}^T_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}} \sum_{l=1}^N u_{il}u_{jl}^* d_l\\
&=\mbox{{\bf H}}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}} \mbox{$\boldsymbol{\Sigma}$}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}} \mbox{{\bf H}}^T_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}}\sum_{l=1}^N u_{il}u_{jl}^* (d_l-Np)\\
&\le\sqrt{Np(1-p)}\mbox{{\bf H}}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}} \mbox{$\boldsymbol{\Sigma}$}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}} \mbox{{\bf H}}^T_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}}.
\end{align*}
Therefore,
\[\lim_{N\to\infty}\frac{\lVert\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\Sigma}$}_{ij}\rVert}{\lVert\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\Sigma}$}_{ii}\rVert}=0.\]
Consequently, as $N\to\infty$, $\mbox{{\bf v}}_i$ become independent. The remaining of the proof is similar to that of Theorem \ref{TheoremRing} and is omitted in the interest of brevity.
\end{proof}
To study the synchronization in small-world networks, we consider the Newman-Watts model \cite{Newman99}. This model constructs a small-world network by starting from a $K$-regular ring network (Fig. \ref{fig: Ring}) as substrate, then randomly adds new links with probability $p$.
\begin{figure}[!t]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=1.5in]{Ring.pdf}
\caption{A 4-regular ring network.}
\label{fig: Ring}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\begin{theo}
Under assumptions \ref{ass:Symmetric} and \ref{ass:Gaussian}, the limiting probability of stable synchronization of an unweighted Newman-Watts small-world network of oscillators, with parameters $p$ and $K$, as $N\to\infty$, is lower bounded by
\begin{align}\label{eq: Pstab2}
P_{\mbox{\scriptsize stab}}^{\mbox{\scriptsize LB}}(\varepsilon|\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\lambda}$})=&\left[\prod_{i=2}^{N-1}\left(\frac{\phi_1~\lambda_i}{\lambda_1~\phi_i}\right)^{n}\right]\nonumber\\
&\times\sum_{j=0}^\infty a^{(N-1)}_jP\left(\frac{(N-1) n}{2}+j,\frac{\lambda_1^2\varepsilon^2}{\phi_1^2\sigma^2}\right),
\end{align}
where
\begin{eqnarray}
\sigma=\limsup_{t\to\infty}~\|\mbox{{\bf F}}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\gamma}$}} \mbox{$\boldsymbol{\Sigma}$}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\gamma}$}} \mbox{{\bf F}}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\gamma}$}}^T+(K+Np) \mbox{{\bf H}}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}} \mbox{$\boldsymbol{\Sigma}$}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}} \mbox{{\bf H}}^T_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}}\|^{1/2}.\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
\end{theo}
\begin{proof} The Laplacian matrix of a Newman-Watts small world network is
\[\mbox{{\bf L}}_{\mbox{\scriptsize NW}}=\mbox{{\bf L}}_{\mbox{\scriptsize Ring}}+\mbox{{\bf L}}_{\mbox{\scriptsize ER}},\]
where $\mbox{{\bf L}}_{\mbox{\scriptsize Ring}}$ and $\mbox{{\bf L}}_{\mbox{\scriptsize ER}}$ are the laplacians of a $K$-regular ring and an Erd\"os-R\'enyi network with parameter $p$. Using Weyl's inequalities we can bound the minimum and maximum eigenvalues of the small-world \cite{Mohar91}
\begin{eqnarray*}
\max\{\mu^{\mbox{\scriptsize Ring}}_{\min},\mu^{\mbox{\scriptsize ER}}_{\min}\}\le\mu_{\min}^{\mbox{\scriptsize NW}}\le d_{\min},\\
\mu^{\mbox{\scriptsize Ring}}_{\max}+\mu^{\mbox{\scriptsize ER}}_{\max}\ge\mu_{\max}^{\mbox{\scriptsize NW}}\ge d_{\max},
\end{eqnarray*}
where the eigenvalues of a $K$-regular ring is \cite{Mohar91}
\begin{eqnarray}
\mu^{\mbox{\scriptsize Ring}}_i & = & K-2\frac{\sin\frac{iK\pi}{2N}\cos\frac{(K+2)i\pi}{2N}}{\sin\frac{i\pi}{N}},\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
and subscripts $\min$ and $\max$ refer to smallest non-zero and maximum eigenvalue of $\mbox{{\bf L}}$ in corresponding configurations, respectively. The remaining of the proof is similar to that of Theorem \ref{TheoremER} and is omitted in the interest of brevity.
\end{proof}
\section{Numerical Example}
In this section we verify our analytical results using numerical examples. We consider the van der Pol oscillator \cite{Poland94} which has the following dynamics
\begin{align}\label{eq: osc}
\mbox{{\bf f}}(\mbox{{\bf x}}_{i},\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\gamma}$}_{i})=\left[\begin{array}{c}x_{i2}\\
-x_{1i}-\gamma_i (x^2_{i1}-1)x_{i2}\end{array}\right].\nonumber
\end{align}
We note that since the van der Pol oscillator has a limit cycle, as $t\to\infty$, $\mbox{{\bf s}}$ is a periodic trajectory. Hence, the Jacobians are also periodic. We can, therefore, solve \eqref{eq: Trajectory} analytically using Fourier series \cite{Poland94}.
We assume that the nodes are coupled through their first states by
\[\mbox{{\bf h}}(\mbox{{\bf x}}_{j},\mbox{{\bf x}}_{i},\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}_{ij})=\left[\begin{array}{c}\theta_{ij1}(x_{1j}-x_{1i})+\theta_{ij2}\\0\end{array}\right].\]
Thus, the Jacobians of $\mbox{{\bf f}}(.)$and $\mbox{{\bf h}}(.)$ around $(\mbox{{\bf s}},\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\bar{\gamma}}$},\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\bar{\theta}}$})$ are
\begin{eqnarray*}
\mbox{{\bf F}}_{\mbox{{\bf x}}}&=&\left[
\begin{array}{cc}
0 & 1 \\
-1-2\bar{\gamma} s_{1}s_{2} &\bar{\gamma}(1-s_{1}^2) \\
\end{array}
\right],\label{eq: F}\\
\mbox{{\bf H}}_{\mbox{{\bf x}}}&=&\left[
\begin{array}{cc}
\bar{\theta}_{1} & 0 \\
0 & 0 \\
\end{array}
\right],\label{eq: H}\\
\mbox{{\bf F}}_{\gamma}&=&\left[
\begin{array}{c}
0 \\
(1-s_{1}^2)s_{2} \\
\end{array}
\right],\label{eq: R}\\
\mbox{{\bf H}}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}}&=&\left[
\begin{array}{cc}
0&1 \\
0&0\\ \end{array}
\right]\label{eq: P},
\end{eqnarray*}
where $\mbox{{\bf s}}=[s_1~s_2]^T$. Fig. \ref{fig: MLE} depicts the maximum Lyapunov exponent of $\mbox{{\bf F}}_{\mbox{{\bf x}}}-\mu\mbox{{\bf H}}_{\mbox{{\bf x}}}$ as a function of $\mu$, where $\mu$ is the eigenvalue of Laplacian matrix of the network.
\begin{figure}[t]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=3.3in]{MLE.pdf}
\caption{Maximum Lyapunov Exponent (MLE) as a function of eigenvalues of Laplacian matrix of the network, $\mu$.}
\label{fig: MLE}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
Furthermore,
\begin{align}
\mbox{{\bf v}}_{i}&=\left[ \begin{array}{c}
\sum_{j=1}^{N}u_{ji}^{*}\sum_{k=1}^{N}a_{jk}\delta \theta_{kj2}\\
(1-s_{1}^2)s_{2}\sum_{j=1}^{N}u_{ji}^{*}\delta\gamma_{j}\\
\end{array}\right].\nonumber
\end{align}
It is clear that $\mbox{{\bf v}}_{i}$ are independent of $\delta\theta_{ij1}$.
\begin{figure}[t]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=3.3in]{Trajectory.pdf}
\caption{Synchronization manifold, $\mbox{{\bf s}}$, and a sample trajectory, $\mbox{{\bf x}}_1$, for a ring network of van der Pol oscillators.}
\label{fig: Trajectory}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
Also, covariance matrix of $\mbox{{\bf v}}_i$ of a $K$-regular ring network for $\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\bar{\gamma}}$}=1$ can be calculated from \eqref{eq: Cov. Regular} as
\begin{eqnarray}
\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\Sigma}$}_{ii}=\left[\begin{array}{cc}K{\bar{\theta}}_1^2\sigma_{\theta 2}^2& 0\\0 & \sigma_\gamma^2((1-s_1^2)s_2)^2\end{array}\right],\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
and
\begin{eqnarray}
\sup \mbox{$\boldsymbol{\Sigma}$}_{ii}=\left[\begin{array}{cc}K\bar{\theta}_1^2\sigma_{\theta 2}^2& 0\\0 & 9.93\sigma_\gamma^2\end{array}\right],\label{eq:supSigma}
\end{eqnarray}
where $\sup((1-s_1^2)s_2)^2$ is determined by simulation to be $9.93$ and the supremums are calculated over one period of the limit cycle.
Hence, $\sigma=\max(\sqrt{K}\bar{\theta}_1\sigma_{\theta_2},3.15\sigma_\gamma)$.
Now, consider a $6$-regular ring network of size $N=100$, where $\gamma\sim\mbox{${\mathcal{N}}$}(1,0.01)$ and $\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}\sim\mbox{${\mathcal{N}}$}([1~0]^T,0.01\mbox{{\bf I}})$. Fig. \ref{fig: Trajectory} depicts the synchronization manifold, $\mbox{{\bf s}}$, and a sample trajectory, $\mbox{{\bf x}}_1$, converging to $\mbox{{\bf s}}$. Fig. \ref{fig: PstabParameters} presents the analytical lower bound on the probability of stable $\varepsilon$-synchronization in the considered ring network, as a function of $\sigma_{\theta_2}$ and $\sigma_{\gamma}$ for $\varepsilon=0.40$. As it can be seen, the probability of synchronization falls sharply as the variances of mismatches increase. Moreover, we observe that the range of $\sigma_\gamma$ and $\sigma_{\theta_2}$ for which the network is stable with high probability is rectangular. This is explained by noting that $\sigma$ is related to the maximum of $\sigma_\gamma$ and $\sigma_{\theta_2}$, as it can be seen in \eqref{eq:supSigma}. Another observation from Fig. \ref{fig: PstabParameters} is that even small mismatches leads to instability of the synchronization state even with a relatively large tolerance of $\varepsilon=0.40$.
We now proceed to compare a ring network, an Erd\"os-R\'enyi network and a Newman-Watts (small-world) network. For a fair comparison, we choose the network parameters such that all networks have the same number of nodes and the same average node degree. That is, we consider a $N=100$ node, $10$-regular ring, an Erd\"os-R\'enyi network with $N=100$ and randomness parameter $p=0.1$, and a Newman-Watts network generated from a $N=100$ node, $6$-regular ring and link addition probability $p=0.4\times 100/94=0.4167$. Fig. \ref{fig: PstabN} presents the probability of stability versus network size, $N$, for these three networks with $\varepsilon=0.4$. As it can be seen for the Ring network (Fig. \ref{fig: PstabN} (a)), as $N$ increases, even though the variance of the mismatch input is constant, $\sigma=3.15\sigma_\gamma$, the $\varepsilon$-synchronization of the network deteriorates. This is because as the degree of the nodes are kept constant and network size increases, the algebraic connectivity\footnote{Algebraic connectivity is defined as the second smallest eigenvalue of the Laplacian matrix of a network.\cite{Mohar91}.} of the network,
\[\mu^{\scriptsize\mbox{ring}}_{N-1}=k-2\frac{\sin(k\pi/2N)\cos((k+2)\pi/2N)}{\sin(\pi/N)},\]
decreases. For large $N$, in our example, smaller algebraic connectivity means smaller MLE (See Fig. \ref{fig: MLE}), hence the probability of $\varepsilon$-synchronization falls sharply.
\begin{figure}[t]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=3.3in]{P_stab_mismatches.pdf}
\caption{$P^{\mbox{\scriptsize LB}}_{\mbox{\scriptsize stab}}$ in the ring network as a function of $\sigma_{\theta_2}$ and $\sigma_{\gamma}$ for $\varepsilon=0.4$.}
\vspace{-0.1in}
\label{fig: PstabParameters}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
Fig. \ref{fig: PstabN} (b) presents the probability of $\varepsilon$-stability of the Erd\"os-R\'enyi network. It is interesting to note that since the network is disconnected for smaller network sizes, the network is not synchronized. As network size continues to grow, the network becomes connected and synchronization behavior emerges. This behavior continues until the growth in the network size, increases the variance of the mismatch input, $\mbox{{\bf v}}$, to the extent that the network falls out of $\varepsilon$-stability.
Fig. \ref{fig: PstabN} (c) presents the probability of $\varepsilon$-stability for the Newman-Watts network. It is interesting to note the mechanisms at work as $N$ increases: At first, when $N$ is small there are very few added links given a small value of $p$. Thus, the network has not yet transitioned into a small-world and its algebraic connectivity is still quite close to that of the ring topology. Thus, as the size of the network increases its second smallest eigenvalue decreases. Since the variance of mismatch, $\mbox{{\bf v}}$, is constant ($\sigma_b=3.15\sigma_\gamma$), the probability of stability decreases. As $N$ continues to increase, by adding links in random, sufficient number of long range connections are established and the small-world transition is achieved. Consequently, algebraic connectivity of the network starts to grow rapidly. Hence, $\lambda_i$ increase and, therefore, $P^{\mbox{\scriptsize LB}}_{\mbox{\scriptsize stab}}$ improves. As $N$ continues to increases $\sqrt{K+Np}\sigma_{\theta_2}$ overtakes $3.15\sigma_\gamma$ in the variance of mismatch and its destructive effect surpasses the improvement caused by transition to small-world. Consequently, we observe that $P^{\mbox{\scriptsize LB}}_{\mbox{\scriptsize stab}}$ begins to drop.
\begin{figure}[!t]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{c}
\includegraphics[width=3.3in]{ProbvsNAveD10Ring.pdf}\\(a)\\
\includegraphics[width=3.3in]{ProbvsNAveD10ER.pdf}\\(b)\\
\includegraphics[width=3.3in]{ProbvsNAveD10SW.pdf}\\(c)
\end{tabular}
\caption{Probability of stability as a function $N$, for (a) ring, (b) Erd\"os-R\'enyi, and (c) Newman-Watts networks.}
\label{fig: PstabN}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[!t]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{c}
\includegraphics[width=3.3in]{ProbvsEpsilon100AveD10.pdf}\\(a)\\
\includegraphics[width=3.3in]{ProbvsEpsilon200AveD10.pdf}\\(b)\\
\includegraphics[width=3.3in]{ProbvsEpsilonAveD20.pdf}\\(c)
\end{tabular}
\caption{$P_{\mbox{\scriptsize stab}}$ as a function of $\varepsilon$ for the ring, NW and Erd\"{o}s-R\'enyi networks: (a) $N=100, \bar{d}=10$, (b) $N=200, \bar{d}=10$, and $N=200, \bar{d}=20$.}\label{fig: Pe}
\vspace{-0.2in}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
Figs. \ref{fig: Pe} (a) through (c) depict the probability of $\varepsilon$-stability as a function of $\varepsilon$ in the considered Ring, Erd\"os-R\'eyni, and Newman-Watts networks for different $N$ and $\bar{d}$: (a) $N=100, \bar{d}=10$, (b) $N=200, \bar{d}=10$, and $N=200, \bar{d}=20$. As it can be seen, the analytical lower bound and the simulation result for the ring network are reasonably close. This is due to the homogeneity of its node degrees, i.e. $d_i=K$, which holds true for the other networks as $N$ approaches infinity. The other point directly observed from these figures is that the rise in the probability of the stability is much sharper in the Erd\"os-R\'eyni and Newman-Watts networks, this is because the spread of the spectrum, [$\mu_{\min},\mu_{\max}$], for these networks are smaller than that of ring topology. This, in fact, causes the Lyapunov exponents of the traverse modes to be closer to each other and hence the networks become easily and rapidly synchronized. Other interesting observation is that the results for the Erd\"os-R\'eyni and Newman-Watts networks are similar. The reason can be sought in the effectiveness of communication in both networks to each other. As it has been shown in \cite{Watts98}, even though small-worlds are strongly locally connected (due to ring substrate), they have almost the same average shortest path length of Erd\"os-R\'eyni networks. This results in almost the same communication efficiency in small-worlds as Erd\"os-R\'eyni network. Hence, the synchronizability of both types of networks are similar.
\section{Conclusion}
We had seen that mismatch in either couplings or the local dynamics does not allow perfect synchronization. Rather, the network can only be synchronized to a neighborhood of the synchronization manifold. Considering this relaxed notion of synchronization we have provided a generalized master stability function that takes the mismatches into account. We then used this master stability function to derive lower bounds on the probability of synchronization in regular, Erd\"os-R\'enyi, and Newman-Watts networks. We verified our results using numerical examples involving networks of van der Pol oscillators. These examples clearly shows the different phase transition behavior of the different network models.
\appendices
\section{Proof of Lemma 2}\label{NonDiag}
\begin{proof}
The state space equation for the $\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\eta}$}_i$ can be written as
\begin{eqnarray}\label{eq: NodeDiag1}
\dot{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\eta}$}_{i}}&=&
\left(\mbox{{\bf F}}_{\mbox{{\bf x}}}-\mu \mbox{{\bf H}}_{\mbox{{\bf x}}}\right)\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\eta}$}_{i}+(\mbox{{\bf F}}_{\mbox{{\bf x}}}-\mbox{{\bf H}}_{\mbox{{\bf x}}} )\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\eta}$}_{i+1}+\mbox{{\bf v}}_i(t),
\end{eqnarray}
for $i\ne N$, and
\begin{eqnarray}\label{eq: NodeDiag2}
\dot{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\eta}$}_N}&=&
\left(\mbox{{\bf F}}_{\mbox{{\bf x}}}-\mu \mbox{{\bf H}}_{\mbox{{\bf x}}}\right)\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\eta}$}_N+\mbox{{\bf v}}_N(t).
\end{eqnarray}
The solution of \eqref{eq: NodeDiag1} and \eqref{eq: NodeDiag2} are
\begin{eqnarray}\label{eq: Solution}
\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\eta}$}_{i}(t)&=&\mathbf{\Phi}(t,0)\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\eta}$}_{i}(0)+\int_{0}^{t}\mathbf{\Phi}(t,\tau)\mbox{{\bf v}}_{i}(\tau)d\tau\nonumber\\
&&+\int_{0}^{t}\mathbf{\Phi}(t,\tau)(\mbox{{\bf F}}_{\mbox{{\bf x}}}-\mbox{{\bf H}}_{\mbox{{\bf x}}})\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\eta}$}_{i+1}(\tau)d\tau, \nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
for $i\ne N$ and
\begin{eqnarray}\label{eq: Solution}
\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\eta}$}_N(t)&=&\mathbf{\Phi}(t,0)\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\eta}$}_N(0)+\int_{0}^{t}\mathbf{\Phi}(t,\tau)\mbox{{\bf v}}_N(\tau)d\tau,\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
where $\mathbf{\Phi}(t,\tau)=\mathbf{Z}(t)\mathbf{Z}^{-1}(\tau)$, and $\mathbf{Z}$ is the normal fundamental matrix of $\mbox{{\bf F}}_{\mbox{{\bf x}}}-\mu\mbox{{\bf H}}_{\mbox{{\bf x}}}$ \cite{Daleckii74}.
Applying triangle inequality yields
\begin{eqnarray}
\lVert\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\eta}$}_{i}(t)\rVert &\leq& \lVert\mathbf{\Phi}(t,0)\rVert \lVert\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\eta}$}_{i}(0)\rVert\nonumber\\
&&+ \int_{0}^{t}\lVert(\mbox{{\bf F}}_{\mbox{{\bf x}}}-\mbox{{\bf H}}_{\mbox{{\bf x}}})\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\eta}$}_{i+1}(\tau)
+\mbox{{\bf v}}_{i}(\tau)\rVert\lVert\mathbf{\Phi}(t,\tau)\rVert d\tau,\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
for $i\in\{1,...,N-1\}$, and
\begin{eqnarray}
\lVert\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\eta}$}_{N}(t)\rVert &\leq&\lVert\mathbf{\Phi}(t,0)\rVert \lVert\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\eta}$}_N(0)\rVert + \int_{0}^{t}\lVert\mbox{{\bf v}}_N(\tau)\rVert\lVert\mathbf{\Phi}(t,\tau)\rVert d\tau,\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
which, as $t\to\infty$, yields
\begin{eqnarray}
\limsup_{t\to\infty}\lVert\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\eta}$}_{i}\rVert & \leq & \lVert\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\eta}$}_{i}(0)\rVert\limsup_{t\to\infty}\lVert\mathbf{\Phi}(t,0)\rVert\nonumber\\
&&+\limsup_{t\to\infty}\lVert\mbox{{\bf v}}_{i}\rVert \limsup_{t\to\infty}\int_{0}^{t}\lVert\mathbf{\Phi}(t,\tau))\rVert d\tau\nonumber\\
&&+\limsup_{t\to\infty}\lVert\mbox{{\bf F}}_{\mbox{{\bf x}}}-\mbox{{\bf H}}_{\mbox{{\bf x}}}\rVert\limsup_{t\to\infty}\lVert\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\eta}$}_{i+1}\rVert\nonumber\\
&&\quad\quad\quad\quad\times\limsup_{t\to\infty}\int_{0}^{t}\lVert\mathbf{\Phi}(t,\tau)\rVert d\tau,\label{Norm Error1}
\end{eqnarray}
and
\begin{align}
\limsup_{t\to\infty}\lVert\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\eta}$}_{N}\rVert \leq & \lVert\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\eta}$}_N(0)\rVert \limsup_{t\to\infty}\lVert\mathbf{\Phi}(t,0)\rVert \nonumber\\
&+\limsup_{t\to\infty}\lVert\mbox{{\bf v}}_{N}\rVert\limsup_{t\to\infty}\int_{0}^{t}\lVert\mathbf{\Phi}(t,\tau)\rVert d\tau.\label{Norm Error2}
\end{align}
We know that there exists positive real $\phi$ such that \cite{Daleckii74}
\begin{align*}
\lVert\mathbf{\Phi}(t,\tau)\rVert \leq \phi e^{-\lambda(t-\tau)},
\end{align*}
where $\lambda$ is the maximum Lyapunov exponent of $\mbox{{\bf F}}_{\mbox{{\bf x}}}-\mu\mbox{{\bf H}}_{\mbox{{\bf x}}}$. If $\lambda>0$ this yields
\begin{eqnarray}
\limsup_{t\to\infty}\lVert\mathbf{\Phi}(t,0))\rVert & = & 0,\nonumber \\
\limsup_{t\to\infty}\int_{0}^{t}\lVert\mathbf{\Phi}(t,\tau))\rVert d\tau & \le & \frac{\phi}{\lambda}.\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
Substituting in \eqref{Norm Error1} and \eqref{Norm Error2} yields,
\begin{eqnarray}
\limsup_{t\to\infty}\lVert\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\eta}$}_{i}\rVert & \leq & \frac{\phi}{\lambda} \limsup_{t\to\infty}\lVert\mbox{{\bf F}}_{\mbox{{\bf x}}}-\mbox{{\bf H}}_{\mbox{{\bf x}}}\rVert\lVert\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\eta}$}_{i+1}\rVert\nonumber\\
&&+\frac{\phi}{\lambda}\limsup_{t\to\infty}\lVert\mbox{{\bf v}}_{i}\rVert,\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
and
\begin{eqnarray}
\limsup_{t\to\infty}\lVert\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\eta}$}_{N}\rVert & \leq & \frac{\phi}{\lambda} \limsup_{t\to\infty}\lVert\mbox{{\bf v}}_{N}\rVert.\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
Solving the recursive inequalities we get
\begin{eqnarray}
\limsup_{t\to\infty}\lVert\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\eta}$}_{i}\rVert & \leq & \sum_{j=i}^{N} \left(\frac{\phi}{\lambda}\right)^{N-j+1}\limsup_{t\to\infty}\lVert\mbox{{\bf F}}_{\mbox{{\bf x}}}+\mbox{{\bf H}}_{\mbox{{\bf x}}}\rVert^{N-j}\nonumber\\
&&\quad\quad\quad\quad\times\limsup_{t\to\infty}\lVert\mbox{{\bf v}}_{j}\rVert.\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
\end{proof}
\section{Covariance of $\mbox{{\bf v}}$}\label{covariance}
The covariance of $\mbox{{\bf v}}$ is
\begin{align}\label{correlation1}
\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\Sigma}$}_{\mbox{{\bf v}}}={E}[(\mbox{{\bf v}}-\bar{\mbox{{\bf v}}})(\mbox{{\bf v}}-\bar{\mbox{{\bf v}}})^{T}]= [\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\Sigma}$}_{ij}],\nonumber
\end{align}
where $\bar{\mbox{{\bf v}}}=\mbox{{\bf h}}(\mbox{{\bf s}},\mbox{{\bf s}},\bar{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}})\otimes(\mbox{{\bf D}}^{\scriptsize\mbox{in}}-\bar{d}_{\scriptsize\mbox{in}}\mbox{{\bf I}})$ and $\mbox{{\bf D}}^{\scriptsize\mbox{in}}=\mbox{diag}([d_{1}^{\scriptsize\mbox{in}} \cdots d_{N}^{\scriptsize\mbox{in}}])$. Thus, the $ij$th block of $\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\Sigma}$}_{\mbox{{\bf v}}}$ is
\begin{eqnarray}
\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\Sigma}$}_{ij}&=&\sum_{k,l\in\mbox{${\mathcal{N}}$}}u_{ik}u_{jl}^{\star}E\left[\left(\mbox{{\bf F}}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\gamma}$}}\delta\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\gamma}$}_{k}+\sum_{m\in\mbox{${\mathcal{N}}$}}a_{mk}\mbox{{\bf H}}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}}\delta\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}_{mk}\right)\right.\nonumber\\
&&\times \left.\left(\mbox{{\bf F}}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\gamma}$}}\delta\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\gamma}$}_{l}+\sum_{n\in\mbox{${\mathcal{N}}$}}a_{ln}\mbox{{\bf H}}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}}\delta\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}_{nl}\right)^{T}\right]\nonumber\\
&=&\sum_{k,l\in\mbox{${\mathcal{N}}$}}u_{ik}u_{jl}^{\star}\mbox{{\bf F}}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\gamma}$}}\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\Sigma}$}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\gamma}$}}\mbox{{\bf F}}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\gamma}$}}^{T}\nonumber\\
&&+\sum_{k,l,m,n\in\mbox{${\mathcal{N}}$}}u_{ik}u_{jl}^{\star}a_{km}a_{ln}\mbox{{\bf H}}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}}\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\Sigma}$}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}}\mbox{{\bf H}}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}}^{T}\mathbbm{1}_{k=l}\mathbbm{1}_{m=n}\nonumber\\
&=&\mbox{{\bf F}}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\gamma}$}}\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\Sigma}$}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\gamma}$}}\mbox{{\bf F}}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\gamma}$}}^{T}1_{i=j}+\sum_{k,m\in\mbox{${\mathcal{N}}$}}u_{ik}u_{jk}^{\star}\lvert a_{km}\rvert^{2}\mbox{{\bf H}}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}}\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\Sigma}$}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}}\mbox{{\bf H}}_{\mbox{$\boldsymbol{\theta}$}}^{T}.\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
|
\section{Introduction}
\vspace{-6pt}
The introduction of new class of engineered materials, coined as functionally graded materials (FGMs) has spurred the interest among researchers to study the response of structures with these materials. The FGMs are characterized by \emph{smooth and continuous} transition of material properties from one surface to another. Typically FGMs are made from a mixture of a ceramic and metal. The ceramic constituent provides thermal stability due to its low thermal conductivity, whilst the metallic phase provides structural stability. FGMs eliminate the sharp interfaces existing in laminated composites with a gradient interface and are considered to be an alternative material in many engineering applications. The material properties can be graded in the thickness direction, in the in-plane or in both the directions. It can be seen from the literature that considerable attention has been devoted to functionally graded material plates with properties graded in the thickness direction~\cite{reddy2000,ganapathiprakash2006,ferreirabatra2006,reddychin1998}. From the literature, it can be seen that the static and the dynamic response of functionally graded material plates and shells is studied extensively. It is beyond the scope of this paper to review the literature on plate/shells with material properties graded in the thickness direction. Interested readers are referred to the literature and references therein and a recent review by Jha and Kant~\cite{jhakant2013}. To the author's knowledge there are only a few investigations on the structural response of structures in which the material is graded in the in-plane direction or in both directions~\cite{nemat-alla2003,qianching2004,qianbatra2005,goupeevel2006,luchen2008,liuwang2010,uymazaydogdu2012}.
Qian and Ching~\cite{qianching2004} and Qian and Batra~\cite{qianbatra2005} optimized the fundamental frequency of bi-directional\footnote{material properties graded in the thickness and in the in-plane direction} functionally graded beams and plates by employing meshless local Petrov Galerkin method. By employing element free Galerkin method, Goupee and Vel~\cite{goupeevel2006} optimized the natural frequency of bidirectional functionally graded beams. Nemat-Alla~\cite{nemat-alla2003} by employing the rule of mixtures studied the thermal response of FGM structures graded in both the directions. L\"u \textit{et al.,}~\cite{luchen2008} derived semi-analytical solutions based on differential quadrature method for beams graded in both the directions. It was observed that the thermal stresses can be reduced by bi-directional functionally gradation instead of the conventional unidirectional functionally graded materials. Very recently, Liu \textit{et al.,}~\cite{liuwang2010} and Uymaz \textit{et al.,}~\cite{uymazaydogdu2012} studied the fundamental frequency of plates with in-plane material inhomogeneity by Levy's type solution and differential quadrature method, respectively. It was observed that the fundamental frequency of the plate with in-plane material inhomogeneity is highly influenced by the gradation.
It is noted that in all of the above studies, the plate structures are modelled by employing two dimensional structural theories. The different approaches employed are: single layer theories, discrete layer theories and mixed plate theory. In the single layer theory approach, the plate is assumed to be one equivalent single layer (ESL), whereas in the discrete layer theory, each layer is considered, for example in the case of laminated composites. Although the discrete layer theories provide very accurate results, increasing the number of layers increases the number of unknowns and in turn the computational time. Recently, Carrera~\cite{carrerademasi2002,carrera2003} derived a series of axiomatic approaches for general description of two-dimensional formulations for multilayered plates and shells. With this unified formulation, it is possible to implement in a single software a series of hierarchical formulations, thus affording a systematic assessment of different theories ranging from simple ESL models up to higher order layerwise descriptions. The aforementioned plate theories have been used to develop discrete models such as the finite element method~\cite{greimannlynn1970,bathedvorkin1985,nguyen-xuantran2012}, meshless methods~\cite{ferreirabatra2005,ferreirabatra2006,liewzhao2011} and more recently, isogeometric analysis~\cite{thainguyen-xuan2012,valizadehnatarajan2013,tranferreira2013}. A comprehensive review of various meshless methods for analyzing plates and shells is given in~\cite{liewzhao2011}. Although, the numerical methods provide a general and systematic technique to analyze plate structures, difficulties still exist in the development of plate elements based on the above mentioned plate theories, one of which is the shear locking phenomenon. It can be seen that considerable effort has been devoted to suppress shear locking~\cite{bathedvorkin1985,brezzibathe1989,hughescohen1978,somashekarprathap1987}.
\paragraph{Approach} However, plates are essentially three dimensional structures. For predicting the realistic behaviour, more accurate analytical/numerical models based on the three-dimensional models are required. In this paper, we study the free vibration and mechanical buckling of plates with in-plane inhomogeneity using a recently developed three-dimensional consistent approach \cite{mansong2012}. This approach is based on the scaled boundary finite element method \cite{songwolf1997a}.
The formulations are directly derived from three-dimensional governing equations without \emph{any plate assumptions}. Only the in-plane dimensions of the plate are discretised and any displacement-based elements can be used. The stiffness matrix is derived from the three dimensional solution, which is expressed analytically in the through-thickness direction with Pad\'e expansion. Thus, no numerical locking arises. The use of high-order spectral elements leads to an efficient stiffness matrix construction. A diagonal mass matrix is also derived such that the free vibration in our study is expressed as a standard eigenproblem.
\paragraph{Outline} The paper is organized as follows. In the following section, after discussing the functionally graded material, the three dimensional consistent approach to analyse plate structures is presented. Section \ref{elemdesc} describes the element employed in this study. The numerical results for the free vibration and critical buckling of thin functionally graded material plates are given in Section \ref{numres}, followed by concluding remarks in the last section.
\section{Theoretical Formulation}
\label{theorydev}
\subsection{Functionally graded material} Consider a functionally graded material (FGM) rectangular skew plate with length $a$, width $b$, height $h$ and skew angle $\psi$ made by mixing two distinct material phases, viz., a ceramic phase and a metallic phase. The ceramic phase provides thermal stability, whilst the metallic phase provides structural stability. Assume the coordinates $x,y$ along the in-plane directions and $z$ along the thickness direction (see \fref{fig:platefig}). The material is assumed to be graded only in the in-plane direction (along global $x$) according to a power law distribution whilst it is constant through the thickness direction. The homogenized material properties can be computed by employing the rule of mixtures. The effective Young's modulus $E$, Poisson's ratio $\nu$ and the mass density $\rho$ of the FGM, evaluated using the rule of mixtures are:
\begin{align}
E &= V_m E_m + V_c E_c \nonumber \\
\nu &= V_m \nu_m + V_c \nu_c \nonumber \\
\rho &= V_m \rho_m + V_c \rho_c
\label{fgmc}
\end{align}
\begin{figure}[htpb]
\centering
\subfigure[]{\input{./Figures/plate.pstex_t}}
\subfigure[]{\input{./Figures/skew.pstex_t}}
\caption{Coordinate system of a rectangular skew plate.}
\label{fig:platefig}
\end{figure}
Here $V_i (i=c,m)$ is the volume fraction of the phase material. The subscripts $c$ and $m$ refer to the ceramic and metal phases, respectively. The volume fractions are related by $V_c + V_m = 1$ and $V_c$ is expressed as
\begin{equation}
V_c = (x/a)^n
\label{eqn:volumefraccer}
\end{equation}
where $n$ in \Eref{eqn:volumefraccer} is the volume fraction exponent, also referred to as the material gradient index in the literature, and $x$ is referred to the global coordinate system. \fref{fig:ceramicvolfrac} shows the variation of the volume fraction of ceramic phase along the in-plane directions.
\begin{figure}[htpb]
\centering
\newlength\figureheight
\newlength\figurewidth
\setlength\figureheight{8cm}
\setlength\figurewidth{10cm}
\input{./Figures/vfrac.tikz}
\caption{Volume fraction of the ceramic phase as a function of global $x$-coordinate.}
\label{fig:ceramicvolfrac}
\end{figure}
\input{sbfemplateeqn}
\section{Element description}
\label{elemdesc}
\begin{figure}[htpb]
\centering
\subfigure[]{\includegraphics[width=8cm]{./Figures/3rdorderelement}}
\subfigure[]{\includegraphics[width=8cm]{./Figures/GLLbasisfunctions}}
\subfigure[]{\includegraphics[width=10cm]{./Figures/GLL2Dshap}}
\caption{3rd order element: (a) Nodal location (b) 1D shape functions (c) 2D shape function.}
\label{fig:GLL1D}
\end{figure}
High-order spectral elements are used in this study to discretize the in-plane dimensions of the plate. As the formulation presented here is 3D consistent, in order to represent the constant curvature, the minimum requirement is that the second derivative of the shape function is a constant. Hence, we require a second order element. However, for better convergence and accuracy, in this study we have employed a 3$^{\rm rd}$ order element (see \fref{fig:GLL1D}). The
2D shape functions are obtained by the product of two sets of 1D shape
functions defined separately in local coordinates $\eta$ and $\zeta$:
\begin{equation}
N_{i}(\eta,\,\zeta)=N_{i_{\eta}}(\eta)N_{i_{\zeta}}(\zeta)\label{eq:2Dshapefunc}
\end{equation}
Denoting the orders of the two 1D elements as $p_{\eta}$ and $p_{\zeta}$, respectively, the total number of nodes of the 2D element is equal to $n_{d}=(p_{\eta}+1)(p_{\zeta}+1)$. The local nodal number $i=1,\,2\,,...,n_{d}$ is defined by the nodal numbers $i_{\eta},\, i_{\zeta}$ of the two 1D elements as
\begin{equation}
i=(i_{\zeta}-1)\times(p_{\eta}+1)+i_{\eta}\label{eq:2Dshapefunc-index}
\end{equation}
and the nodal number ascends firstly along $\eta$ direction and then $\zeta$ direction. This also applies to the weights such that
\begin{equation}
w_{i}=w_{i_{\eta}}w_{i_{\zeta}}.\label{eq:2Dweight}
\end{equation}
The coefficient matrices $\mathbf{E}_0, \mathbf{E}_1$ and $\mathbf{E}_2$, the mass matrix $\mathbf{M}$ and geometry stiffness matrix $\mathbf{K}_G$ are computed using Gauss-Lobatto-Legendre quadrature. As demonstrated in \cite{gravenkampman2013}, $\mathbf{E}_0$ becomes a lumped matrix. Consequently, the inversion of $\mathbf{E}_0$ , which is required to compute the stiffness matrix, becomes trivial in Equation \eqref{eq:Z}. This leads us an efficient stiffness matrix construction. With the same quadrature, a diagonal mass matrix is also obtained and the 3$\times$3 submatrix $\mathbf{M}_{\mathit{i}}$ corresponding to the diagonal block of the $i^{th}$ node is expressed as
\begin{equation}
\mathbf{M}_{\mathit{i}}= \int\limits_\Omega N_{i}(\eta,\,\zeta)\mathbf{H}\rho N_{i}(\eta,\,\zeta)|J|~\mathrm{d} \Omega =w_{i}\mathbf{H}\rho |J|
\label{eq:finalm0}
\end{equation}
\section{Numerical Results}
\label{numres}
In this section, we present examples of the free vibration and the mechanical buckling of plates with in-plane material inhomogeneity based on the approach discussed in the previous section. The effect of various parameters, viz., material gradient index $n$, the skewness of the plate, $\psi$, the plate aspect ratio $a/b$, the plate thickness $b/h$ and the boundary conditions on the global response is numerically studied. The FGM plate considered in this study is made up of silicon nitride (Si$_3$N$_4$) and stainless steel (SUS304). The material is considered to be temperature independent. The mass density $(\rho)$, Young's modulus $(E)$ and Poisson's ratio $(\nu)$ are $\rho_c=$ 2370 Kg/m$^3$, $E_c=$ 348.43 GPa, $\nu_c=$ 0.24 for Si$_3$N$_4$ and $\rho_m=$ 8166 Kg/m$^3$, $E_m=$ 201.04 GPa, $\nu_m=$ 0.3262 for SUS304.
\paragraph{Validation} Before proceeding with the detailed numerical study, the formulation developed herein is validated against available numerical results pertaining to isotropic plates for fundamental frequency and critical buckling load. Table \ref{table:convergenceRes} compares the first non-dimensionalized fundamental frequency and critical buckling load factor for a simple supported square plate based on a progressive mesh refinement. It is observed that with decreasing element size, the non-dimensionalized frequency and the non-dimensionalized critical buckling load converges. It can be seen that the results from the present formulation compare very well with the available solutions, a structured mesh of 8$\times$8 with 3$^{\rm rd}$ order element is found to be adequate to model the full plate. This mesh is, therefore, used in the subsequent studies of this section.
\begin{table}[htpb]
\centering
\renewcommand{\arraystretch}{1.2}
\caption{Convergence of the non-dimensionalized fundamental frequency $(\overline{\omega})$ and the critical buckling load parameter $(\lambda_{cru})$ with plate thickness ratio $b/h=1000$. The plate is simply supported on all the edges.}
\begin{tabular}{lrrr}
\hline
Mesh & $\overline{\omega} = \omega \left( \frac{a}{\pi} \right)^2 \sqrt{\frac{\rho_c}{D_c}}$ && $\lambda_{cru} = \frac{N_{xxcr}^{\circ}b^{2}}{\pi^{2}D_{c}} $ \\
\hline
2$\times$2 & 2.0035 && 4.0154 \\
4$\times$4 & 1.9997 && 4.0010 \\
8$\times$8 & 1.9995 && 4.0000 \\
Ref.~\cite{reddy1984} & 1.9974 && 4.0000 \\
Ref.~\cite{aydogdu2009} & 1.9974 && - \\
Ref.~\cite{liewhung19993} & 1.9993 && - \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\label{table:convergenceRes}
\end{table}
\subsection{Free vibration}
In this section, the free vibration of FGM rectangular and skew plate with side lengths $a$ and $b$ and thickness $h$ is studied. In all cases, we present the non-dimenisonalized flexural frequencies, unless specified otherwise, as:
\begin{equation}
\overline{\omega} = \omega \left( \frac{a}{\pi} \right)^2 \sqrt{\frac{\rho_c}{D_c}}
\end{equation}
where $D_c=\frac{E_c h^3}{12(1-\nu^2)}$ and $\rho_c$ are the flexural rigidity and the mass density of the ceramic phase, respectively. The influence of the plate thickness ratio $b/h$, the material gradient index $n$ and the boundary conditions on the first non-dimensionalized frequency is shown in Table \ref{table:effectofahVib}. It indicates that with increasing plate thickness ratio, the non-dimensionalized frequency decreases irrespective of the boundary conditions of the plate. This can be attributed to the decreased flexural rigidity. Table \ref{table:effectofahVib} also shows that the non-dimensionalized frequency reduces with increasing material gradient index $n$ due to the increase in metallic volume fraction. \frefs{fig:FreeVibrationSS} - (\ref{fig:FreeVibrationCC}) illustrates the influence of the plate aspect ratio $a/b$ and the material gradient index $n$ on the first four non-dimensionalized frequency for a plate with simply supported edges and clamped edges, respectively. The non-dimensionalized frequency decreases for both simply supported and clamped boundary conditions with increasing plate aspect ratio $a/b$ ratio or increasing material gradient index $n$. Table \ref{table:effectskewVib} shows the influence of the skew angle $\psi$ and the gradient index $n$ on the first four non-dimensionalized frequency for a square FGM plate with $b/h=$ 100. The plate is subjected to simply support and clamped boundary conditions on alternating edge, i.e, SCSC. With increasing skew angle $\psi$, the non-dimensionalized frequency increases, whilst the frequency decreases with increasing material gradient index $n$. This can be attributed to the change in the flexural rigidity due to the change in the geometry of the plate and the increase in the metallic volume fraction.
\begin{table}[htpb]
\renewcommand{\arraystretch}{1.5}
\centering
\caption{Influence of the boundary conditions, the plate thickness ratio $b/h$ and the material gradient index $n$ on the non-dimensionalized fundamental frequency of a square plate.}
\begin{tabular}{crrrrrrr}
\hline
& $b/h$ & \multicolumn{6}{c}{Gradient index, $n$}\\
\cline{3-8}
& & 0 & 0.5 & 1 & 2 & 5 & 10 \\
\hline
\multirow{3}{*}{SSSS} & 1000 & 2.0000 & 1.3976 & 1.1865 & 1.0212 & 0.9021 & 0.8665 \\
& 100 & 1.9995 & 1.3972 & 1.1861 & 1.0209 & 0.9018 & 0.8662 \\
& 50 & 1.9978 & 1.3960 & 1.1851 & 1.0200 & 0.9011 & 0.8655 \\
\cline{2-8}
\multirow{3}{*}{CCCC} & 1000 & 3.6461 & 2.5437 & 2.1543 & 1.8470 & 1.6320 & 1.5773 \\
& 100 & 3.6431 & 2.5415 & 2.1524 & 1.8454 & 1.6306 & 1.5759 \\
& 50 & 3.6341 & 2.5349 & 2.1467 & 1.8406 & 1.6263 & 1.5718 \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\label{table:effectofahVib}
\end{table}
\begin{figure}[htpb]
\begin{centering}
\subfigure[$\overline{\omega} _1$]{\scalebox{0.65}{\input{./Figures/ssss1.tikz}}}\hspace{1cm}
\subfigure[$\overline{\omega} _2$]{\scalebox{0.65}{\input{./Figures/ssss2.tikz}}}\par\end{centering}
\begin{centering}
\subfigure[$\overline{\omega} _3$]{\scalebox{0.65}{\input{./Figures/ssss3.tikz}}}\hspace{1cm}
\subfigure[$\overline{\omega} _4$]{\scalebox{0.65}{\input{./Figures/ssss4.tikz}}}\par\end{centering}
\caption{Influence of the plate aspect ratio on the first four non-dimensionalized frequency for a simply supported FGM plate with material gradient indexes $n=0,1,5,10$.}
\label{fig:FreeVibrationSS}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[htpb]
\begin{centering}
\subfigure[$\overline{\omega} _1$]{\scalebox{0.65}{\input{./Figures/cccc1.tikz}}}\hspace{1cm}
\subfigure[$\overline{\omega} _2$]{\scalebox{0.65}{\input{./Figures/cccc2.tikz}}}\par\end{centering}
\begin{centering}
\subfigure[$\overline{\omega} _3$]{\scalebox{0.65}{\input{./Figures/cccc3.tikz}}}\hspace{1cm}
\subfigure[$\overline{\omega} _4$]{\scalebox{0.65}{\input{./Figures/cccc4.tikz}}}\par\end{centering}
\caption{Influence of the plate aspect ratio on the first four non-dimensionalized frequency for a clamped FGM plate with material gradient indexes $n=0,1,5,10$.}
\label{fig:FreeVibrationCC}
\end{figure}
\begin{table}[htpb]
\centering
\renewcommand{\arraystretch}{1.2}
\caption{Influence of the skew angle $\psi$ and the material gradient index $n$ on the first four non-dimensionalized frequencies of a SCSC square FGM plate with $b/h=$ 100.}
\begin{tabular}{ccrrrrrrr}
\hline
& Skew & \multicolumn{7}{c}{Gradient index, $n$} \\
\cline{3-9}
& Angle & \multicolumn{2}{c}{0} & 0.5 & 1 & 2 & 5 & 10\\
\cline{3-4}
& $\psi$ & Ref.~\cite{Lee2004} & Present \\
\hline
\multirow{4}{*}{$\overline{\omega} _1$} & $0^{\circ}$ & 2.934 & 2.9316 & 2.0419 & 1.7352 & 1.4960 & 1.3275 & 1.2818\\
& $15^\circ$ & 3.111 & 3.1107 & 2.3818 & 2.0455 & 1.7445 & 1.5076 & 1.4516\\
& $30^\circ$ & 3.746 & 3.7555 & 3.1157 & 2.7422 & 2.3501 & 1.9916 & 1.9151\\
& $45^\circ$ & 5.341 & 5.3647 & 4.7620 & 4.3136 & 3.7529 & 3.1333 & 2.9658\\
\hline
\multirow{4}{*}{$\overline{\omega} _2$} & $0^\circ$ & 5.548 & 5.5466 & 3.8578 & 3.2565 & 2.7880 & 2.4626 & 2.3795\\
& $15^\circ$ & 5.765 & 5.7502 & 4.3782 & 3.7537 & 3.1938 & 2.7414 & 2.6146\\
& $30^\circ$ & 6.514 & 6.5364 & 5.3893 & 4.7608 & 4.1176 & 3.5244 & 3.3750\\
& $45^\circ$ & 8.488 & 8.5580 & 7.5554 & 6.9019 & 6.1311 & 3.1263 & 2.9457\\
\hline
\multirow{4}{*}{$\overline{\omega} _3$} & $0^\circ$ & 7.024 & 7.0242 & 4.9013 & 4.2054 & 3.6514 & 3.2228 & 3.0785\\
& $15^\circ$ & 7.579 & 7.5625 & 5.8082 & 5.0302 & 4.3229 & 3.7304 & 3.5363\\
& $30^\circ$ & 8.450 & 9.4358 & 7.8143 & 6.8921 & 5.9187 & 4.9814 & 4.6545\\
& $45^\circ$ & 12.559 & 12.6199 & 11.0078 & 10.0606 & 8.9901 & 5.3264 & 5.1068\\
\hline
\multirow{4}{*}{$\overline{\omega} _4$} & $0^\circ$ & 9.586 & 9.5671 & 6.7129 & 5.7526 & 4.9765 & 4.3725 & 4.1708\\
& $15^\circ$ & 9.552 & 9.5381 & 7.2636 & 6.2959 & 5.4370 & 4.7372 & 4.5186\\
& $30^\circ$ & 10.224 & 10.2492 & 8.4668 & 7.5816 & 6.6930 & 5.9038 & 5.7063\\
& $45^\circ$ & 13.899 & 13.9775 & 12.5132 & 11.4675 & 10.1024 & 7.6899 & 7.0433\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\label{table:effectskewVib}
\end{table}
\subsection{Buckling}
In this section, we present the mechanical buckling behavior of FGM rectangular and skew plates with in-plane material inhomogeneity under uni- and bi-axial compressive loads. In all our cases, we present the non-dimensionalized critical buckling parameters, unless otherwise specified, as:
\begin{align}
\lambda_{cru} & = \frac{N_{xxcr}^{\circ}b^{2}}{\pi^{2}D_{c}} \nonumber \\
\lambda_{crb} & = \frac{N_{yycr}^{\circ}b^{2}}{\pi^{2}D_{c}}
\end{align}
where $\lambda_{cru}$ and $\lambda_{crb}$ are the critical buckling parameters corresponding to uni- and bi-axial compressive loads, $D_{c}=\frac{E_{c}h^{3}}{12(1-v^{2})}$. The influence of plate aspect ratio $a/b$ on the critical buckling load parameter is shown in \fref{fig:bucklingRectangular} subjected to uni- and bi-axial compressive loads. The influence of material gradient index $n$ is also shown. It is seen that the critical buckling parameter decreases with increasing plate aspect ratio and material gradient index.
\begin{figure}[hp]
\begin{centering}
\subfigure[]{\scalebox{0.7}{\input{./Figures/uniaxial.tikz}}}\hspace{1cm}
\subfigure[]{\scalebox{0.7}{\input{./Figures/biaxial.tikz}}}\par\end{centering}
\caption{Critical buckling parameters of a rectangular plate with material gradient indexes $n=0,1,5,10$ : (a) uni-axial compressive load; (b) bi-axial compressive load.}
\label{fig:bucklingRectangular}
\end{figure}
The influence of the plate thickness ratio $b/h$, the material gradient index $n$ and boundary conditions on the critical buckling parameter is given in Table \ref{table:effectahBuck}. The influence of the skew angle $\psi$ on the critical buckling parameters of a simply supported FGM skew plate with $b/h=$ 1000 is given in Table \ref{table:effectskewBuck}. It can be seen that the critical buckling parameters obtained from proposed technique are in good agreement with the results available in the literature~\cite{ganapathiprakash2006} for an isotropic plate. It is seen that increasing the critical buckling parameter for both uni- and bi-axial compressive load decreases with increasing material gradient index and the skew angle. This can be attributed to the decreasing flexural rigidity and increasing metallic volume fraction respectively.
\begin{table}[htpb]
\renewcommand{\arraystretch}{1.5}
\centering
\caption{Influence of the plate thickness ratio $b/h$, the material gradient index $n$ and the boundary conditions on the critical buckling parameters for a square FGM plate.}
\begin{tabular}{crrrrrrrrr}
\hline
& $b/h$ & & \multicolumn{7}{c}{Gradient index, $n$}\\
\cline{4-10}
& & & \multicolumn{2}{c}{0} & 0.5 & 1 & 2 & 5 & 10 \\
\cline{4-5}
& & & Ref.~\cite{wang1997} & Present \\
\hline
\multirow{6}{*}{SSSS} & \multirow{2}{*}{1000} & $\lambda_{cru}$ & 4.0000 & 4.0000 & 3.4553 & 3.1651 & 2.8861 & 2.6435 & 2.5474\\
& & $\lambda_{crb}$ & 2.0000 & 2.0000 & 1.7356 & 1.5962 & 1.4573 & 1.3285 & 1.2761\\
& \multirow{2}{*}{100} & $\lambda_{cru}$ & & 3.9979 & 3.4533 & 3.1632 & 2.8844 & 2.6419 & 2.5459\\
& & $\lambda_{crb}$ & & 1.9989 & 1.7346 & 1.5953 & 1.4565 & 1.3277 & 1.2754\\
& \multirow{2}{*}{50} & $\lambda_{cru}$ & & 3.9913 & 3.4473 & 3.1574 & 2.8791 & 2.6372 & 2.5414\\
& & $\lambda_{crb}$ & & 1.9957 & 1.7316 & 1.5925 & 1.4540 & 1.3254 & 1.2732\\
\hline
\multirow{6}{*}{CCCC} & \multirow{2}{*}{1000} & $\lambda_{cru}$ & 10.0740 & 10.0782 & 8.7605 & 7.9632 & 7.1523 & 6.4679 & 6.2671\\
& & $\lambda_{crb}$ & 5.3036 & 5.3054 & 4.6056 & 4.2238 & 3.8288 & 3.4712 & 3.3533\\
& \multirow{2}{*}{100} & $\lambda_{cru}$ & & 10.0624 & 8.7426 & 7.9463 & 7.1369 & 6.4541 & 6.2538\\
& & $\lambda_{crb}$ & & 5.2968 & 4.5980 & 4.2167 & 3.8222 & 3.4652 & 3.3475\\
& \multirow{2}{*}{50} & $\lambda_{cru}$ & & 10.0034 & 8.6894 & 7.8962 & 7.0910 & 6.4129 & 6.2143\\
& & $\lambda_{crb}$ & & 5.2711 & 4.5752 & 4.1954 & 3.8026 & 3.4473 & 3.3301\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\label{table:effectahBuck}
\end{table}
\begin{table}[htpb]
\renewcommand{\arraystretch}{1.2}
\centering
\caption{Influence of the skew angle $\psi$ and the material gradient index $n$ on the critical buckling parameters for a simply supported in-plan FGM skew square plate with $b/h=$ 1000.}
\begin{tabular}{ccccccccc}
\hline
Skew & & \multicolumn{7}{c}{Gradient index, $n$} \\
\cline{3-9}
Angle& & \multicolumn{2}{c}{0} & 0.5 & 1 & 2 & 5 & 10 \\
\cline{3-4}
$\psi$ & & Ref.~\cite{ganapathiprakash2006} & Present \\
\hline
\multirow{2}{*}{$0^{\circ}$} & $\lambda_{cru}$ & 4.0000 & 4.0000 & 3.4553 & 3.1651 & 2.8861 & 2.6435 & 2.5474\tabularnewline
& $\lambda_{crb}$ & 2.0000 & 2.0000 & 1.7356 & 1.5962 & 1.4573 & 1.3285 & 1.2761\tabularnewline
\multirow{2}{*}{$15^{\circ}$} & $\lambda_{cru}$ & 4.3946 & 4.4026 & 3.9951 & 3.7161 & 3.3932 & 3.0937 & 3.0435\tabularnewline
& $\lambda_{crb}$ & 2.1154 & 2.1191 & 1.9267 & 1.7997 & 1.6537 & 1.5143 & 1.4991\tabularnewline
\multirow{2}{*}{$30^{\circ}$} & $\lambda_{cru}$ & 5.8966 & 5.9316 & 5.5845 & 5.3066 & 4.9138 & 4.4514 & 4.4811\tabularnewline
& $\lambda_{crb}$ & 2.5365 & 2.5503 & 2.4006 & 2.2868 & 2.1344 & 1.9766 & 2.0898\tabularnewline
\multirow{2}{*}{$45^{\circ}$} & $\lambda_{cru}$ & 10.1031 & 10.1171 & 9.7879 & 9.4940 & 9.0046 & 8.1707 & 8.2645\tabularnewline
& $\lambda_{crb}$ & 3.6399 & 3.6326 & 3.5109 & 3.4063 & 3.2425 & 3.0212 & 3.5359\tabularnewline
\hline
\end{tabular}
\label{table:effectskewBuck}
\end{table}
\section{Conclusions}
In this article, we presented a three dimensional consistent approach that does not require ad hoc shear correction factors to analyse plate structures. Based on this approach, we studied the free vibration and mechanical buckling of thin functionally graded material plates considering various parameters such as the material gradient index, the thickness ratio, the plate aspect ratio and the boundary conditions. From the detailed numerical study, it can be concluded that the material gradient index has strong influence on the fundamental frequency and the critical buckling load parameter. It is also observed that the change in the non-dimensionalized frequency and the critical buckling load parameter is significant for material gradient index $n \le 2$.
\section*{Acknowledgements}
Sundararajan Natarajan would like to acknowledge the financial support of the School of Civil and Environmental Engineering, The University of New South Wales for his research fellowship since September 2012.
\section*{References}
\bibliographystyle{plain}
\section{Scaled Boundary Finite Element Method for Plate Structures}
\vspace{10pt}
\subsection{3D governing equations for plate structures}
Consider a plate of constant thickness $h$ and with length $a$ and width $b$ (see \fref{fig:platefig}). The displacement components along the $(x,y)$ directions and $z-$direction are denoted as $u_{x}=u_{x}(x,y,z)$, $u_{y}=u_{y}(x,y,z)$ and $u_{z}=u_{z}(x,y,z)$. The displacement vector $\mathbf{u}=\mathbf{u}(x,y,z)$ is arranged as $\mathbf{u}=[u_{z},u_{x},u_{y}]^{\rm T}$. The strains $\{\varepsilon\}=\{\varepsilon(x,\, y,\, z)\}$
are expressed as
\begin{align}
\boldsymbol{\varepsilon} & =[\varepsilon_{z}\;\;\varepsilon_{x}\;\;\varepsilon_{y}\;\;\gamma_{xy}\;\;\gamma_{yz}\;\;\gamma_{xz}]^{\T}=\mathbf{L} \mathbf{u},\label{straineq-1}
\end{align}
where $\mathbf{L}$ is the differential operator. The stresses $\boldsymbol{\sigma} =\{\sigma(x,\, y,\, z)\}$ follow from Hooke's
law with the elasticity matrix $\mathbf{D}$ as
\begin{equation}
\boldsymbol{\sigma} = [\sigma_{z}\;\;\sigma_{x}\;\;\sigma_{y}\;\;\tau_{xy}\;\;\tau_{yz}\;\;\tau_{xz}]^{\T}=\mathbf{D} \boldsymbol{\varepsilon}.
\label{eq-stress_strain}
\end{equation}
The equation of equilibrium with vanishing body force is written as
\begin{equation}
\mathbf{L}^{\T} \boldsymbol{\sigma} = \rho\ddot{\mathbf{u}} \label{eq:equilibrium}
\end{equation}
and the bottom and top surfaces of the plate may be subjected to surface traction. The strain energy $U$, the work done by the applied external forces $V$ and the kinetic energy $T$ is given by:
\begin{align}
U &= \int\limits_\Omega \left[ \varepsilon_{x} \sigma_{x} + \varepsilon_{y} \sigma_{y} + \gamma_{xy} \tau_{xy} + \gamma_{xz} \tau_{xz} + \gamma_{yz} \tau_{yz} + \varepsilon_{z} \sigma_{z} \right] ~\rm{d} \Omega \nonumber \\
V &= \int\limits_\Omega \left[ N_{x} (u_{z,x})^2 + N_{y} (u_{z,y})^2 + 2N_{xy} u_{z,x}u_{z,y} \right] ~\rm{d} \Omega \nonumber \\
T &= \int\limits_\Omega \left. \rho[ \delta(u_{x})\ddot{u}_{x}+ \delta(u_{y})\ddot{u}_{y} + \delta(u_{z})\ddot{u}_{z} \right]~\rm{d} \Omega
\end{align}
The derivation of the governing equations is based on the principle of virtual work equation
\begin{equation}
\delta( U + V - T) = 0
\end{equation}
In the following section, the scaled boundary finite element method will be employed to derive the stiffness matrix for the plate structure. The conventional finite element procedure~\cite{zinekiewicztaylor2000} is employed to derive the mass matrix $\mathbf{M}$ and the geometric stiffness matrices, $\mathbf{K}_G$.
\subsection{3D consistent approach for plate structures}
The geometry of the plate is modeled by translating the two dimensional (2D) mesh along the $z-$direction, where the geometry of an in-plane 2D plate elements is obtained by interpolating the nodal coordinates $\mathbf{x}$ and $\mathbf{y}$ using the shape function $\mathbf{N}(\eta,\zeta)$ formulated in the local coordinate $\eta$ and $\zeta$
\begin{align}
\bf{x} (\eta,\zeta) & =\mathbf{N} (\eta,\zeta) \mathbf{x}
\end{align}
In this study, $\mathbf{N}$ is based on high-order spectral elements that are detailed in the next section. However, other shape functions, such as the moving least square approximations (MLS) and non-uniform rational B-splines can be also employed to discretize the in-plane dimensions.
The strain in Equation \eqref{straineq-1} is rewritten as
\begin{equation}
\boldsymbol{\varepsilon} = \mathbf{b}_1 \mathbf{u}_{,z} + \mathbf{b}_2 \mathbf{u}_{,\eta} + \mathbf{b}_3 \mathbf{u}_{,\zeta}
\end{equation}
where
\begin{align}
\mathbf{b}_1 &= \frac{1}{|J|} \left[\begin{array}{ccc}
1 & 0 & 0\\
0 & 0 & 0\\
0 & 0 & 0\\
0 & 0 & 0\\
0 & 0 & 1\\
0 & 1 & 0
\end{array}\right]; \nonumber \\
\mathbf{b}_2 &= \frac{1}{|J|}\left[\begin{array}{ccc}
0 & 0 & 0\\
0 & y_{,\zeta} & 0\\
0 & 0 & -x_{,\zeta}\\
0 & -x_{,\zeta} & y_{,\zeta}\\
-x_{,\zeta} & 0 & 0\\
y_{,\zeta} & 0 & 0
\end{array}\right]; \nonumber \\
\mathbf{b}_3 &= \frac{1}{|J|}\left[\begin{array}{ccc}
0 & 0 & 0\\
0 & -y_{,\eta} & 0\\
0 & 0 & x_{,\eta}\\
0 & x_{,\eta} & -y_{,\eta}\\
x_{,\eta} & 0 & 0\\
-y_{,\eta} & 0 & 0
\end{array}\right].
\end{align}
The 3D displacement field of the plate, $\mathbf{u}$, is represented semi-analytically here. The displacement variations along the line pass through a node of the 2D mesh and normal to the mid-plane are expressed analytically by functions $\mathbf{u}(z)$ of the coordinate $z$. The 3D displacement field is described by interpolating the displacement functions $\mathbf{u}(z)$ using the same shape function $\mathbf{N}\equiv\mathbf{N}(\eta,\zeta)$ such that $\mathbf{u}=\mathbf{N}\mathbf{u}(z)$. By employing the principle of virtual work as shown in \cite{mansong2012} for the full derivation, the internal nodal force is derived into
\begin{equation}
\mathbf{q}(z)=\mathbf{E}_0 \mathbf{u_{\mathit{,z}}}(z)+\mathbf{E}_{1}^{\rm T} \mathbf{u}(z)
\label{eq:q1}
\end{equation}
Satisfying the virtual work equation also brings
\begin{equation}
\mathbf{q}_{,z}(z)=\mathbf{E}_1 \mathbf{u_{\mathit{,z}}}(z)+\mathbf{E}_2 \mathbf{u}(z)\label{eq:q2}
\end{equation}
where $\mathbf{E}_0$, $\mathbf{E}_1$ and $\mathbf{E}_2$ are the scaled boundary finite element coefficient matrices:
\begin{align}
\mathbf{E}_0 & =\int_{-1}^{+1}\int_{-1}^{+1}\mathbf{B}_{1}^{\rm T} \mathbf{D} \mathbf{B}_1 |J| ~\rm{d} \eta ~\rm{d} \zeta \nonumber \\
\mathbf{E}_1 & =\int_{-1}^{+1}\int_{-1}^{+1}\mathbf{B}_{2}^{\rm T} \mathbf{D} \mathbf{B}_1 |J| ~\rm{d} \eta ~\rm{d} \zeta \nonumber \\
\mathbf{E}_2 & =\int_{-1}^{+1}\int_{-1}^{+1}\mathbf{B}_{2}^{\rm T} \mathbf{D} \mathbf{B}_2 |J| ~\rm{d} \eta ~\rm{d} \zeta
\end{align}
with
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}[t]{cc}
\mathbf{B}_1=\mathbf{b}_1 \mathbf{N}; & \mathbf{B}_2 = \mathbf{b}_2 \mathbf{N_{\mathit{,\eta}}}+\mathbf{b}_3 \mathbf{N_{\mathit{,\zeta}}}\end{array}
\end{equation}
where $\mathbf{D}$ is the elasticity matrix
\begin{equation}
\mathbf{D}=\frac{E(x)}{1-\nu^2(x)}\left[\begin{array}{ccc}
1 & \nu(x) & 0\\
\nu(x) & 1 & 0\\
0 & 0 & \frac{1-\nu(x)}{2}
\end{array}\right],
\end{equation}
and is evaluated with Equation~\eqref{fgmc}.
The determinant of the Jacobin matrix is given by $\mathbf{|\mathit{J}|}=x_{,\eta}y_{,\zeta}-x_{,\zeta}y_{,\eta}$. By introducing the variable
\begin{equation}
\mathbf{X}(z)=\left\{ \begin{array}{c}
\mathbf{u}(z)\\
\mathbf{q}(z)
\end{array}\right\} ,
\end{equation}
Equations~\eqref{eq:q1} and \eqref{eq:q2} are combined into
\begin{equation}
\mathbf{X_{\mathit{,z}}}(z)=-\mathbf{A}\mathbf{X}(z)\label{eq:1stode}
\end{equation}
with the coefficient matrix
\begin{equation}
\mathbf{A}=\left[\begin{array}{cc}
\mathbf{A_{11}} & \mathbf{A_{12}}\\
\mathbf{A_{21}} & \mathbf{A_{22}}
\end{array}\right]=\left[\begin{array}{cc}
\mathbf{E}_{\mathbf{0}}^{-1}\mathbf{E}_{\mathbf{1}}^{\mathrm{T}} & -\mathbf{E}_{\mathbf{0}}^{-1}\\
-\mathbf{E_{2}}+\mathbf{E}_{\mathbf{1}}\mathbf{E}_{0}^{-1}\mathbf{E}_{\mathbf{1}}^{\mathrm{T}} & -\mathbf{E}_{\mathbf{1}}\mathbf{E}_{\mathbf{0}}^{-1}
\end{array}\right].\label{eq:Z}
\end{equation}
The general solution of $\mathbf{X}(z)$ is given as
\begin{equation}
\mathbf{X}(z)=\mathrm{e}^{-\mathbf{A}z}\mathbf{c}\label{fsol}
\end{equation}
By applying a Pad\'e expansion of order $(2,2)$ to express $\mathbf{X}(z)$ and substituting the boundary conditions at the top and bottom surfaces of the plate, a 3D consistent stiffness matrix is obtained \cite{mansong2013}. When further transforming the 3D displacements into typical plate degree of freedoms $\mathbf{d}=\left[\boldsymbol{\theta},\boldsymbol{u}\right]^{\mathrm{T}}$, the stiffness matrix for the plate is devised:
\begin{equation}
\mathbf{K}=h\left[\begin{array}{cc}
\mathbf{E}_{\mathbf{0}}\left(\mathbf{I}+h^{2}\mathbf{V_{11}}\right) & \mathbf{E}_{\mathbf{1}}^{\mathrm{T}}\\
{}\mathbf{E}_{\mathbf{1}}\left(\mathbf{I}+h^{2}\mathbf{V_{11}}\right)-h^{2}\mathbf{V_{21}} & \mathbf{E}_{\mathbf{2}}
\end{array}\right]
\label{eq:fullplateK}
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}[t]{cc}
\mathbf{V_{11}}=\frac{1}{12}(\mathbf{A_{11}^{\mathit{2}}}+\mathbf{A_{12}}\mathbf{A_{21}}); & \mathbf{V_{21}}=\frac{1}{12}(\mathbf{A_{21}}\mathbf{A_{11}}-\mathbf{A_{11}^{\mathrm{T}}}\mathbf{A_{21}})\end{array}
\end{equation}
Note that plate kinematics is then enforced such that $\theta_z=u_x=u_y=0$ to reduce the size of the stiffness matrix. The matrix equation governing free vibrations may be expressed as
\begin{equation}
(\mathbf{K}+\omega^{2}\mathbf{M})\mathbf{v}=\mathbf{0}\label{eq:freevibraiton}
\end{equation}
in which the global mass matrix of the plate structures is defined as
\begin{equation}
\mathbf{M}=\rho\int_{\Omega}\mathbf{N}{}^{\mathrm{T}}\mathbf{H}\mathbf{N}~\rm{d} \Omega \label{eq:GolbalMass-1}
\end{equation}
with the transformation matrix
\begin{equation}
\renewcommand{\arraystretch}{2}
\mathbf{H}=\left[ \begin{array}{ccc}
\frac{h^{3}}{12} & 0 & 0\\
0 & \frac{h^{3}}{12} & 0\\
0 & 0 & h
\end{array}\right]
\end{equation}
where $\mathbf{H}$ is used to transform the 3D consistent mass matrix obtained from the kinetic energy into the one with plate DOFs, $\omega$ is the natural frequency and $\mathbf{v}$ is the corresponding mode shape. The stability problem involves the solution of the following eigenproblem
\begin{equation}
(\mathbf{K}+\lambda\mathbf{K}_{G})\mathbf{d}=\mathbf{0}\label{eq:buckling}
\end{equation}
where $\lambda$ is the critical buckling load parameter, a constant by which the in-plane loads must be multiplied to cause buckling and $\mathbf{K}_{G}$ is the geometric stiffness matrices. The geometric stiffness matrix is given by:
\begin{equation}
\mathbf{K}_G = \int \left\{ \mathbf{G}_b^{\rm T} \mathbf{N}^\circ \mathbf{G}_b + \mathbf{G}_{s1}^{\rm T} \mathbf{N}^\circ \mathbf{G}_{s1} + \mathbf{G}_{s2}^{\rm T} \mathbf{N}^\circ \mathbf{G}_{s2} \right\}~\rm{d} \Omega
\end{equation}
where
\begin{align}
\renewcommand{\arraystretch}{2}
\mathbf{G}_b &= \left[ \begin{array}{ccc} \frac{\partial N}{\partial x} & 0 & 0 \\ \frac{\partial N}{\partial y} & 0 & 0 \end{array} \right]; \nonumber \\
\mathbf{G}_{s1} &= \left[ \begin{array}{ccc} 0 & \frac{\partial N}{\partial x} & 0 \\ 0 & \frac{\partial N}{\partial y} & 0 \end{array} \right]; \nonumber \\
\mathbf{G}_{s2} &= \left[ \begin{array}{ccc} 0 & 0 & \frac{\partial N}{\partial x} \\ 0 & 0 & \frac{\partial N}{\partial y} \end{array} \right].
\end{align}
and
\begin{equation}
\mathbf{N}^\circ = \left[ \begin{array}{cc} N_x & N_{xy} \\ N_{xy} & N_y \end{array} \right]
\end{equation}
The natural frequency and critical buckling load in \Erefs{eq:freevibraiton} and (\ref{eq:buckling}) are computed using a standard eigenvalue algorithm. |
\section{Introduction}
The behaviour of long, flexible fibers in a suspension plays an
important role in many applications, including pulp and paper
manufacture, polymer melts, and fiber-reinforced composite
materials~\cite{keshtkar-etal-2009, switzer-klingenberg-2003}. The
dynamics of such suspensions depend heavily on the shape and flexibility
of the individual fibers as well as the interactions between fibers.
Because of the complexity of the fiber motion in suspensions, many
researchers have developed numerical methods that afford valuable
insight into both individual fiber dynamics and the resulting aggregate
suspension rheology~\cite{Joung2001, Petrie1999,
switzer-klingenberg-2003}. These simulations can complement physical
experiments by providing information that is not easily obtained through
direct measurement.
In this paper, we develop an approach for simulating a suspension of
flexible fibers that is based on the immersed boundary (IB)
method~\cite{Peskin2002}, which is a mathematical framework originally
developed by Peskin~\cite{Peskin1972} to capture the two-way interaction
between a fluid and an immersed deformable structure. Here, the fluid
deforms the elastic structure while the structure exerts forces onto the
fluid. The IB method has been used to study a wide variety of
biological and engineering applications including blood flow through
heart valves~\cite{Griffith2009,Peskin1972}, cell growth and
deformation~\cite{Rejniak2007}, jellyfish locomotion~\cite{Hamlet2011},
evolution of dry foams~\cite{Kim2012} and parachute
aerodynamics~\cite{Kim2009}.
We treat the flexible fibers as one-dimensional Kirchhoff
rods~\cite{Dill1992} described using the {\it generalized IB framework}
developed by Lim et al.~\cite{Lim2008}. In this approach, the fibers
are represented as 1D space curves using a moving Lagrangian coordinate,
wherein at each Lagrangian point an orthonormal triad of vectors
describes the orientation and ``twist state'' of the rod. This permits
the fiber to generate not only a force but also a torque that is applied
to the surrounding fluid.
The primary objective of this paper is to develop an efficient
methodology for simulating suspensions containing a large number of
flexible fibers. Since solving the full fluid-structure interaction
problem comes at the expense of additional computational work, the
underlying parallel algorithm is purposely designed to scale efficiently
on distributed-memory computer clusters. This permits non-dilute
suspensions to be simulated efficiently by spreading the work over
multiple processors. The numerical algorithm is based on the work of
Wiens and Stockie~\cite{Wiens2013} who implemented a pseudo-compressible
fluid solver developed by Guermond and
Minev~\cite{Guermond2010,Guermond2011} in the IB framework. We extend
this original algorithm to use the Eulerian--Lagrangian discretization
employed by Griffith and Lim~\cite{Griffith2012-2} which employs a
predictor-corrector procedure to evolve the immersed boundary.
Here, two separate force spreading and velocity interpolation steps
are applied at each time step which improves the spatial convergence rate of the method.
We begin in Section~\ref{sec:Background} by reviewing theoretical and
experimental results in the literature pertaining to the hydrodynamics
of suspensions containing flexible fibers, as well as discussing several
prominent computational approaches. In Sections~\ref{sec:Equations}
and~\ref{sec:NumericalMethod}, we state the governing equations
underlying our IB model for fluid-fiber interaction, as well as the
numerical algorithm used to approximate these equations. In
Section~\ref{sec:Results}, we present simulations of fiber dynamics in
both single- and multi-fiber systems, and compare these results to
previously published experimental work.
\section{Background: Pulp Fibers}
\label{sec:Background}
\subsection{Theory and Experiments}
Theoretical investigations of the dynamics of fibers in a shear flow
date back to Jeffery in the 1920s~\cite{Jeffery1922}, who derived an
analytical solution for the motion of a single rigid, neutrally-buoyant
ellipsoidal particle immersed in an incompressible Newtonian fluid
(specifically, in a Stokes flow). Jeffery found that such a fiber
rotates with a well-defined periodic orbit having constant period but
non-uniform angular velocity. It was later shown by
Bretherton~\cite{Bretherton1962} that Jeffery's analytical solution
could be extended to more general axisymmetric particles with
non-elliptical cross-sections by replacing the ellipsoidal aspect ratio
$a_r$ by an effective aspect ratio $a_r^\ast$.
Although the theory for rigid fiber dynamics is relatively
well-developed, far less is known about fibers that experience
significant bending. For this reason, experimental observations are of
critical importance in understanding the dynamics and rheology of
suspensions containing flexible fibers. Unlike rigid fibers, flexible
fibers undergo a much wider and richer range of motion when subjected to
a background linear shear flow given with velocity field
$\bs{u}=(Gy,0,0)$. This problem was studied in the pioneering work of
Mason and co-workers~\cite{Arlov1958,Forgacs1959,Forgacs1958} who
categorized the fiber dynamics into several distinct orbit classes.
When motions are confined to the $xy$-plane, fiber dynamics fall into
one of four orbit classes -- rigid, springy, flexible, and complex rotations --
which are illustrated in Table~\ref{Table:FiberRotations}. The
experiments of Mason et al.~involved primarily synthetic fibers (made of
rayon and dacron) immersed in highly viscous fluids (such as corn syrup)
although their original motivation was the application to natural wood
pulp fiber suspensions.
\begin{table}[ht!bp]\centering\small
\caption{Two-dimensional orbit classes for flexible fibers whose
unstressed state is intrinsically straight. Adapted from Forgacs et
al.~\cite{Forgacs1958}.}
\begin{tabular}{ll c}\toprule
& Orbit Class & \multicolumn{1}{c}{} \\
\midrule
{\sc I} & Rigid rotation & \includegraphics[height=.6in]{Figures/orbit-rigid.pdf} \\
\midrule
{\sc II} & Springy rotation & \includegraphics[height=.6in]{Figures/orbit-springy.pdf} \\
\midrule
{\sc IIIa} & Loop or S~turn & \includegraphics[height=.6in]{Figures/orbit-sturn.pdf} \\
\cmidrule(r){3-3}
{\sc IIIb} & Snake turn & \includegraphics[height=.6in]{Figures/orbit-snake.pdf} \\
\midrule
{\sc IV} & Complex rotation & \includegraphics[height=.6in]{Figures/orbit-complex.pdf} \\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\label{Table:FiberRotations}
\end{table}
These experiments on fiber suspensions demonstrate that varying either
the hydrodynamic drag force or the fiber flexibility governs the
transition between the various planar orbit classes. In
class~{\sc I}~orbits, the fiber remains rigid and rotates as predicted
by Jeffery's equation. When a small flexibility is introduced into the
fiber, it undergoes a springy rotation (class~{\sc II}) in which it
bends into a shallow arc as it rotates outside the horizontal plane of
shear. When the fiber flexibility is increased, it experiences
significant deformations that take the form of {\it S~turns}
(class~{\sc IIIa}) or {\it snake turns} (class~{\sc IIIb}). Note that
S~turns require a high degree of initial symmetry so that snake turns
are actually far more prevalent in actual
suspensions~\cite{Arlov1958,Forgacs1959}. When the fiber flexibility is
increased even further, the fiber may never straighten out as it returns
to the horizontal, in which case the orbit is classified as a complex
rotation (class~{\sc IV}). For the largest values of flexibility
encountered in thread-like synthetic fibers, the fiber can transition
beyond the class of complex rotations and undergo convoluted
self-intersections as observed by Forgacs and Mason~\cite{Forgacs1959}
in experiments.
In many cases, the fiber rotation is not constrained to the $xy$-plane
but instead undergoes a genuinely three-dimensional orbit that protrudes
or ``buckles'' out along the $z$-direction, although the $xy$-projection
of the fiber may still belong to one of the planar orbit classes
{\sc I}--{\sc IV}\ described above. Note that real suspensions such as
wood pulp also contain irregularly-shaped fibers that are either
intrinsically curved or contain kinks or other non-uniformities;
consequently, fiber orbital dynamics in such suspensions are not
necessarily confined to these idealized orbit classes. Indeed, the
experiments of Arlov et al.~\cite{Arlov1958} were used to classify a
much broader class of genuinely three-dimensional orbits for wood pulp
fibers having an intrinsic curvature.
We close this discussion by defining a dimensionless parameter that can
be used to conveniently classify and predict the orbit class to which a
specific fiber belongs. For low Reynolds number flows (with $\mbox{\itshape Re}
\lessapprox 1$), the hydrodynamic drag force experienced by a fiber is
proportional to
\begin{gather}
\label{eq:DragForce}
F_d = \mu G D,
\end{gather}
where $\mu$ is the fluid viscosity, $G$ is the shear rate, and $D$ is
the diameter of the fiber~\cite{White2006}. By balancing this drag
force with the corresponding fiber bending force, a
single dimensionless parameter can be derived that captures the fiber
flexibility~\cite{Stockie1997}
\begin{gather}
\label{eq:DimensionlessShearRate}
\chi = \frac{\mu D G L^3}{EI},
\end{gather}
where $L$ is the fiber length, $E$ is Young's modulus of the material,
and $I$ is moment of area in the plane of bending. The parameter $\chi$
may also be interpreted as a ratio of fiber deflection to fiber length.
In a series of 2D numerical simulations~\cite{Stockie1998}, the
parameter $\chi$ was shown to provide a useful measure of fiber
flexibility that characterizes each orbit class over a wide range of
fluid and fiber parameters. This dimensionless flexibility parameter
has also appeared in the computational studies of Ross and
Klingenberg~\cite{Ross1997} (where they referred to it as a
dimensionless shear rate) and Wherrett et~al.~\cite{Wherrett1997} (where
$\chi^{-1}$ is called a bending number).
\subsection{Overview of Computational Approaches}
A popular class of numerical methods for simulating flexible fibers is
the so-called {\it bead models} in which a flexible fiber is treated as
a string of rigid beads that are linked together by flexible
connectors. This approach originated with the work of Yamamoto and
Matsuoka~\cite{Yamamoto1993} who treated fibers as chains of bonded
spheres that are free to stretch, bend and twist relative to each other.
Their approach was extended by Ross and Klingenberg~\cite{Ross1997} who
modelled fibers as chains of rigid prolate spheroids connected by ball
and socket joints. The dynamics of the bead network are governed by
Newton's laws through a balance of linear and angular momentum that
incorporates the hydrodynamic and interparticle forces acting on each
bead. More recently, Klingenberg's group has validated their model
results against experiments for single fiber dynamics~\cite{Skjetne1997}
as well as developing a multi-fiber extension that has been used to
simulate flocculation~\cite{Switzer2004}.
A significant shortcoming of Klingenberg's model and related
variants~\cite{Wang2006,Wherrett1997,Yamamoto1993} is that they fail to
capture the full fluid-structure interaction in fiber suspensions.
Although their approach does include the hydrodynamic force exerted by
the fluid on the fiber, the fiber does not itself exert any force back
onto the fluid; therefore, the fluid is a passive medium that obviously
neglects any of the complex fluid dynamics that must occur in the region
immediately adjacent to a dynamically deforming fiber. Several recent
bead-type models have attempted to address this limitation, for example
Wu and Aidun who proposed a model for rigid~\cite{Wu2010} and
flexible~\cite{Wu2010-2} fibers that incorporates the full
fluid-structure interaction using a Lattice Boltzmann approach.
Similarly, Lindstr{\"o}m and Uesaka proposed an alternative model for
rigid~\cite{Lindstrom2009} and
flexible~\cite{Lindstrom2007,Lindstrom2008} fibers that uses the
incompressible Navier--Stokes equations to model the fluid.
A completely different approach for capturing flexible fiber dynamics is
based on the slender body theory~\cite{Batchelor1970} which exploits
approximations to the governing equations based on a small fiber aspect
ratio. This is the approach taken by Tornberg and
Shelley~\cite{TornbergShelley2004} who studied flexible filaments in a
Stokes flow by deriving a system of one-dimensional integral equations.
They solved these integral equations numerically using a second-order
method that also captures interactions between multiple fibers. This
approach has been further extended by Li et al.~\cite{Li2013} who used a
similar methodology to investigate the problem of sedimentation (or
settling) of flexible fibers. Unlike the bead models described earlier,
this slender-body approach cleanly separates the fiber model from its
numerical treatment, which makes the model more amenable to mathematical
analysis and also permits the numerical discretization to be
independently tested through convergence studies. Furthermore, because
the fluid has been simplified by assuming a Stokes flow regime, these
slender-body discretizations do not require a fluid grid because of the
availability of numerical methods based on Green's-function solutions
that greatly reduce the computational complexity. The only significant
disadvantage of this approach, beside the Stokes flow restriction, is
that there are as yet no results that incorporate any effects of fiber
twist~\cite{Olson2013}.
An alternative approach that permits simulating flexible fibers immersed
in higher Reynolds flows is the immersed boundary method. This is the
approach taken by Stockie and Green~\cite{Stockie1998} who simulated a
single flexible fiber in two dimensions using a simple representation of
the fiber in terms of spring-like forces that resist stretching and
bending. Stockie~\cite{Stockie2002} later extended these results to
a single 3D wood pulp fiber using a much more detailed and realistic
model that explicitly captures the interwoven multi-layer network of
cellulose fibrils making up the wood cell wall. More recently, Nguyen
and Fauci studied diatom chains using the IB method with a similarly
detailed fiber model~\cite{Nguyen2014}. The IB method properly captures
the full interaction between the fluid and immersed structure by
including the appropriate no-slip boundary condition along the fiber,
although it does come at an additional cost. First of all, in
comparison with slender-body models, the fluid solver portion of the IB
algorithm can be significantly more expensive because it solves the
Navier-Stokes equations on a finite difference grid. Secondly, because
the IB method aims to capture the detailed fluid flow around the fiber,
the fluid grid needs to be adequately refined in order to resolve
details on the order of the fiber diameter, which in turn places
practical limitations on the fiber aspect ratio that can be computed.
Thirdly, a detailed characterization of the structure of a
three-dimensional fiber such as in~\cite{Nguyen2014,Stockie2002}
typically requires thousands of IB points to resolve and is therefore
computationally impractical for simulating semi-dilute suspensions of
multiple fibers.
In this paper, we apply the IB approach to simulate flexible fibers, and
we have chosen to treat each fiber instead as a one-dimensional
Kirchhoff rod that resists stretching, bending and twisting, as
described in the generalized IB method of Lim et al.~\cite{Lim2008}.
Additionally, we employ a highly scalable implementation of the
generalized IB algorithm~\cite{Wiens2013} that spreads the computational
work over a large number of processors, thereby permitting us to
simulate hydrodynamic interactions in suspensions containing large
numbers of flexible fibers.
\section{Governing Equations}
\label{sec:Equations}
Consider a Newtonian, incompressible fluid that fills a rectangular
domain $\Omega$ having dimensions $H_x \times H_y \times H_z$ and whose
state is specified using Eulerian coordinates $\bs{x}=(x,y,z)$.
Immersed within the fluid is a neutrally-buoyant elastic fiber of length
$L$. The fiber is described by a one-dimensional space curve $\Gamma
\subset \Omega$, parameterized by the Lagrangian coordinate $s\in
[0,L]$. The spatial configuration of the rod at time $t$ is given in
parametric form as $\bs{x}=\bs{X}(s,t)$ and its orientation and ``twist
state'' are defined in terms of the orthonormal triad of vectors
$\{\bs{D}^1(s,t),\bs{D}^2(s,t),\bs{D}^3(s,t)\}$, where the third triad
vector $\bs{D}^3$ remains tangent to the space curve $\bs{X}$. Note
that because of numerical considerations (described shortly),
$\bs{D}^3(s,t)$ is not exactly tangent to the space curve $\bs{X}$ but
is rather penalized in a way that it is only approximately in the
tangential direction.
The fluid velocity $\bs{u}(\bs{x},t)$ and pressure $p(\bs{x},t)$ at
location $\bs{x}$ and time $t$ are governed by the incompressible
Navier--Stokes equations
\begin{gather}
\label{eq:NSE}
\rho \brac{\pd{\bs{u}}{t} + \bs{u}\cdot\nabla\bs{u}} + \nabla p = \mu
\nabla^2 \bs{u} + \bs{f} + \frac{1}{2} \nabla \times \bs{n},
\\
\label{eq:incompressible}
\nabla \cdot \bs{u} = 0,
\end{gather}
where $\rho$ is the fluid density and $\mu$ is the dynamic viscosity
(both constants). The {\it Eulerian} force and torque densities,
$\bs{f}$ and $\bs{n}$, are written as
\begin{align}
\label{eq:force}
\bs{f}(\bs{x},t) =& \int\limits_\Gamma \bs{F}(s,t) \, \Phi_w(\bs{x} -
\bs{X}(s,t)) \,ds \qquad \text{and} \\
\label{eq:torque}
\bs{n}(\bs{x},t) =& \int\limits_\Gamma \bs{N}(s,t) \, \Phi_w(\bs{x} -
\bs{X}(s,t)) \,ds,
\end{align}
wherein the integrals spread the {\it Lagrangian} force and torque
densities, $\bs{F}(s,t)$ and $\bs{N}(s,t)$, onto points in the fluid.
The interaction between Eulerian and Lagrangian quantities is mediated
using the smooth kernel function
\begin{gather}
\label{eq:fulldiscretekernel}
\Phi_w(\bs{x}) = \frac{1}{w^3} \, \phi \brac{ \frac{x_1}{w} } \phi
\brac{ \frac{x_2}{w} } \phi
\brac{ \frac{x_3}{w} },
\end{gather}
where
\begin{gather}
\label{eq:discretekernel}
\phi(r) =
\begin{cases}
\frac{1}{8}(3-2|r| + \sqrt{1+4|r|-4r^2}) &
\text{if $0 \leq |r| < 1$}, \\
\frac{1}{8}(5-2|r| - \sqrt{-7+12|r|-4r^2}) &
\text{if $1 \leq |r| < 2$}, \\
0 & \text{if $2 \leq |r|$}.
\end{cases}
\end{gather}
Here, $w$ represents an effective thickness of the rod which is set to
some multiple of the fluid mesh width $h$; that is, $w=C h$ for some
integer multiple $C \in \mathbb{Z}^+$. Note that if $w=h$, the kernel
$\Phi_w(\bs{x})$ is identical to the discrete delta function employed in
many immersed boundary methods~\cite{Griffith2005,Lai2000,Mori2008}.
The rod is modeled as a Kirchhoff rod~\cite{Dill1992} using the
generalized immersed boundary framework of Lim~\cite{Lim2008}.
Balancing linear and angular momentum yields the Lagrangian force and
torque densities
\begin{align}
\label{eq:linearmomentumbalance}
\bs{F} =&~ \pd{\bs{F}^{\text{rod}}}{s} \text{, } \\
\label{eq:angularmomentumbalance}
\bs{N} =&~ \pd{\bs{N}^{\text{rod}}}{s} + \pd{\bs{X}}{s} \times
\bs{F}^{\text{rod}} \text{, }
\end{align}
in terms of the internal force $\bs{F}^{\text{rod}}(s,t)$ and moment
$\bs{N}^{\text{rod}}(s,t)$ transmitted across a segment of the rod.
Internal quantities are expanded in the basis $\{ \bs{D}^1, \bs{D}^2,
\bs{D}^3\}$ as
\begin{align}
\label{eq:rodforce}
\bs{F}^{\text{rod}} = &~ F^1 \bs{D}^1 + F^2 \bs{D}^2 + F^3 \bs{D}^3,\\
\label{eq:momentforce}
\bs{N}^{\text{rod}} = &~ N^1 \bs{D}^1 + N^2 \bs{D}^2 + N^3 \bs{D}^3,
\end{align}
where the coefficient functions are defined by the constitutive
relations
\begin{align}
\label{eq:momentconstitutive}
N^1 =&~ a_1 \brac{\pd{\bs{D}^2}{s} \cdot \bs{D}^3 - \kappa_1}, &
N^2 =&~ a_2 \brac{\pd{\bs{D}^3}{s} \cdot \bs{D}^1 - \kappa_2}, &
N^3 =&~ a_3 \brac{\pd{\bs{D}^1}{s} \cdot \bs{D}^2 - \tau},\\
\label{eq:forceconstitutive}
F^1 =&~ b_1 \brac{\bs{D}^1 \cdot \pd{\bs{X}}{s}}, &
F^2 =&~ b_2 \brac{\bs{D}^2 \cdot \pd{\bs{X}}{s}}, &
F^3 =&~ b_3 \brac{\bs{D}^3 \cdot \pd{\bs{X}}{s} - 1}.
\end{align}
Equations~\eqref{eq:momentconstitutive} incorporate the resistance of
the rod to bending and twisting, with $a_1$ and $a_2$ being the bending
moduli (about axes $\bs{D}^1$ and $\bs{D}^2$ respectively) while $a_3$
is the twisting modulus. The constants
$\brac{\kappa_1,~\kappa_2,~\tau}$ define the intrinsic twist vector of
the rod where $\kappa := \sqrt{\kappa_1^2 + \kappa_2^2}$ is the
intrinsic curvature and $\tau$ is the intrinsic twist in the stress-free
configuration. The remaining force terms~\eqref{eq:forceconstitutive}
act to keep the triad vector $\bs{D}^3$ approximately aligned with the
tangent curve $\partial \bs{X} / \partial s$ and also penalize any
stretching of the rod from its equilibrium configuration. Accordingly,
the generalized IB method can be viewed as a type of penalty method in
which the rod is only approximately inextensible and approximately
aligned with the orthonormal triad, and the constants $b_1$, $b_2$ and
$b_3$ play the role of penalty parameters.
The final equations required to close the system are evolution equations
for the rod configuration and triad vectors
\begin{align}
\label{eq:membrane}
\pd{\bs{X}}{t}(s,t) =& ~\bs{U}(s,t)\text{, } \\
\label{eq:twisting}
\pd{\bs{D}^\alpha}{t}(s,t) =&~ \bs{W}(s,t) \times \bs{D}^\alpha(s,t) \text{,}
\end{align}
where $\alpha=1,2,3$, and $\bs{U}(s,t)$ and $\bs{W}(s,t)$ are the linear
and angular velocities along the axis of the rod respectively. These
equations require that the rod translate and rotate according to the
local average linear and angular velocity of the fluid, and are
interpolated in the standard IB fashion as
\begin{align}
\label{eq:LinVel}
\bs{U}(s,t) =&~ \int\limits_\Omega
\bs{u}(\bs{x},t) \,\Phi_w(\bs{x}-\bs{X}(s,t)) \, d\bs{x} \text{, } \\
\label{eq:AngVel}
\bs{W}(s,t) =&~ \frac{1}{2} \int\limits_\Omega
\nabla \times \bs{u}(\bs{x},t) \,\Phi_w(\bs{x}-\bs{X}(s,t)) \, d\bs{x}.
\end{align}
By using the same kernel function $\Phi_w$ as in
\eqref{eq:force}--\eqref{eq:torque}, we ensure that energy is conserved
during the Eulerian--Lagrangian interactions~\cite{Lim2008}.
\subsection{Problem Geometry and Initial Conditions}
\label{sec:InitialConditions}
The problem geometry is illustrated in
Figure~\ref{fig:ShearFluidDomain}, showing a fiber $\Gamma$ immersed in
a rectangular fluid domain $\Omega$. Periodic boundary conditions are
imposed on the fluid in the $x$- and $z$-directions, while the fluid is
sheared in the vertical ($y$) direction. The shear flow is induced by
imparting a horizontal motion to the top and bottom boundaries, with the
top wall moving at speed $U_{\text{top}}$ and the bottom wall in the
opposite direction at speed $U_{\text{bot}}$. In practice, we impose
$U_{\text{top}}=U_{\text{bot}} := U$ and set the initial fluid velocity
to the linear shear profile $\bs{u}(\bs{x},0) = \brac{G(y-H_y/2), 0, 0}$
that would develop in the absence of the fiber, with shear rate $G =
2U/H_y$.
\begin{figure}[!htbp]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.8\textwidth]{Figures/SuspensionFluidDomain.pdf}
\caption{Problem geometry for a single fiber $\Gamma$ located at the
center of a periodic, rectangular channel $\Omega$ of dimension
$H_x\times H_y\times H_z$. A planar shear flow is generated by
forcing the top and bottom walls to move with constant velocities
$\pm U_{top}$.}
\label{fig:ShearFluidDomain}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
The fiber of length $L$ is placed at the center of the fluid domain
which is specified by the constant $\bs{X}_0$, and we consider three
different initial configurations for the fiber:
\begin{description}
\item[\normalfont\itshape Configuration 1.] The fiber is initially
straight and is parameterized by
\begin{align*}
\bs{X}(s,0) &= \brac{ (\epsilon_0+1) s,~0,~ 0} + \bs{X}_0,
\\
\bs{D}^1(s,0) &= \brac{0,~1,~0},
\\
\bs{D}^2(s,0) &= \brac{0,~0,~1},
\\
\bs{D}^3(s,0) &= \brac{1,~0,~0},
\end{align*}
where $0 \leq s < L$ and $\epsilon_0$ is a perturbation parameter that
initially stretches the fiber.
\item[\normalfont\itshape Configuration 2.] The fiber is curved in the $xy$-plane with
\begin{align*}
\bs{X}(s,0) &= \brac{ r_0 \cos(s/r_0 + \pi),~ r_0 \sin(s/r_0 + \pi),~ 0} + \bs{X}_0,
\\
\bs{D}^1(s,0) &= \brac{0,~0,~1},
\\
\bs{D}^2(s,0) &= \brac{\cos(s/r_0 + \pi),~\sin(s/r_0 + \pi),~0},
\\
\bs{D}^3(s,0) &= \brac{\sin(s/r_0),~\cos(s/r_0 + \pi),~0},
\end{align*}
where $\alpha_b r_0 \pi \leq s < \alpha_e r_0 \pi$, and $\alpha_b$ and
$\alpha_e$ are constants with $0 \leq \alpha_b < \alpha_e \leq 1$.
Here, the fiber is a segment of a circle of radius $r_0$ lying in the
$xy$-plane and having length $L = (\alpha_e-\alpha_b) \pi r_0$.
Choosing a sufficiently large radius $r_0$ generates fiber with
small initial curvature.
\item[\normalfont\itshape Configuration 3.] Similar to Configuration~2,
except that the fiber is curved in the $xz$-plane with
\begin{align*}
\bs{X}(s,0) &= \brac{ (\epsilon_0+r_0) \cos(s/r_0 ),~ 0,~
(\epsilon_0+r_0) \sin(s/r_0 )} + \bs{X}_0,
\\
\bs{D}^1(s,0) &= \brac{0,~-1,~0},
\\
\bs{D}^2(s,0) &= \brac{\cos(s/r_0 ),~0,~\sin(s/r_0)},
\\
\bs{D}^3(s,0) &= \brac{\sin(s/r_0+ \pi),~0,~\cos(s/r_0)},
\end{align*}
where $\alpha_b r_0 \pi \leq s < \alpha_e r_0 \pi$, and $\alpha_b$ and
$\alpha_e$ are constants satisfying $0 \leq \alpha_b < \alpha_e \leq 1$.
\end{description}
For all three configurations, the rod has open ends so that boundary
conditions are required at $s = 0$ and $L$. We assume that the internal
force and moment vanish at the endpoints, corresponding to
$\bs{F}^{\text{rod}}_{-1/2} = \bs{F}^{\text{rod}}_{N_s-1/2} = 0$ and
$\bs{N}^{\text{rod}}_{-1/2} = \bs{N}^{\text{rod}}_{N_s-1/2} = 0$, which
are consistent with the boundary conditions applied by
Lim~\cite{Lim2010}.
\section{Numerical Method}
\label{sec:NumericalMethod}
Here, we provide only a very brief overview of the numerical method used
to solve the governing equations, while a detailed description of the
method and its parallel implementation can be found
in~\cite{Wiens2014,Wiens2013}.
When discretizing the governing equations we use two separate
computational grids, one each for the Eulerian and Lagrangian variables.
The fluid domain is divided into an $N_x \times N_y \times N_z$,
uniform, rectangular mesh where each cell has side length $h$. We employ
a \emph{marker-and-cell} (MAC) discretization~\cite{Harlow1965} wherein
the pressure is approximated at cell center points $\bs{x}_{i,j,k}$ for
$i,j,k = 0,1,\ldots,N-1$, while velocity components are located on cell
faces. The Lagrangian variables are discretized at $N_s$
uniformly-spaced points denoted by $s_\ell = \ell \Delta s$ for $\ell=0, 1,
\ldots, N_s-1$ with $\Delta s = L/N_s$. Since our current implementation is
restricted to periodic fluid domains, the top and bottom wall boundary
conditions are imposed by slightly increasing the size of the fluid
domain in the $y$-direction and introducing planes of {\it IB tether
points} along $y=0$ and $H_y$ that are attached by very stiff springs to
points moving at the specified velocities $U_{\text{top}}$ and
$U_{\text{bot}}$. We did this for convience only, since neither the
governing equations nor the fluid solver is restricted to periodic
domains.
The IB equations are approximated using a fractional-step method
described by Wiens and Stockie~\cite{Wiens2013} in which the calculation
of fluid variables is decoupled from that of the immersed boundary. For
integrating the fluid equations, we use the pseudo-compressibility
method developed by Guermond and Minev~\cite{Guermond2010,Guermond2011},
which employs a directional-splitting strategy that reduces to a series
of one-dimensional tridiagonal systems. These linear systems can be
solved efficiently on distributed-memory clusters by combining Thomas's
algorithm with a Schur-complement technique.
When integrating the rod position and orthonormal triad vectors forward
in time, we use the predictor-corrector procedure devised by Griffith
and Lim~\cite{Griffith2012-2}. This differentiates our numerical method
from the approach taken in~\cite{Wiens2013}, where an Adams--Bashforth
extrapolation was used to evolve the immersed boundary in time.
Although the predictor-corrector procedure introduces additional work,
this change is necessary in order to obtain second-order convergence
rates in space.
Lastly, the constitutive relations
\eqref{eq:linearmomentumbalance}--\eqref{eq:forceconstitutive} are
discretized in the same manner as in Lim et al.~\cite{Lim2008}, with the
main difference being in how the orthonormal triad vectors are
interpolated onto half Lagrangian steps $s_{\ell+\frac{1}{2}} = (\ell+\frac{1}{2})
\Delta s$. Here, we use the Rodrigues' rotation formula as described
in~\cite{Wiens2014} instead of taking the principal square root used by
Lim et al.~\cite{Lim2008}.
If we assume that the state variables are all known at time $t_n$, the
IB algorithm for a single time step $\Delta t$ proceeds as follows.
\begin{enumerate}
\setlength{\itemsep}{.5em}
\item Interpolate the linear and angular fluid velocities onto the
rod using the the delta kernel $\Phi_w(\bs{x})$ to obtain $\bs{U}^n$
and $\bs{W}^n$.
\item Predict the rod position $\bs{X}^{n+1,\ast}$ and orthonormal
triad vectors $(\bs{D}^\alpha)^{n+1,\ast}$ at time
$t_{n+1}=(n+1)\Delta t$ to first order for $\alpha=1,2,3$.
\item Calculate the {Lagrangian} force and torque densities,
$\bs{F}$ and $\bs{N}$, at times $t_{n}$ and $t_{n+1}$ using the
discretization employed by Lim et al.~\cite{Lim2008}.
\item Spread the Lagrangian force and torque densities just calculated
onto fluid grid points. Then approximate the {Eulerian} force
and torque density, $\bs{f}^{n+\frac{1}{2}}$ and $\bs{n}^{n+\frac{1}{2}}$, at time
$t_{n+\frac{1}{2}}=(n+\frac{1}{2})\Delta t$ using an arithmetic average.
\item Integrate the incompressible Navier--Stokes equations to time
$t_{n+1}$ using ($\bs{f}^{n+\frac{1}{2}} + \frac{1}{2} \nabla \times
\bs{n}^{n+\frac{1}{2}}$) as the external body force.
\item Correct the rod position $\bs{X}^{n+1}$ and orthonormal triad
$(\bs{D}^\alpha)^{n+1}$ to second order. This requires interpolating
the linear and angular fluid velocity at time $t_{n+1}$ onto the rod
location.
\end{enumerate}
\section{Numerical Results}
\label{sec:Results}
\subsection{Intrinsically Straight Fibers}
\label{sec:IntrinsicallyStraightFiber}
We begin by considering the behaviour of a single flexible fiber
immersed in a shear flow, where the equilibrium fiber state is
intrinsically straight (with no bend, no twist). As described earlier
in Section~\ref{sec:Background}, experimental observations show that
such fibers are characterized by a well-defined orbital motion that can
be separated into one of several distinct orbit classes according to a
fiber flexibility parameter $\chi$ that captures the ratio of fiber
bending force to hydrodynamic drag. This section aims to investigate
the full range of these two-dimensional orbital motions.
In all simulations, we use the numerical parameters listed in
Tables~\ref{Table:RigidFiberParameters}
and~\ref{Table:FlexibleFiberParameters}. Since the fiber motion is
confined to the $xy$-plane, we significantly reduce the execution time
of a simulation by shrinking the domain depth $H_z$, which
allows us to run $100+$ simulations in a reasonable timeframe.
Note that these results are virtually identical to simulations
using a larger domain ($H_z=2$), which we confirmed through
numerous computational experiments.
In all simulations, we choose physical parameters that are
consistent with natural (unbeaten) kraft pulp fibers, taking a fiber
length of $0.1-0.3$~cm and flexural rigidity of $0.001-0.07\, \text{g
cm}^3/\text{s}^2$ \cite{Tamdoo1981,Tamdoo1982}. Because fibers in our
numerical simulations have diameter that is proportional to the
effective thickness $w$, our simulated fibers are actually thicker than
a natural pulp fiber. For example, we use a delta function
regularization corresponding to $w \approx 80~\mu$m, whereas a natural
pulp fiber has a diameter between $20$--$80~\mu$m. Since the precise
dependence of the simulated fiber diameter on $w$ is unknown, we appeal
to the work of Bringley and Peskin~\cite{BringleyPeskin2008} where they
observed that a one-dimensional array of rigid IB points has an
effective numerical thickness of $D \approx 2 w$. Although these results
may not be strictly applicable in the present setting, this
approximation is sufficient for our purposes. Any remaining discrepancy
in the fiber diameter can then be accommodated for by adjusting the
value of fiber drag force (see $F_d$ from
equation~\eqref{eq:DragForce}).
\begin{table}[ht!bp]\centering\small
\caption{Numerical and physical parameter values used in rigid fiber
simulations.}
\begin{tabular}{l|ccc}\toprule
Parameter & Symbol & Value \\
\midrule
Size of fluid domain $\Omega$ & $H_x \times H_y \times H_z$ & $2 \times \frac{1}{2} \times 16h$ & cm\\
Number of fluid grid points & $N_x \times N_y \times N_z$ & $256 \times 64 \times 16$ & \\
Fluid mesh width & $h$ & $1/128$ & cm\\
Fluid density & $\rho$ & $1.0$ & g/cm$^3$\\
Fluid viscosity & $\mu$ & $10.0$ & g/(cm$\cdot$s)\\
Speed of moving plates & $U_{\text{top}}=U_{\text{bot}}$ & $8$ & cm/s \\
Shear rate & $G$ & $32$ & s$^{-1}$\\
Time step & $\Delta t$ & $1\text{e}{-5}$ & s \\
Fiber length & $L$ & $0.3$ & cm\\
Fiber mesh width & $\Delta s$ & $L/120$ & cm\\
Bending and twisting modulus (EI)& $a_1=a_2=a_3$ & $0.7$ & $\text{dyne} \cdot \text{cm}^2$\\
Shear and stretch modulus & $b_1=b_2=b_3$ & $540$ & $\text{dyne} \cdot \text{cm}^2$ \\
Fiber effective thickness & $w$ & $0.0078125$ & cm\\
Intrinsic twist vector & $\brac{\kappa_1,~\kappa_2,~\tau}$ & $\brac{0,~0,~0}$ & \\
Fiber length perturbation & $\epsilon_0$ & $0.001$ &\\
Support of delta kernel & $C$ & $4$ & \\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\label{Table:RigidFiberParameters}
\end{table}
In Figures~\ref{fig:AllOrbits} and~\ref{fig:AllOrbits2}, we display
snapshots of the dynamics of a fiber with initial configuration lying in
the $xy$-plane and for six values of the dimensionless flexibility
parameter $\chi$ between $0.19$ and $1.125\text{e}{5}$. As expected, the
simulations exhibit a range of different orbital motions that transition
between the various orbit classes (rigid, springy, flexible, complex,
coiled) as the flexibility increases. We also note that within the
intermediate range of $\chi$ values, we observe both S~turns and snake
turns depending on the symmetry of the initial fiber configuration.
Despite being very rare in actual fiber suspensions, S~turns turn
out to be remarkably stable in our idealized setting with a planar shear
flow; indeed, it is only when asymmetry is introduced in the fiber
through (for example) the initial shape or a length-dependent stiffness
that snake turns are observed instead of S~turns. These results are
consistent with those of Mason and
co-workers~\cite{Arlov1958,Forgacs1959} who observed that S~turns
required a high degree of symmetry that is rarely achieved in
experiments. For the largest value of $\chi=1.125\text{e}{5}$ in
Figure~\ref{fig:AllOrbits2}\subref{fig:CoiledOrbit} we observe a coiled
orbit with self-entanglement, and although this type of behaviour is not
pertinent to pulp fibers, Forgacs and Mason~\cite{Forgacs1959} did
observe such coiling with thread-like synthetic fibers. Eventually,
this fiber forms a complex writhing bundle as the fiber undergoes
self-contact, but because our model doesn't incorporate any contact
(fiber-on-fiber) forces we make no claim that these results correspond
to physically accurate coiling dynamics.
\begin{table}[!tbp]\centering\small
\caption{Parameter modifications for the flexible fiber simulations in
Figures~\ref{fig:AllOrbits} and~\ref{fig:AllOrbits2}. Only those
parameters that have changed relative to values indicated in
Table~\ref{Table:RigidFiberParameters} are shown here.}
\begin{tabular}{ccc}\toprule
Orbit Class & Configuration & Parameters \\
\midrule
Springy & 2 & $r_0 =0.45$, $\alpha_b=0.4$, $\alpha_e=0.6$, $EI=2.5\text{e}{-2}$, \\
& & $\Delta s\approx 1.25\text{e}{-3}$, $L\approx 0.282$\\\\
S~turn & 1 & $EI=3.0\text{e}{-3}$\\\\
& & \\
Snake turn & 2 & $r_0 =0.45$, $\alpha_b=0.4$, $\alpha_e=0.6$, $EI=3.0\text{e}{-3}$, \\
& & $\Delta s\approx 1.25\text{e}{-3}$, $L\approx 0.282$\\\\
Complex & 2 & $r_0 =0.4$, $\alpha_b=0.4$, $\alpha_e=0.6$, $\mu = 15$, $EI=1.0\text{e}{-3}$, \\
& & $\Delta s\approx 1.25\text{e}{-3}$, $L\approx 0.251$\\\\
Coiled & 1 & $G = 64,$ $\mu = 90$, $EI=1.0\text{e}{-4}$, $L=0.5$\\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\label{Table:FlexibleFiberParameters}
\end{table}
\begin{sidewaysfigure}[!tbp]
\begin{center}
\subfigure[Rigid Orbit ($\chi = 0.19$, $EI = 7.0\text{e}{-1}$, $L = 0.3$)]{
\includegraphics[width=0.7\textwidth]{Figures/RigidOrbit.pdf}
\label{fig:RigidOrbit}}
\subfigure[Springy Orbit ($\chi = 4.49$, $EI = 2.5\text{e}{-2}$, $L \approx 0.282$)]{
\includegraphics[width=0.7\textwidth]{Figures/SpringyOrbit.pdf}
\label{fig:SpringyOrbit}}
\subfigure[Snake Orbit ($\chi = 37.38$, $EI = 3.0\text{e}{-3}$, $L \approx 0.282$)]{
\includegraphics[width=0.7\textwidth]{Figures/SnakeOrbit.pdf}
\label{fig:SnakeOrbit}}
\caption{Snapshots of fiber position and fluid vorticity in the
$xy$-plane for a half-rotation in a rigid, springy and snake
orbit. Parameter values are listed in
Tables~\ref{Table:RigidFiberParameters} and
\ref{Table:FlexibleFiberParameters}.}
\label{fig:AllOrbits}
\end{center}
\end{sidewaysfigure}
\begin{sidewaysfigure}[!tbp]
\begin{center}
\subfigure[S~Orbit ($\chi = 45.00$, $EI = 3.0\text{e}{-3}$, $L = 0.3$)]{
\includegraphics[width=0.7\textwidth]{Figures/SOrbit.pdf}
\label{fig:SOrbit}}
\subfigure[Complex Orbit ($\chi = 119.06$, $EI = 1.0\text{e}{-3}$, and $L \approx 0.251$)]{
\includegraphics[width=0.7\textwidth]{Figures/ComplexOrbit.pdf}
\label{fig:ComplexOrbit}}
\subfigure[Coiled Orbit ($\chi = 1.125\text{e}{5}$, $EI = 1.0\text{e}{-4}$, and $L = 0.5$)]{
\includegraphics[width=0.75\textwidth]{Figures/CoiledOrbit.pdf}
\label{fig:CoiledOrbit}}
\caption{Snapshots of fiber position and fluid vorticity in the
$xy$-plane for an S~turn, complex and coiled orbit. Parameter
values are listed in Tables~\ref{Table:RigidFiberParameters} and
\ref{Table:FlexibleFiberParameters}.}
\label{fig:AllOrbits2}
\end{center}
\end{sidewaysfigure}
When the initial fiber configuration is rotated into the $xz$-plane, the
resulting dynamics are non-planar but still follow orbits qualitatively
similar to those derived by Jeffery~\cite{Jeffery1922}. Examples of
these non-planar orbits are given in the first author's doctoral
thesis~\cite{Wiens2014}, which show that the flexible fiber undergoes a
motion consisting of a rotations in the $xy$-plane superimposed on a
rocking motion back and forth about the $z$-axis in the $xz$-plane.
We next explore in more detail the dependence of the fiber orbit class
on the dimensionless flexibility parameter $\chi$. To this end, we
perform a much larger series of simulations with varying fiber length
($L=0.1$--$0.3$~cm), diameter ($D \approx 156$--$312~\mu$m), flexural
rigidity ($EI = 0.001$--$0.1~\text{dyne} \cdot \text{cm}^2$), shear rate
($G = 20$--$120$~s$^{-1}$) and viscosity ($\mu =
0.07$--$100.0$~g/(cm$\cdot$s)) corresponding to Reynolds numbers lying in
the range $0.0027$--$23.9$. For each simulation, we assign the fiber
dynamics to one of the four orbit classes {\sc I}--{\sc IV}\ by
calculating the {\it total fiber curvature}
\begin{align*}
\lambda(t) = \int_0^L \left|\pd{\bs{D}^3}{s}(s,t)\right| \,ds,
\end{align*}
and using the maximum curvature over a half-rotation $t_0 \leq t \leq
t_1$ to apply the following criteria:
\begin{itemize}
\itemsep.5em
\item {\sc I}: The orbit is rigid if $\displaystyle \max_{t_0 \leq t \leq
t_1} \lambda(t)< 0.4$.
\item {\sc II}: The orbit is springy if $\displaystyle 0.4 \leq
\max_{t_0 \leq t \leq t_1} \lambda(t)< 3.7$.
\item {\sc III}: The orbit is an S~or snake turn if $\displaystyle 3.7
\leq \max_{t_0 \leq t \leq t_1} \lambda(t)$ and $\lambda(t_1)< 2.5$.
\item {\sc IV}: The orbit is complex if $\displaystyle 3.7 \leq
\max_{t_0 \leq t \leq t_1} \lambda(t)$ and $\displaystyle 2.5 \geq
\lambda(t_1)$.
\end{itemize}
Note that S/snake turns and complex rotations have the same range of
maximum curvature, and that we use the fiber curvature $\lambda(t_1)$ at
the end of the half-rotation to determine whether or not the fiber has
straightened out.
Simulations are depicted graphically in Figure~\ref{fig:FiberType} in
terms of two plots of flexural rigidity $EI$ and drag force $F_d$ versus
dimensionless flexibility $\chi$. Each point on the plot corresponds to
a simulation using a specific choice of physical parameters, and the
point type is assigned based on the orbit classification criteria above.
From these two plots, it is evident that there is a clear division of
orbits into classes {\sc I}, {\sc II}\ and {\sc III}\ along vertical
divisions that correspond to values of $\chi \cong 3.85$ and $\chi \cong
20.0$. The boundary between classes {\sc III}~and {\sc IV}\ is not as
sharply defined, but can still be assigned to a value of flexibility
$\chi \approx 65.0$. Based on these observations, we conclude that the
dimensionless flexibility $\chi$ provides a useful measure for
characterizing orbit classes at the lower Reynolds numbers considered
here.
\begin{figure}[!tbp]
\begin{center}
\subfigure[]{\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{Figures/FiberType_EIVsChi.pdf}
\label{fig:FiberType:EIVsChi}}
\qquad
\subfigure[]{\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{Figures/FiberType_FdVsChi.pdf}
\label{fig:FiberType:FdVsChi}}
\caption{Summary of all simulations showing the relationship between
orbit class and different values of the dimensionless flexibility
$\chi$, flexural rigidity $EI$ and drag rate $F_d$. Open markers denote the experimental data shown in
Table~\ref{Table:ExperimentalOrbitClass} where $E=3$ GPa.}
\label{fig:FiberType}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
We conclude this section by performing a further comparison of our
numerical simulations with the experiments of Forgacs and
Mason~\cite{Forgacs1959} on dacron fibers in corn syrup. First of all,
we list the parameters and observed orbit class for several of these
experiments in Table~\ref{Table:ExperimentalOrbitClass}. Based on
values of $\chi \cdot EI$, we see that this rescaled flexibility
parameter may be used to classify each orbit, assuming that $EI$ is
constant in all experiments. However, we emphasize that since Forgacs
and Mason did not provide a value for the flexural rigidity ($EI$), we
were unable to determine the value of $\chi$ explicitly.
\begin{table}[ht!bp]\centering\small
\caption{Experimental results obtained from Forgacs and
Mason~\cite{Forgacs1959} for synthetic dacron fibers.}
\begin{tabular}{cccccc}\toprule
Orbit Class & $\chi \cdot EI$ & $G$ (s$^{-1}$) & $\mu$ (g/(cm$\cdot$s)) & $L$ (cm)& $D$ ($\mu$m) \\
\midrule
Rigid & $1.96\text{e}{-4}$ & $3.921$ & $11.4$ & $0.1778$ & $7.8$ \\
Rigid & $1.01\text{e}{-3}$ & $5.143$ & $91.2$ & $0.1404$ & $7.8$ \\
Springy & $1.43\text{e}{-3}$ & $4.763$ & $11.4$ & $0.3229$ & $7.8$ \\
Springy & $2.39\text{e}{-3}$ & $5.965$ & $91.2$ & $0.1778$ & $7.8$ \\
Springy & $4.91\text{e}{-3}$ & $4.879$ & $91.2$ & $0.2418$ & $7.8$ \\
Flexible & $1.16\text{e}{-2}$ & $4.825$ & $91.2$ & $0.3229$ & $7.8$ \\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\label{Table:ExperimentalOrbitClass}
\end{table}
Because these experiments were all performed with dacron fibers, we next
explore further the assumption that $EI$ is roughly constant, and also
whether the experimental results are consistent with the division of
orbit classes in our simulations in Figure~\ref{fig:FiberType}. First
of all, we remark that all experimental data points are consistent with our
simulations if $2.46\text{e}{-4} < EI < 3.71\text{e}{-4}$ ($\text{dyne} \cdot
\text{cm}^2$).\ \
Unfortunately, the Young's modulus $E$ for dacron is known to vary over
an extremely wide range of $71.5 \text{ MPa} \leq E \leq 22.1 \text{
GPa}$ between various manufacturers~\cite{WolframAlphaDacron}.
However, the manufacturer of the fibers used by Forgacs and Mason was
identified as E.I. du Pont de Nemours and Co., and we were able to find
a patent filed by this company in 1969~\cite{Cope1969} for several
dacron blends that lists a much tighter range for Young's modulus of $2.0
\text{ GPa} < E < 3.5 \text{ GPa}$. Therefore, the hypothetical $EI$ of these
synthetic fibers would be between $3.63\text{e}{-4} < EI < 6.36\text{e}{-4}$, which is consistent
with our numerical results! Furthermore, most data points are
still classified correctly when the $EI$ falls outside our consistency range
($2.46\text{e}{-4} < EI < 3.71\text{e}{-4}$). To illustrate, we have plotted the experimental
data in Figure~\ref{fig:FiberType} using open markers, assuming $E = 3$ GPa (giving an $EI = 5.45\text{e}{-4}$).
Here, we observe that all experimental data are classified correctly, except for one troublesome data point.
Therefore, we conclude from these results that our simulations are
in excellent agreement with experimental data.
\subsection{Intrinsically Curved Fibers}
\label{sec:IntrinsicallyCurvedFiber}
We next consider single flexible fibers that have an intrinsic curvature
at equilibrium, a situation that is often encountered for natural fibers
such as wood pulp. We use the base parameter values in
Table~\ref{Table:RigidFiberParameters} and simulate two cases
corresponding to the modifications listed in
Table~\ref{Table:FlexibleBentFiberParameters}. In both cases, the fiber
is initialized as a curved segment of a circular arc with intrinsic
twist vector $\brac{\kappa_1,~\kappa_2,~\tau} = \brac{1/r_0,~0,~0}$, which
keeps the initial fiber configuration at equilibrium (that is,
$N^1=N^2=N^3=0$ at $t=0$).
\begin{table}[!tbp]\centering\small
\caption{Parameter modifications for the flexible fiber simulations in
Figure~\ref{fig:ProtrudedSTurn} and~\ref{fig:ProtrudedSnakeTurn}.
Only those parameters that have changed relative to values
in Table~\ref{Table:RigidFiberParameters} are shown here.}
\begin{tabular}{ccc}\toprule
Orbit Class & Configuration & Parameters \\
\midrule
S~turn & 3 & $H_z = 2$, $r_0 =0.45$, $\alpha_b=0.4$, $\alpha_e=0.6$, $EI=3.0\text{e}{-3}$, \\
& & $\epsilon_0 = 1\text{e}{-3}$, $\Delta s\approx 1.25\text{e}{-3}$, $L\approx 0.282$\\
\\
Snake turn & 2 & $H_z = 2$, $r_0 =0.45$, $\alpha_b=0.4$, $\alpha_e=0.6$, $EI=3.0\text{e}{-3}$, \\
& & $\Theta_{xz} = \pi/16$, $\Delta s\approx 1.25\text{e}{-3}$, $L\approx 0.282$\\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\label{Table:FlexibleBentFiberParameters}
\end{table}
The resulting orbits depicted in Figures~\ref{fig:ProtrudedSTurn}
and~\ref{fig:ProtrudedSnakeTurn} clearly correspond to S- and snake-like
orbits. The projections of both fibers in the $xy$-plane behave like
the corresponding planar orbits considered in
Section~\ref{sec:IntrinsicallyStraightFiber}, but protrude into the
$xz$-plane. These simulations reproduce similar orbital dynamics to
those observed in experiments of Arlov et al.~\cite{Arlov1958}. The
first author's thesis~\cite{Wiens2014} shows additional simulations for
a fiber initially oriented along the $z$-direction and undergoing an
additional axial spin, for which the fiber rotates around the $z$-axis
and slightly straightens out as it rotates into the shear flow.
\begin{sidewaysfigure}[!tbp]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.31\textwidth]{Figures/STurn-Curved-1.png}
\quad
\includegraphics[width=0.31\textwidth]{Figures/STurn-Curved-2.png}
\quad
\includegraphics[width=0.31\textwidth]{Figures/STurn-Curved-3.png}
\quad
\includegraphics[width=0.31\textwidth]{Figures/STurn-Curved-4.png}
\quad
\includegraphics[width=0.31\textwidth]{Figures/STurn-Curved-5.png}
\quad
\includegraphics[width=0.31\textwidth]{Figures/STurn-Curved-6.png}
\caption{Snapshots of an S~turn orbit for an intrinsically curved
fiber with parameters in Tables~\ref{Table:RigidFiberParameters}
and~\ref{Table:FlexibleBentFiberParameters}.}
\label{fig:ProtrudedSTurn}
\end{center}
\end{sidewaysfigure}
\begin{sidewaysfigure}[!tbp]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.31\textwidth]{Figures/SnakeTurn-Curved-1.png}
\quad
\includegraphics[width=0.31\textwidth]{Figures/SnakeTurn-Curved-2.png}
\quad
\includegraphics[width=0.31\textwidth]{Figures/SnakeTurn-Curved-3.png}
\quad
\includegraphics[width=0.31\textwidth]{Figures/SnakeTurn-Curved-4.png}
\quad
\includegraphics[width=0.31\textwidth]{Figures/SnakeTurn-Curved-5.png}
\quad
\includegraphics[width=0.31\textwidth]{Figures/SnakeTurn-Curved-6.png}
\caption{Snapshots of snake turn for an intrinsically curved fiber
with parameters in Tables~\ref{Table:RigidFiberParameters}
and~\ref{Table:FlexibleBentFiberParameters}.}
\label{fig:ProtrudedSnakeTurn}
\end{center}
\end{sidewaysfigure}
\subsection{Multiple Flexible Fibers}
\label{sec:MultipleFiberSuspension}
For our last series of simulations, we consider an idealized
representation of a fiber suspension that permits us to employ the
domain tiling techniques described in~\cite{Wiens2013}. In these
computations, we simulate a $P_x \times 1 \times P_z$ array of fibers
immersed in the fluid domain $\Omega = [0,P_x H_x] \times [0,H_y] \times
[0,P_z H_z]$ using the boundary conditions stated in Section~\ref{sec:InitialConditions}. The
code runs in parallel on a $P=P_x \times P_z$ array of computer
processors ($P_y=1$) and the fluid domain $\Omega$ is partitioned along
the $x$- and $z$-axes so that one processor labelled $I,K$ is
responsible for each subdomain $\Omega_{I,K}=[(I-1)H_x, IH_x] \times [0,
H_y] \times [(K-1)H_z, KH_z]$, for $I=1,2,\ldots, P_x$ and $K=1,2,\ldots
P_z$. We have constructed this problem so that it can be used as a weak
scalability test, wherein the local problem size is held fixed as both
the number of processors and global problem size are increased. It is
important to recognize that our method is in no way restricted to such
idealized arrays of fibers, but rather we have employed this arrangement
here in order to clearly illustrate the parallel scalability of our
algorithm.
Initially, each subdomain $\Omega_{I,K}$ contains a single
intrinsically-curved fiber located at its centroid, with a
randomly-chosen orientation angle and whose initial shape is defined in
the same manner as described earlier for Configuration~3. The numerical
and physical parameters are as in Table~\ref{Table:RigidFiberParameters}
with the following modifications: $H_x = 0.421875$, $H_y = \frac{1}{2}$, $H_z
= 0.3125$, $\Delta t = 5\text{e}{-5}$, $r_0 =0.45$, $\alpha_b=0.4$,
$\alpha_e=0.6$, $EI=3.0\text{e}{-3}$, $\Delta s\approx 1.25\text{e}{-3}$, $L\approx
0.282$, $U_{\text{top}}=8.5$ and $U_{\text{bot}}=7.5$. Another
difference from our earlier simulations is that the top and bottom
boundaries that induce the shear flow now move at different speeds (that
is, $U_{\text{top}} \ne U_{\text{bot}}$); consequently, fibers are
transported across subdomain boundaries which provides a nontrivial test
of our algorithm's ability to handle inter-process communication as well
as changes to the IB data stored on each processor over time.
Figure~\ref{fig:BigMultiFiberCurvedFlexible} presents three snapshots of
the dynamics of a $16 \times 16$ array of fibers at the initial and two
later times. The image at time $t=0.25$ emphasizes the fact that all
fibers spend the majority of their time aligned horizontally with the
shear flow (i.e., along the $x$-axis) and that only a small proportion
of the fibers at any time instant are rotated out of the shear plane.
As the suspension evolves over time, the fibers are prone to drift and
cluster together, leading to development of more complex behavior such
as is shown in the image at time $t=1.80$. This last snapshot suggests
that our algorithm is capable of simulating at least the initial phases
fiber flocculation in a suspension with a reasonable concentration of
fibers.
\begin{figure}[!tbp]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.90\textwidth]{Figures/Suspension-Large-1.png}
\qquad
\includegraphics[width=0.90\textwidth]{Figures/Suspension-Large-2.png}
\qquad
\includegraphics[width=0.90\textwidth]{Figures/Suspension-Large-3.png}
\caption{A suspension of $256$ intrinsically-curved fibers ($P_x =
P_z = 16$) in Configuration $3$. Parameters are described in
Section~\ref{sec:MultipleFiberSuspension}.}
\label{fig:BigMultiFiberCurvedFlexible}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
The next set of results attempts to quantify the importance of including the
full two-way fluid-structure interaction between fluid and fibers,
relative to other more common numerical approaches that simplify or
eliminate this interaction. For this purpose, we define a quantity we
call the {\it local deviation} as
\begin{gather*}
{\mathcal E}_{\text{rel}}(\bs{x},t) = \frac{| \bs{u}(\bs{x},t) - \bs{u}(\bs{x},0)
|}{\max_{\bs{x}}(|\bs{u}(\bs{x},0)|)},
\end{gather*}
which is a local measure of the relative difference between the computed
fluid velocity and the corresponding linear shear flow that would arise
in the absence of any fibers. We also define a related {\it global
deviation} from linear shear using either the $\ell^\infty$-norm
\begin{gather*}
\| {\mathcal E}_{\text{rel}}(\bs{x},t) \|_\infty = \max_{i,j,k}
|{\mathcal E}_{\text{rel}}(\bs{x}_{i,j,k},t_n)|,
\end{gather*}
or $\ell^1$-norm
\begin{gather*}
\| {\mathcal E}_{\text{rel}}(\bs{x},t) \|_1 = \frac{h^3}{V} \sum_{i,j,k}
|{\mathcal E}_{\text{rel}}(\bs{x}_{i,j,k},t_n)|,
\end{gather*}
where $V$ is the fluid volume.
For a 25-fiber simulation computed with $(P_x,P_y,P_z)=(5,1,5)$
processors, we provide plots in Figure~\ref{fig:FluidDeviationSlice} of
the local deviation ${\mathcal E}_{\text{rel}}$ at time $t=1.80$ and along two different
horizontal slices. The figures have truncated the values of ${\mathcal E}_{\text{rel}}$
above the threshold 0.025 so that smaller deviations can be visualized.
From these plots we observe that the local deviation is largest adjacent
to the individual fibers where the no-slip condition forces the fluid to
follow the deforming and rotating fibers, but that the deviation decays
rapidly away from the fibers. Nonetheless, there are still significant
fluid disturbances spread throughout the entire fluid domain that
influence fiber motion and are related to hydrodynamic interactions
between individual fibers. The corresponding global deviation values
are $\|{\mathcal E}_{\text{rel}}\|_1 = 0.0159$ and $\|{\mathcal E}_{\text{rel}}\|_\infty = 0.135$ which show
that relative deviations in the flow are as high as 13.5\%\ near the
fibers but that the average over the entire flow field is only about
1.6\%. Other simulations using different parameters and initial
conditions yield similar results (see \cite{Wiens2014}) with the average
relative deviation hovering around 2\%\ and the maximum ranging up to
40\%. These results suggest that incorporating the full fluid-structure
interaction into models for non-dilute suspensions is important in
terms of properly capturing the dynamics of the flexible fibers. We also
note that these simulations are performed at relative low values of
Reynolds number and fiber concentration, and that the deviation measure
will only get larger as the Reynolds number and concentration increase.
\begin{figure}[!tbp]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.95\textwidth]{Figures/FluidDeviations-Curved.png}
\caption{Fluid deviation ${\mathcal E}_{\text{rel}}$ on two horizontal planes for the
$25$ fiber simulation computed in Table~\ref{Table:WeakScaling}.
Plotted values are truncated at the threshold ${\mathcal E}_{\text{rel}} = 0.025$.}
\label{fig:FluidDeviationSlice}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
Finally, we close by investigating the parallel performance of our IB
algorithm by considering simulations of different-sized suspensions of
fibers on multiple processors. Based on our problem setup, the execution
time would ideally stay constant as the global problem size and number
of processors increase. Indeed, Table~\ref{Table:WeakScaling} shows
that as the size of the fiber array ($P_x$, $P_z$) is increased, there
is only a slight increase in execution time and hence our algorithm is
said to be weakly scalable. We remark that our code is still not fully
optimized and that the algorithm performance could be further improved
by making enhancements such as enforcing the top/bottom wall boundary
conditions directly instead of our approach of treating the walls using
IB tether points.
\begin{table}[htbp]\centering\small
\caption{Weak scaling results showing the average execution time
per time step (in seconds) for the multiple fiber problem. The
local problem size is held fixed as the number of processors $P$ (and
global problem size) is increased. Simulations are run on the
Bugaboo cluster managed by WestGrid~\cite{Bugaboo}.}
\begin{tabular}{cc c}\toprule
$P$ & ($P_x,P_y,P_z$)& Wall Time \\
\midrule
$25$ & ($5,1,5$) & $0.57$ \\
$64$ & ($8,1,8$) & $0.58$ \\
$144$ & ($12,1,12$) & $0.58$ \\
$225$ & ($15,1,15$) & $0.62$ \\
$256$ & ($16,1,16$) & $0.61$ \\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\label{Table:WeakScaling}
\end{table}
\section{Conclusions}
\label{sec:Conclusion}
In this paper, we have presented a parallel immersed boundary algorithm
for simulating suspensions of flexible fibers, where individual fibers
are modelled as Kirchhoff rods. The novelty of this work derives from
its application to multi-fiber suspension flows with non-zero Reynolds
number and the inclusion of the the full two-way interaction between the
fluid and suspended fibers. In our numerical simulations, we reproduce
the full range of orbital dynamics observed experimentally by Mason and
co-workers for isolated fibers immersed in a linear shear flow. When
extending the results to multi-fiber suspensions, we demonstrate through
a weak scalability test that the parallel scaling of our algorithm is
near optimal and hence shows promise for simulating more complex
scenarios such as semi-dilute suspensions and fiber flocculation.
In the future, we plan to improve on the underlying model, which will
allow us to simulate more realistic fiber suspensions. First, we plan on
incorporating the contact forces between fibers such as the frictional
forces modelled by Schmid et al.~\cite{Schmid2000}. Second, we will
incorporate the effect of added fiber mass using the penalty IB
method~\cite{Kim2007}. After incorporating these extensions, a more
extensive comparison to experimental data would be required, comparing
quantities such as the specific viscosity of the
suspension~\cite{Petrie1999}.
|
\section{Introduction}
Current and upcoming galaxy surveys such as BOSS \citep{2007AAS...21113229S}, DES \citep{2013AAS...22133501F}, DESI \citep{2013arXiv1308.0847L}, LSST \citep{2008arXiv0805.2366I} and {\sc euclid} \citep{EUCLID}
will require extremely accurate theoretical predictions to match
the precise observations of large-scale structure in our Universe.
Cosmological N-body simulations which combine high resolution and large
volume have the statistical power to play a key role in guiding the
development of accurate theoretical models which will advance our understanding of the hierarchical growth of structure, galaxy formation and the properties of dark energy.
A large uncertainty in extracting cosmological information from observations is the bias between galaxies or dark matter halos and the underlying dark matter
distribution. Using the {\it Millennium-XXL} ({\sc mxxl}) simulation we examine both the halo mass and velocity bias for different mass bins and compare with theoretical predictions. To our knowledge this is the first time that
the velocity divergence power spectra have been presented for halos of different masses measured from N-body simulations.
Accurate models for the mass and velocity bias of halos are
extremely important in theoretical predictions
for redshift space distortions which are a major cosmological probe in
the Dark Energy Task Force stage IV experiments \citep{2006astro.ph..9591A}.
Dark matter halos form at high fluctuation peaks in the matter distribution and represent a biased tracer of the dark matter \citep[e.g.][]{1986ApJ...304...15B}.
As a consequence,
extracting cosmological parameters from clustering statistics requires an accurate model for this bias as a function of both scale and redshift
\citep[e.g.][]{2005MNRAS.362..505C, 2003MNRAS.345..923V}.
Previous studies have calibrated semi-analytic models for
the halo mass bias from simulations using either a Friends-of-Friends (FOF) halo finding algorithm \citep{1998ApJ...503L...9J,Sheth:1999su,2004MNRAS.355..129S,2005ApJ...631...41T,2010MNRAS.402..191P} or a spherical overdensity (SO) halo finder
\citep{2003ApJ...584..702H,2010MNRAS.402..589M,2010ApJ...724..878T}.
In the FOF approach, particles are simply linked together in a percolation scheme which tracks iso-density contours. The main advantage of this method
is that it makes
no assumptions about halo geometry and tracks the shapes of bound objects faithfully.
In the SO approach halos are identified as isolated spheres around density peaks where the mass of a halo
is defined by the overdensity relative to the background.
Simulations have shown that the mass function and bias for FOF and SO defined halos
can differ substantially at the high mass end where the FOF algorithm tends to spuriously group distinct halos together \citep{2009ApJ...692..217L,2010ApJ...724..878T}.
Recent analytical advancements to the excursion set theory of halo formation which
accounts for both non-Markovian walks and
stochastic barriers have been developed \citep{2010ApJ...711..907M} but
have yet to be rigously tested or calibrated against simulations.
In this paper we re-visit some of these models and compare their
predictions with the measured bias for FOF halos in the {\sc mxxl }
simulation at $z=0$ and $z=0.7$ for a much wider range of halo masses
than previously explored at both redshifts (e.g. \citealt{Angulo:2007fw}).
\citet{2011ApJ...726....5O} carried out a detailed analysis of the redshift space clustering of
dark matter halos and the systematic effects on measuring the growth rate parameter taking into account
uncertainties in the halo mass bias. Recent advancements in modelling redshift space distortions, where the
apparent positions of galaxies are altered along the line of sight by their intrinsic velocities \citep{Kaiser:1987qv},
have shown that taking into account nonlinearities in the velocity field provides an improved model for the power spectrum on quasi-linear scales \citep{Scoccimarro:2004tg, 2011MNRAS.410.2081J}.
These studies focused on the redshift space distortion effects in the dark matter only and assume that halo velocities trace the dark matter velocity field faithfully.
Here we present, for the first time, the halo velocity divergence
power spectra for different halo mass bins and show that there
is a significant sampling bias compared to the dark matter velocity
power spectrum. Measuring the velocity field from simulations
has been shown to be extremely sensitive to resolution effects \citep{2009PhRvD..80d3504P,2011MNRAS.410.2081J}.
The high force and mass resolution in the {\sc mxxl} simulation allows us to
accurately probe the extent of this velocity bias for different halo masses
as a function of scale, redshift and number density.
This has not been possible before for such a broad range of halo masses.
Accounting for and modelling this bias in improved redshift space
distortion models is left to future work.
The attainable precision of cosmological parameters extracted from
clustering statistics is also limited by the galaxy shot noise which
is often modelled using Poisson statistics. Following the work of
\citet{2009PhRvL.103i1303S} we investigate if a mass dependent weighting of the density field can be used to suppress the shot noise in the clustering signal of high mass halos compared to the Poisson signal. This method relies on the
assumption that on large scales the halo or galaxy cross correlation
coefficient is unity assuming a deterministic relationship between the
dark matter and halo density fields.
The {\sc mxxl} simulation \citep{2012MNRAS.426.2046A} is one of the largest high-resolution cosmological simulations to date, employing over 300 billion particles to model the evolution of the matter distribution in a volume of almost $70 {\rm Gpc}^{3}$. The
{\sc mxxl} run complements previous simulations of the same cosmology in different
box sizes with different particle numbers, the Millennium and Millennium-II simulations
\citep{Springel:2005nw,2009MNRAS.398.1150B}.
At present the largest simulations carried out such as the MICE Grand Challenge \citep{2013arXiv1312.1707F} of 70 billion dark-matter particles in a (3 $h^{-1}$Gpc$)^3$
comoving volume;
the Dark Energy Universe Simulation Full Universe Run \citep{2012arXiv1206.2838A} of 550 billion particles in a (21 $h^{-1}$Gpc$)^3$ comoving volume;
the MultiDark simulation \citep{2012MNRAS.423.3018P} of 3840$^3$ particles in a (2.5 $h^{-1}$Gpc$)^3$ comoving volume;
the DarkSky simulation \citep{2014arXiv1407.2600S} of $\sim 10240^3$ particles in a volume $8h^{-1}\mathrm{Gpc}$ on a side
or the Horizon Run 3 simulation
\citep{2011JKAS...44..217K} of 375 billion particles in (10.8 $h^{-1}$Gpc$)^3$ comoving volume, cannot match the {\sc mxxl} simulation in both mass and force resolution,
which allows us to accurately model halo masses
and velocities from $10^{12} - 10^{15} h^{-1}M_{\sun}$ over a range of redshifts.
\begin{table}
\caption{Mass bins and number densities for the halo samples shown in Fig. \ref{fig:pk} for $z=0$ and $z=0.7$.
Note the last bin of masses in the range $3-6 \times 10^{14}$$( h^{-1}M_{\sun})$ is not plotted at $z=0.7$.
}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{@{}lrl}
\hline
mass range\phantom{00000} & \phantom{0000}number density & \hspace{-0.3cm}$(h/$Mpc$)^3$ \\
\end{tabular}
\begin{tabular}{@{}lcc}
$( h^{-1}M_{\sun})$ & $z = 0$ & $z=0.7$ \\
\hline
$> 1 \times 10^{12}$ & $3.54 \times 10^{-3}$ & - \\
$1-3 \times 10^{12}$ & $2.26 \times 10^{-3}$ & $2.27 \times 10^{-3}$ \\
$7-9 \times 10^{12}$ & $1.22 \times 10^{-4}$ & $1.07 \times 10^{-4}$\\
$1-3 \times 10^{13}$ & $2.47 \times 10^{-4}$ &$1.96 \times 10^{-4}$\\
$ 5-7 \times 10^{13}$ & $2.38 \times 10^{-5}$ & $1.42 \times 10^{-5}$\\
$9\times 10^{13} - 3 \times 10^{14}$ & $2.82 \times 10^{-5}$ & $1.19 \times 10^{-5}$ \\
$3-6 \times 10^{14}$ & $3.92 \times 10^{-6}$ & - \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\label{table:masses}
\end{table}
\begin{figure*}
\center
{\epsfxsize=18.5truecm
\epsfbox[53 367 510 523]{bias_z0_z0.7.ps}}
\caption{ Left: The halo power spectra for different halo mass ranges measured from the {\sc mxxl} simulation at z=0.
Note that not all error bars are plotted after $k = 0.06 (0.02) h$Mpc$^{-1}$ in the left (right) panel for clarity. Middle: The $z=0$ measured halo bias for different mass ranges where
$b = \sqrt{P_{\rm hh}/P_{m}}$. The horizontal lines in each case represent the best fit value for the bias over the range
$k < 0.1 h$Mpc$^{-1}$.
Right: The halo bias measured at $z=0.7$. The colour coding for each mass bin is given by the legend in the left panel.
\label{fig:pk}}
\end{figure*}
This paper is organised as follows: In Section~\ref{section:mxxl}
we describe the {\sc mxxl} $N$-body simulation used in this paper.
In Section~\ref{section:bias} we analyse the halo matter power spectra
for different mass bins at redshift $z=0$ and $z=0.7$. These redshifts
are chosen to be revelvant to current and future redshift surveys.
We compare the measured linear bias from the {\sc mxxl} simulation to
different models for the bias at both redshifts.
In Section~\ref{section:shot} we
examine whether the shot noise for a high mass sample of halos can be reduced using a mass weighting method compared with Poisson shot noise estimates.
In Section~\ref{section:velocity}
we present
the measured velocity divergence power spectra for the different mass bins measured from the {\sc mxxl } simulation at redshift $z=0$ and $z=0.7$
and compare with theoretical models for the dark matter velocity field.
Our conclusions and summary are presented in Section~\ref{section:summary}.
\section{The {\sc mxxl} N-body simulation }\label{section:mxxl}
The {\it Millennium-XXL} ({\sc mxxl}) simulation follows the evolution of the matter distribution within a cubic region of $4.11$Gpc (3$h^{-1}$)Mpc on a side using $6720^3$ particles \citep[see ][for full details]{2012MNRAS.426.2046A}.
The simulation volume is equivalent to that of the full sky out to redshift $0.7$. The {\sc mxxl} run particle mass is $m_p = 8.456 \times 10^9 h^{-1}M_{\sun}$.
The {\sc mxxl} adopts the same $\Lambda$CDM cosmology as in \citet{Springel:2005nw,2009MNRAS.398.1150B} which faciliates the use of all three simulations for comparative studies on galaxy formation in simulations. The cosmological parameters of the simulation are $\Omega_m = 0.25, \Omega_b = 0.045, \Omega_{\Lambda}=0.75, \sigma_8 = 0.9$ and
$H_0 = 73$km s$^{-1}$Mpc$^{-1}$. Although the power spectrum normalization $\sigma_8$ is somewhat high compared to current estimates \citep{2010arXiv1001.4538K} the
theoretical models for the halo bias and velocity statistics considered in this work have previously been tested using simulations of varying cosmologies
\citep{2010MNRAS.401.2181J,2010ApJ...724..878T}. Given the impressive mass and force resolution in the
{\sc mxxl} simulation, it is interesting to test the validity of these models for halo masses which lie beyond the resolving power of the original simulations used for calibration.
The initial conditions for the simulation were laid down by periodically replicating a $280^3$ particle cubic glass \citep{White:1996}; \citep[see also][]{Baugh:1995hv}
file twenty-four times in each coordinate direction. The displacement and velocities for each particle at the starting redshift of $z=63$ were then computed using
second-order Lagrangian perturbation theory \citep{1998MNRAS.299.1097S}.
The {\sc mxxl} simulation was run using a ``lean'' version of the {\sc GADGET}-3 code which is a highly optimised version of the TreePM code {\sc GADGET}-2
\citep{Springel:2005nw,Springel:2005mi}. The group finder makes use of a Friends-of-Friends (FOF) algorithm \citep{1985ApJ...292..371D}
to locate gravitationally bound structures.
\citet{2012MNRAS.426.2046A} measured the mass function of dark matter
halos using the $z=0$ output of the {\sc mxxl} over the mass
interval
$2 \times 10^{11} h^{-1} M_{\odot} - 3 \times 10^{15} h^{-1} M_{\odot}$,
and combined this with the other simulations in the Millennium suite to
calibrate a new fitting formula to describe the mass function.
Angulo et~al. also demonstrated that the matter power spectrum
could be measured from the {\sc mxxl} over the wavenumber
range $ 2 \times 10^{-3} h {\rm Mpc}^{-1}$ to $ 10 h {\rm Mpc}^{-1}$,
demonstrating the huge dynamic range of the simulation.
The {\sc mxxl} has also been used with semi-analytical galaxy formation
models to study the appearence of the baryonic acoustic oscillation peak
when using different galaxy tracers \citep{2014MNRAS.442.2131A}.
\section{The spatial distribution of dark matter halos }\label{section:bias}
\begin{figure*}
\center
{\epsfxsize=17.5truecm
\epsfbox[75 368 509 634]{bnu.ps}}
\caption{ Left: The linear halo mass bias $b({\rm log}\nu)$ measured from
the {\sc mxxl} simulation at $z=0$ where $b = \sqrt{P_{\rm hh}/P_{m}}$
using $0.004<k (hMpc^{-1}) < 0.1$ is shown as green squares.
The lines show analytic models from \citet{2005ApJ...631...41T} (blue solid),
\citet{2010ApJ...724..878T} (red dashed), \citet{Sheth:1999su} (purple dotted)
and the model from \citet{2011MNRAS.411.2644M} (cyan dot-dashed) which includes
non-Markovian terms and a stocastic barrier.
Right: The halo bias at $z=0.7$. All model predictions were generated by scaling
the variance of the linear density field by the ratio of the linear growth at $z=0.7$ and $z=0$.
The \citet{2011MNRAS.411.2644M} model has been plotted at this redshift (cyan dot dashed lines) using the best fit values to the {\sc mxxl} $b-{\rm log}\nu$ relation.
In both cases the lower panels show the ratio of the model predictions to the mass bias measured
from the simulation.
\label{fig:bias}}
\end{figure*}
In this section we present the measured power spectra of various halo mass samples from the {\sc mxxl} simulation at $z=0$ and $z=0.7$. We focus first on comparing the halo power spectrum with that of the matter distribution,
as quantified through the halo mass bias (Section 3.1). We then test a prescription for
suppressing the shot noise in the power spectrum of a halo sample which is a modification of the method
proposed by \citet{2009PhRvL.103i1303S} (Section 3.2).
\subsection{Bias of dark matter halos }
We analyse the linear bias measured from the ratio of the halo auto and mass power spectra $b \equiv (P_{\rm hh}/P_{\rm m})^{1/2}$ as a function of scale and compare the predictions
for the bias - peak height relation with commonly used models.
The power spectrum was computed by assigning the particles to a mesh using the cloud in cell (CIC) assignment scheme \citep{1981csup.book.....H}
and then performing a fast Fourier transform on the density field. To restore the resolution
of the true density field this assignment scheme is corrected for by performing an
approximate de-convolution \citep{1991ApJ...375...25B}.
Throughout this paper the fractional error on the power spectrum plotted is given by
$\sigma_P/P = (2/N)^{1/2}(1 + \sigma_n^2/P)$ where $N$ is the number of modes measured in a spherical shell of width $\delta k$ and $\sigma_n$ is the shot noise \citep{1994ApJ...426...23F}. This number depends upon the survey volume, $V$, as
$N = V 4\pi k^2 \delta k/(2\pi)^3$.
In Fig. \ref{fig:pk} we show the $z=0$ halo power spectra for the halo samples listed in Table \ref{table:masses}. The dark matter power spectrum is shown as a purple solid line in this figure.
In the middle panel we show the halo bias at $z=0$ for each halo sample evaluated as $b = \sqrt{P_{\rm hh}/P_{m}}$.
The best fitting value for the bias over the range $0.004<k (h$Mpc$^{-1}) < 0.1$ is shown as horizontal lines for each sample.
These ratios are remarkably flat over the range
$k < 0.2 h$Mpc$^{-1}$ for
masses $< 2 \times 10^{13}h^{-1}M_{\sun}$ and $k < 0.1 h$Mpc$^{-1}$ for masses $> 6\times 10^{13}h^{-1}M_{\sun}$ at $z=0$
in agreement with the work of \citet{2011ApJ...726....5O}.
At a higher redshift of $z=0.7$ this bias is scale independent for all masses at $k < 0.1 h$Mpc$^{-1}$ although the scale dependence is more pronounced on quasi-linear scales compared to redshift zero.
In Fig. \ref{fig:bias} we show the linear halo mass bias $b$, as a function of $\log \,\nu$ where $\nu = \delta_c/\sigma(R)$,
measured from the {\sc mxxl} simulation at $z=0$ as green squares. Here $\sigma(R)$ is the variance of the smoothed density field defined as
\begin{eqnarray}
\sigma^2(R) = \frac{1}{\left(2\pi^2\right)}\int_0^{\infty} {\rm d ln}k k^2 P(k) W^2(k,R)
\end{eqnarray}
where $W(k,R)$ is the Fourier transform of a top hat window function and $\delta_{c}$ is the threshold for perturbation collapse in linear theory.
The best fitting value for the bias was obtained using the range $0.004<k (h$Mpc$^{-1}) < 0.1$. We find that the estimated bias is sensitive to the maximum wavenumber used in the fit; extending this to smaller scales where non-linear bias is present decreases the bias as shown for
$k_{\tiny \rm max} = 0.2 h$Mpc$^{-1}$ (grey circles) and $k_{\tiny \rm max} = 0.27 h$Mpc$^{-1}$ (grey stars).
When fitting a linear scale independent bias to the simulation results we find a gradual decline in the best fit value with increasing $k_{\tiny \rm max}$. This indicates that the bias becomes scale dependent. Unfortunately there is not a sudden jump in the recovered bias which would indicate a good point at which to limit the range of $k$-values used in the fit.
Fig.~\ref{fig:bias} compares various analytic models for the halo
mass bias to the {\sc mxxl} measurements.
The \citet{Sheth:1999su} model improves on the halo bias predictions
assuming spherical collapse by using a moving barrier whose scale-dependent
shape is motivated by the ellipsoidal gravitational collapse model.
It is well know that this model overpredicts the bias at
the low mass end while overall it matches the results of
simulations within 20\% in agreement with our results shown in Fig. \ref{fig:bias} \citep{2005ApJ...631...41T,2004MNRAS.355..129S,2010MNRAS.402..191P}.
The models of \citet{2005ApJ...631...41T} and \citet{2010ApJ...724..878T}
represent updated fitting formulae calibrated using halos defined using a friends-of-friends (FOF) and spherical overdensity (SO) algorithm
respectively.
The SO algorithm identifies halos as isolated density peaks, whose masses are determined by the
overdensity $\Delta$, defined here as the mean interior density relative to the background density.
We have used $\Delta = 200$ times the critical density in the \citet{2010ApJ...724..878T} model
as this overdensity is close to the overdensity of halos identified with the
FOF algorithm with a linking length of 0.2 \citep{1985ApJ...292..371D}.
The discrepancy between the \citet{2010ApJ...724..878T} model predictions and the {\sc mxxl } bias relation at the high mass end is most likely due to
difference in the halo finder used in each case.
As shown in \citet{2008ApJ...688..709T} and \citet{2009ApJ...692..217L}, a SO finder would identify a significant fraction of FOF halos as two distinct density peaks.
This artifact of FOF linking increases the
abundance of massive FOF halos relative to the abundance of SO halos and reduces the bias as seen in Fig.~\ref{fig:bias}
\citep[see also figure 3 in][]{2010ApJ...724..878T}.
Overall we find good agreement to within $10$\% between the {\sc mxxl} bias relation and the model from \citet{2005ApJ...631...41T}.
The low mass end of the bias relation is well fit to within a few percent
by the two parameter model of \citet{2011MNRAS.411.2644M} which a incorporates non-Markovian extension of
the excursion set theory with a stochastic barrier \citep[see also][]{2010ApJ...711..907M}. In Fig. \ref{fig:bias} we use $\kappa = 0.23, a=0.818$ where
the two parameters $\kappa$ and $a$ describe
the degree of non-Markovianity and the degree of stochasticity of the barrier respectively \citep[see][for more details]{2011MNRAS.411.2644M}.
The right hand side of Fig.~\ref{fig:bias} compares the bias measured from the {\sc mxxl}
simulation at $z=0.7$. In this case the \citet{2005ApJ...631...41T} provides a reasonable
match to the bias of halos corresponding to modest peak heights. For rarer peaks,
the \citet{Sheth:1999su} works better at this redshift.
\begin{figure*}
\center
{\epsfxsize=17.5truecm
\epsfbox[77 364 555 579]{minshotnoise.ps}}
\caption{Left: The measured power spectrum with uniform weighting for all halos with masses $M>10^{12}M_{\sun}/h$ and halos with $M \in 3\times10^{13} - 1\times10^{14}M_{\sun}/h$
are shown as a solid purple and red line respectively. The cross spectrum with uniform weighting for these two tracers is shown as a blue solid line.
Power spectra using mass weightings for the $M \in 3\times10^{13} - 1\times10^{14}M_{\sun}/h$ sample are shown as dashed lines. The expected Poisson shot noise for the uniform and
mass weighting schemes are shown as horizontal solid and dashed lines. The grey shaded regions show errors on the uniform weighted $P(k)$ for the halo sample $M>10^{12}M_{\sun}/h$.
Right: The measured noise and expected Poisson shot noise for different weighting schemes are shown as solid and dotted lines respectively.
\label{fig:shotnoise}}
\end{figure*}
\subsection{Minimising shot noise }\label{section:shot}
The two main sources of error in a measurement of the power spectrum are cosmic variance,
due to a finite number of modes available on large scales with which to determine the variance of
the field, and the shot noise due to the discrete sampling of the density field using
galaxies or halos. If we assume Poisson statistics then the shot noise error equals
the inverse of the number density which can be simply substracted from the overall measurement.
Within the halo model where all dark matter lies in collapsed halos of different masses
there should be significant halo exclusion effects for the most massive halos which will
cause discrete sampling effects to deviate from Poisson statistics.
\citet{2009PhRvL.103i1303S} proposed accounting for this difference using mass weighting
schemes to boost the clustering signal of a halo sample resulting in a shot noise term
which is lower then predicted from $1/\bar{n}$ Poisson statistics. Here we make use of
the cross correlation power spectra between a high number density halo sample, whose
shot noise is negligible, and a high-mass, low number density sample
with $\bar{n} \sim 10^{-4} (h/$Mpc$)^3$.
Consider the cross correlation between the dark matter and a tracer, which has
overdensity $\delta_h$ and noise $n$, where the cross correlation coefficient is
\begin{eqnarray}
r \equiv \frac{P_{hm}}{\sqrt{P_{hh}P_{m}}}.
\end{eqnarray}
Here $P_{hh}, P_{m}$ are the auto power spectra for the halos and mass and
$P_{hm} = \langle \delta_h\delta_m\rangle$ is the cross power spectrum.
Given $r = 1$ we can re-write this in terms of the shot noise
$\sigma^2 = \langle n^2 \rangle$ where $P_{hh} = \langle \delta_h^2\rangle - \sigma^2$,
\begin{eqnarray}
\sigma^2 = \langle \delta_h^2\rangle - \frac{P^2_{hm}}{P_{m}}.
\end{eqnarray}
Everything on the RHS of the above equation can be measured from simulations
(or from surveys by combining clustering and lensing measurements) and the resulting $\sigma^2$ can be compared with the Poisson prediction as a function of scale.
In the case of uniform weighting for each halo in the sample the Poisson prediction is $\sigma^2_{\tiny expected} = 1/{\bar{n}}$. If we weight each halo by its mass, using weights
$w_i$ then the expected shot noise is $\sigma^2_{\tiny expected} = V \sum_i w_i^2/(\sum_i w_i)^2$.
Here we modify this approach as follows.
Using two halo samples labelled \\
$H : $ all halos with $>10^{12}h^{-1}M_{\sun}$ \\
$h : $ halos with mass $ \in 3\times10^{13} - 1\times10^{14}h^{-1}M_{\sun}$\\
we can define a cross correlation coefficient between them as
\begin{eqnarray}
r_{Hh} \equiv \frac{P_{Hh}}{\sqrt{P_{hh}P_{HH}}}
\end{eqnarray}
where $P_{hh} = \langle \delta_h^2\rangle - \sigma_h^2$ and $P_{HH} = \langle \delta_H^2\rangle - \sigma_H^2$ and $P_{Hh} = \langle \delta_h \delta_H \rangle$ is the cross spectrum and we have assumed that the noise for each tracer is uncorrelated with the other i.e. $\sigma^2_{Hh} = \langle n_H n_h\rangle = 0$.
We make two assumptions: firstly as the halo sample $H$ is large we assume that the noise term $\sigma^2_{HH}$ in the above equation is small and neglect it, secondly we assume that
on large scales there is a deterministic relationship between these two tracers such that
the cross correlation coefficient is equal to one $r_{Hh} = 1$ \citep[see e.g.][]{2008MNRAS.385.1635S}.
We can then write the shot noise term for the $h$ halo sample as
\begin{eqnarray}
\sigma^2_{hh} = \langle \delta_h^2\rangle - \frac{P^2_{Hh}}{P_{HH}}.
\end{eqnarray}
Using these two halo samples from {\sc mxxl} we can compare the measured shot noise from the above equation and compare it with the Poisson prediction in the case of uniform or mass weighting schemes.
\begin{figure*}
\center
{\epsfxsize=17.5truecm
\epsfbox[71 370 510 686]{ptt_ptd.ps}}
\caption{ Upper panels: The auto (left) and cross (right) velocity divergence power spectra measured from the {\sc mxxl} simulation at $z=0$
for different mass bins and number densities as shown in the legend.
For clarity only error bars for the 2$\times 10^{12}h^{-1}M_{\sun}$ bin
are plotted (grey shaded region).
Lower panels: The $z=0$ velocity divergence power
spectra normalised by $f^2 P_{\rm \tiny dark matter}$ and $f b P_{\rm \tiny dark matter}$ for the auto and cross power spectra respectively.
Note the dark blue and grey dashed lines correspond to different mass ranges but equal number densities.
Middle panels: Same ratios as the lower panels at $z=0.7$.
\label{fig:vel}}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure*}
\center
{\epsfxsize=17.5truecm
\epsfbox[71 370 510 686]{ptt_ptd_theory.ps}}
\caption{ Upper panels: The {\sc mxxl} matter (black circles) and velocity (black triangles)
power spectra for the dark matter at $z=0$. The velocity divergence power spectra for the 2$\times 10^{12}h^{-1}M_{\sun}$ mass bin are plotted
as red squares in both panels. The error bars for the dark matter power spectra are plotted as grey shaded regions.
The velocity divergence power spectrum predictions from 1 loop perturbation theory, Jennings et al. 2013 and Hahn et al. 2014 are shown as blue dotted, green dashed and purple dot dashed lines respectively in all panels.
The dark matter $P(k)$ predicted from perturbation theory is shown as an orange dashed line in the upper left panel only.
Lower panels: The ratio between the power spectra measured for the 2$\times 10^{12}h^{-1}M_{\sun}$ mass bin halo sample (see labels) and the different model predictions
at $z=0$. Middle panels: same ratios as shown in the lower panels but for $z=0.7$.
\label{fig:velocity_models}}
\end{figure*}
In Fig. \ref{fig:shotnoise} the measured power spectrum with uniform
weighting for all halos with masses $M>10^{12}h^{-1}M_{\sun}$ and halos with $M = 3\times10^{13} - 1\times10^{14}h^{-1}M_{\sun}$
are shown as a solid purple and red line respectively. The cross spectrum with uniform weighting for these two tracers is shown as a blue solid line.
Power spectra using mass weightings for the $M \in 3\times10^{13} - 1\times10^{14}h^{-1}M_{\sun}$ sample are shown as dashed lines. The expected Poisson shot noise for the uniform and
mass weighting schemes are shown as horizontal solid and dashed lines.
As can be seen from this plot, the mass weighting scheme boosts the Poisson shot noise term but also boosts the clustering signal.
In the right panel the measured noise and expected Poisson shot noise for different weighting schemes are shown as solid and dotted lines respectively.
Here the $f(\rm mass) $ weighting scheme is the one suggested in \citet{2009PhRvL.103i1303S} where $f(M) = M/(1 + \sqrt(M/10^{14}h^{-1}M_{\sun}))$
As can be seen from this figure on large scales the
measured and expected shot noise in the case of uniform weighted
agree on large scales (purple solid and dotted lines) but this agreement breaks down as we
go to smaller non-linear scales. This may be due to stocasticity on small scales as $r$ differs from unity or the fact that assuming
Poisson shot noise overestimates the noise levels for highly biased tracers as found in \citet{2009PhRvL.103i1303S}.
Using either the mass or $f(M)$ weighting schemes we find a small (factor of 1.5)
reduction in the measured shot noise compared to the expected value from Poisson statistics. These improvements are
small compared to the factor of three reduction in shot noise which \citet{2009PhRvL.103i1303S} found when using the cross correlation between a halo sample and the dark matter field.
Although this approach does not yield such a large reduction in shot noise the main advantage of this
method is that the dark
matter density field does not need to be estimated in contrast to the method presented in \citet{2009PhRvL.103i1303S}.
\section{Velocity bias }\label{section:velocity}
In this section we examine the statistics of the velocity field measured from the dark matter and halo populations in the {\sc mxxl} simulation through
the auto, $P_{\theta \theta}$, and cross, $P_{\delta \theta}$, power
spectra for the velocity divergence $\theta \equiv \vec{\nabla} \cdot \vec{v}/(aH)$, where $a$ is the scale factor and $H$ is the Hubble rate.
These two power spectra are important in many models for redshift space distortions
\citep[see e.g.][]{Scoccimarro:2004tg,2009MNRAS.393..297P,2011MNRAS.410.2081J,2011MNRAS.416.2291T,2012MNRAS.427..327D}.
Any bias between the velocity divergence power spectra for a galaxy/halo population
and the underlying dark matter would have important implications for cosmological parameters extracted assuming that a tracer population follows the dark matter exactly.
To our knowledge this is the first time that these power spectra have been analysed for different halo populations using simulations.
Measuring the velocity power spectrum accurately from N-body simulations can be difficult
as both mass and volume weighted approaches can involve significant noise and biases on small
scales \citep{2011arXiv1105.0370C,2003A&A...403..389P,Scoccimarro:2004tg,2009PhRvD..80d3504P,2011MNRAS.410.2081J,2012MNRAS.427L..25J,2014arXiv1404.2280H}. The method suggested by \citet{Scoccimarro:2004tg}
allows a mass weighted velocity field to be constructed but is limited by the fact that it is the momentum field
which is calculated on a grid and so the velocity field in empty cells is artificially set to zero \citep{2009PhRvD..80d3504P}.
Another limitation of this method is that most calculations require the volume weighted velocity field instead of the mass weighted field.
Using a Delaunay tessellation
of a discrete set of points allows the desired volume weighted velocity field to be constructed accurately on small scales.
We use the publicly available {\sc dtfe} code \citep{2011arXiv1105.0370C}
to construct the velocity divergence field for our halo samples directly.
This code constructs the Delaunay tessellation from a discrete set of points and interpolates the field values onto a user defined grid.
The density field is interpolated onto the
grid using the cloud-in-cell assignment scheme. The resolution of the mesh means that
mass assignment effects are negligible on the scales of interest here.
Given the large number density of particles in the {\sc mxxl} simulation it is numerically infeasible to run the
{\sc dtfe} code on the dark matter. Instead, we adopt the mass weighted method suggested by \citet{Scoccimarro:2004tg} to measure
$P_{\theta \theta}$ and $P_{\delta \theta}$ for the dark matter particles both at $z=0$ and $z=0.7$ using a 1024$^3$ grid.
Using smaller volume $\Lambda$CDM simulations in a box of 1500$h^{-1}$Mpc on a side and 1024$^3$ particles
from \citet{2012MNRAS.427L..25J}, we have verified that this mass weighted method
agrees with the {\sc dtfe} dark matter velocity field up to $k\sim0.2h/$Mpc for $P_{\theta \theta}$ and
$k\sim0.3h/$Mpc for $P_{\delta \theta}$. We will restrict our comparison between the velocity statistics for dark matter and halos to this range where
the mass weighted method has converged.
To account for both aliasing and shot noise effects
on both the halo and dark matter velocity power spectra we have verified that increasing the size of the grid used ($1024^3$) has no effect on the measured power
over the range of scales we consider in this work.
Fig \ref{fig:vel} shows the halo velocity power spectra $P_{\theta \theta}$ (left panel) and
$P_{\delta \theta}$ (right panel) at $z=0$ for different mass ranges and number densities
given in the legend. For clarity we only plot the error bars for the 2$\times 10^{12}h^{-1}M_{\sun}$ bin as a grey shaded region.
There is a clear difference in the $P(k)$ measured using different halo samples,
which increases with increasing mass (decreasing number density) on large scales
$k >0.01 h$Mpc$^{-1}$. As shown in \citet{2009PhRvD..80d3504P}{ and \citet{2011MNRAS.410.2081J} the velocity power spectrum is very senstive to resolution and this trend of increasing bias with an increase in the halo mass is actually due to a decrease in the number density of the velocity field tracers.
We verify that this is indeed a number density bias by matching number densities for different mass ranges and comparing the measured $P_{\theta \theta}$
and $P_{\delta \theta}$. As can be seen from the black dot dashed and blue dashed lines in Fig. \ref{fig:vel}, once
we match the number density for these two different mass bins to $\bar{n} = 1.2 \times 10^{-4}(h/$Mpc$)^3$ we obtain the same
velocity power spectra. We have also verified this for two mass bins which have different bias factors,
$M = 1.5 \times 10^{14}h^{-1}M_{\sun}$ ($b\sim 2 $ at $z=0$) and $M = 1 \times 10^{13}h^{-1}M_{\sun}$ ($b\sim 1 $ at $z=0$),
but the same number density $\bar{n} = 2.8 \times 10^{-5}(h/$Mpc$)^3$
(green dashed and dot-dashed lines in Fig. \ref{fig:vel}). Note that the power spectra for all halos with masses
$> 10^{12}h^{-1}M_{\sun}$ (purple dot dashed line) is similar to the sample $1-3 \times 10^{12}h^{-1}M_{\sun}$ (red dashed line) in this figure, which is why their measured velocity $P(k)$ agree.
In the lower four panels in Fig. \ref{fig:vel} we show the ratios
$P^{\rm \tiny halos}_{\theta \theta}/(f^2 P^{\rm \tiny dark matter}_{\delta \delta})$ and
$P^{\rm \tiny halos}_{\delta \theta}/(f b P^{\rm \tiny dark matter}_{\delta \delta})$ as a function of scale at $z=0$ and $z=0.7$ where
$f \equiv {\rm d ln}D/{\rm d ln}a$ is the growth rate (logarithmic derivative of the growth factor, $D$) and $b$ is the linear bias for each halo sample
at that redshift. From the panels we can see that the velocity $P(k)$ agree with linear theory predictions
only on large scales $k = 0.004h$Mpc$^{-1}$ at both redshifts for our halo mass bins
2$\times 10^{12}h^{-1}M_{\sun}$ ($\bar{n} = 2.26 \times 10^{-3}(h/$Mpc$)^3$)
and 8$\times 10^{12}h^{-1}M_{\sun}$ ($\bar{n} = 1.2 \times 10^{-4}(h/$Mpc$)^3$). Beyond $k = 0.004h$Mpc$^{-1}$ we see a departure from linear
theory and a difference of $\approx 50$\% between the measured velocity $P(k)$ and linear perturbation theory predictions at $k = 0.1h$Mpc$^{-1}$.
For the 1$\times 10^{13}h^{-1}M_{\sun}$ mass bin the measured $P_{\theta \theta}$
and $P_{\delta \theta}$ only agree with linear theory predictions for $k < 0.002h$Mpc$^{-1}$.
We see the largest deviations for the 4.5$\times 10^{13}h^{-1}M_{\sun}$ mass bin, which we were only able to accurately measure at $z=0$.
It is clear from the ratios in these figures that for small number densities, $\bar{n} \sim 10^{-6}(h/$Mpc$)^3$, the sampling bias is extremely large
and we do not recover the linear theory prediction for the cross power spectrum on large scales.
Note the agreement between the cross spectra and the preditions of linear perturbation theory for these halo
velocity divergence power spectra is interesting considering that the linear bias used is defined as an average quantity which
takes into account stochasticity
$b \equiv (P_{\rm \tiny halo}/P_{\rm \tiny dark matter})^{1/2}$
rather then a local linear variable $b = \delta_{\rm \tiny halo}/\delta_{\tiny \rm dark matter}$ \citep{1999ApJ...525..543M}.
In Fig. \ref{fig:velocity_models} we compare the measured {\sc mxxl} matter (black circles) and velocity (black triangles)
power spectra for the dark matter
and the 2$\times 10^{12}h^{-1}M_{\sun}$ mass bin velocity $P(k)$ (red squares) with two models which have been calibrated from N-body simulations. We also compare
these measured power spectra with the predictions of perturbation theory as in \citet{Scoccimarro:2004tg}.
The vertical dashed line in each panel indicates the maximum wavenumber where our velocity $P(k)$ have converged.
Although the \citet{2012MNRAS.427L..25J} (green dashed line) and the \citet{2014arXiv1404.2280H} (purple dot dashed line)
formulas where calibrated on simulations of different resolutions
and cosmologies to the {\sc mxxl} simulation, and, furthermore, each study used a different method for determining the velocity field, we find very good agreement between both formula and the measured $P_{\theta \theta}$ and $P_{\delta \theta}$ at $z=0$ and $z=0.7$
for $k < 0.15h$Mpc$^{-1}$.
In agreement with \citet{Scoccimarro:2004tg} we find that 1-loop perturbation theory (blue dotted line)
predictions are accurate for $k<0.1h$Mpc$^{-1}$. On smaller scales perturbation theory over (under) predicts the amplitude of the matter (velocity) power
spectra for the dark matter.
As shown in Fig. \ref{fig:vel} there is a significant sampling bias between velocity power spectra for mass bins with different number densities.
In Fig. \ref{fig:velocity_models} it is clear that the dark matter (black circles) and
the 2$\times 10^{12}h^{-1}M_{\sun}$ mass bin (red squares) velocity power spectra only agree up to $k < 0.08h$Mpc$^{-1}$. Even for the largest number
density mass bin which we use in this study there is a significant sampling bias between the dark matter and the halo velocity $P(k)$.
In order to highlight the discrepancy between the models, which accurately predict the dark matter $P_{\theta \theta}$ and $P_{\delta \theta}$, and the
halo velocity divergence power spectra, we plot the ratio of these two power spectra in the lower ($z=0$) and middle ($z=0.7$) panels in Fig.
\ref{fig:velocity_models}. It is clear from these ratio plots that all models for the dark matter velocity statistics are biased by approximately
20\% for $P_{\theta \theta}$ and approximately 10\% for $P_{\delta \theta}$
at $k = 0.1 h$Mpc$^{-1}$ compared to the halo velocity divergence $P(k)$. This discrepancy is significant and will have an impact on cosmological parameter
inference from e.g. redshift space clustering measurements where redshift space distortions models assume zero velocity bias.
The question of how to correct for this sampling bias in both power
spectra as a function of scale is beyond the scope of this work and is left for future study.
Note while writing up this paper we became aware of two recent studies by
\citet{2014arXiv1405.5885B} and \citet{2014arXiv1405.7125Z} who have also reported
that there should be a bias in the velocity power spectra. \citet{2014arXiv1405.7125Z}
report that the velocity divergence auto power spectra
for $\bar{n} \sim 10^{-3}(h/$Mpc$)^3$ tracers should be affected by approximately 10\% at $k = 0.1 h$Mpc$^{-1}$ in agreement with our findings.
\section{Conclusions and Summary }\label{section:summary}
We have measured and tested various models for the linear halo mass bias using measurements of
the ratio of the halo auto power spectra from the {\sc mxxl} simulation at redshift
$z=0$ and $z=0.7$ for different mass bins in the range 2 $\times 10^{12} - 3 \times 10^{15}h^{-1}M_{\sun}$.
In agreement with the work of \citet{Angulo:2007fw} and \citet{2011ApJ...726....5O}
we find that the assumption of a linear bias is only valid on scales $k < 0.2 h$Mpc$^{-1}$ for
masses $< 2 \times 10^{13}h^{-1}M_{\sun}$ and $k < 0.1 h$Mpc$^{-1}$ for masses $> 6\times 10^{13}h^{-1}M_{\sun}$ at $z=0$. At a higher redshift of $z=0.7$ this bias is remarkably scale independent for all masses at $k < 0.1 h$Mpc$^{-1}$ although the scale dependence is more pronounced on quasi-linear scales compared to redshift zero.
When fitting for a linear scale independent bias we find a gradual decline in the best fit value with increasing $k_{\tiny \rm max}$ instead of a sharp jump which would indicated an obvious scale
dependent bias.
When plotted as a function of peak height we find that the bias - ${\rm log}\nu$ relation is well fit at $z=0$ by the model of \citet{2005ApJ...631...41T} except for low mass halos
$<7\times 10^{12}h^{-1}M_{\sun}$ whose bias is overpredicted by the model. We find that the non-Markovian and diffusive barrier model of \citet{2010ApJ...711..907M} is a better fit to the linear bias of these low mass halos.
At redshift $z=0.7$ we find that the linear bias of {\sc mxxl} FOF halos more massive then $10^{13}h^{-1}M_{\sun}$ is better fit by the ellipsoidal collapse model of
\citet{Sheth:1999su} which is accurate to $\sim 5$\% when fitting over the range $0.004 - 0.1 h$Mpc$^{-1}$. We find that the model of \citet{2010ApJ...724..878T},
which was calibrated on SO halos,
overestimates the FOF halos from the {\sc mxxl} simulation at both redshifts by approximately 10-20\% over the range of masses we consider.
We have investigated different weighting schemes applied to the dark matter halo power spectra clustering measurements in order to reduce the shot noise for a high mass
(low number density) sample. We have modified the approach of \citet{2009PhRvL.103i1303S} who made use of the cross correlation power spectra between the halos and dark matter to measure the actual shot noise (assuming deterministic biasing on large scales). \citet{2009PhRvL.103i1303S} found that mass weighting could lower the shot noise compared with Poisson statistics by a factor of
3 for a $\bar{n} \sim 10^{-4} (h/$Mpc$)^3$ sample. Here we make use of the cross correlation power spectra between a large number density halo sample, whose shot noise is negligible,
and a high mass (low number density) sample with $\bar{n} \sim 10^{-4} (h/$Mpc$)^3$. We find that mass weighting is able to reduce the shot noise of the measured
power spectra by at most a factor of 1.5 compared to the Poisson estimate. Although this approach does not yield such a large reduction in shot noise the main advantage of this
method is that the dark
matter density field does not need to be estimated in contrast to the method presented in \citet{2009PhRvL.103i1303S}.
We have measured the velocity divergence auto, $P_{\theta \theta}$, and cross, $P_{\delta \theta}$,
power spectra for a range of halo masses from the {\sc mxxl} simulation at redshift $z=0$ and $z=0.7$. This is the first time that these velocity statistics have been presented
and compared with the dark matter velocity power spectra
from a simulation. The high mass and force resolution of the {\sc mxxl} simulation allows us to reconstruct the velocity power spectra for halos masses
$10^{12} - 6\times 10^{14}h^{-1}M_{\sun}$ up to
$k = 0.1h$Mpc$^{-1}$ and the dark matter velocity power spectra up to $k = 0.2h$Mpc$^{-1}$ ($k = 0.3h$Mpc$^{-1}$) for $P_{\theta \theta}$ ($P_{\delta \theta}$) at $z=0$.
We find that there is a significant sampling bias in both velocity divergence power spectra at $z=0$ and $z=0.7$ which decreases the measured power compared to
the dark matter velocity $P(k)$
by approximately 20\% at $k=0.1h$Mpc$^{-1}$ for a $\bar{n} = 2 \times 10^{-3} (h/$Mpc$)^3$ sample. This sampling bias increases to $\sim 40$\% for a $\bar{n} = 1.2 \times 10^{-4} (h/$Mpc$)^3$
sample at $k=0.07h$Mpc$^{-1}$. If neglected this bias would have a significant impact on cosmological parameter constraints extracted from redshift space clustering measurements which
use fitting formula or perturbation theory predictions for the dark matter velocity divergence power spectra.
Current and future large galaxy redshift surveys will map the three-dimensional galaxy distribution to a high precision. There is an on-going major effort to advance
the models for the clustering signal in
redshift space where the observed redshift is composed of both the peculiar velocities of galaxies and a cosmological redshift from the Hubble expansion.
It is well known that any scale dependent bias between halos and the dark matter would be a key systematic affecting cosmological parameter constraints.
In this paper we have used one of the highest resolution simulations to date to test currently used models for the linear bias beyond the mass limits where they were calibrated.
We also draw attention to another potentially serious systematic due to a sampling bias in the halo velocity power spectra which would affect
the comparison between observations and any redshift space distortion model which assumes dark matter velocity statistics.
We leave further analysis and modelling of this bias to future research.
\\
\\
\\
\\
\\
\\
\\
\section*{Acknowledgments}
The authors are grateful to Raul Angulo and Volker Springel for comments on this paper and
for allowing the {\sc mxxl} outputs to be used in this study.
The {\sc mxxl}
simulation was carried out on Juropa at the Juelich Supercomputer Centre in
Germany.
EJ acknowledges the support of a grant from the Simons Foundation, award number 184549. This work was supported in part by the Kavli Institute for Cosmological Physics at the University of Chicago through grants NSF PHY-0114422 and NSF PHY-0551142 and an endowment from the Kavli Foundation and its founder Fred Kavli. This work was supported by the Science and Technology Facilities Council
[grant number ST/L00075X/1].
This work used the DiRAC Data Centric system at Durham University, operated by the Institute for Computational Cosmology on behalf of the STFC DiRAC HPC Facility (www.dirac.ac.uk). This equipment was funded by BIS National E-infrastructure capital grant ST/K00042X/1, STFC capital grant ST/H008519/1, and STFC DiRAC Operations grant ST/K003267/1 and Durham University. DiRAC is part of the National E-Infrastructure.
We are grateful for the support of the University of Chicago Research Computing Center for assistance with the calculations carried out in this work.
\bibliographystyle{mn2e}
|
\section{Introduction}
We study the \textit{modified corrector equation}
\begin{equation}\label{eq:1}
\frac{1}{T}\phi_T+\nabla^*(a\nabla\phi_T)=-\nabla^*(a\xi)\qquad\text{in }\mathbb{Z}^d,\ d\geq2,
\end{equation}
which is a discrete elliptic finite-difference equation for the real valued function $\phi_T$, called the \textit{modified
corrector}. \stef{As we explain below, }it arises in stochastic
homogenization. The symbols $\nabla$ and $\nabla^*$ denote the discrete
(finite-difference) gradient and the negative divergence, see
Section~\ref{S:FW} below for the precise definition. In the modified corrector equation
$T$ denotes a positive ``cut-off'' parameter (which we think of to be very large),
and $\xi\in\mathbb{R}^d$ is a vector, fixed throughout this paper. We consider \eqref{eq:1} with a \textit{random, uniformly elliptic} field of coefficients
$a:\mathbb{Z}^d\to\mathbb{R}^{d\times d}$. To be precise, for a fixed constant of
ellipticity $\lambda>0$ we denote
by $\Omega_0$ those matrices $a_0\in\mathbb{R}^{d\times d}$ that are uniformly
elliptic in the sense that
\begin{equation}\label{ass:ell}
\forall v\in\mathbb{R}^d\,:\qquad v\cdot a_0v\geq \lambda|v|^2\ \ \text{ and
}\ \ |a_0v|\leq|v|,
\end{equation}
and define the set of admissible coefficient fields
\begin{equation*}
\Omega:=\Omega_0^{\mathbb{Z}^d}=\{\,a:\mathbb{Z}^d\to\Omega_0\,\}.
\end{equation*}
In this paper we derive optimal bounds for finite
moments of the modified corrector and its gradient, under the assumption
that the coefficients are distributed according to a \textit{stationary and
ergodic} law on $\Omega$, where ergodicity holds in the \textit{quantitative} form of
a \textit{Logarithmic Sobolev Inequality} (LSI), see Definition~\ref{def:LSI}
below. Our main results are presented in Theorems~\ref{T1} and
\ref{T2} below. For easy reference, let us state them already here, somewhat
informally. \stef{Throughout the paper,} we write $\expec{\cdot}$ for the expected value
\stef{associated to the law on $\Omega$}.
\smallskip
{\bf The first result} concerns a bound on all moments of the gradient
of the corrector. Under the assumptions of stationarity and LSI, we
have for all $1\leq p<\infty$ and $T\geq 2$ that
\[
\langle |\nabla\phi_T(0) + \xi|^{2p} \rangle \le C |\xi|^{2p},
\]
where the constant $C$ is independent of $T$. (Note that here and
throughout the paper the
constant ``2'' in ``$T\geq 2$'' has no special meaning. In fact, since we are interested in the
behavior $T\uparrow\infty$, we could replace ``$2$'' with any number greater than $1$).
\smallskip
{\bf The second result} is a bound on the corrector itself. Under the same assumptions (even under a slightly weaker assumption than LSI, see Theorem~\ref{T2} below), we have that
\[
\langle |\phi_T(0)|^{2p} \rangle \le C \expec{|\nabla \phi_T(0)+\xi|^{2p}}\times
\begin{cases}
(\log T)^p&\text{for }d=2,\\
1&\text{for }d>2.
\end{cases}
\]
\medskip
These estimates are optimal, even in dimension $d=2$ where we
recover the optimal logarithmic rate of divergence of the moment of
$\phi_T$. While the first result is relatively easy to proof, the argument for
the second result is substantially harder and the main purpose of our
paper. Let us emphasize that the coefficients in \eqref{eq:1} are not
assumed to be symmetric or even diagonal. Thus, equation~\eqref{eq:1} in general \textit{does not enjoy a maximum
principle}; this constitutes a major difference to previous works
where the maximum principle played a major role and exclusively the case of diagonal
coefficients was studied, see e.g.\
\cite{GO1,GO2,GNO1}. In fact, the method presented in this paper only
relies on arguments that are also available in the case of elliptic
systems. The extension of our findings to discrete systems, in
particular a discrete version of linear elasticity, is work in
progress. Very recently, Bella and Otto
considered in \cite{Bella-Otto-14} \textit{systems} of
elliptic equations (on $\mathbb{R}^d$) with periodic (but still
random) coefficients. As a main result, they obtain moment bounds on
the \textit{gradient} of the corrector with help of an argument that avoids the maximum
principle and even the use of Green's functions. Still, the derivation
of moment bounds on the \textit{corrector itself} -- which is the
main purpose of our paper -- remains open.
\medskip
{\bf Relation to stochastic homogenization.} The modified corrector equation
\eqref{eq:1} appears in stochastic
homogenization: For $\varepsilon>0$ and $a\in\Omega$ distributed according to
$\expec{\cdot}$, we consider the equation
\begin{equation}\label{eq:13}
\nabla^*(a\nabla u^\varepsilon)=\varepsilon^2f(\varepsilon\cdot)\qquad\text{in }\mathbb{Z}^d.
\end{equation}
For simplicity we suppose that the right-hand side
$f:\mathbb{R}^d\to\mathbb{R}$ is smooth, compactly supported, deterministic and has
zero spatial average, so that \eqref{eq:13} admits a unique, decaying solution $u^\varepsilon(a;\cdot):\mathbb{Z}^d\to\mathbb{R}$.
As
shown in \cite{Papanicolaou-Varadhan-79, Kozlov-79, Kozlov-87, Kunnemann-83}, in the homogenization limit $\varepsilon\downarrow 0$
the rescaled solution $u^\varepsilon(a;\tfrac{\cdot}{\varepsilon})$ converges for almost
every $a\in\Omega$ to the unique
decaying solution $u^0:\mathbb{R}^d\to\mathbb{R}$ of the homogenized equation
\begin{equation*}
-\operatorname{div}(a_{\hom}\nabla u_{\hom})=f\qquad\text{in }\mathbb{R}^d.
\end{equation*}
Here $a_{\hom}\in\Omega_0$ is deterministic and determined by the
formula
\begin{equation}\label{eq:hom-formula}
e_i\cdot
a_{\hom}e_j=\lim\limits_{T\uparrow\infty}\expec{(e_i+\nabla\phi_{T,i}(0))\cdot
a(0)(e_j+\nabla\phi_{T,j}(0))},
\end{equation}
where $\phi_{T,j}$ is the solution to \eqref{eq:1} with $\xi=e_j$.
Let us comment on the appearance of the limit as $T\uparrow\infty$ in this formula.
Formally, and in analogy to periodic homogenization, we expect that
\[
e_i\cdot
a_{\hom}e_j=
\expec{(e_i+\nabla\phi_{i}(0))\cdot a(0)(e_j+\nabla\phi_{j}(0))},
\]
where $\phi_i$ is a solution to the \textit{corrector equation}
\begin{equation}\label{eq:corr}
\nabla^*(a(\nabla\phi_i+e_i))=0\qquad\text{in }\mathbb{Z}^d,
\end{equation}
that is \textit{stationary} in the sense of
\begin{equation}\label{LMC:1a}
\phi_i(a;x+z)=\phi_i(a(\cdot+z);x)\qquad\text{$\expec{\cdot}$-almost
every
}a\in\Omega\text{ and all }x,z\in\mathbb{Z}^d.
\end{equation}
Furthermore, a
formal calculation suggests the two-scale expansion
\begin{equation}\label{eq:11}
u^\varepsilon\approx
u_{\hom}(\varepsilon\cdot)+\varepsilon\sum_{j=1}^d\phi_j\partial_ju_{\hom}(\varepsilon\cdot).
\end{equation}
In the case of deterministic, periodic homogenization, it suffices to
solve \eqref{eq:corr} on the reference torus of periodicity and
existence essentially follows from Poincar\'e's inequality on the torus. In the stochastic case, the corrector equation~\eqref{eq:corr} has to be solved on the
infinite space $\mathbb{Z}^d$ subject to the stationarity
condition~\eqref{LMC:1a}.
\stef{Since this is not possible in general, the corrector equation
\eqref{eq:corr} is typically regularized by
adding the zeroth-order term $\frac{1}{T}\phi_i$ with parameter $T\gg
1$.} In fact this was already done in the pioneering work of
Papanicolaou and Varadhan \cite{Papanicolaou-Varadhan-79} and leads to the modified corrector equation
\eqref{eq:1}, which in contrast to \eqref{eq:corr}, admits for all
$a\in\Omega$ a unique bounded solution
$\phi_T(a;\cdot)\in\ell^\infty(\mathbb{Z}^d)$ that automatically is
stationary, see Lemma~\ref{LMC} below. While simple energy bounds, cf.~\eqref{T1.3}, make it relatively easy to pass to the regularization-limit
$T\uparrow\infty$ on the level of $\nabla\phi_T$ (and thus in the
homogenization formula \eqref{eq:hom-formula}), it is difficult, and
in general even impossible, to do the same on the level of
$\phi_T$ itself. For similar reasons (and in contrast to the periodic case), it is
difficult to \textit{quantify} errors in stochastic homogenization, such as the
homogenization error $u_\varepsilon-u_{\hom}$ \stef{or the expansion
\eqref{eq:11}.}
\medskip
{\bf Previous quantitative results and novelty of the paper.}
For periodic homogenization the quantitative behavior of
\eqref{eq:13} \stef{and the expansion \eqref{eq:11}} is
reasonably well understood (e.g.\ see
\cite{Avellaneda-Lin-87, Allaire-Amar-99, Gerard-Varet-12}).
\stef{In the stochastic case, due to the lack of compactness,
the quantitative understanding of \eqref{eq:13} is less developed
and in most cases only suboptimal estimates are obtained, see
\cite{Yurinskii-76, Naddaf-Spencer-98, Conlon-Naddaf-00,
Conlon-Spencer-13, Caputo-Ioffe-03, Bourgeat-04, Armstrong-Smart-14}.} \stef{In particular, the first
quantitative result is due to Yurinskii \cite{Yurinskii-76} who
proved an algebraic rate of convergence (with an suboptimal exponent) for the homogenization error $u_\varepsilon-u_{\hom}$ in dimensions
$d>2$ for algebraically mixing coefficients. For refinements and extensions to dimensions
$d\geq 2$ we refer to the inspiring work by Naddaf and Spencer
\cite{Naddaf-Spencer-98}, and the recent works by Conlon and Naddaf
\cite{Conlon-Naddaf-00} and Conlon and Spencer
\cite{Conlon-Spencer-13}. Most recently, Armstrong and Smart
\cite{Armstrong-Smart-14} obtained the first result on the
homogenization error for the stochastic homogenization of convex
minimization problems. Their
approach, which builds up on ideas of Avellaneda and Lin
\cite{Avellaneda-Lin-87}, substantially differs from what has been done before in stochastic
homogenization of divergence form equations. It in particular applies to the continuum version of
\eqref{eq:13} with symmetric coefficients, and potentially extends to symmetric systems (at least under sufficiently strong ellipticity
assumptions). For results on non-divergence form elliptic
equations see \cite{Cafarelli-Souganidis-10, Armstrong-Smart-13}.}
\medskip
While qualitative stochastic homogenization only requires $\expec{\cdot}$ to be stationary and
ergodic, the derivation of error estimates requires a quantification
of ergodicity. \stef{Persuing optimal error bounds}, in a series of papers
\cite{GO1,GO2,GO3,GNO1, GNO3,MO1,LNO1, Mourrat-Otto-14} (initiated by Gloria and Otto) a quantitative theory for \eqref{eq:13} is developed
based on \emph{Spectral Gap} (SG) and LSI as tools to quantify ergodicity. In contrast to earlier results, the estimates in the papers
mentioned above are optimal: E.g.\ \cite{GNO1} contains a complete and optimal
analysis of the approximation of $a_{\hom}$ via periodic representative volume elements and \cite{GNO3}
establishes optimal estimates for the homogenization error and the
expansion in \eqref{eq:11}. A fundamental step in the derivation of
these results are \stef{optimal} moment bounds for the corrector, see
\cite{GO1,GO2,GNO1}. The extension to the continuum case has been
discussed in recent papers: In \cite{GO3} moment bounds on the corrector
and its gradient have been obtained for scalar equations with elliptic
coefficients.
\medskip
In the present contribution we continue the theme of quantitative
stochastic homogenization and present a new approach that relies on
methods, that -- we believe -- extend with only few modifications to
the case of systems satisfying sufficiently strong ellipticity assumptions. In the works
discussed above, arguments restricted to scalar equations are used at
central places. Most significantly, \textit{Green's function
estimates} are required and derived via De Giorgi-Nash-Moser regularity
theory (\stef{e.g.\
see \cite[Theorem~3]{GNO1}}). This method is based on the \textit{maximum principle}, which
holds for diagonal coefficients, but not for general symmetric or possibly non-symmetric
coefficients as considered here. In fact, in our case the Green's
function is not in general positive everywhere. We derive the
required estimates on the gradient of the Green's function from the
corresponding estimate on the constant coefficient Green's function by a
perturbation argument that invokes a Helmholtz projection; this is inspired by \cite{Conlon-Spencer-11}. Secondly, previous works rely on a
gain of stochastic integrability obtained by a nonlinear Caccioppoli
inequality (see Lemma~2.7 in \cite{GO1}). In the present contribution
we appeal to an alternative argument that invokes the LSI instead. While SG, which is weaker than LSI (see~\cite{Guionnet-Zegarlinski-03}), has
been introduced into the field of stochastic homogenization by Naddaf
and Spencer \cite[Theorem~1]{Naddaf-Spencer-98} (in form of the
Brascamp-Lieb inequality), the LSI has been used in \cite{MO1} in the
context of stochastic homogenization to obtain optimal annealed estimates on the gradient of the Green's
function and bounds on the random part of the homogenization error
$u_\varepsilon - \langle u_\varepsilon \rangle$.
\medskip
Note that in the special case of diagonal
coefficients (i.e.\ when the maximum principle \stef{and the
De~Giorgi-Nash-Moser regularity theory} is available) our
results are not new: The $T$-independent results on $\phi_T$
and $\nabla \phi_T$ in $d>2$ dimensions have already been established
in~\cite{GO1,GNO1} under the slightly weaker assumption SG on the
statistics (see \eqref{eq:SG} below), \stef{and the estimate on the corrector in the optimal
form of $\langle |\phi_T|^{2p} \rangle \le C (\log T)^p$ with a
constant independent of $T$ is obtained in \cite{GNO1}.}
\medskip
{\bf Relation to random walks in random environments.} There is a
strong link between stochastic homogenization and random walks in
random environments (see \cite{Biskup-11} and \cite{Kumagai-14} for
recent surveys). Suppose for a moment that $\expec{\cdot}$
concentrates on diagonal matrices. Then for each
diagonal-matrix-valued field $a:\mathbb{Z}^d\to\in\mathbb{R}^{d\times d}$, we may interpret
\eqref{eq:13} as a conductance network, where each edge
$[x,x+e_i]$ ($x\in\mathbb{Z}^d$, $i=1,\ldots,d$) is endowed with the
conductance $a_{ii}(x)$. The elliptic operator $\nabla^*(a\nabla)$
generates a stochastic process, called the \emph{variable speed random walk}
$X=(X_a(t))_{t\geq 0}$ in a random environment with law $\expec{\cdot}$.
Using arguments from stochastic homogenization, Kipnis and
Varadhan \cite{Kipnis-Varadhan-86} (see also \cite{Kunnemann-83} for
an earlier result) show
that the law of the rescaled process
$\sqrt{\varepsilon}X(\varepsilon t)$ converges weakly to that of a Brownian motion
with covariance $2a_{\hom}$. This \textit{annealed} invariance
principle for $X$ has been upgraded to a \textit{quenched} result by
Sidoravicious and Sznitman \cite{Sidoravicius-Sznitman-04}. The key
ingredient in their argument is to prove that the ``anchored
corrector'' (i.e.\ the function $\varphi$ introduced in
Corollary~\ref{cor:1} (a) below) satisfies a \textit{quenched
sublinear growth} property.
The quantitative analysis derived in the present paper is stronger. Indeed, our
estimate on $\nabla\phi_T$ almost immediately
implies that the anchored corrector grows sublinearly. On top of
that in dimensions $d>2$ the moment bound on $\phi_T$ implies that the anchored corrector is almost
bounded, in the sense that it grows \textit{slower than any rate}, see
Corollary~\ref{cor:1} and the subsequent remark.
\smallskip
If the coefficients are not diagonal, then \eqref{eq:13} is not any
longer related to a random conductance model. As mentioned before, for
non-symmetric $a$ (and even for certain symmetric coefficients) the
maximum principle for $\nabla^*(a\nabla)$ generally fails to hold. In that case
the semigroup generated by $\nabla^*(a\nabla)$ is not a Markov process and there is no natural
probabilistic interpretation for \eqref{eq:13}. {This may also be seen in terms of Dirichlet forms. While the (non-symmetric) elliptic operator $-\operatorname{div}(a_{\hom}\nabla)$ acting on functions on $\mathbb{R}^d$ generates a Dirichlet form $\int_{\mathbb{R}^d} \nabla u \cdot a_{\hom} \nabla v dx$ in the sense of \cite[Definition~I.4.5]{Ma-Rockner} and a corresponding Markov process, the discrete operator $\nabla^*(a\nabla)$ with associated bilinear form $\sum_{\mathbb{Z}^d}\nabla u \cdot a \nabla v$ defined on $\ell^2(\mathbb{Z}^d)\times\ell^2(\mathbb{Z}^d)$ does not. Indeed, the contraction property~(4.4) in \cite{Ma-Rockner} (which encodes a maximum principle) generally fails to hold in the non-diagonal discrete case.}
However, the limiting process can be approximated by (non-symmetric)
Markov processes, see \cite{Deuschel-Kumagai-13} for a recent construction.
\medskip
Let us finally remark that we do not use any ingredients from probability theory except for the quantification of ergodicity via SG and LSI in this paper. Furthermore,
since we view our present contribution as a first step towards systems
(which certainly are unrelated to
probability theory), we do not further investigate the connection to
random walks in the present paper.
\bigskip
{\bf Outline of the paper.} In Section~\ref{S:FW}, we present the main
results of our paper and give a brief sketch of our proof. The proof
of the main result and auxiliary lemmas are contained in Section~\ref{S:P}.
Let us mention that in the critical dimension $d=2$, we invoke a Calder\'{o}n-Zygmund estimate
on weighted $\ell^p$-spaces on $\mathbb{Z}^d$. We give a proof of this
estimate, which may be of independent interest, in Section~\ref{S:CZ}.
\bigskip
{\it{\bf Acknowledgements.} The authors gratefully acknowledge Felix
Otto for suggesting the problem and for helpful discussions.
J.~B.-A.~and S.~N.~thank the Max-Planck-Institute for Mathematics in
the Sciences, Leipzig, for its hospitality. S.~N.~was
partially supported by ERC-2010-AdG no.267802 AnaMultiScale. }
\section{Main results and sketch of proof}\label{S:FW}
\subsection{General framework}
{\bf Discrete functions and derivatives.}
Let $\{e_i\}_{i=1}^d$ denote the canonical basis of $\mathbb{R}^d$. For a
scalar function $u:\mathbb{Z}^d\to\mathbb{R}$ and a vector field $g:\mathbb{Z}^d\to\mathbb{R}^d$
with components $g=(g_1,\ldots,g_d)$ we define the
discrete gradient $\nabla u:\mathbb{Z}^d\to\mathbb{R}^d$ and negative divergence $\nabla^*g:\mathbb{Z}^d\to\mathbb{R}$ as follows:
\begin{align*}
&\nabla u:=(\nabla_1u,\ldots,\nabla_du),\qquad \nabla^*g:=\sum_{i=1}^d\nabla^*_ig_i,\qquad\text{where}\\
&\nabla_iu(x):=u(x+e_i)-u(x),\qquad
\nabla^*_iu(x):=u(x-e_i)-u(x).
\end{align*}
We denote by $\ell^p(\mathbb{Z}^d)$,
$1\leq p\leq \infty$, the space of functions $u:\mathbb{Z}^d\to\mathbb{R}$ with
$\|u\|_{\ell^p}<\infty$, where
$\|u\|_{\ell^p}:=\left(\sum_{x\in\mathbb{Z}^d}|u(x)|^p\right)^{\frac{1}{p}}$
for $p<\infty$ and $\|u\|_{\ell^\infty}:=\sup_{x\in\mathbb{Z}^d}|u(x)|$. Note that $\nabla$ and $\nabla^*$ are adjoint: We have the discrete integration by parts formula
\begin{equation*}
\sum_{x\in\mathbb{Z}^d}\nabla u(x)\cdot g(x)=\sum_{x\in\mathbb{Z}^d}u(x)\nabla^*g(x)
\end{equation*}
for all exponents $1\le p,q \le \infty$ such that $1 = \frac{1}{p} + \frac{1}{q}$ and all functions $u\in\ell^p(\mathbb{Z}^d)$ and $g\in\ell^q(\mathbb{Z}^d,\mathbb{R}^d)$.
\medskip
{\bf Random coefficients and quantitative ergodicity.}
In order to describe random coefficients, we endow $\Omega$ with the product topology induced by $\mathbb{R}^{d \times
d}$ and denote by $C_b(\Omega)$ the set of continuous functions
$\zeta:\Omega\to\mathbb{R}$ that are uniformly bounded in the sense that
\begin{equation*}
\|\zeta\|_\infty:=\sup_{a\in\Omega}|\zeta(a)|<\infty.
\end{equation*}
Throughout this work, we consider a probability measure on $\Omega$ with respect to the Borel-$\sigma$-algebra. Following the convention in statistical mechanics, we call this probability measure an \emph{ensemble} and write $\expec{\cdot}$ for the associated expected
value, the ensemble average. We assume that $\expec{\cdot}$ is
\textit{stationary} w.~r.~t.~translation on $\mathbb{Z}^d$, i.e.~for all
$x\in\mathbb{Z}^d$, the mapping $\tau_x : \Omega\to\Omega, a\mapsto a(\cdot+x)$ is
measurable and measure preserving:
\[
\forall \zeta: \Omega\to\mathbb{R}:\quad \langle \zeta( \tau_x \cdot) \rangle = \langle \zeta(\cdot) \rangle.
\]
Our key assumption is that $\expec{\cdot}$ is \textit{quantitatively ergodic} where the ergodicity is quantified through either LSI or SG. To be precise, we make the following definitions:
\begin{definition}[Definition~1 in~\cite{MO1}]\label{def:LSI}
We say that $\langle \cdot \rangle$ satisfies the LSI with constant $\rho>0$ if
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:LSI}
\expec{\zeta^2\log\frac{\zeta^2}{\expec{\zeta^2}}}\le \frac{1}{2\rho}\expec{\sum_{x\in\mathbb{Z}^d} \Big( \osc_{a(x)} \zeta\Big)^2 }.
\end{equation}
for all $\zeta\in C_b(\Omega)$.
\end{definition}
Here the {\it oscillation} of a
function $\zeta\in C_b(\Omega)$ is defined by taking the oscillation over all $\tilde a\in\Omega$ that coincide with $a$ outside of $x\in\mathbb{Z}^d$, i.e.\
\begin{multline}\label{eq:osc}
\osc_{a(x)} \zeta(a) := \sup\{ \zeta(\tilde a) \ | \ \tilde a\in \Omega \text{ s.t.\ } \tilde a(y)=a(y)\ \forall y\neq x \}\\ - \inf\{
\zeta(\tilde a) \ | \ \tilde a\in \Omega \text{ s.t.\ } \tilde a(y)=a(y)\ \forall y\neq x \}.
\end{multline}
The continuity assumption on $\zeta$ ensures that the oscillation is well-defined. A weaker form of quantitative ergodicity is the SG which is defined as follows.
\begin{definition}\label{def:SG}
We say that $\langle \cdot \rangle$ satisfies the SG with constant $\rho>0$ if
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:SG}
\expec{(\varphi-\expec{\varphi})^2}\le \frac{1}{\rho}\expec{\sum_{x\in\mathbb{Z}^d} \Big( \osc_{a(x)} \varphi\Big)^2 }
\end{equation}
for all $\varphi\in C_b(\Omega)$.
\end{definition}
The SG~\eqref{eq:SG} is automatically satisfied if LSI~\eqref{eq:LSI} holds, which may be seen by expanding $\zeta = 1+\epsilon\varphi$ in powers of $\epsilon$.
Moreover, LSI and SG are satisfied in the case of independently and identically distributed coefficients, i.e.~when $\expec{\cdot}$ is the
$\mathbb{Z}^d$-fold product of a probability measure on $\Omega_0$,
cf.~\cite[Lemma~1]{MO1}. We refer to~\cite{Guionnet-Zegarlinski-03}
for a recent exposition on LSI and to~\cite{GNO1} for a systematic application of SG to stochastic
homogenization.
\medskip
\subsection{Main results}
Throughout this paper the modified corrector $\phi_T$ is defined as the
unique bounded solution to
\eqref{eq:1}, see Lemma~\ref{LMC} below for details. Our first result yields boundedness of the finite
moments of $\nabla\phi_T$.
\begin{theorem}\label{T1}
Assume that $\langle \cdot \rangle$ is stationary and satisfies LSI~\eqref{eq:LSI} with constant $\rho>0$. Then the modified corrector defined via \eqref{eq:1} satisfies
\begin{equation}\label{eq:Dphi}
\langle |\nabla\phi_T(x) + \xi|^{2p} \rangle \le C(d,\lambda,p,\rho) |\xi|^{2p}
\end{equation}
for all $x\in\mathbb{Z}^d$, $p<\infty$ and $T\ge2$.
Here and throughout this work, $C(d,\lambda,p,\rho)$ stands for a constant which may change from line to line and that only depends on the exponent $p$, the LSI-constant $\rho$, the ellipticity ratio $\lambda$ and the dimension $d$.
\end{theorem}
As already mentioned earlier, the lower bound ``2'' for $T$ is arbitrary and may be replaced by any other constant greater than 1.
The second result establishes moment bounds on the corrector itself.
More precisely, we establish control of moments of $\phi_T$ by moments
of $\nabla\phi_T$. As opposed to Theorem~\ref{T1}, we just need to assume that the ensemble satisfies SG, i.e.~Definition~\ref{def:SG}.
\begin{theorem}\label{T2}
Assume that $\langle \cdot \rangle$ is stationary and satisfies SG~\eqref{eq:SG} with constant $\rho>0$. {There exists $p_0 = p_0(d,\lambda)$ such that} the the modified corrector defined via~\eqref{eq:1} satisfies
\begin{equation}\label{eq:phi}
\langle |\phi_T(x)|^{2p} \rangle \le C(d,\lambda,p,\rho) \expec{|\nabla \phi_T(x)+\xi|^{2p}}\times
\begin{cases}
(\log T)^p&\text{for }d=2,\\
1&\text{for }d>2,
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
for all {$x\in\mathbb{Z}^d$, $p\ge p_0$ and $T\ge2$.}
\end{theorem}
By letting $T\uparrow\infty$, we obtain the following estimate for
the (unmodified) corrector.
\begin{corollary}
\label{cor:1}
Assume that $\langle \cdot \rangle$ is stationary and
satisfies LSI~\eqref{eq:LSI} with constant $\rho>0$. Then:
\begin{enumerate}[(a)]
\item[(a)] In dimensions $d\geq 2$ there
exists a unique measurable function
$\varphi:\Omega\times\mathbb{Z}^d\to\mathbb{R}$ that solves \eqref{eq:corr} for
$\expec{\cdot}$-almost every $a\in\Omega$ and
\begin{itemize}
\item[(a1)] $\varphi$ satisfies the anchoring condition $\varphi(a,0)=0$ for $\expec{\cdot}$-almost every $a\in\Omega$,
\item[(a2)] $\nabla\varphi$ is stationary in the sense
of~\eqref{LMC:1a} and $\expec{\nabla\varphi(x)}=0$ for all $x\in\mathbb{Z}^d$,
\item[(a3)] $\expec{|\nabla\varphi(x)|^p}<\infty$ for all $x\in\mathbb{Z}^d$ and $p<\infty$.
\end{itemize}
\item[(b)] In dimensions $d>2$ there
exists a unique measurable function $\phi:\Omega\times\mathbb{Z}^d\to\mathbb{R}$ that solves
\eqref{eq:corr} for $\expec{\cdot}$-almost every $a\in\Omega$,
and
\begin{itemize}
\item[(b1)] $\phi$ is stationary in the sense of~\eqref{LMC:1a},
\item[(b2)] $\expec{|\phi(x)|^p}<\infty$ for all $x\in\mathbb{Z}^d$ and $p<\infty$.
\end{itemize}
\end{enumerate}
\end{corollary}
\begin{remark}
\label{sec:labelt2-assume-that}
\begin{itemize}
\item The ``anchored corrector'' $\varphi$ defined in Corollary~\ref{cor:1} (a) has already been considered in the
seminal works by Papanicolaou and Varadhan
\cite{Papanicolaou-Varadhan-79} and Kozlov \cite{Kozlov-79}. In
fact, for existence and uniqueness -- which can be proved by soft
arguments -- only (a1) and
(a2) are required. The new estimate
(a3) follows from Theorem~\ref{T1} in the
limit $T\uparrow\infty$. Note that (a3) implies (by a short ergodicity argument) sublinearity
of the anchored corrector in the sense that
\begin{equation*}
\lim\limits_{R\uparrow\infty}\max_{|x|\leq R}\frac{|\varphi(a,x)|}{R}=0
\end{equation*}
for $\expec{\cdot}$-almost every $a\in\Omega$.
\item Existence, uniqueness and moment bounds of the ``stationary corrector''
$\phi$ defined in Corollary~\ref{cor:1} (b) have been obtained in the
case of diagonal coefficients in \cite{GO1}, see also
\cite{GNO1}. Note that the anchored corrector $\varphi$ can be obtained
from $\phi$ via $\varphi(x,a):=\phi(a,x)-\phi(a,0)$, and, as explained in the discussion below \cite[Corollary~1]{LNO1}, the moment bound (b2) implies that
\begin{equation*}
\forall\theta\in (0,1]\,:\qquad \lim\limits_{R\uparrow\infty}\max_{|x|\leq R}\frac{|\varphi(a,x)|}{R^\theta}=0
\end{equation*}
for $\expec{\cdot}$-almost every $a\in\Omega$.
\end{itemize}
\end{remark}
\begin{remark}
Instead of the modified corrector, one might consider the periodic corrector which in the stochastic context is defined as follows: For
$L\in\mathbb{N}$ let
\begin{equation*}
\Omega_L:=\{\,a\in\Omega\,:\,a(\cdot+Lz)=a\;\;\text{for all }z\in\mathbb{Z}^d\,\}
\end{equation*}
denote the set of $L$-periodic coefficient fields. In the $L$-periodic case, one considers the corrector equation \eqref{eq:corr}
together with an $L$-periodic ensemble, i.~e. a stationary probability measure on $\Omega_L$. In that case, equation \eqref{eq:corr}
admits a unique solution $\phi_L$ with $\sum_{x\in([0,L)\cap\mathbb{Z})^d}\phi_L(x)=0$ for all $a\in\Omega_L$. The $L$-periodic versions of LSI and
SG are obtained by replacing the sum $\sum_{x\in\mathbb{Z}^d}$ in \eqref{eq:LSI} and \eqref{eq:SG} by $\sum_{x\in([0,L)\cap\mathbb{Z})^d}$. With
these modifications, Theorem~\ref{T1} and Theorem~\ref{T2} extend to the $L$-periodic case ({with $L=\sqrt{T}$ since the cut-off term involving $T$ effectively restricts the equation to a domain of side length $\sqrt{T}$}). In particular, if
the $L$-periodic ensemble satisfies an $L$-periodic LSI with constant $\rho>0$, then the $L$-periodic corrector satisfies for all
$p<\infty$
\begin{equation*}
\expec{\phi_L^{2p}}^{\frac{1}{2p}}\lesssim
\begin{cases}
(\log L)^{\frac{1}{2}}&\text{for }d=2,\\
1&\text{otherwise.}
\end{cases}
\end{equation*}
The proof follows along the same lines and can easily be adapted.
For estimates on the periodic corrector $\phi_L$ in the case of diagonal
coefficients, see \cite{GNO1}.
\end{remark}
\subsection{Sketch of proof of Theorem~\ref{T1}}\label{SS:sketch1}
Theorem~\ref{T1} is relatively straight-forward to prove. We simply
follow the approach developed in~\cite{MO1} and use the
LSI~\eqref{eq:LSI} of Definition~\ref{def:LSI} to upgrade a lower
order $L^2_{\langle \cdot \rangle}(\Omega)$-bound to a bound in
$L^{2p}_{\langle \cdot \rangle}(\Omega)$. Note that by stationarity of
$\expec{\cdot}$ and $\phi_T$, see \eqref{LMC:1a}, it suffices to prove the estimates~\eqref{eq:Dphi} at $x=0$. The lower order bound
\[
\langle |\nabla\phi_T(0) + \xi|^{2} \rangle \le C(d,\lambda) |\xi|^{2},\qquad\text{cf.~\eqref{T1.3},}
\]
follows from a simple energy argument, i.e.\ an $L^2$-estimate obtained by testing the equation for $\phi_T$ with $\phi_T$ itself. The integral here is the ensemble average and not the sum over $\mathbb{Z}^d$; this is possible thanks to stationarity of $\phi_T$. For details, we refer to Step~1 in the proof of Theorem~\ref{T1}. This bound is then upgraded via the following consequence of LSI~\eqref{eq:LSI}:
\[
\langle |\nabla \phi_T(0) + \xi|^{2p} \rangle \le C(d,p,\rho,\delta) \langle |\nabla \phi_T(0) + \xi|^{2} \rangle^p + \delta \expec{ \bigg( \sum_{x\in\mathbb{Z}^d} \Big| \osc_{a(x)} \nabla\phi(0) \Big|^2 \bigg)}
\]
for all $\delta > 0$, where we have implicitly taken the oscillation
of the vector $\nabla \phi_T$ component-wise. This reverse Jensen
inequality is the content of Lemma~\ref{L1} below. Next, we need an
expression for $\osc_{a(x)} \nabla \phi_T$. In Lemma~\ref{L:RP} we
will show that the response to a variation at $x$ in the coefficient field is given via the Green's function $G_T$ as:
\[
\osc_{a(x)}(\nabla_j \phi_T(a;0) + \xi_j) \leq C(d,\lambda) |\nabla \nabla G_T(a;0,x)| |\nabla \phi_T(a;x) + \xi|,
\]
where $G_T$ is the Green's function associated to~\eqref{eq:1}, see Definition~\ref{def:1}.
Throughout this work, $\nabla\nabla G_T(x,y) = \nabla_x\nabla_y G_T(x,y)\in\mathbb{R}^{d\times d}$ denotes the mixed derivative and we use the spectral norm on $\mathbb{R}^{d\times d}$.
The above estimate on the oscillation then yields
\begin{align*}
\expec{ \bigg( \sum_{x\in\mathbb{Z}^d} \Big| \osc_{a(x)} \nabla\phi(0) \Big|^2 \bigg)} &\le C(d,\lambda,p) \expec{ \bigg( \sum_{x\in\mathbb{Z}^d} |\nabla \nabla G_T(a;0,x)|^2 |\nabla \phi_T(a;x) + \xi|^2 \bigg)}\\
&\le C(d,\lambda,p) \expec{ |\nabla \phi_T(a;0) + \xi|^2 },
\end{align*}
where in Step~2 of the proof of Theorem~\ref{T1}, we will obtain the last inequality from stationarity and the energy estimate~\eqref{P1.18}, i.e.\
\[
\sum_{x\in\mathbb{Z}^d} |\nabla\nabla G_T(x,y)|^2\le C(d,\lambda),
\]
which holds in any dimension $d\ge 2$.
\subsection{Sketch of proof of Theorem~\ref{T2}}\label{SS:sketch2}
By stationarity of $\expec{\cdot}$ and $\phi_T$, it suffices to prove \eqref{eq:phi} at $x=0$.
In contrast to Theorem~\ref{T1}, the proof of Theorem~\ref{T2} only requires the weaker ergodicity assumption SG of Definition~\ref{def:SG}, which we will use in form of
\[
\expec{|\phi_T(0)|^{2p}}\le C(p,\rho) \expec{\bigg(\sum_{x\in\mathbb{Z}^d} \Big( \osc_{a(x)} \phi_T(0) \Big)^2 \bigg)^p},
\]
see Lemma~\ref{LSGp} below. Again, we require an estimate on the oscillation, which we shall obtain in Lemma~\ref{L:RP} and which yields
\[
\osc_{a(x)} \phi_T(a;0) \le C(d,\lambda) |\nabla_x G_T(a;0,x)| |\nabla \phi_T(a;x) + \xi|.
\]
Again, this will be substituted in the above SG-type inequality.
In contrast to the proof of Theorem~\ref{T1}, where a simple $\ell^2$-estimate of $\nabla\nabla G_T$ sufficed, we will see that we require a bound on $\nabla G_T$ including weights: In Lemma~\ref{L2}, we show that
\[
\sum_{x\in\mathbb{Z}^d}|\nabla_x G_T(a;0,x)|^{2q}\omega_q(x)
\le C(d,\lambda,q)
\begin{cases}
\log T&\text{for }d=2,\\
1&\text{for }d>2
\end{cases}
\]
for all $q\ge1$ close enough to $1$, and weight $\omega_q$ given by
\[
\omega_q(x):=
\begin{cases}
(|x|+1)^{2(q-1)}+T^{1-q}(|x|+1)^{4(q-1)}&\text{for }d=2,\\
(|x|+1)^{2d(q-1)}&\text{for }d>2.
\end{cases}
\]
The case $d>2$ is relatively straight-forward and follows by testing the equation with weights and applying Hardy's inequality.
The case $d=2$ is critical for this estimate and we will prove it by reducing the problem via a perturbation argument to the constant-coefficient case; this approach involves a Helmholtz projection and is inspired by the work~\cite{Conlon-Spencer-11}. To make it rigorous, we require a Calder\'{o}n-Zygmund estimate in discrete weighted spaces which may be of independent interest and which is proved in Section~\ref{S:CZ}. With this estimate at hand, we may smuggle in the weight $\omega_q$ and apply H\"older's inequality with $q\approx 1$ and large dual exponent $p$ to obtain
\begin{multline*}
\expec{ \bigg( \sum_{x\in\mathbb{Z}^d} |\nabla_x G_T(a;0,x)|^2 |\nabla \phi_T(a;x) + \xi|^2 \bigg)}\\ \le C(d,\lambda,q) \expec{ |\nabla \phi_T(a;x) + \xi|^{2p} }
\begin{cases}
\log T&\text{for }d=2,\\
1&\text{for }d>2
\end{cases}
\end{multline*}
as long as $p$ is large enough such that $\sum_x \omega_q^{1-p}(x) < \infty$.
\section{Auxiliary results and proofs}\label{S:P}
In this section we first present and prove some auxiliary results and
then turn to the actual proof of our main results. We start in
Section~\ref{SS:W} with the
definition of the modified corrector and prove its existence and some
continuity properties. This invokes the elliptic Green's function,
which we introduce in the same section. Section~\ref{SS:G} and
Section~\ref{SS:E} contain the two key ingredients of our approach: In Section~\ref{SS:G}, we prove estimates on the oscillation
of the corrector and estimates on the gradient of the Green's
function; in
Section~\ref{SS:E}, we revisit LSI and SG, which quantify ergodicity
and are the only ingredients from probability theory in our approach.
Finally in
Sections~\ref{SS:T1} and \ref{SS:T2}, we present the proofs of
Theorems~\ref{T1} and \ref{T2}.
\subsection{Well-posedness of the modified corrector}\label{SS:W}
We define the modified
corrector $\phi_T:\Omega\times\mathbb{Z}^d\to\mathbb{R}$ as the unique
bounded solution to \eqref{eq:1}, i.e.\ for each
$a\in\Omega$, we require
$\phi_T(a,\cdot):\mathbb{Z}^d\to\mathbb{R}$ to solve \eqref{eq:1} and to be
bounded, see Lemma~\ref{LMC} for details. Note that this definition is {\em
pointwise in $a\in\Omega$} and does not invoke any
probability measure on $\Omega$. This is in contrast to what is typically done in stochastic
homogenization (e.g.\ in the seminal work
\cite{Papanicolaou-Varadhan-79}, where $\phi_T$ is unambigously defined through
an equation on the probability space $L^2_{\expec{\cdot}}(\Omega)$).
We opt for the ``non-probabilistic'' definition, since
later we need to estimate the oscillation in $a$ of $\phi_T$, which is
most conveniently done when $\phi_T$ is defined for {\em all}
$a\in\Omega$ and not only $\expec{\cdot}$-almost surely.
However, since the right-hand
side of~\eqref{eq:1} is only in $\ell^\infty(\mathbb{Z}^d)$, it is not clear
a-priori whether \eqref{eq:1} admits a bounded solution. To settle this question we
consider the elliptic Green's function
$G_T:\Omega\times\mathbb{Z}^d\times\mathbb{Z}^d\to \mathbb{R}$ and prove integrability of $G_T$ in
Lemma~\ref{L:Gint} below. The latter then implies existence of $\phi_T$
together with some continuity properties,
see Lemma~\ref{LMC} below.
\begin{definition}[Green's function]
\label{def:1}
{Given $a\in\Omega$ and $y\in\mathbb{Z}^d$, the Green's function $G_T(a;x,y)$ associated to equation~\eqref{eq:1} is the
unique solution in $\ell^2(\mathbb{Z}^d)$ to
\begin{equation}\label{T1.2}
\frac{1}{T}G_T(a;\cdot,y)+\nabla^*(a\nabla G_T(a;\cdot,y))=\delta(\cdot-y)\qquad\text{in }\mathbb{Z}^d,
\end{equation}
where $\delta:\mathbb{Z}^d\to\{0,1\}$ denotes the Dirac function centered at $0$. }
\end{definition}
Equation~\eqref{T1.2} can also be expressed in its ``weak" formulation: For all $w\in\ell^2(\mathbb{Z}^d)$ we have that
\begin{equation}\label{P1.3}
\frac{1}{T}\sum_{x\in\mathbb{Z}^d}G_T(a;x,y)
w(x)+\sum_{x\in\mathbb{Z}^d}\nabla w(x)\cdot a(x)\nabla_x
G_T(a;x,y)=w(y).
\end{equation}
It immediately follows from the unique characterization of $G_T$ through
(\ref{T1.2}) that the Green's function is stationary:
\begin{equation}\label{P1.15}
\nabla\nabla G_T(a,x+z,y+z)=\nabla\nabla G_T(a(\cdot+z),x,y).
\end{equation}
Furthermore it is symmetric in the sense that
\begin{equation}\label{P1.16}
\nabla\nabla G_T(a;y',y)=\nabla\nabla G_T(a^t;y,y'),
\end{equation}
where $a^t$ denotes the transpose of $a$ in $\mathbb{R}^{d\times d}$.
This can be seen from applying (\ref{P1.3}) to $w(x)= G_T(a^t;x,y')$, yielding
the representation \[G_T(a^t;y,y')=\frac{1}{T}\sum_{x}
G_T(a^t;x,y') G_T(a;x,y)+ \sum_{x}\nabla_x G_T(a^t;x,y') \cdot a(x)\nabla_x G_T(a;x,y).\] On the other hand, choosing $w(x) = G_T(a;x,y)$
in the definition for $G_T(a^t;\cdot,\cdot)$ shows \[G_T(a;y',y)=\frac{1}{T}\sum_{x}
G_T(a;x,y) G_T(a^t;x,y') + \sum_{x}\nabla_x G_T(a;x,y) \cdot a^t(x)\nabla_x G_T(a^t;x,y').\] By definition of the transpose $a^t$, this
shows $G_T(a;y,y') = G_T(a^t;y',y)$ and hence \eqref{P1.16}.
The Green's function is useful since by linearity it encodes all the information for the solution $u$ to the equation
\begin{equation}\label{eq:7}
\frac{1}{T}u+\nabla^*(a\nabla u)=f\qquad\text{in }\mathbb{Z}^d.
\end{equation}
Indeed, testing \eqref{eq:1} with $G_T(a;\cdot,y)$ and
integrating by parts \textit{formally} yields
\begin{equation}\label{eq:6}
u(a;x)=\sum_{y\in\mathbb{Z}^d}G_T(a;x,y)f(y).
\end{equation}
Of course, to make sense of this for $f=\nabla^*(a\xi)\in\ell^\infty(\mathbb{Z}^d)$, we need $G_T$ in $\ell^1(\mathbb{Z}^d)$. On the other hand, the definition of the Green's function only yields $G_T(\cdot,y) \in \ell^2(\mathbb{Z}^d)$ but this is not enough to establish well-posedness of~\eqref{eq:1}. It is not difficult to establish that $\sum_x G_T(x,y) = T$ for all $y\in\mathbb{Z}^d$ and $a\in\Omega$ but without the maximum principle, $G_T$ may be negative and it does not follow that $G_T$ is in $\ell^1(\mathbb{Z}^d)$. Therefore we need another argument to establish well-posedness of~\eqref{eq:1}. This is provided by the following lemma, which shows exponential decay of $G_T$ and in particular that $G_T$ is in $\ell^1(\mathbb{Z}^d)$.
\begin{lemma}\label{L:Gint}
{There exist a large constant $C=C(d,\lambda,T)<\infty$ and a small constant $\delta=\delta(d,\lambda,T)>0$, both only depending on $d$, $\lambda$
and $T$, such that
\begin{equation*}
\sum_{x\in\mathbb{Z}^d}\Big(|G_T(a;x,y)|^2+|\nabla_x G_T(a;x,y)|^2\Big)e^{\delta(d,\lambda,T)|x-y|}\leq C(d,\lambda,T)
\end{equation*}
for all $a\in\Omega$ and $y\in\mathbb{Z}^d$.}
\end{lemma}
Since we could not find a suitable reference for this estimate in the
discrete, non-symmetric case, we present a proof in the appendix. The proof uses Agmon's positivity method~\cite{Agmon} and in the discrete setting is inspired by~\cite[Proof of Lemma~3]{Gloria10}.
With this result at hand, we can provide well-posedness of the modified corrector $\phi_T$. In addition to well-posedness, Lemma~\ref{L:Gint} allows us to deduce $\phi_T(0) = \phi_T(a; 0) \in C_b(\Omega)$, which is necessary for the application of LSI~\eqref{eq:LSI} and SG~\eqref{eq:SG} to $\phi_T$.
\begin{lemma}[Modified corrector]
\label{LMC}
For all $a\in\Omega$ the modified corrector equation \eqref{eq:1} admits a unique
bounded solution $\phi_T(a;\cdot)\in\ell^\infty(\mathbb{Z}^d)$. The so
defined modified corrector $\phi_T:\Omega\times\mathbb{Z}^d\to\mathbb{R}$ satisfies
$\phi_T(\cdot,x)\in C_b(\Omega)$ for all $x\in\mathbb{Z}^d$,
and
\begin{equation}\label{LMC:2}
|\phi_T(a;x)|\leq C(T,\lambda,d)|\xi|\qquad\text{for all
$a\in\Omega$ and all $x\in\mathbb{Z}^d$}.
\end{equation}
Furthermore, $\phi_T$ is stationary, i.e.\
\begin{equation}
\label{LMC:1}
\phi_T(a;x+z)=\phi_T(a(\cdot+z);x)\qquad\text{for all
$a\in\Omega$ and all $x,z\in\mathbb{Z}^d$}.
\end{equation}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
{\bf Step 1}. Existence and uniqueness of $\phi_T$:
In this step, we argue that for arbitrary $f\in\ell^\infty(\mathbb{Z}^d)$
equation \eqref{eq:7} admits a unique solution $u$ and $u$ can be represented as in \eqref{eq:6}. The existence and
uniqueness of $\phi_T$ then follows by setting $f:=-\nabla^*(a\xi)$.
For the argument, note that by Lemma~\ref{L:Gint} we have
$G_T(a;\cdot,y)\in\ell^1(\mathbb{Z}^d)$. Hence, for every
$f\in\ell^\infty(\mathbb{Z}^d)$, equation \eqref{eq:6} defines a function
$u(a;\cdot)\in\ell^\infty(\mathbb{Z}^d)$ that solves \eqref{eq:7}. For the
uniqueness, let $\tilde u\in\ell^\infty(\mathbb{Z}^d)$ solve \eqref{eq:7}.
Testing \eqref{eq:7} with $G_T(a^t;\cdot,x)$ yields
\begin{eqnarray*}
\sum_{y\in\mathbb{Z}^d}G_T(a^t;y,x)f(y)&=&\sum_{y\in\mathbb{Z}^d}G_T(a^t;y,x)\Big(\frac{1}{T}+\nabla^*(a\nabla))\Big)\tilde u(y)\\
&=&\sum_{y\in\mathbb{Z}^d}\Big(\frac{1}{T}+\nabla^*(a^t\nabla)\Big)G_T(a^t;y,x)\tilde
u(y)\\
&=&\sum_{y\in\mathbb{Z}^d}\delta(x-y)\tilde u(y)=\tilde u(x).
\end{eqnarray*}
By symmetry the left-hand side is equal to $\sum_{y\in\mathbb{Z}^d}G_T(a;x,y)f(y)=u(a;x)$ and thus $u(a;\cdot)=\tilde
u(\cdot)$ follows.
\medskip
{\bf Step 2}. Argument for \eqref{LMC:2} and \eqref{LMC:1}:
The stationarity property \eqref{LMC:1} directly follows from
uniqueness and the
stationarity of the operator and the right-hand side
$-\nabla^*(a\xi)$. We turn to estimate \eqref{LMC:2}. By the Green's representation \eqref{eq:6}, which is valid by Step~1,
and an integration by parts (possible since $G_T(x,\cdot) \in \ell^1(\mathbb{Z}^d)$), we have
\begin{equation*}
\phi_T(a;x)=\sum_{y\in\mathbb{Z}^d}\nabla_yG_T(a;x,y)\cdot a(y)\xi.
\end{equation*}
We smuggle in the exponential weight from
Lemma~\ref{L:Gint}, use uniform ellipticity and the Cauchy-Schwarz inequality to get
\begin{align*}
|\phi_T(a;x)|&\leq\sum_{y\in\mathbb{Z}^d}\left(|\nabla_yG_T(a;x,y)|e^{\frac{\delta}{2}|y|}\right)\left(|a(y)\xi|e^{-\frac{\delta}{2}|y|}\right)\\
&\leq\left(\sum_{y\in\mathbb{Z}^d}|\nabla_yG_T(a;x,y)|^2e^{\delta|y|}\right)^{\frac{1}{2}}\left(\sum_{y\in\mathbb{Z}^d}e^{-\delta|y|}\right)^{\frac{1}{2}}|\xi|,
\end{align*}
where $\delta>0$ is given in Lemma~\ref{L:Gint}.
By symmetry, cf.~\eqref{P1.16}, and Lemma~\ref{L:Gint}, the
right-hand side is bounded by $C(d,\lambda,T)|\xi|$ and \eqref{LMC:2} follows.
{\bf Step 3}. Argument for $\phi_T(\cdot;x)\in C_b(\Omega)$:
Thanks to \eqref{LMC:2}, we only need to show that $\phi_T(a;x)$ is
continuous in $a$. Furthermore, by stationarity, cf.~\eqref{LMC:1}, it
suffices to consider $\phi_T(a;0)$. Now, consider a sequence $a_n\in\Omega$ that
converges to some $a\in\Omega$ in the product topology. We need to
show that $\phi_T(a_n;0)\to\phi_T(a;0)$. To that end, consider the function
\begin{equation*}
\psi_n(x):=\phi_T(a_n;x)-\phi_T(a;x),
\end{equation*}
which can be characterized as the unique bounded solution to
\begin{equation*}
\frac{1}{T}\psi_n+\nabla^*(a_n\nabla\psi_n)=\nabla^*((a-a_n)(\nabla\phi_T(a,\cdot)+\xi))\qquad\text{in }\mathbb{Z}^d.
\end{equation*}
Hence, by Step~1 we have
\begin{equation*}
\psi_n(0)=\sum_{y\in\mathbb{Z}^d}\nabla_yG_T(a_n;0,y)\cdot (a(y)-a_n(y))(\nabla\phi_T(a,y)+\xi),
\end{equation*}
and thus Lemma~\ref{L:Gint} and the result of Step~2 yield
\begin{align*}
|\psi_n(0)|&\leq\left(\sup_{y\in\mathbb{Z}^d}\sup_{a\in\Omega}|\nabla\phi_T(a,y)+\xi|\right)\\
&
\qquad\times\,\left(\sum_{y\in\mathbb{Z}^d}|\nabla_yG_T(a_n;0,y)|^2e^{\delta|y|}\right)^{\frac{1}{2}}\left(\sum_{y\in\mathbb{Z}^d}e^{-\delta|y|}|a(y)-a_n(y)|^2\right)^{\frac{1}{2}}\\
&\le C(T,\lambda,d)\,\left(\sum_{y\in\mathbb{Z}^d}e^{-\delta|y|}|a(y)-a_n(y)|^2\right)^{\frac{1}{2}}.
\end{align*}
Since $a_n\to a$ in the product topology, i.e.\ $a_n(y)\to a(y)$ for all $y\in\mathbb{Z}^d$, the right-hand side vanishes as $n\to\infty$ by dominated convergence.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Oscillations and Green's function estimates}\label{SS:G}
In this section, we estimate the oscillation of the
corrector and its gradient, see Lemma~\ref{L:RP} below, and establish estimates
on the gradient of the elliptic Green's functions, see Lemma~\ref{L2} below. These bounds
are at the core of our analysis. Indeed, the proofs of Theorem~\ref{T1} and Theorem~\ref{T2} start with an
application of quantitative ergodicity: In Theorem~\ref{T1}, the LSI~\eqref{eq:LSI} in form of Lemma~\ref{L1} is applied
to $\zeta=\nabla_j\phi_T(0)+\xi_j$, while in Theorem~\ref{T2}, the SG~\eqref{eq:SG} in form of Lemma~\ref{LSGp} is
applied to $\zeta=\phi_T(0)$. Hence we require estimates for
$\osc_{a(x)}(\nabla_j\phi_T(a;0)+\xi_j)$ and
$\osc_{a(x)}\phi_T(a;0)$. Following \cite{GO1}, these expressions
are related to the elliptic Green's function:
\begin{lemma}
\label{L:RP}
For all $T>0$, $a\in\Omega$, $x\in\mathbb{Z}^d$ and $j=1,\ldots,d$ we have
\begin{subequations}
\begin{align}
\label{eq:osc_phi}
\osc_{a(x)} \phi_T(a;0) &\leq C(d,\lambda) |\nabla_x G_T(a;0,x)| |\nabla \phi_T(a;x) + \xi|,\\
\label{T1.1}
\osc_{a(x)}(\nabla_j \phi_T(a;0) + \xi_j) &\leq C(d,\lambda) |\nabla \nabla G_T(a;0,x)| |\nabla \phi_T(a;x) + \xi|.
\end{align}
\end{subequations}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let $a\in\Omega$ and $x\in\mathbb{Z}^d$ be fixed. As in the definition of the
oscillation, let $\tilde a\in\Omega$ denote an arbitrary coefficient
field that differs from $a$ only at $x$, i.e.\ $\tilde a(y)=a(y)$ for all $y\neq x$.
We consider the difference $\phi_T(\tilde a;x)-\phi_T(a;x)$. Equation~\eqref{eq:1} yields
\[
\frac{1}{T} ( \phi_T(\tilde a;\cdot) - \phi_T(a;\cdot) ) + \nabla^* \big(\tilde a(\cdot) ( \nabla \phi_T(\tilde a;\cdot) - \nabla \phi_T(a;\cdot) \big) = \nabla^* \big(( a - \tilde a )(\cdot) (\nabla \phi_T(a;\cdot) + \xi )\big)
\]
and consequently the Green's function representation \eqref{P1.3} yields
\begin{equation}\label{eq:phi_rep}
\phi_T(\tilde a; y) - \phi_T(a;y) = \nabla_x G_T(\tilde a;y,x) \cdot ( a(x) - \tilde a(x) ) (\nabla \phi_T(a;x) + \xi )
\end{equation}
for all $y\in\mathbb{Z}^d$. In particular, taking the gradient w.~r.~t.~$y_j$ and then setting $y=x$ yields
\[
|\nabla_j \phi_T(\tilde a; x) - \nabla_j \phi_T(a;x)| \le 2 |\nabla_{j}\nabla G_T(\tilde a;x,x)| |\nabla \phi_T(a;x) + \xi|
\]
since $a, \tilde a\in\Omega$ are uniformly bounded.
In view of \eqref{P1.18}, the mixed derivative of $G_T$ is bounded by $\lambda^{-1}$ and we obtain
\begin{equation}\label{eq:osc_x_phi_x}
|\nabla_j \phi_T(\tilde a; x) - \nabla_j \phi_T(a;x)| \le 2 \lambda^{-1} |\nabla \phi_T(a;x) + \xi|.
\end{equation}
Exchanging $a$ and $\tilde a$ in \eqref{eq:phi_rep} yields
\begin{equation}\label{eq:phi_rep2}
\phi_T(a; y) - \phi_T(\tilde a;y) = \nabla_x G_T(a;y,x) \cdot ( \tilde a(x) - a(x) ) (\nabla \phi_T(\tilde a;x) + \xi ).
\end{equation}
We take the absolute value to obtain
\[
|\phi_T(a;0) - \phi_T(\tilde a;0)| \le 2 |\nabla_x G_T(a;0,x)| |\nabla \phi_T(\tilde a;x) + \xi|.
\]
On the right hand side, we plug in~\eqref{eq:osc_x_phi_x} to obtain
\[
|\phi_T(a;0) - \phi_T(\tilde a;0)| \le C(d,\lambda) |\nabla_x G_T(a;0,x)| |\nabla \phi_T(a;x) + \xi|.
\]
Since $\tilde a(x)$ was arbitrary, it follows that
\begin{equation*}
\osc_{a(x)} \phi_T(a;0) \le C(d,\lambda) |\nabla_x G_T(a;0,x)| |\nabla \phi_T(a;x) + \xi|,
\end{equation*}
which is precisely the claimed identity \eqref{eq:osc_phi}.
Taking the gradient with respect to $y_j$ in~\eqref{eq:phi_rep2} yields
\begin{equation*
\nabla_j\phi_T(a; y) - \nabla_j\phi_T(\tilde a;y) = \nabla_{y,j}\nabla_x G_T(a;y,x) \cdot ( \tilde a(x) - a(x) ) (\nabla \phi_T(\tilde a;x) + \xi ).
\end{equation*}
We take the absolute value and insert \eqref{eq:osc_x_phi_x} to obtain
\[
|\nabla_j\phi_T(a; y) - \nabla_j\phi_T(\tilde a;y)| \le C(d,\lambda) |\nabla_{y,j}\nabla_x G_T(a;y,x)| |\nabla \phi_T(a;x) + \xi |.
\]
and \eqref{T1.1} follows
\end{proof}
In view of \eqref{eq:osc_phi} and \eqref{T1.1} it is natural that
integrability properties of $G_T$ are required. Next to quantitative
ergodicity, these Green's function
estimates are the second key ingredient in our approach. For Theorem~\ref{T1},
which invokes \eqref{T1.1}, a standard $\ell^2$-energy estimate
for $\nabla\nabla G_T$ suffices, see \eqref{P1.18}. For Theorem~\ref{T2}, which
invokes \eqref{eq:osc_phi}, some more regularity of the Green's function is
required. We need a spatially weighted estimate on the gradient
$\nabla G_T$ that is uniform in $a\in\Omega$. To this end, as announced in Section~\ref{SS:sketch2}, we define a weight
\begin{equation}\label{def_weight}
\omega_q(x):=
\begin{cases}
(|x|+1)^{2(q-1)}+T^{1-q}(|x|+1)^{4(q-1)}&\text{for }d=2,\\
(|x|+1)^{2d(q-1)}&\text{for }d>2,
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
for every $q\ge 1$ and $T\ge 1$.
\begin{lemma}\label{L2}
There exists $q_0>1$ only depending on $\lambda$ and $d$ such that
\begin{align}\label{P1.18}
\sum_{x\in\mathbb{Z}^d} |\nabla_x\nabla_{y,j} G_T(x,y)|^2 &\le\lambda^{-2},\quad j=1, \ldots, d,\\
\sum_{x\in\mathbb{Z}^d}|\nabla_x G_T(a;x,0)|^{2q}\omega_q(x)
&\le C(d,\lambda)
\begin{cases}
\log T&\text{for }d=2,\\
1&\text{for }d>2
\end{cases}\label{eq:L2}
\end{align}
for all $1\leq q \le q_0$.
\end{lemma}
Lemma~\ref{L2} establishes a weighted $\ell^{2q}$-estimate on the
gradient $\nabla G_T$ of the Green's function. For the application,
it is crucial that the integrability exponent $2q$ is larger than $2$. The weight is chosen in such a way that the estimate
remains valid for the constant coefficient Green's function $G_T^0(x):=G_T(\ones;x,0)$ (where we use the symbol $\ones$ to denote the identity in $\mathbb{R}^{d\times d}$) whose gradient behaves as
\begin{equation}\label{eq:decay-const}
|\nabla G_T^0(x)| \le C(d) (|x|+1)^{1-d}\exp\Big(-c_0\frac{|x|+1}{\sqrt T}\Big)
\end{equation}
for some generic constant $c_0>0$, {which can easily be deduced from the well-known heat kernel bounds on the gradient of the parabolic Green's function (for lack of a better reference, we refer to~\cite[Theorem~1.1]{Delmotte-Deuschel} in the special case of a measure concentrating on $a(x)=\ones$) along the lines of~\cite[Proposition~3.6]{Mourrat}.}
With this bound at hand, the definition of the weight \eqref{def_weight} yields
\begin{equation}\label{eq:const}
\sum_{x\in\mathbb{Z}^d}|\nabla G_T^0(x)|^{2q}\omega_q(x)
\le C(d,q)
\begin{cases}
\log T&\text{for }d=2,\\
1&\text{for }d>2
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
for all $q>1$. Hence, Lemma~\ref{L2} says that the variable-coefficient Green's function exhibits (on a spatially averaged level) the same
decay properties as the constant-coefficient Green's function. In the diagonal, scalar case, Lemma~\ref{L2} is a consequence of \cite[Lemma~2.9]{GO1} and
can also be derived from the weighted estimates on the parabolic Green's
function in \cite[Theorem~3]{GNO1}. Although the arguments in
\cite{GO1,GNO1} rely on scalar techniques, Lemma~\ref{L2} also holds
in the case of systems. Indeed, our proof relies only on techniques which are also available for systems.
The proof will be split into three parts: First we will provide a simple argument for~\eqref{P1.18} valid in all dimensions. Then we will prove~\eqref{eq:L2} in $d>2$ dimensions. The hardest part is the proof of~\eqref{eq:L2} if $d=2$ since this is the critical dimension.
\begin{proof}[Proof of~\eqref{P1.18}]
An application of $\nabla_{y,j}$ to \eqref{P1.3} yields the
following characterization for $\nabla_{y,j} G_T(a;\cdot,y)$
\begin{equation*
\frac{1}{T}\sum_{x\in\mathbb{Z}^d}\nabla_{y,j}
G_T(a;x,y) w(x)+\sum_{x\in\mathbb{Z}^d}\nabla w(x) \cdot a(x)\nabla_x\nabla_{y,j}
G_T(a;x,y)=\nabla_j w(y)
\end{equation*}
for all $w\in\ell^2(\mathbb{Z}^d)$.
Taking $w(\cdot):=\nabla_{y,j} G_T(\cdot,y) \in\ell^2(\mathbb{Z}^d)$ yields
\[
\frac{1}{T} \sum_{x\in\mathbb{Z}^d} |\nabla_{y,j} G_T(x,y)|^2 + \sum_{x\in\mathbb{Z}^d} \nabla_x \nabla_{y,j} G_T(x,y) \cdot a(x) \nabla_x \nabla_{y,j} G_T(x,y)
= \nabla_{j} \nabla_{j} G_T(y,y),
\]
where $\nabla_{j} \nabla_{j} G_T(y,y)=\nabla_{x,j} \nabla_{y,j} G_T(x,y)\big|_{x=y}$.
The first term on the l.~h.~s.~is positive and ellipticity yields
\[
\lambda \sum_{x\in\mathbb{Z}^d} |\nabla_x \nabla_{y,j} G_T(x,y)|^2 \le |\nabla_{j} \nabla_{j} G_T(y,y)| \le \bigg( \sum_{x\in\mathbb{Z}^d} |\nabla_x \nabla_{y,j} G_T(x,y)|^2 \bigg)^\frac{1}{2}.
\]
Thus \eqref{P1.18} follows.
\end{proof}
\begin{proof}[Proof of~\eqref{eq:L2} in $d>2$ dimensions]
{\bf Step 1}. A priori estimate:
We prove
\begin{equation}\label{apriori_L2}
|G_T(0,0)| + \sum_x |\nabla G_T(x,0)|^2 \le C(d,\lambda).
\end{equation}
The weak form of \eqref{P1.3} with $\zeta = G_T(\cdot,0)$ and ellipticity immediately yield
\[
0 \le \lambda \sum_x |\nabla G_T(x,0)|^2 \le G_T(0,0),
\]
in particular $G_T(0,0) \ge 0$.
Now a Sobolev embedding in $d>2$ with constant $C(d)$ yields
\begin{align*}
|G_T(0,0)| &\le \bigg(\sum_x |G_T(x,0)|^{\frac{2d}{d-2}}\bigg)^{\frac{d-2}{2d}}\\ &\le C(d) \bigg( \sum_x |\nabla G_T(x,0)|^2 \bigg)^{\frac{1}{2}} \le C(d,\lambda) |G_T(0,0)|^{\frac{1}{2}}.
\end{align*}
The Sobolev embedding is readily obtained from its continuum version
on $\mathbb{R}^d$ via a linear interpolation function on a triangulation subordinate to the lattice $\mathbb{Z}^d$. Hence $|G_T(0,0)|\le C(d,\lambda)$ and \eqref{apriori_L2} follows.
\medskip
{\bf Step 2}. A bound involving weights: In this step we show that there exists $\alpha_0(d) > 0$ such that
\begin{equation}\label{weight_hardy}
\sum_x ( |x| + 1 )^{2\alpha-2} |G_T(x,0)|^2 \le C(d) \sum_x (|x|+1)^{2\alpha} |\nabla G_T(x,0)|^2
\end{equation}
for all $0 < \alpha \le \alpha_0$. (Note that both sides are well-defined for $G_T$.)
We start by recalling Hardy's inequality in $\mathbb{R}^d$ if $d>2$:
\[
\int_{\mathbb{R}^d}\frac{|f|^2}{|x|^2} \;dx \le \Big(\frac{2}{d-2}\Big)^2 \int_{\mathbb{R}^d} |\nabla f|^2 \;dx
\]
for all $f\in H^1(\mathbb{R}^d)$. A discrete counterpart can be derived by interpolation w.~r.~t.~a triangulation subordinate to the lattice and yields
\begin{equation}\label{hardy}
\sum_x ( |x| + 1 )^{2\alpha-2} |G_T(x,0)|^2 \le C(d) \sum_x \big|\nabla( ( |x| + 1 )^{\alpha} G_T(x,0) ) \big|^2.
\end{equation}
The discrete Leibniz rule $\nabla_i (fg)(x) = f(x+e_i)\nabla_i g(x) + g(x)\nabla_i f(x)$
yields
\[
\nabla_i(( |x| + 1 )^{\alpha} G_T(x,0) ) = ( |x+e_i| + 1 )^{\alpha} \nabla_i G_T(x,0) + G_T(x,0) \nabla_i( |x| + 1 )^{\alpha}.
\]
By the mean value theorem we obtain the simple inequality $|a^\alpha - b^\alpha| \le \alpha (a^{\alpha-1} + b^{\alpha-1}) |a-b|$ for all $a,b\ge 0$ {and we trivially have that
\[
\frac{1}{2} (|x|+1) \le |x+e|+1 \le 2(|x|+1).
\]
The choice $a=|x+e|+1$ and $b=|x|+1$ thus yields
\[
\nabla_i( |x| + 1 )^{\alpha} \le 3 \alpha (|x|+1)^{\alpha-1}
\]
}for all $0\le\alpha\le1$. Summation over $i=1,\ldots,d$ and the discrete Leibniz rule above consequently yield
\[
\big| \nabla \big( ( |x| + 1 )^{\alpha} G_T(x,0) \big) \big|^2 \le C(d) \Big( ( |x| + 1 )^{2\alpha} |\nabla G_T(x,0)|^2 + \alpha ( |x| + 1 )^{2\alpha-2} |G_T(x,0)|^2 \Big)
\]
for any $0\le\alpha\le1$. We substitute this estimate in Hardy's inequality \eqref{hardy} and take $\alpha=\alpha_0(d)$ small enough to absorb the last term into the l.~h.~s.~to obtain~\eqref{weight_hardy}, i.e.\
\[
\sum_x (|x|+1)^{2\alpha_0-2} |G_T(x,0)|^2 \le C(d) \sum_x ( |x| + 1 )^{2\alpha_0} |\nabla G_T(x,0)|^2.
\]
\medskip
{\bf Step 3}. Improvement of Step~1 to include weights: Now we deduce
the existence of $\alpha_0 = \alpha_0(d,\lambda) > 0$ (smaller
than $d$ and possibly smaller than $\alpha_0(d)$ from Step~2) such that
\begin{equation}\label{apriori_L2_alpha}
\sum_x \big( |x| + 1 \big)^{2\alpha_0} |\nabla G_T(x,0)|^2 \le C(d,\lambda).
\end{equation}
To this end, we set $w(x) = (|x|+1)^{2\alpha} G_T(x,0)$ and
note that
\begin{equation*}
\nabla_iw(x)=(|x|+1)^{2\alpha}\nabla_iG_T(x,0)+\nabla_i\Big((|x+e_i|+1)^{2\alpha}\Big) G_T(x+e_i,0).
\end{equation*}
Hence, \eqref{P1.3} yields (for $y=0$):
\begin{multline}\label{Green_weights_eq}
\frac{1}{T} \sum_x (|x|+1)^{2\alpha} |G_T(x,0)|^2 +
\sum_x\sum_{i,j=1}^d G_T(x+e_i,0) \nabla_i \big((|x+e_i|+1)^{2\alpha}\big) \cdot a_{ij}(x) \nabla_j G_T(x,0)\\
+ \sum_x( |x| + 1 )^{2\alpha} \nabla G_T(x,0) \cdot a(x) \nabla G_T(x,0) = G_T(0,0).
\end{multline}
As in Step~2, we have that
\[
\big|\nabla_i \big((|x|+1)^{2\alpha}\big)\big| \le 4 \alpha (|x|+1)^{\alpha-1}(|x+e_i|+1)^\alpha.
\]
for all $0 \le \alpha \le 1$ and $i=1,\ldots,d$. Thus~\eqref{Green_weights_eq}, ellipticity, and H\"older's inequality yield
\begin{multline*}
\lambda\sum_x \big( |x| + 1 \big)^{2\alpha} |\nabla G_T(x,0)|^2 \le |G_T(0,0)|+\\mathbb{C}(d) \alpha \bigg(\sum_x |G_T(x,0)|^2 (|x|+1)^{2\alpha-2} \bigg)^\frac{1}{2}
\bigg(\sum_x |\nabla G_T(x,0)|^2 (|x|+1)^{2\alpha} \bigg)^\frac{1}{2}.
\end{multline*}
We apply the result of Step 2 with $\alpha \le \alpha_0(d)$ and then possibly decrease $\alpha$ further to absorb the second term on the r.~h.~s. This is possible for $\alpha\le\alpha_0(d,\lambda)$ for some $\alpha_0(d,\lambda)>0$. By Step 1, we conclude \eqref{apriori_L2_alpha}. By the discrete $\ell^{2q}-\ell^2$-inequality $\|f\|_{\ell^{2q}(\mathbb{Z}^d)} \le \|f\|_{\ell^{2}(\mathbb{Z}^d)}$, it follows that
\[
\sum_x \big( |x| + 1 \big)^{2q\alpha_0} |\nabla G_T(x,0)|^{2q} \le C(d,\lambda)
\]
for all $q>1$. {Hence Lemma~\ref{L2} holds for $d>2$ with $\omega_q$ defined in~\eqref{def_weight} as long as $2d(q-1) \le 2q\alpha_0$, i.e.\ we may take $q_0 = \frac{d}{d-\alpha_0}$.}
\end{proof}
\begin{proof}[Proof of~\eqref{eq:L2} in $d=2$ dimensions]
Let us remark that the following proof is valid in all dimensions $d\ge2$. However, if $d>2$, we have the simpler proof above.
Fix $T>0$ and $a\in\Omega$. For convenience, we set
\begin{equation}\label{eq:5}
G(x):=G_T(a;x,0)\qquad\text{and}\qquad G^0(x):=G_{\frac{T}{\lambda}}(\ones;x,0),
\end{equation}
where $\ones$ denotes the identity in $\mathbb{R}^{d\times d}$ and $\lambda$ denotes the constant of
ellipticity from Assumption~\ref{ass:ell}.
We first introduce some notation. For $1\leq q<\infty$ and $\gamma>0$, we denote by $\ell^{q}_\gamma$ the space of vector fields $g:\mathbb{Z}^d\to\mathbb{R}^d$
with
\begin{eqnarray*}
\|g\|_{\ell^q_\gamma}&:=&\left(\sum_{x\in\mathbb{Z}^d}|g(x)|^q(|x|+1)^{\gamma}\right)^{\frac{1}{q}}<\infty.
\end{eqnarray*}
Likewise we denote by $\ell^{2q}_{{\omega_q}}$ the space of vector fields
with
\begin{equation*}
\|g\|_{\ell^{2q}_{\omega_q}}:=\left(\sum_{x\in\mathbb{Z}^d}|g(x)|^{2q}{\omega_q}(x)\right)^{\frac{1}{2q}}<\infty,
\end{equation*}
with ${\omega_q}$ defined by \eqref{def_weight}. We write $\|\mathcal
H\|_{B(X)}$ for the operator norm of a linear operator $\mathcal H: X\to X$ defined on a normed space $X$.
\smallskip
{\bf Step 1}. Helmholtz decomposition:
We claim that the gradients of the variable coefficient Green's function
$G$ and of the constant coefficient Green's function $G^0$ from \eqref{eq:5} are
related by
\begin{equation}\label{helmholtz}
(\id + \mathcal{H} \overline a) \nabla G = \lambda \nabla G^0
\end{equation}
where $\overline a = \lambda a - \ones$, $\mathcal H:=\nabla\mathcal
L^{-1} \nabla^*$ denotes the
modified Helmholtz projection, $\mathcal L:= \frac{\lambda}{T} +
\nabla^*\nabla$, and $\id$ denotes the identity operator. Here and in the following, we tacitly identify
$\overline a$ with the multiplication operator that maps the vector
field $g:\mathbb{Z}^d\to\mathbb{R}^{d}$ to the vector field $(\overline a
g)(x):=\overline a(x)g(x)$. Moreover, since $G$ is integrable {in the sense of Lemma~\ref{L:Gint}, the operators} $\mathcal L^{-1}$,
and thus $\mathcal H$ and $(\id+\mathcal{H}\overline a)$ are bounded
linear operators on $\ell^2(\mathbb{Z}^d)$ (resp. $\ell^2(\mathbb{Z}^d,\mathbb{R}^d)$) and the
weighted spaces discussed in Step~2 below.
Identity \eqref{helmholtz} may be seen by appealing to \eqref{T1.2} satisfied by $G$ and the
equation $\mathcal L G^0=\delta$ satisfied by $G^0$:
\begin{align*}
(\id + \mathcal{H} \overline a) \nabla G
&=
\nabla G+\lambda \nabla\mathcal L^{-1} \nabla^* a\nabla G- \nabla\mathcal L^{-1} \nabla^* \nabla G\\
&=
\nabla G+\lambda \nabla\mathcal L^{-1} \left(\delta-\frac1TG\right)- \nabla\mathcal L^{-1}\left(\mathcal
L-\frac{\lambda}{T}\right) G\\
&=
\lambda \nabla\mathcal L^{-1}\delta=\lambda \nabla G^0.
\end{align*}
\medskip
{\bf Step 2.} Invertibility of $(\id+\mathcal H\overline a)$ in a weighted space:
In this step, we prove that there exists $q_0=q_0(d,\lambda)>1$ such
that the operator $(\id+\mathcal H\overline a):\ell^{2q}_{\omega_q}\to \ell^{2q}_{\omega_q}$ is invertible and
\begin{equation}\label{inv_Helmholtz}
\|(\id+\mathcal H\overline
a)\|_{B(\ell^{2q}_{\omega_q})}\leq C(d,\lambda)
\end{equation}
for all $1\leq q\leq q_0$
We split the proof into several sub-steps.
\medskip
{\it Step 2a.} Reduction to an estimate for $\mathcal H$:
We claim that it suffices to prove the following statement. There exists
$q_0=q_0(\lambda)>1$ such that
\begin{equation}\label{eq:8}
\max \left\{ \| \mathcal{H} \|_{B(\ell^{2q}_{2q-2})}, \| \mathcal{H}
\|_{B(\ell^{2q}_{4q-4})} \right\}
\leq \frac{2-\lambda}{2(1-\lambda)}
\end{equation}
for all $1\leq q\leq q_0$.
Our argument is as follows: We only need to show that \eqref{eq:8}
implies that
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:10}
\|\mathcal H\overline a\|_{B(\ell^{2q}_{\omega_q})}\leq \frac{2-\lambda}{2},
\end{equation}
since then $(\id+\mathcal H\overline a)$ can be inverted by a
Neumann-series. Since the $\|\cdot\|_{B(\ell^{2q}_{\omega_q})}$-norm is
submultiplicative, inequality \eqref{eq:10} follows from
\begin{equation}\label{eq:9}
\| \mathcal{H} \|_{B(\ell^{2q}_{\omega_q})}\leq
\frac{2-\lambda}{2(1-\lambda)}\qquad\text{and}\qquad
\|\overline a\|_{B(\ell^{2q}_{\omega_q})}\leq 1-\lambda.
\end{equation}
We start with the argument for the second inequality in \eqref{eq:9}. Thanks to \eqref{ass:ell}, we have for all $a_0\in\Omega_0$
and $v\in\mathbb{R}^d$:
\begin{eqnarray*}
|(\lambda a_0-\ones)v|^2&=&v\cdot((\lambda a_0-\ones)^t(\lambda a_0-\ones))v\\
&=&\lambda^2|a_0v|^2-2v\cdot\frac{a_0+a_0^t}{2}v+|v|^2\ =\
\lambda^2|a_0v|^2-2v\cdot a_0v+|v|^2\\
&\stackrel{\eqref{ass:ell}}{\leq}&\lambda^2|v|^2-2\lambda|v|^2+|v|^2=(1-\lambda)^2|v|^2,
\end{eqnarray*}
{which shows~\eqref{eq:9} by definition of the (spectral) operator norm.}
Regarding the first inequality in \eqref{eq:9}, we note that $\|\cdot\|_{\ell^{2q}_{\omega_q}}^{2q} =
\|\cdot\|_{\ell^{2q}_{2q-2}}^{2q} + {T}^{1-q}
\|\cdot\|_{\ell^{2q}_{4q-4}}^{2q}$, as can been seen by recalling
definition \eqref{def_weight}. Hence,
\begin{align*}
\| \mathcal{H} \|_{B(\ell^{2q}_{\omega_q})}^{2q}
&=
\sup_{\|g\|_{\ell^{2q}_{\omega_q}}\le1}\left( \|\mathcal Hg\|_{\ell^{2q}_{2q-2}}^{2q} + {T}^{1-q} \|\mathcal Hg\|_{\ell^{2q}_{4q-4}}^{2q}\right)\\
&\le
\max \left\{ \| \mathcal{H} \|_{B(\ell^{2q}_{2q-2})}^{2q}, \| \mathcal{H}
\|_{B(\ell^{2q}_{4q-4})}^{2q} \right\}\sup_{\|g\|_{\ell^{2q}_{\omega_q}}\le1}\left( \|g\|_{\ell^{2q}_{2q-2}}^{2q} + {T}^{1-q}
\|g\|_{\ell^{2q}_{4q-4}}^{2q}\right)\\
&=
\max \left\{ \| \mathcal{H} \|_{B(\ell^{2q}_{2q-2})}^{2q}, \| \mathcal{H}
\|_{B(\ell^{2q}_{4q-4})}^{2q} \right\}
\stackrel{\eqref{eq:8}}{<}\Big(\frac{2-\lambda}{2(1-\lambda)}\Big)^{2q},
\end{align*}
and \eqref{eq:9} follows.
\smallskip
{\it Step 2b.} Proof of \eqref{eq:8}:
A standard energy estimate yields
\begin{equation}\label{eq:12}
\|\mathcal H\|_{B(\ell^2(\mathbb{R}^d,\mathbb{Z}^d))}\leq 1.
\end{equation}
{Indeed, given $g\in[\ell^2(\mathbb{Z}^d)]^d$, we have that $\mathcal{H} g = \nabla u$ where $u$ solves $\frac{\lambda}{T} u + \nabla^* \nabla u = \nabla^* g$. Testing with $u$ yields $\|\nabla u\|_{\ell^2(\mathbb{Z}^d)} \le \| g \|_{\ell^2(\mathbb{Z}^d)}$ which is just another way of writing~\eqref{eq:12}.}
In the following we prove the desired inequality \eqref{eq:8} by complex interpolation of
$B(\ell^2(\mathbb{R}^d,\mathbb{Z}^d))=B(\ell^2_0)$ with $B(\ell^{p}_\gamma)$ for
suitable $p$ and $\gamma$. In Proposition \ref{prop:weighted-dics-cz}
below (in Section~\ref{S:CZ}) we prove a Calder\'{o}n-Zygmund-type estimate
for $\mathcal H$ in weighted spaces
and obtain
\begin{equation}
\| \mathcal{H} \|_{B(\ell^{p}_\gamma)} < \infty\quad\text{for all }
2\le p\le \infty\text{ and }0 \le \gamma < \min\{2(p-1),{\textstyle\frac{1}{2}}\}.\label{eq:4}
\end{equation}
Fix such $p$ and $\gamma$ and $0 < \theta < 1$. A theorem due to Stein and Weiss \cite[Theorem 5.5.1]{Bergh-Lofstrom-76} that also holds in the discrete setting yields
\begin{equation}\label{stein_weiss}
\| \mathcal{H} \|_{B(\ell^{p}_{\gamma'})} \le \| \mathcal{H} \|_{B(\ell^{p}_\gamma)}^{1-\theta} \| \mathcal{H} \|_{B(\ell^{p})}^\theta,\qquad\text{if $\gamma'= (1-\theta)\gamma$.}
\end{equation}
Likewise the classical Riesz-Thorin theorem \cite[Theorem 1.1.1]{Bergh-Lofstrom-76} yields
\begin{equation}\label{riesz_thorin}
\| \mathcal{H} \|_{B(\ell^{p'}_{\gamma})} \le \| \mathcal{H} \|_{B(\ell^{p}_\gamma)}^{1-\theta} \| \mathcal{H} \|_{B(\ell^{2}_\gamma)}^\theta,\qquad\text{if $\frac{1}{p'} = \frac{1-\theta}{p} + \frac{\theta}{2}$.}
\end{equation}
In particular, the map $(p,\gamma)\mapsto\|\mathcal{H}\|_{\mathcal
B(\ell_{\gamma}^{p})}$ is continuous at $(2,0)$: Given $\epsilon >
0$, we use \eqref{riesz_thorin} with $\gamma=0$ to find $p'>2$ such
that $\| \mathcal{H} \|_{\mathcal B(\ell^{p'})} \le 1+
\frac{\epsilon}{2}$. Then we apply \eqref{stein_weiss} to find
$\gamma' > 0$ such that $\max\{\| \mathcal{H} \|_{\mathcal
B(\ell^{2}_{\gamma'})},\| \mathcal{H} \|_{\mathcal
B(\ell^{p'}_{\gamma'})}\} \le 1+\epsilon$. Hence, we have $\| \mathcal{H} \|_{\mathcal
B(\ell^{p}_{\gamma})} \le 1+\epsilon$ for the corner points
$(p,\gamma)$ of the square $[2,p']\times[0,\gamma']$. By~\eqref{riesz_thorin} resp.~\eqref{stein_weiss}, we may always decrease
either $p'$ resp.\ $\gamma'$ while achieving the same bound. Consequently we have that $\| \mathcal{H} \|_{\mathcal
B(\ell^{p}_{\gamma})} \le 1+\epsilon$ for all $(p,\gamma)\in
[2,p']\times[0,\gamma']$. In particular, {letting $\epsilon=\frac{2-\lambda}{2(1-\lambda)}-1>0$}, there exists $q_0>1$ such
that $\| \mathcal{H} \|_{\mathcal B(\ell^{2q_0}_{2q_0-2})}\leq\frac{2-\lambda}{2(1-\lambda)}$ and the same
bound for $\| \mathcal{H} \|_{\mathcal B(\ell^{2q_0}_{4q_0-4})}$. By
monotonicity in the exponent, estimate \eqref{eq:8} follows for all
$1\leq q\leq q_0$. This completes the argument of Step~2.
\medskip
{\bf Step 3}. In this last step, we fix $d=2$ and derive the bound
\begin{equation}\label{nabla_G_bound}
\sum_x |\nabla G(x)|^{2q} {\omega_q}(x) = \| \nabla G \|_{\ell^{2q}_{\omega_q}}^{2q} \le C(\lambda,q) \log T
\end{equation}
for $q$ and ${\omega_q}$ as in Step 2.
The relation \eqref{helmholtz} and the estimate \eqref{inv_Helmholtz} yield
\[
\| \nabla G \|_{\ell^{2q}_{\omega_q}} \le C(\lambda) \| \nabla G^0 \|_{\ell^{2q}_{\omega_q}}
\]
so that it is enough to consider the constant coefficient Green's
function whose behaviour is well-known and is given by
(cf.~\eqref{eq:decay-const})
\begin{equation*}
|\nabla G^0(x)| \le C (|x|+1)^{-1}\exp\bigg(-\frac{{\sqrt{\lambda}}|x|}{C\sqrt{T}}\bigg),
\end{equation*}
where $C$ is a universal constant.
Hence by
splitting $ \| \nabla G^0 \|_{\ell^{2q}_{\omega_q}}^{2q}$ into its contributions coming from $|x|\le \sqrt{T}$ and $|x| > \sqrt{T}$ and using
the definition of the weight ${\omega_q}$, we have
\begin{align*}
\| \nabla G^0 \|_{\ell^{2q}_{\omega_q}}^{2q} &= \sum_x |\nabla G^0(x)|^{2q}\left((|x|+1)^{2q-2}+T^{1-q}(|x|+1)^{4q-4}\right) \\
&\le C \sum_x (|x|+1)^{-2q} e^{-\frac{2q{\sqrt{\lambda}}|x|}{C\sqrt{T}}} \left((|x|+1)^{2q-2}+T^{1-q}(|x|+1)^{4q-4}\right) \\
& \le C(\lambda ,q) \sum_{|x|\le\sqrt{T}} (|x|+1)^{-2} +C(\lambda ,q)\sum_{|x|>\sqrt{T}} {T}^{1-q}(|x|+1)^{2q-4} e^{-\frac{2q{\sqrt{\lambda}}|x|}{C\sqrt{T}}}\\
&\le C(\lambda ,q) \log T+ C(\lambda ,q) \sum_{|x|>\sqrt{T}} {T}^{-1} \big({\textstyle\frac{|x|}{\sqrt{T}}}\big)^{2q-4} e^{-\frac{2{\sqrt{\lambda}}|x|}{C\sqrt{T}}}\\
&\le C(\lambda ,q) \log T+C(\lambda ,q),
\end{align*}
where we have used that $q > 1$.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Logarithmic Sobolev inequality and spectral gap
revisited}\label{SS:E}
The LSI only enters the proof of Theorem~\ref{T1} in form of the following lemma borrowed from \cite{MO1}.
\begin{lemma}[Lemma~4 in \cite{MO1}]\label{L1}
Let $\expec{\cdot}$ statisfy LSI~\eqref{eq:LSI} with constant $\rho>0$. Then we have that
\begin{equation}\label{T1.0}
\langle|\zeta|^{2p}\rangle^\frac{1}{2p}\le C(\delta,p,\rho)\langle|\zeta|^2\rangle^{\frac{1}{2}}
+\delta\Big\langle\bigg(\sum_{x\in\mathbb{Z}^d} \Big( \osc_{a(x)} \zeta\Big)^2 \bigg)^p\Big\rangle^\frac{1}{2p}
\end{equation}
for any $\delta>0$, $1\le p<\infty$ and $\zeta\in C_b(\Omega)$.
\end{lemma}
This inequality expresses a reverse Jensen inequality and allows to bound
high moments of $\zeta$ to the expense of some control on the
oscillations of $\zeta$. {The difference to SG lies in the fact that the improved integrability properties of LSI allow us to choose $\delta>0$ arbitrarily small.} In the proof of Theorem~\ref{T1}, we will apply \eqref{T1.0} to the random
variables $\zeta=\nabla_i \phi_T(0) + \xi_i$ for $i=1,\ldots,d$. The second moment of $\nabla_i \phi_T(0) + \xi_i$ will be controlled below, whereas the oscillation was already estimated Lemma~\ref{L:RP} and involves the second mixed derivatives of $G_T$.
\medskip
In the proof of Theorem~\ref{T2}, we just require the weaker statement of SG. To be precise, we will use an $L^{2p}_{\langle\cdot\rangle}$-version of SG which is the content of the following lemma.
\begin{lemma}[cf.~Lemma~2 in \cite{GNO1}]
\label{LSGp}
Let $\expec{\cdot}$ statisfy SG~\eqref{eq:SG} with constant $\rho>0$. Then for
arbitrary $1\le p<\infty$ and $\zeta\in
C_b(\Omega)$ it holds that
\begin{equation}\label{eq:SGp}
\expec{|\zeta - \langle \zeta \rangle|^{2p}}\le C(p,\rho) \Big\langle\bigg(\sum_{x\in\mathbb{Z}^d} \Big( \osc_{a(x)} \zeta\Big)^2 \bigg)^p \Big\rangle.
\end{equation}
\end{lemma}
The proof is a combination of the proofs of~\cite[Lemma~2]{GNO1} and~\cite[Lemma~4]{MO1}. We present it here for the convenience of the reader.
\begin{proof}
Without loss of generality assume that $\zeta\in C_b(\Omega)$ satisfies $\expec{\zeta}=0$. The triangle inequality and SG~\eqref{eq:SG} yield
\begin{align*}
\expec{|\zeta|^{2p}} &\le 2\expec{ \big(|\zeta|^{p} - \expec{|\zeta|^p}\big)^2 } + 2\expec{|\zeta|^p}^2\\
&\le \frac{2}{\rho}\expec{\sum_{x}\Big(\osc_{a(x)}|\zeta|^p\Big)^2}+2\expec{|\zeta|^{2p}}^{\frac{p-2}{p-1}}\expec{|\zeta|^2}^{\frac{p}{p-1}}.
\end{align*}
By Young's inequality, we may absorb $\langle |\zeta|^{2p} \rangle$ on the l.~h.~s.\ and we obtain that
\begin{equation}\label{eq:SG-p}
\expec{|\zeta|^{2p}} \le \frac{4}{\rho}\expec{\sum_{x}\Big(\osc_{a(x)}|\zeta|^p\Big)^2}+C(p)\expec{|\zeta|^2}^{p}.
\end{equation}
We insert SG~\eqref{eq:SG}, note $\langle\zeta\rangle=0$ and apply Jensen's inequality to obtain that
\begin{equation}\label{eq:SG-1^p}
\expec{|\zeta|^2}^{p} \le \rho^{-p} \expec{\sum_{x}\Big(\osc_{a(x)}\zeta\Big)^2}^p \le \rho^{-p} \expec{\bigg(\sum_{x}\Big(\osc_{a(x)}\zeta\Big)^2\bigg)^p}.
\end{equation}
In order to deal with the first term in~\eqref{eq:SG-p}, we note that the elementary inequality $|t^p - s^p| \le C(p) (t^{p-1} |t-s| + |t-s|^p)$ for all $t,s\ge0$ yields for every two coefficient fields $a,\tilde a \in \Omega$:
\[
\Big||\zeta(a)|^p - |\zeta(\tilde a)|^p\Big| \le C(p) \big(|\zeta(a)|^{p-1} |\zeta(a)-\zeta(\tilde a)| + |\zeta(a)-\zeta(\tilde a)|^p\big),
\]
where we have in addition used the triangle inequality in form of $\Big||\zeta(a)|-|\zeta(\tilde a)|\Big| \le |\zeta(a)-\zeta(\tilde a)|$. Letting $\tilde a \in \Omega$ run over the coefficient fields that coincide with $a$ outside of $x\in\mathbb{Z}^d$ yields
\[
\osc_{a(x)}|\zeta|^p \le C(p) \bigg(|\zeta|^{p-1} \osc_{a(x)} \zeta + \Big(\osc_{a(x)} \zeta\Big)^p\bigg)
\]
Consequently we obtain
\begin{align*}
\expec{\sum_{x}\Big(\osc_{a(x)}|\zeta|^p\Big)^2} &\le C(p) \Bigg(\expec{|\zeta|^{2(p-1)}\sum_{x}\Big(\osc_{a(x)}\zeta\Big)^2} + C(p) \expec{\sum_{x}\Big(\osc_{a(x)} \zeta\Big)^{2p}}\Bigg)\\
&\le C(p) \Bigg(\expec{|\zeta|^{2p}}^{\frac{p-1}{p}}\expec{\bigg(\sum_{x}\Big(\osc_{a(x)}\zeta\Big)^2\bigg)^p}^{\frac{1}{p}} + \expec{\bigg(\sum_{x}\Big(\osc_{a(x)}\zeta\Big)^2\bigg)^p}\Bigg)
\end{align*}
by H\"older's inequality and the discrete $\ell^2\subset\ell^{2p}$-inequality. Inserting this estimate as well as~\eqref{eq:SG-1^p} into~\eqref{eq:SG-p} yields
\[
\expec{|\zeta|^{2p}} \le C(p,\rho) \Bigg(\expec{|\zeta|^{2p}}^{\frac{p-1}{p}}\expec{\bigg(\sum_{x}\Big(\osc_{a(x)}\zeta\Big)^2\bigg)^p}^{\frac{1}{p}} + \expec{\bigg(\sum_{x}\Big(\osc_{a(x)}\zeta\Big)^2\bigg)^p}\Bigg).
\]
Again, we may absorb the factor $\langle |\zeta|^{2p} \rangle$ on the l.~h.~s.\ using Young's inequality and thus conclude the proof of Lemma~\ref{LSGp}.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Proof of Theorem~\ref{T1}}\label{SS:T1}
{\bf Step 1}. We claim the following energy estimate:
\begin{equation}\label{T1.3}
\expec{|\nabla\phi_T(0)+\xi|^2}\le C(\lambda) |\xi|^2.
\end{equation}
To see this, we multiply~\eqref{eq:1} with $\phi_T(0)$ and take the
expectation:
\[
\frac{1}{T}\expec{|\phi_T(0)|^2}+\expec{\phi_T(0)\nabla^*(a\nabla\phi_T)(0)}=-\expec{\phi_T(0)\nabla^*(a\xi)(0)}.
\]
Thanks to the stationarity of $\expec{\cdot}$ and the stationarity of
$\phi_T$, cf.~\eqref{LMC:1}, we have that
\begin{align*}
\langle \phi_T(0) \nabla^* w(x) \rangle &= \sum_{i=1}^d \langle \phi_T(0) \big( w_i(x-e_i) - w_i(x) \big) \rangle\\ &= \sum_{i=1}^d \langle \big( \phi_T(e_i) - \phi_T(0) \big) w_i(x) \rangle = \langle \nabla \phi_T(0) \cdot w(x) \rangle
\end{align*}
for all stationary vector fields $w : \mathbb{Z}^d \to \mathbb{R}^d$. This integration by parts property then yields
\[
\frac{1}{T}\expec{|\phi_T(0)|^2}+\langle \nabla\phi_T(0) \cdot a(0) \nabla\phi_T(0) \rangle =- \langle \nabla\phi_T(0) \cdot a(0) \xi \rangle.
\]
Since the first term on the left-hand side is non-negative, uniform
ellipticity, cf.~\eqref{ass:ell}, yields
\[
\expec{|\nabla \phi_T(0)|^2} \le \lambda^{-2} |\xi|^2,
\]
and~\eqref{T1.3} follows from the triangle inequality.
\medskip
{\bf Step 2}. We claim that
\begin{equation}\label{P1.17}
\bigg\langle\bigg(\sum_{x}|\nabla\nabla G_T(0,x)|^2|\nabla\phi_T(x)+\xi|^2\bigg)^p\bigg\rangle \le
\lambda^{-2p}\langle|\nabla\phi_T(0)+\xi|^{2p}\rangle.
\end{equation}
We start by applying H\"older's inequality with exponent $p$ in space:
\begin{multline*}
\bigg(\sum_{x}|\nabla\nabla G_T(0,x)|^2|\nabla\phi_T(x)+\xi|^2\bigg)^p\\
\le \bigg(\sum_{x}|\nabla\nabla G_T(0,x)|^2\bigg)^{p-1}
\sum_{x}|\nabla\nabla G_T(0,x)|^2|\nabla\phi_T(x)+\xi|^{2p}.
\end{multline*}
We now apply $\langle\cdot\rangle$ to obtain
\begin{align*}
&\Big\langle\bigg(\sum_{x}|\nabla\nabla G_T(0,x)|^2 |\nabla\phi_T(x)+\xi|^2 \bigg)^p\Big\rangle\\
&\le
\bigg(\sup_{a\in\Omega}\sum_{x}|\nabla\nabla G_T(0,x)|^2\bigg)^{p-1}
\sum_{x}\langle |\nabla\nabla G_T(0,x)|^2 |\nabla\phi_T(x)+\xi|^{2p}\rangle.
\end{align*}
At this stage, we appeal to the stationarity of $G_T$, cf.\
(\ref{P1.15}), the stationarity of $\nabla\phi_T$, cf.~\eqref{LMC:1},
and the stationarity of $\langle\cdot\rangle$ in
form of
\[
\langle|\nabla\nabla G_T(0,x)|^2|\nabla\phi_T(x)+\xi|^{2p}\rangle
=\langle|\nabla\nabla G_T(-x,0)|^2|\nabla\phi_T(0)+\xi|^{2p}\rangle,
\]
which yields
\begin{align*}
&\Big\langle\bigg(\sum_{x}|\nabla\nabla G_T(0,x)|^2|\nabla\phi_T(x)+\xi|^2\bigg)^p\Big\rangle\\
&\le \bigg(\sup_{a\in\Omega}\sum_{x}|\nabla\nabla G_T(0,x)|^2\bigg)^{p-1} \Big\langle \sum_{x} |\nabla\nabla G_T(-x,0)|^2|\nabla\phi_T(0)+\xi|^{2p} \Big\rangle\\
&\le \bigg(\sup_{a\in\Omega}\sum_{x}|\nabla\nabla G_T(0,x)|^2\bigg)^{p-1} \bigg(\sup_{a\in\Omega}\sum_{x}|\nabla\nabla G_T(x,0)|^2 \bigg) \langle|\nabla\phi_T(0)+\xi|^{2p}\rangle.
\end{align*}
We conclude by appealing to symmetry, cf.~\eqref{P1.16}, and \eqref{P1.18}. Note that the transposed coefficient field $a^t$ satisfies $a^t\in\Omega$.
\medskip
{\bf Step 3}. Conclusion: The combination of \eqref{P1.17} and \eqref{T1.1} yields
\begin{equation}\label{P1.35}
\bigg\langle \bigg(\sum_{x}\Big(\osc_{a(x)}(\nabla_i\phi_T(0)+\xi_i)\Big)^2\bigg)^p\bigg\rangle^\frac{1}{p}
\le C(d,\lambda) \langle|\nabla\phi_T(0)+\xi|^{2p}\rangle^\frac{1}{p}
\end{equation}
for $i=1,\ldots,d$. We now appeal to Lemma~\ref{L1} with $\zeta=\nabla_i \phi_T(0) +
\xi_i$, i.e.\
\[
\langle|\nabla_i \phi_T(0) + \xi_i|^{2p}\rangle^\frac{1}{2p}\le C(\delta,p,\rho)\langle|\nabla_i \phi_T(0) + \xi_i|^2\rangle^{\frac{1}{2}}
+\delta\Big\langle\bigg(\sum_{x\in\mathbb{Z}^d} \Big( \osc_{a(x)} (\nabla_i \phi_T(0) + \xi_i) \Big)^2 \bigg)^p\Big\rangle^\frac{1}{2p}.
\]
On the r.~h.~s.~we insert the estimates (\ref{T1.3}) and (\ref{P1.35}) and
sum in $i=1,\ldots,d$ to obtain (after redefining $\delta$)
\begin{equation}\nonumber
\sum_{i=1}^d\langle|\nabla_i\phi_T(0)+\xi_i|^{2p}\rangle^\frac{1}{2p}\le C(d,\lambda,\delta,p,\rho)|\xi|
+\delta
\langle|\nabla\phi_T(0)+\xi|^{2p}\rangle^\frac{1}{2p}.
\end{equation}
By the equivalence of finite-dimensional norms, it follows (again, after redefining $\delta$)
\[
\langle|\nabla\phi_T(0)+\xi|^{2p}\rangle^\frac{1}{2p}\le C(d,\lambda,\delta,p,\rho)|\xi|
+\delta
\langle|\nabla\phi_T(0)+\xi|^{2p}\rangle^\frac{1}{2p}.
\]
By choosing $\delta=\frac{1}{2}$, we may absorb the second term on
the r.~h.~s.~into the l.~h.~s.~which completes the
proof.\qed
\subsection{Proof of Theorem~\ref{T2}}\label{SS:T2}
As a starting point, we apply SG in its $p$-version Lemma~\ref{LSGp}:
We apply this inequality with $\zeta=\phi_T(0)$. Since
$\expec{\phi_T(0)}=0$ (as can be seen by taking the expectation of
\eqref{eq:1} and using the stationarity of
$\expec{\cdot}$ and $\phi_T$), estimate \eqref{eq:SGp} yields
\begin{equation*}
\langle|\phi_T(0)|^{2p}\rangle\le \frac{1}{\rho}
\Big\langle\bigg(\sum_{x}\Big( \osc_{a(x)} \phi_T(0) \Big)^2\bigg)^p\Big\rangle.
\end{equation*}
The oscillation estimate~\eqref{eq:osc_phi} yields
\[
\langle|\phi_T(0)|^{2p}\rangle \le C(d,\lambda,\rho) \Big\langle \bigg( \sum_x |\nabla G_T(0,x)|^2 |\nabla\phi_T(x)+ \xi|^2 \bigg)^p \Big\rangle.
\]
With the help of H\"older's inequality we can introduce the weight
$\omega_q$ from Lemma~\ref{L2} and get for the r.~h.~s.
\begin{align*}
&\Big\langle \bigg( \sum_x |\nabla G_T(0,x)|^2
|\nabla\phi_T(x) + \xi|^2 \bigg)^p\Big\rangle\\
&\le \Big\langle \bigg(\sum_x |\nabla G_T(0,x)|^{2q} \omega_q(x)\bigg)^{p-1} \sum_x
|\nabla\phi_T(x)+ \xi|^{2p} \omega_q(x)^{-\frac{1}{q-1}} \Big\rangle\\
&\le \bigg(\sup_{a\in\Omega} \sum_x |\nabla G_T(0,x)|^{2q}\omega_q(x) \bigg)^{p-1} \sum_x \langle|\nabla\phi_T(x) + \xi|^{2p}\rangle \omega_q^{-\frac{1}{q-1}}(x).
\end{align*}
Due to the stationarity of $\nabla\phi_T+\xi$ and Lemma~\ref{L2} we obtain
\begin{equation*}
\langle |\phi_T(0)|^{2p} \rangle \le C(d,\lambda,p)
\begin{cases}
(\log T)^{p-1} \big\langle
|\nabla\phi_T+\xi)(0)|^{2p}\big\rangle \sum_x \omega_q(x)^{-\frac{1}{q-1}}&\text{for }d=2,\\
\big\langle
|\nabla\phi_T+\xi)(0)|^{2p}\big\rangle \sum_x \omega_q(x)^{-\frac{1}{q-1}}&\text{for }d>2.
\end{cases}
\end{equation*}
To conclude in the case of $d=2$, we simply insert \eqref{def_weight}
to bound (for $T\geq 2$)
\begin{align*}
\sum_x \omega_q(x)^{-\frac{1}{q-1}} &\le C(p) \Bigg(\sum_{|x|\le\sqrt{T}} (|x|+1)^{2} +
\sum_{|x|>\sqrt{T}} T(|x|+1)^{-4} \Bigg)\\
& \le C(p) \Big( \log T + \frac{1}{\sqrt{T}} \Big) \le C(p) \log T.
\end{align*}
If $d>2$, we find that
\[
\sum_x \omega_q(x)^{-\frac{1}{q-1}} = \sum_x (|x|+1)^{-2d} \le C(d),
\]
which finishes the proof.
\qed
\section{A weighted Calder\'{o}n-Zygmund estimate}\label{S:CZ}
In this section we present a discrete Calder\'{o}n-Zygmund
estimate on $\ell^p$-spaces with Muckenhoupt weights, which we used in
Step~2b of the proof of estimate~\eqref{eq:L2} in Lemma~\ref{L2} in
the case $d=2$, see \eqref{eq:4}. Although we require the estimate in this paper only in dimension $d=2$, we present it here for any dimension $d\ge
2$ since it may be of independent interest. The proof closely follows~\cite[Lemma~28]{GNO1prep}; the difference lies in the inclusion of weighted spaces which requires a bit more effort.
\begin{proposition}\label{prop:weighted-dics-cz}
Let $T>0$, let $g:\mathbb{Z}^d\to\mathbb{R}^d$ be a compactly supported function and let $u\in\ell^2(\mathbb{Z}^d)$ be the unique solution to
\begin{equation}\label{eq:cz-1}
{\frac{1}{T}} u+\nabla^*\nabla u=\nabla^*g\quad\text{on }\mathbb{Z}^d.
\end{equation}
Then for all $1<p<\infty$ and all $0\le \gamma < \min\{d(p-1),1/2\}$ we
have
\[
\sum_{x\in\mathbb{Z}^d}|\nabla u(x)|^p(|x|+1)^\gamma\le C(d,p,\gamma) \sum_{x\in\mathbb{Z}^d}|g(x)|^p(|x|+1)^\gamma.
\]
\end{proposition}
This proposition is a discrete version of the well-known
\emph{continuum Calder\'{o}n-Zygmund estimate} with
Muckenhoupt weight:
\begin{proposition}[see \cite{Stein-70}]\label{prop:weighted-cont-cz}
Let $T>0$, let $g:\mathbb{R}^d\to\mathbb{R}^d$ be smooth and compactly supported, and
let $u:\mathbb{R}^d\to\mathbb{R}$ be the unique smooth and decaying solution to
\[
{\frac{1}{T}} u - \Delta u= -\nabla \cdot g\quad\text{on }\mathbb{R}^d.
\]
Then for all $1<p<\infty$ and all $-d<\gamma<d(p-1)$ we have that
\[
\int_{\mathbb{R}^d} |\nabla u(x)|^p|x|^\gamma \;dx \le C(d,p,\gamma) \int_{\mathbb{R}^d} |g(x)|^p|x|^\gamma \;dx.
\]
\end{proposition}
The rest of this section is devoted to the proof of Proposition~\ref{prop:weighted-dics-cz}. To simplify the upcoming argument, fix for the remainder of this
section two indices $j,\ell\in\{1,\dots,d\}$. By linearity it
suffices to consider instead of \eqref{eq:cz-1} the equation
\begin{equation}\label{eq:cz-2}
{\frac{1}{T}} u+\nabla^*\nabla u=\nabla^*_\ell g\quad\text{on }\mathbb{Z}^d
\end{equation}
for scalar $g$, and then to prove
\begin{equation}\label{eq:disc-weighted-cz}
\sum_{x\in\cap\mathbb{Z}^d}|\nabla_j u(x)|^p(1+|x|)^\gamma\le C(d,p,\gamma) \sum_{x\in\cap\mathbb{Z}^d}|g(x)|^p(1+|x|)^\gamma.
\end{equation}
The discrete estimate \eqref{eq:disc-weighted-cz} will be obtained from
Proposition~\ref{prop:weighted-cont-cz} by a perturbation argument.
More precisely, we compare the discrete equation \eqref{eq:cz-2}
and its continuum version in Fourier space. We denote the Fourier
transform on $\mathbb{R}^d$ by
\[
(\mathcal{F} g)(\xi)
=
(2\pi)^{-d/2}\int_{\mathbb{R}^d} g(x)e^{-i\xi\cdot x}\ dx,\quad \xi\in\mathbb{R}^d,
\]
and for functions defined on the discrete lattice $\mathbb{Z}^d$ we define the \emph{discrete Fourier transform} as
\[
(\mathcal{F}_{dis}g)(\xi)
=
(2\pi)^{-d/2}\sum_{x\in\mathbb{Z}^d}g(x)e^{-i\xi\cdot x},\quad \xi\in\mathbb{R}^d.
\]
Note that $\mathcal{F}_{dis}F$ is $(-\pi,\pi)^d$-periodic and that we have the inversion formula
\begin{equation}\label{eq:Finv}
(\mathcal{F}^{-1}(\chi\mathcal{F}_{dis}g))(x)=g(x)\qquad\text{for all }x\in\mathbb{Z}^d,
\end{equation}
where $\chi$ denotes the indicator function of the \emph{Brillouin zone}
$(-\pi,\pi)^d$ {which is the unit cell of the Fourier transform on a lattice}.
The Fourier multipliers corresponding to \eqref{eq:cz-2} and its continuum
version are given by
\begin{align*}
\mathfrak{M}_{T}^{cont}(\xi)
=
\frac{\xi_j\xi_\ell}{{\frac{1}{T}}+|\xi|^2},\qquad\qquad \mathfrak{M}_{T}(\xi)
=
\frac{(e^{-i\xi_j}-1)(e^{i\xi_\ell}-1)}{{\frac{1}{T}}+\sum_{n=1}^d|e^{i\xi_n}-1|^2}.
\end{align*}
In particular,~\eqref{eq:cz-2} reads in Fourier space as
\begin{equation*}
\nabla_j u=\mathcal F^{-1}(\chi\mathfrak{M}_{T}\mathcal F_{dis}g)
\end{equation*}
and \eqref{eq:disc-weighted-cz} is equivalent to
\begin{equation}\label{eq:main-ineq}
\sum_{x\in\mathbb{Z}^d}|(\mathcal{F}^{-1}(\chi\ \mathfrak{M}_{T}\mathcal{F}_{dis}g))(x)|^p\,(|x|+1)^\gamma\le C(d,p,\gamma)\sum_{x\in\mathbb{Z}^d}|g(x)|^p\,(|x|+1)^\gamma.
\end{equation}
Finally, we state two auxiliary results that will be used in the subsequent
argument and which we prove at the end of this section. The first
result shows that the discrete and continuum norms for band-restricted
functions are equivalent. For brevity, we set
\begin{equation}\label{eq:norms}
\|g\|_{\ell^p_\gamma} = \bigg( \sum_{x\in\mathbb{Z}^d} |g(x)|^p(|x|+1)^\gamma \bigg)^{\frac{1}{p}} \quad\text{and}\quad
\|g\|_{L^p_\gamma} = \bigg( \int_{\mathbb{R}^d} |g(x)|^p|x|^\gamma \;dx \bigg)^{\frac{1}{p}}.
\end{equation}
Furthermore, we use the notation
$\|\cdot\|_{\ell^p_\omega}$ (resp. $\|\cdot\|_{L^p_\omega}$), if
$(|x|+1)^\gamma$ (resp. $|x|^\gamma$) is replaced by a general weight
function $\omega$.
\begin{lemma}[Equivalence of discrete and continuous norms]\label{lemma:equiv-norms}
For all $L$ large enough, the $\ell^p_\gamma$-norm and the $L^p_\gamma$-norm are equivalent for functions supported on $[-\frac{1}{L},\frac{1}{L}]^d$ in
Fourier space, i.e.\
\[
\frac{1}{C(d,p,\gamma)} \|g\|_{L^p_\gamma} \le \|g\|_{\ell^p_\gamma} \le C(d,p,\gamma) \|g\|_{L^p_\gamma}
\]
for all functions $g:=\mathcal{F}^{-1}(F):\mathbb{R}^d\to\mathbb{C}$ with $F$ supported on $[-\frac{1}{L},\frac{1}{L}]^d$ where we let without loss generality $\frac{1}{L} < \pi$.
\end{lemma}
The second result is a generalization of Young's convolution estimate
to weighted spaces.
\begin{lemma}[Young's convolution estimate on weighted spaces]\label{lemma:weighted-young}
Let $\omega:\mathbb{Z}^d\to\mathbb{R}$ satisfy
\begin{equation}\label{eq:23}
\omega(x)\geq 1\qquad\text{and}\qquad \omega(x)\le \omega(y)\omega(x-y)\qquad\text{for all }x,y\in\mathbb{Z}^d.
\end{equation}
Then the estimate
\begin{equation}\label{eq:weighted-young}
\|f \ast_{dis} g\|_{\ell_\omega^p}
\le
\|f\|_{\ell_\omega^q}\|g\|_{\ell_\omega^r},
\quad
1+\frac1p=\frac1q+\frac1r
\end{equation}
holds, where $\ast_{dis}$ denotes the discrete convolution on $\mathbb{Z}^d$:
\begin{equation*}
(f\ast_{dis}g)(x):=\sum_{y\in\mathbb{Z}^d}f(x-y)g(y).
\end{equation*}
The same estimate
holds in the continuum case (with $\ast_{dis}$ and
$\|\cdot\|_{\ell^p_\omega}$ replaced by the usual
convolution $\ast$ and $\|\cdot\|_{L_\omega^p}^p$, respectively) as long
as $\omega$ satisfies \eqref{eq:23} for all $x,y\in\mathbb{R}^d$.
\end{lemma}
Now, we are ready to start the proof of
Proposition~\ref{prop:weighted-dics-cz} in earnest.
\textbf{Step 1}. Fourier multipliers:
We claim that the invoked Fourier multipliers satisfy
\begin{equation}\label{eq:step1}
\mathfrak{M}_{T}-\mathfrak{M}_{T}^{cont}=\mathfrak{M}_{T}\mathfrak{M}^*_{T},
\end{equation}
where we define
\begin{equation}\label{eq:m*}
\mathfrak{M}^*_{T}:= 1 - \frac{1}{h(\xi_j) h(-\xi_\ell)} + \frac{|\xi|^2}{{\frac{1}{T}} + |\xi|^2} \ \sum_{k=1}^d \frac{|\xi_k|^2
(1-|h(\xi_k)|^2)}{|\xi|^2 h(\xi_j) h(-\xi_\ell)}
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}\label{eq:hz}
h(z):=\begin{cases}\frac{e^{iz}-1}{iz}&0\neq z\in\mathbb{C},\\1&z=0.\end{cases}
\end{equation}
Indeed, \eqref{eq:step1} is true for $\xi=0$. For $\xi\neq 0$ the definition of $h(z)$ yields that
\begin{align*}
\mathfrak{M}^*_{T} &= 1 - \frac{\mathfrak{M}^{cont}_{T}}{\mathfrak{M}_{T}}\\
&= 1 - \frac{\xi_j\xi_\ell}{(e^{i\xi_j}-1)(e^{-i\xi_\ell}-1)} - \frac{1}{{\frac{1}{T}}+|\xi|^2} \ \sum_{k=1}^d \frac{\xi_j\xi_\ell({\frac{1}{T}} + |\xi_k|^2 -
({\frac{1}{T}} +
|e^{i\xi_k}-1|^2))}{(e^{i\xi_j}-1)(e^{-i\xi_\ell}-1)}\\
&= 1 - \frac{1}{h(\xi_j) h(-\xi_\ell)} - \frac{|\xi|^2}{{\frac{1}{T}}+|\xi|^2} \ \sum_{k=1}^d \frac{{\frac{1}{T}} + |\xi_k|^2 - ({\frac{1}{T}} +
|\xi_k|^2|h(\xi_k)|^2)}{|\xi|^2 h(\xi_j) h(-\xi_\ell)}\\
&= 1 - \frac{1}{h(\xi_j) h(-\xi_\ell)} + \frac{|\xi|^2}{{\frac{1}{T}} + |\xi|^2} \ \sum_{k=1}^d \frac{|\xi_k|^2 (1-|h(\xi_k)|^2)}{|\xi|^2 h(\xi_j)
h(-\xi_\ell)}.
\end{align*}
In order to prove uniformity in $T$ (recall that the assertion of Proposition~\ref{prop:weighted-dics-cz} does not involve $T$), we may split $\mathfrak{M}_{T}^*$ into two terms independent of $T$ and a simple prefactor involving $\frac{1}{T}$:
\begin{equation}
\mathfrak{M}^*_{T}
=
\mathfrak{M}^*_1+\frac{|\xi|^2}{{\frac{1}{T}}+|\xi|^2} \mathfrak{M}^*_2,\label{eq:19}
\end{equation}
where we have set
\begin{align}\label{eq:M1a}
\mathfrak{M}^*_1
&=
1 - \frac{1}{h(\xi_j) h(-\xi_\ell)},\\
\mathfrak{M}^*_2
&=\label{eq:M2a}
\sum_{k=1}^d \frac{|\xi_k|^2 (1-|h(\xi_k)|^2)}{|\xi|^2 h(\xi_j) h(-\xi_\ell)}.
\end{align}
\medskip
\textbf{Step 2}. Reduction by separating low and high frequencies:
We take a smooth cutoff function $\eta_1$ that equals one in $[-1,1]^d$ with compact support in $(-\pi,\pi)^d$. We then rescale it to
\[
\eta_L(\xi)=\eta_1(L\xi).
\]
Using the triangle inequality and $\chi\eta_L=\eta_L$, we separate the expression on the left hand side of \eqref{eq:main-ineq} into low and high frequencies:
\[
\|\mathcal{F}^{-1}(\chi\ \mathfrak{M}_{T}\mathcal{F}_{dis}g)\|_{\ell^p_\gamma}
\le
\underbrace{\|\mathcal{F}^{-1}(\eta_L \mathfrak{M}_{T}\mathcal{F}_{dis}g)\|_{\ell^p_\gamma}}_{I}
+
\underbrace{\|\mathcal{F}^{-1}(\chi(1-\eta_L) \mathfrak{M}_{T}\mathcal{F}_{dis}g)\|_{\ell^p_\gamma}}_{II}.
\]
Term $I$ represents low frequencies (treated in Step 4) and term $II$
represents high frequencies (treated in Step 5). Hence, in order to
conclude, we only need to prove the following two statements:
\begin{enumerate}[(I)]
\item For all $L\geq L_0$ (where $L_0\geq 1$ only
depends on $\gamma,p$ and $d$) we have
\begin{equation}\label{eq:low}
\|\mathcal{F}^{-1}(\mathfrak{M}_{T} \eta_L\mathcal{F}_{dis}g)\|_{\ell^p_\gamma}
\le C(d,\gamma,p)\,\|g\|_{\ell^p_\gamma}.
\end{equation}
\item For all $L\geq 1$ we have
\begin{equation}\label{eq:high}
\|\mathcal{F}^{-1}(\chi(1-\eta_L) \mathfrak{M}_{T}\mathcal{F}_{dis}g)\|_{\ell^p_\gamma}
\le C(d,\gamma,p,L)
\|g\|_{\ell^p_\gamma}.
\end{equation}
\end{enumerate}
We note that while the constants a-priori depend on the cutoff functions $\eta_1$ and $\zeta_1$ (the latter
will be introduced in Step~3), both may be constructed in a canonical way only depending on $d$.
\medskip
\textbf{Step 3}. A bound on the correction $\mathfrak{M}^*_{T}$ for low frequencies:
This is perhaps the most important ingredient in the proof, as it is
here that we truly capture the difference between the discrete and
continuous settings. Recall that $\mathfrak{M}^*_1$ and $\mathfrak{M}^*_2$ are defined
in~\eqref{eq:M1a} and \eqref{eq:M2a}. In this step we prove that
\begin{equation}\label{eq:m*-estimate}
\|\mathcal{F}^{-1}(\mathfrak{M}^*_j\eta_L)\|_{\ell^1_\gamma}\le C(d,\gamma) L^{2\gamma-1},\quad j=1,2,
\end{equation}
for $L$ large enough.
We start the argument with the observation that $h(z)$, defined in \eqref{eq:hz}, and $h^{-1}(z)$ are both analytic in the disk $\{z\in\mathbb{C}:|z|<2\pi\}$ and we may write
\[
\frac{1}{h(z)} = 1 + z r_1(z) \quad\text{and}\quad h(z) = 1 + z r_2(z)
\]
with two functions $r_1, r_2$ which are analytic on the disk $\{z\in\mathbb{C}:|z|<2\pi\}$.
\textbf{The term $\mathfrak{M}_1^*$.}
This term becomes
\[
\mathfrak{M}^*_1= 1 - \frac{1}{h(\xi_j) h(-\xi_\ell)} = \xi_\ell r_1(-\xi_\ell) - \xi_j r_1(\xi_j) + \xi_j \xi_\ell r_1(\xi_j) r_1(-\xi_\ell),
\]
which is a linear combination of terms of the form $i\xi_m\phi(\xi)$, $m=1,\ldots,d$, with a (generic) analytic function $\phi$ on the disk $\{z\in\mathbb{C}:|z|<2\pi\}$.
\textbf{The term $\mathfrak{M}_2^*$.}
Denoting the real part of $z\in\mathbb{C}$ by $\mathrm{Re}(z)$, we compute that
\[
\mathfrak{M}^*_2= \sum_{k=1}^d \frac{|\xi_k|^2 (1-|h(\xi_k)|^2)}{|\xi|^2 h(\xi_j) h(-\xi_\ell)} = \sum_{k=1}^d \frac{|\xi_k|^2
\big(2\xi_k \mathrm{Re}(r_2(\xi_k)) + |\xi_k|^2 |r_2(\xi_k)|^2\big)}{|\xi|^2 h(\xi_j) h(-\xi_\ell)},
\]
which is a linear combination of terms of the form $\xi_m\frac{|\xi_n|^2}{|\xi|^2}\phi(\xi)$, $m,n=1,\ldots,d$, with a (generic) analytic function $\phi$ on the disk $\{z\in\mathbb{C}:|z|<2\pi\}$.
\medskip
Hence our problem reduces to showing that
\begin{equation}\label{eq:m*-est1}
\left\|\mathcal{F}^{-1} \left(i\xi_m\frac{|\xi_n|^2}{|\xi|^2}\phi(\xi)\eta_L\right) \right\|_{\ell^1_\gamma} \le C(d,\gamma,\phi) L^{2\gamma-1}
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}\label{eq:m*-est2}
\left\| \mathcal{F}^{-1} \left(i\xi_m \phi(\xi)\eta_L\right) \right\|_{\ell^1_\gamma} \le C(d,\gamma,\phi) L^{2\gamma-1}
\end{equation}
for any generic analytic function $\phi$ on the complex disc of radius
$2\pi$. For the argument consider the Schwartz functions
\begin{equation*}
K_L=\mathcal{F}^{-1}(\phi\eta_L)\qquad\text{and}\qquad \hat K_L = \mathcal{F}^{-1}(\phi({\textstyle \frac{\cdot}{L}})\eta_1),
\end{equation*}
and note that both are related through the scaling:
\[
K_L(x) = \frac{1}{L^d}\hat K_L({\textstyle \frac xL}).
\]
For what follows it is crucial to note that the family $\{\hat
K_L\}_{L\geq 1}$ is equibounded in the space of Schwartz space
functions, i.e.\ for all multi-indices $\alpha,\beta$ we have
\begin{equation}\label{eq:KL-equi}
\sup_x | x^\alpha \partial_x^\beta \hat{K}_L(x)| \le C(\phi,\alpha,\beta),
\end{equation}
{where $x^\alpha:=\prod_{i=1}^dx^{\alpha_i}_i$ and $\partial_x^\beta:=\prod_{i=1}^d\partial^{\beta_i}_{x_i}$.}
We now turn to the argument for \eqref{eq:m*-est1} and
\eqref{eq:m*-est2}. The latter is easily shown, in fact with a
slightly better decay rate of $L^{\gamma-1}$. Since $\gamma\geq 0$ and $L\geq1$, we have that
\begin{equation}\label{eq:weight_scale}
(L|y|+1)^\gamma = L^\gamma (|y|+L^{-1})^\gamma\le L^\gamma (|y|+1)^\gamma,
\end{equation}
and the definition of $K_L$ yields
\begin{align*}
\left\| \mathcal{F}^{-1} \left(i\xi_m \phi(\xi)\eta_L\right)
\right\|_{\ell^1_\gamma} &= \sum_{x\in\mathbb{Z}^d} |\partial_m K_L(x)|\
(|x|+1)^\gamma\\
&\le L^{\gamma-1}\left(L^{-d}\sum_{x\in \frac{1}{L}\mathbb{Z}^d} |\partial_m \hat{K}_L(x)|\ (|x|+1)^\gamma\right).
\end{align*}
Thanks to \eqref{eq:KL-equi} the term in the brackets on the
right-hand side is bounded by $C(d,\gamma,\phi)$ and
\eqref{eq:m*-est2} follows. To show~\eqref{eq:m*-est1}, we notice that
\[
\mathcal{F}^{-1}\Big({\frac{\xi_m}{|\xi|^2}}\Big) =
\frac{(2\pi)^{\frac{d}{2}}}{|S^{d-1}|}\frac{x_m}{|x|^d}\qquad\text{as
a tempered distribution on $\mathbb{R}^d$},
\]
where $|S^{d-1}|$ denotes the surface area of the $d-1$-dimensional unit sphere $S^{d-1}\subset \mathbb{R}^d$. Therefore standard properties of the Fourier transform yield
\begin{equation}\label{eq:sing}
\mathcal{F}^{-1} \left(i\xi_m\frac{\xi_n^2}{|\xi|^2}\phi(\xi)\eta_L\right) = \frac{(2\pi)^{\frac{d}{2}}}{|S^{d-1}|} \partial_n^2 \left(\frac{x_m}{|x|^d} \ast K_L\right).
\end{equation}
Next we introduce a spatial cutoff $\zeta_L$ (as opposed to the frequency cutoff $\eta_L$), defined as follows: first define a smooth cutoff function $\zeta_1$ for $\{x\in\mathbb{R}^d:|x|\le1\}$ in $\{x\in\mathbb{R}^d:|x|\le2\}$ and its rescaled version
\[
\zeta_L(x) = \zeta_1({\textstyle \frac xL}).
\]
By the triangle inequality and since the derivative in
\eqref{eq:sing} may fall on either term in the convolution, for
\eqref{eq:m*-est1} we only need to argue that
\begin{equation}\label{eq:m*-est22}
\sum_{x} \left| \left(\frac{\zeta_Lx_m}{|x|^d} \ast \partial_n^2K_L\right)(x) \right| (|x|+1)^\gamma \le C(d,\gamma,\phi) L^{2\gamma-1}
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}\label{eq:m*-est3}
\sum_{x}\left| \left( \partial_n^2 \frac{(1-\zeta_L)x_m}{|x|^d} \ast K_L \right)(x) \right| (|x|+1)^\gamma
\le C(d,\gamma,\phi) L^{2\gamma-1}.
\end{equation}
By definition of the (continuous) convolution, thanks to
\begin{equation*}
(|x|+1)^\gamma\leq (|x-y|+1)^\gamma(|y|+1)^\gamma\qquad\text{for all }x,y\in\mathbb{Z}^d,\ \gamma\geq0,
\end{equation*}
by a change of variables and~\eqref{eq:weight_scale}, we obtain that
\begin{align}\nonumber
\text{[l.h.s. of \eqref{eq:m*-est22}]}=\,&\sum_{x\in\mathbb{Z}^d} \bigg| \int_{\mathbb{R}^d} \frac{\zeta_L(y) y_m}{|y|^d} \partial_n^2 K_L(x-y) \;dy \bigg| (|x|+1)^\gamma\\
\le\,& \sum_{x\in\mathbb{Z}^d} \int_{\mathbb{R}^d} \Big| \frac{\zeta_L(y) y_m}{|y|^d} \partial_n^2 K_L(x-y) \Big| (|x-y|+1)^\gamma(|y|+1)^\gamma\;dy\nonumber\\
=\,& \sum_{x\in\frac1L\mathbb{Z}^d} \int_{\mathbb{R}^d} \Big| L \frac{\zeta_1(y) y_m}{|y|^d} L^{-2-d} \partial_n^2 \hat{K}_L(x-y) \Big| (L|x-y|+1)^\gamma(L|y|+1)^\gamma\;dy.\label{eq:step3.1}
\end{align}
Hence~\eqref{eq:weight_scale} yields
\begin{align*}
&\text{[l.h.s. of \eqref{eq:m*-est22}]}\\
&\leq\,L^{2\gamma-1}L^{-d}\sum_{x\in\frac1L\mathbb{Z}^d} \int_{\mathbb{R}^d} \Big| \frac{\zeta_1(y) y_m (|y|+1)^\gamma}{|y|^d} \Big| (|x-y|+1)^\gamma
\big| \partial_n^2 \hat{K}_L(x-y) \big| \;dy\\
&\leq\,L^{2\gamma-1}\int_{|y|\leq 2} |y|^{1-d}(|y|+1)^\gamma\Big(L^{-d}\sum_{x\in\frac1L\mathbb{Z}^d} (|x-y|+1)^\gamma
\big| \partial_n^2 \hat{K}_L(x-y) \big|\Big) \;dy.
\end{align*}
The Schwartz property~\eqref{eq:KL-equi} yields
\begin{equation*}
\Big(L^{-d}\sum_{x\in\frac1L\mathbb{Z}^d} (|x-y|+1)^\gamma
\big| \partial_n^2 \hat{K}_L(x-y) \big|\Big)\leq C(d,\gamma,\phi),
\end{equation*}
and thus
\begin{align*}
\text{[l.h.s. of \eqref{eq:m*-est22}]}\,\leq\,
C(\phi)L^{2\gamma-1} \int_{|y|\leq 2}
|y|^{1-d}(|y|+1)^\gamma\;dy\leq C(d,\gamma,\phi)\,L^{2\gamma-1},
\end{align*}
which completes the argument for \eqref{eq:m*-est22}.
The second term \eqref{eq:m*-est3} is bounded similarly: by the same triangle inequality and change of variables that allowed us to arrive
at \eqref{eq:step3.1}, we obtain a bound on the l.~h.~s.\ of \eqref{eq:m*-est3} by
\[
L^{-1-d}\sum_{x\in\frac1L\mathbb{Z}^d} \int_{\mathbb{R}^d} \Big| \partial_n^2 \frac{(1-\zeta_1(x-y)) (x_m-y_m)}{|x-y|^d} \Big| (L|x-y|+1)^\gamma
|\hat{K}_L(y)|
(L|y|+1)^\gamma \;dy.
\]
We insert \eqref{eq:weight_scale} again to obtain a bound by
\[
L^{2\gamma-1} \frac{1}{L^d}\sum_{x\in\frac1L\mathbb{Z}^d} \int_{\mathbb{R}^d} \Big| \partial_n^2 \frac{(1-\zeta_1(x-y)) (x_m-y_m)}{|x-y|^d} \Big|
(|x-y|+1)^\gamma |\hat{K}_L(y)| (|y|+1)^\gamma \;dy.
\]
This time, we use that $\left|\partial_n^2\Big((1-\zeta_1(x-y)) (x_m-y_m)|x-y|^{-d}\Big)\right| \, (|x-y|+1)^\gamma$ is integrable for large $x-y$ and
vanishes for $|x-y| \le 1$, to obtain that
\[
\frac{1}{L^d}\sum_{x\in\frac1L\mathbb{Z}^d} \Big| \partial_n^2 \frac{(1-\zeta_1(x-y)) (x_m-y_m)}{|x-y|^d} \Big| (|x-y|+1)^\gamma \le C(d,\gamma,\phi).
\]
Consequently, it remains to bound
\[
L^{2\gamma-1} \int_{\mathbb{R}^d} |\hat{K}_L(y)| (|y|+1)^\gamma \;dy,
\]
which, thanks to \eqref{eq:KL-equi}, is clearly bounded by $C(d,\gamma,\phi)L^{2\gamma-1}$.
\medskip
\textbf{Step 4}. Low frequencies -- proof of \eqref{eq:low}:
We assume that $L$ is large enough, so that we can apply
Lemma~\ref{lemma:equiv-norms} to deduce the equivalence of the norm
$\ell^p_\gamma$ and $L^p_\gamma$.
For brevity we set $F= \eta_L\mathcal{F}_{dis}g$.
Equation~\eqref{eq:step1} yields
\begin{equation}\label{eq:disc-cont}
\| \mathcal{F}^{-1}(\mathfrak{M}_{T} F) \|_{\ell^p_\gamma}
\le
\| \mathcal{F}^{-1}(\mathfrak{M}_{T}^{cont} F) \|_{\ell^p_\gamma}
+
\| \mathcal{F}^{-1}(\mathfrak{M}_{T}\mathfrak{M}^*_{T} F) \|_{\ell^p_\gamma}.
\end{equation}
With help of the continuum Calder\`on-Zygmund estimate, cf.~Proposition~\ref{prop:weighted-cont-cz}, and the equivalence of
discrete and continuous norms, see Lemma~\ref{lemma:equiv-norms}, we
get for the first term:
\[
\|\mathcal{F}^{-1}(\mathfrak{M}_{T}^{cont}F)\|_{L^p_\gamma}\leq C
\|g\|_{\ell^p_\gamma}.
\]
Hence, we only need to estimate
the term $\mathcal{F}^{-1}(\mathfrak{M}_{T}\mathfrak{M}^*_{T} F)$. First we notice that by definition of $F$ and $\eta_{L}$, we have that $F=\eta_{L/2}F$.
Since the Fourier transform turns multiplication into convolution, we have
\begin{align} \label{eq:M_frak-split}
&\mathcal{F}^{-1}(\mathfrak{M}_{T}\mathfrak{M}_{T}^*F)
\stackrel{\eqref{eq:19}}{=}
\mathcal{F}^{-1} \left(\mathfrak{M}_{T} \left(\mathfrak{M}_1^* + \frac{|\xi|^2}{{\frac{1}{T}}+|\xi|^2} \mathfrak{M}^*_2 \right) \eta_{\frac{L}{2}} F \right)\\\nonumber
&=
(2\pi)^{d/2} \left(\mathcal{F}^{-1} \left( \mathfrak{M}_1^*\eta_{\frac{L}{2}} \right) \ast_{dis} \mathcal{F}^{-1} (\mathfrak{M}_{T} F) + \mathcal{F}^{-1} \left( \mathfrak{M}_2^* \eta_{\frac{L}{2}} \right) \ast_{dis} \mathcal{F}^{-1}\left( \frac{|\xi|^2}{{\frac{1}{T}}+|\xi|^2} \mathfrak{M}_{T} F \right) \right).
\end{align}
We estimate the right-hand side using the Young's inequality of Lemma \ref{lemma:weighted-young}.
For the first term, we get
\[
\|\mathcal{F}^{-1}(\mathfrak{M}_1^*\eta_{\frac{L}{2}})\ast_{dis}\mathcal{F}^{-1}(\mathfrak{M}_{T} F)\|_{\ell^p_\gamma}
\le
\|\mathcal{F}^{-1}(\mathfrak{M}_1^*\eta_{\frac{L}{2}})\|_{\ell_\gamma^1}\|\mathcal{F}^{-1}(\mathfrak{M}_{T} F)\|_{\ell_\gamma^p},
\]
and likewise for the second term:
\[
\left\| \mathcal{F}^{-1}\left( \mathfrak{M}_2^* \eta_{\frac{L}{2}} \right) \ast_{dis} \mathcal{F}^{-1}\left( \frac{|\xi|^2}{{\frac{1}{T}}+|\xi|^2} \mathfrak{M}_{T} F\right)
\right\|_{\ell^p_\gamma}
\le \left\| \mathcal{F}^{-1}\left( \mathfrak{M}_2^*
\eta_{\frac{L}{2}} \right) \right\|_{\ell^1_\gamma} \left\| \mathcal{F}^{-1}\left( \frac{|\xi|^2}{{\frac{1}{T}}+|\xi|^2} \mathfrak{M}_{T}
F\right)\right\|_{\ell^p_\gamma}.
\]
In both cases, the first term is bounded by~\eqref{eq:m*-estimate}, see Step 3. Hence, we have shown
\begin{align}\label{eq:M1}
\left\|\mathcal{F}^{-1}\left(\mathfrak{M}_1^*\eta_{\frac{L}{2}} \right) \ast_{dis} \mathcal{F}^{-1}\left(\mathfrak{M}_{T} F\right)\right\|_{\ell^p_\gamma} &\le
C L^{2\gamma-1} \left\|\mathcal{F}^{-1}\left(\mathfrak{M}_{T} F\right)\right\|_{\ell^p_\gamma},\\
\left\| \mathcal{F}^{-1}\left( \mathfrak{M}_2^* \eta_{\frac{L}{2}} \right) \ast_{dis} \mathcal{F}^{-1}\left(\frac{|\xi|^2}{{\frac{1}{T}}+|\xi|^2} \mathfrak{M}_{T} F\right)
\right\|_{\ell^p_\gamma} &\le C L^{2\gamma-1}
\left\|
\mathcal{F}^{-1}\left( \frac{|\xi|^2}{{\frac{1}{T}}+|\xi|^2} \mathfrak{M}_{T} F\right)\right\|_{\ell^p_\gamma}.\label{eq:M2}
\end{align}
We may use the equivalence of norms for band-restricted functions, cf.~Lemma~\ref{lemma:equiv-norms}, and then write the last term as another convolution to obtain that
\begin{align*}
\left\| \mathcal{F}^{-1}\left( \frac{|\xi|^2}{{\frac{1}{T}}+|\xi|^2} \mathfrak{M}_{T} F\right)\right\|_{\ell^p_\gamma} &\le C \left\|
\mathcal{F}^{-1}\left( \frac{|\xi|^2}{{\frac{1}{T}}+|\xi|^2} \right) \ast \mathcal{F}^{-1}\left( \mathfrak{M}_{T} F\right)\right\|_{L^p_\gamma}\\
&\le C \left\| \mathcal{F}^{-1}\left(\mathfrak{M}_{T} F\right)\right\|_{L^p_\gamma},
\end{align*}
where for the second inequality we used the continuum Calder\'on-Zygmund estimate with Muckenhoupt weights for the Fourier-multiplier $|\xi|^2/({\frac{1}{T}}+|\xi|^2)$ which follows from Proposition \ref{prop:weighted-cont-cz}.
Combining \eqref{eq:M_frak-split}, \eqref{eq:M1} and \eqref{eq:M2}
and using the equivalence of norms yet again, we arrive at
\begin{align*}
\|\mathcal{F}^{-1}(\mathfrak{M}_{T}\mathfrak{M}_{T}^*F)\|_{\ell^p_\gamma}
&\le C
L^{2\gamma-1}\|\mathcal{F}^{-1}(\mathfrak{M}_{T} F)\|_{L_\gamma^p}\\ &\le C
L^{2\gamma-1}\|\mathcal{F}^{-1}(\mathfrak{M}_{T} F)\|_{\ell_\gamma^p}.
\end{align*}
Hence, for $L$ sufficiently large the right-hand side may be absorbed
into the left-hand side of \eqref{eq:disc-cont}, and \eqref{eq:low} follows.
\medskip
\textbf{Step 5}. High frequencies -- proof of~\eqref{eq:high}: By the weighted convolution estimate of Lemma~\ref{lemma:weighted-young}, we have that
\begin{align*}
\|\mathcal F^{-1}(\mathfrak{M}_{T}(1-\eta_L)\chi\mathcal F_{dis}
g)\|_{\ell^p_\gamma}
&=
\|\mathcal F^{-1}(\mathfrak{M}_{T}(1-\eta_L)\chi)\ast_{dist}\mathcal F^{-1}(\chi\mathcal F_{dis}
g)\|_{\ell^p_\gamma}\\
&\le
\|\mathcal F^{-1}(\mathfrak{M}_{T}(1-\eta_L)\chi)\|_{\ell^1_\gamma}\|\mathcal F^{-1}(\chi\mathcal F_{dis}
g)\|_{\ell^p_\gamma}.
\end{align*}
where we haved used that $\chi^2 = \chi$ by definition. {By the Fourier inversion formula~\eqref{eq:Finv}, the right-hand side equals $\|\mathcal F^{-1}(\mathfrak{M}_{T}(1-\eta_L)\chi)\|_{\ell^1_\gamma}\|g\|_{\ell^p_\gamma}$ whereof we just need to estimate the first term. We have that}
\begin{align*}
\|\mathcal F^{-1}(\mathfrak{M}_{T}(1-\eta_L)\chi)\|_{\ell^1_\gamma}
&= \sum_{x\in\mathbb{Z}^d}|\mathcal F^{-1}(\mathfrak{M}_{T}(1-\eta_L)\chi)(x)|(1+|x|)^\gamma\\
&=
\sum_{x\in\mathbb{Z}^d}|\mathcal
F^{-1}(\mathfrak{M}_{T}(1-\eta_L)\chi)(x)|(1+|x|)^{\gamma+2d}(1+|x|)^{-2d}\\
&\le C\sup_{x\in\mathbb{Z}^d}\big|\mathcal
F^{-1}(\mathfrak{M}_{T}(1-\eta_L)\chi)(x)(1+|x|)^{\gamma+2d}\big|.
\end{align*}
We rewrite this result using the definition of the Fourier transform
and integration by parts. Let $x\in\mathbb{Z}^d$ and let $\alpha\in\mathbb{N}^d$ be an
arbitrary multi-index such that $|\alpha| \ge \gamma + 2d$. {Then we have that:}
\begin{align*}
x^{2\alpha}\mathcal
F^{-1}(\mathfrak{M}_{T}(1-\eta_L)\chi)(x)&=(2\pi)^{-d}\int_{(-\pi,\pi)^d}\mathfrak{M}_{T}(\xi)(1-\eta_L)(\xi)x^{2\alpha}e^{i\xi\cdot
x}\,d\xi\\
&=(2\pi)^{-d}\int_{(-\pi,\pi)^d}\mathfrak{M}_{T}(\xi)(1-\eta_L)(\xi)i^{2|\alpha|}\partial_\xi^{2\alpha}e^{i\xi\cdot
x}\,d\xi\\
&=(2\pi)^{-d}\int_{(-\pi,\pi)^d}i^{2|\alpha|}\partial_\xi^{2\alpha}\big(\mathfrak{M}_{T}(1-\eta_L)\big)(\xi)e^{i\xi\cdot
x}\,d\xi
\end{align*}
For the integration by parts when passing from the second to third lines of the last identity, we used that $\mathfrak{M}_{T}(\xi)(1-\eta_L(\xi))$ and $\exp(i\xi\cdot x)$ are
$(-\pi,\pi)^d$-periodic function of $\xi$. It remains to argue that the latter integral is bounded by a constant $C(L,\alpha)$.
The main difficulty lies in checking that the estimate is uniform in
$T\geq 1$.
Since the integral over the Brillouin zone is finite, it suffices to show that
\begin{equation}\label{eq:CZ3}
\sup_{\xi\in(-\pi,\pi)^d\setminus (-\frac{1}{L},\frac{1}{L})^d}|\partial_\xi^{\alpha}\mathfrak{M}_{T}(\xi)|\le C(L,\alpha)
\end{equation}
for all multi-indices $\alpha\in\mathbb{N}^d$. Note that
\begin{equation*}
\mathfrak{M}_{T}(\xi) = \frac{\sum_{j=1}^d |\exp(i\xi_j)-1|^2}{{\frac{1}{T}} + \sum_{j=1}^d |\exp(i\xi_j)-1|^2} \mathfrak{M}_0(\xi)
\end{equation*}
and $\mathfrak{M}_0$ is smooth away from the origin so that
\[
\sup_{\xi\in(-\pi,\pi)^d\setminus (-\frac{1}{L},\frac{1}{L})^d} |\partial_\xi^{\alpha} \mathfrak{M}_0(\xi)| \le C(L,\alpha)
\]
for all multi-indices $\alpha\in\mathbb{N}^d$. Furthermore, we have that
\[
\sup_{\xi\in(-\pi,\pi)^d\setminus (-\frac{1}{L},\frac{1}{L})^d} \frac{1}{{\frac{1}{T}}+\sum_{j=1}^d|\exp(i\xi_j)-1|^2} \le C(d,L)
\]
and
\[
\partial_\xi^\alpha\left(\frac{\sum_{j=1}^d|\exp(i\xi_j)-1|^2}{{\frac{1}{T}}+\sum_{j=1}^d|\exp(i\xi_j)-1|^2}\right) =
\frac{\phi(\xi)}{({\frac{1}{T}}+\sum_{j=1}^d|\exp(i\xi_j)-1|^2)^k}
\]
for some (generic) smooth function $\phi$ and some $k\ge 0$, both depending only on the multi-index $\alpha$ and $d$. Hence we have that
\[
\sup_{\xi\in(-\pi,\pi)^d\setminus (-\frac{1}{L},\frac{1}{L})^d}
\bigg| \partial_\xi^{\alpha}\left(\frac{\sum_{j=1}^d|\exp(i\xi_j)-1|^2}{{\frac{1}{T}}+\sum_{j=1}^d|\exp(i\xi_j)-1|^2}\right) \bigg| \le C(L,\alpha).
\]
Since $\alpha$ was arbitrary, estimate \eqref{eq:CZ3} follows from the Leibniz rule.
\qed
\bigskip
\begin{proof}[Proof of Lemma \ref{lemma:weighted-young}]
First we write $|f(x-y)g(y)|$ as
\[
|f(x-y)g(y)|
=
\underbrace{|f(x-y)|^{\frac qp}|g(y)|^{\frac rp}}_{I}
\underbrace{|f(x-y)|^{1-\frac qp}}_{II}\underbrace{|g(y)|^{1-\frac rp}}_{III}
\]
and apply a H\"older inequality to the terms $I,II$ and $III$ with exponents $p,\frac{pq}{p-q},\frac{pr}{p-r}$ to obtain:
\[
\sum_{y\in\mathbb{Z}^d} f(x-y)g(y)
\le
\bigg(\sum_{y\in\mathbb{Z}^d}|f(x-y)|^q|g(y)|^r\bigg)^{\frac 1p}
\bigg(\sum_{y\in\mathbb{Z}^d}|f(x-y)|^q\bigg)^{\frac 1q-\frac 1p}
\bigg(\sum_{y\in\mathbb{Z}^d}|g(y)|^r\bigg)^{\frac 1r-\frac 1p}.
\]
Therefore
\begin{align*}
\sum_{x\in\mathbb{Z}^d} \Big|\sum_{y\in\mathbb{Z}^d} f(x-y)g(y)\Big|^pw(x)
&\le
\bigg(\sum_{x,y\in\mathbb{Z}^d}|f(x-y)|^q|g(y)|^rw(x)\bigg)\|f\|_{\ell^q}^{p-q}\|g\|_{\ell^r}^{p-r}\\
&\le
\left(\|f\|^q_{\ell_w^q}\|g\|_{\ell_w^r}^r\right)\|f\|_{\ell^q_w}^{p-q} \|g\|_{\ell^r_w}^{p-r}\\
&=
\|f\|_{\ell_w\gamma^q}^p\|g\|_{\ell_w^r}^p,
\end{align*}
where in the second inequality we used the assumption \eqref{eq:23}.
\end{proof}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Lemma \ref{lemma:equiv-norms}]
For convenience we set $Q:=(-\tfrac{1}{2},\tfrac{1}{2})^d$ and without
loss of generality we assume that $L\geq 1$.
\textbf{Step 1.} We claim that for all
$z\in\mathbb{Z}^d$ and $1\leq p<\infty$ we have
\begin{align}\label{eq:22}
\sup_{x\in (z+Q)}|g(x)|&\leq
C(d,p)\|g\|_{L^p(z+Q)},\\
\label{eq:24}
\|g\|_{L^p(z+Q)}&\leq C(d,p)\left(|g(z)|+L^{-1}\|g\|_{L^p(z+Q)}\right).
\end{align}
By translation invariance it suffices to consider $z=0$. Thanks to the
Sobolev embedding of $W^{n,p}(Q)$ into $L^\infty(Q)$ for $n>d$, we get
\begin{equation}\label{eq:20}
\sup_{x\in Q}|g(x)|\leq
C(d,n,p)\|g\|_{L^p(Q)}+\|\nabla^ng\|_{L^p(Q)}.
\end{equation}
We argue that the band restriction implies for all $n\geq 1$ that
\begin{equation}\label{eq:21}
\|\nabla^ng\|_{L^p(Q)}\leq C(d,n)L^{-n}\|g\|_{L^p(Q)},
\end{equation}
which combined with \eqref{eq:20} and $L\geq 1$ yields \eqref{eq:22}.
Estimate \eqref{eq:21} can be seen as follows: Recall that $g=\mathcal
F^{-1}F$ where $F$ is supported in $[-\tfrac{1}{L},\tfrac{1}{L}]$. Let
$\eta_1$ denote a smooth cutoff function that is one in $[-1,1]^d$ and
compactly supported in $(-2,2)^d$, say. Let $\phi_1:=\mathcal F^{-1}\eta_1$ and note that
for all $L>0$ we have
\[
(\mathcal F^{-1}\eta_L)(x)=\phi_L\qquad\text{where
}\eta_L(\xi):=\eta_1(L\xi)\text{ and }
\phi_L(x):=L^{-d}\phi_1(\tfrac{x}{L}).
\]
In view of the band restriction of $F$ and its definition we have $g={\mathcal F}^{-1}F={\mathcal F}^{-1}(\eta_L F)
=(2\pi)^\frac{d}{2}{\mathcal F}^{-1}\eta_L*{\mathcal F}^{-1}F=\phi_L*g$.
We thus obtain the representation $\nabla^ng=\nabla^n(\phi_L*g)=(\nabla^n\phi_L)*g$ with $\nabla^n\phi_L(x)
=L^{-n}\frac{1}{L^d}\nabla^n\phi_1(\frac{x}{L})$, which yields the inequality
\begin{equation}\nonumber
\|\nabla^ng\|_{L^p}\le\|\nabla^n\phi_L\|_{L^1}\|g\|_{L^p}=L^{-n}\|\nabla^n\phi_1\|_{L^1}\|g\|_{L^p},
\end{equation}
and thus the estimate \eqref{eq:21}, since $\phi_1$ is a Schwartz
function that can be chosen only depending on $d$.
{Estimate \eqref{eq:24} may be seen as follows: A simple application of the mean-value theorem yields
\[
\left(\int_{Q}|g(x)-g(0)|^p\,dx\right)^{\frac{1}{p}} \leq C(d,p)\sup_{x\in Q}|\nabla g(x)|.
\]
Then the Sobolev embedding~\eqref{eq:20} with $g$ replaced by $\nabla g$ yields
\[
\left(\int_{Q}|g(x)-g(0)|^p\,dx\right)^{\frac{1}{p}} \leq C(d,n,p)\|\nabla g\|_{L^p(Q)}+\|\nabla^{n+1}g\|_{L^p(Q)}.
\]
Finally, we insert estimate~\eqref{eq:21} (with $n$ replaced by $n+1$) to obtain that
\[
\left(\int_{Q}|g(x)-g(0)|^p\,dx\right)^{\frac{1}{p}} \leq C(d,n,p)(L^{-1}+L^{-(n+1)})\|g\|_{L^p(Q)},
\]
which easily turns into the desired estimate~\eqref{eq:24} at $z=0$.}
\medskip
\textbf{Step 2.} We claim that there exists $L_0=L_0(d,p)$ such that for all $L\geq L_0$ and $z\in\mathbb{Z}^d$ we have
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:26}
\frac{1}{C(d,p,\gamma)}|g(z)|^p(|z|+1)^\gamma\leq\int_{z+Q}|g(x)|^p(|x|+1)^\gamma\,dx\leq C(d,p,\gamma)|g(z)|^p(|z|+1)^\gamma.
\end{equation}
For the argument first note that for all $z\in\mathbb{Z}^d$ and $x\in z+Q$ we have
\begin{equation}\label{eq:25}
(|z|+1)^\gamma\leq C(d,\gamma)(|x|+1)^\gamma\qquad\text{and}\qquad
(|x|+1)^\gamma\leq C(d,\gamma)(|z|+1)^\gamma.
\end{equation}
{Indeed, since $\max_{y\in Q}|y|+1 = \frac{1}{2}\sqrt{d}+1$ we have that
\[
(|z|+1)^\gamma\leq (|x|+|z-x|+1)^\gamma\leq (|x|+{\textstyle\frac{1}{2}\sqrt{d}+1})^\gamma\leq ({\textstyle\frac{1}{2}\sqrt{d}+1})^\gamma(|x|+1)^\gamma,
\]
and
\[
(|x|+1)^\gamma\leq (|z|+|x-z|+1)^\gamma\leq ({\textstyle\frac{1}{2}\sqrt{d}+1})^\gamma(|z|+1)^\gamma.
\]
Hence the result~\eqref{eq:22} of Step~1 yields
\[
|g(z)|^p(|z|+1)^\gamma
\le\left(\sup_{x\in
z+Q}|g(x)|\right)^p(|z|+1)^\gamma
\le C(d,p)\int_{z+Q}|g(x)|^p(|z|+1)^\gamma\,dx
\]
Estimate~\eqref{eq:25} thus yields the desired first inequality
\[
|g(z)|^p(|z|+1)^\gamma
\le C(d,p,\gamma)\int_{z+Q}|g(x)|^p(|x|+1)^\gamma\,dx.
\]
For the second estimate in~\eqref{eq:26}, we note that, by absorption,~\eqref{eq:24} implies existence of $L_0=L_0(d,p)$ such that
\[
\int_{z+Q}|g(x)|^p\,dx\leq C(d,p)|g(z)|^p
\]
for all $L\geq L_0$.
Hence another application of~\eqref{eq:25} yields as desired
\begin{equation*}
\int_{z+Q}|g(x)|^p(|x|+1)^\gamma\,dx
\leq C(d,\gamma)\int_{z+Q}|g(x)|^p\,dx\ (|z|+1)^\gamma
\leq C(d,p,\gamma)|g(z)|^p(|z|+1)^\gamma
\end{equation*}
for all $L\geq L_0$.}
\medskip
\textbf{Step 3.} Conclusion:
The estimate $\|g\|_{L^p_\gamma}^p\leq
C(d,p,\gamma)\|g\|_{\ell^p_\gamma}^p$ follows from the second part of \eqref{eq:26} by
summation in $z\in\mathbb{Z}^d$. For the opposite inequality, estimate~\eqref{eq:22} and H\"older's inequality yield
\[
\frac{1}{C(d,q)}|g(0)|^p \le \left(\int_Q|g|^q\,dx\right)^{\frac{p}{q}}
\leq\left(\int_Q|g|^p|x|^\gamma\,dx\right)\left(\int_Q|x|^{-\frac{q}{p-q}\gamma}\,dx\right)^{\frac{p-q}{p}}
\]
for all $1\leq q<p$.
Thanks to the assumption $0\leq \gamma<d(p-1)$, we can find $1\leq q<p$
such that the second integral on the right-hand side is finite, so that
\begin{equation}\label{eq:27}
|g(0)|^p\leq C(d,p,\gamma)\int_Q|g(x)|^p|x|^\gamma\,dx.
\end{equation}
(Note that this is the only place where the upper bound on $\gamma$ is
required.) We conclude by~\eqref{eq:27} and~\eqref{eq:26} that
\begin{align*}
\|g\|^p_{\ell^p_\gamma}&=\sum_{z\in\mathbb{Z}^d}|g(z)|(|z|+1)^\gamma=|g(0)|+\sum_{z\in\mathbb{Z}^d\setminus\{0\}}|g(z)|^p(|z|+1)^\gamma\\
&\leq C(d,p,\gamma)\left(\int_Q|g(x)|^p|x|^\gamma\,dx+\int_{\mathbb{R}^d\setminus Q}|g(x)|^p(|x|+1)^\gamma\right)\\
&\leq C(d,p,\gamma)\int_{\mathbb{R}^d}|g(x)|^p|x|^\gamma\,dx,
\end{align*}
where in the last line we have used that $|x|+1 \le 3 |x|$ for all $|x| \ge \frac{1}{2}$.
\end{proof}
|
\section{Introduction and Summary}
Inflation represents the leading candidate mechanism for the sourcing of the primordial fluctuations. Notwithstanding the great observational advances of the last two decades, with spectacular experiments that recently culminated in the Planck satellite or BICEP telescope, little is known about this primordial epoch. In an essential way, inflation can be defined as a primordial phase of quasi de Sitter epoch where time-translations are spontaneously broken~\cite{Cheung:2007st}, but little is known beyond this very general definition. The measurement of the primordial power spectrum of the density perturbations as observed with great precision in the Cosmic Microwave Background (CMB) or in Large Scale Structure (LSS) is ultimately traceable to the quadratic Lagrangian of the fluctuations during the primordial quasi de Sitter phase. It would be much more interesting to test the interacting structure of the theory, in order to understand the nature of the physics that drove inflation and its connections with other fundamental interactions. The leading and most general way to test the interacting structure of the inflationary field is by measuring the non-Gaussian signal that is induced by its self-interactions. Not only do non-Gaussianities offer a signal that is directly associated to the interacting structure of the theory, but they represent such a rich signal from the observational point of view so that, if detected, a plethora of interesting measurements would be possible beyond the first detection. For example, if we were to detect a primordial 3-point function, we would be subsequently curious to know how strong is the signal as a function of the triangular configurations in momentum space, the so-called shape of the non-Gaussianities; or if there is also a non-trivial 4-point function.
So far, limits on inflationary 3-point function have been focussed on two different approaches. The first is based on providing templates for 3-point functions that are matched against the data; while the second attempts trying to reconstruct a generic 3-point function from the data. The advantage of the first method is that it can focus directly on theoretically motivated models over which one can perform an optimal analysis. It has however the disadvantage of potentially missing a signal present in the data simply because it was not looked for. So far, this first approach has been used to search for the equilateral~\cite{Creminelli:2005hu} and orthogonal~\cite{Senatore:2009gt} templates from single field inflation~\cite{Alishahiha:2004eh,Cheung:2007st}, as well as the local template~\cite{Komatsu:2003iq} from multi field inflation~\cite{Lyth:2002my,Zaldarriaga:2003my,Senatore:2010wk}. The second approach~\cite{Fergusson:2009nv} is instead based on reconstructing the primordial signal present in the data by matching it to a basis of functions that can cover, at least in principle, any potential signal. This second approach has the advantage of being very thorough, though it has the disadvantage of being rather suboptimal, as the significance of a signal can be diluted away as many independent shapes are matched to the data.
So far, the most constraining search for non-Gaussianities is provided by the analysis of the Planck team~\cite{Ade:2013ydc}, which finds no evidence of non-Guassianities. It should be stressed however that this limit is still rather weak: the skewness of the distribution of the primordial fluctuations is constrained to be smaller than about $10^{-3}$. Apart from the awe that is associated to us, mankind, being to be able to say anything about the first instants of the universe, such a limit is not very strong from the particle physics point of view: it constrains inflation to be more or less as interacting as the electron in Quantum ElectroDynamics, or as the Pion at energies of order of its mass. It would be clearly very interesting to be able to further constrain the level of non-Gaussianities by one or two orders of magnitude, a sensitivity that the recently developed Effective Field Theory of Large Scale Structures~\cite{Carrasco:2012cv} has shown the potential to achieve with LSS surveys in the next decade; but also to explore in an optimal way all possible signals potentially produced by inflation.
The purpose of this paper is to present a more detailed exploration of the 3-point functions that are theoretically predicted by the single field inflationary models. The study of the phenomenology of inflation is greatly simplified by the so-called Effective Field Theory of Inflation~(EFTofI)~\cite{Cheung:2007st,Senatore:2010wk}. By postulating that inflation is the theory associated to the spontaneous breaking of time-translation in a quasi de Sitter epoch, it allows a description of the dynamics of the fluctuations during inflation, the so-called $\pi$ field, without the need of describing the background solution, which is largely irrelevant for the purpose of predicting the observations. With the EFTofI, the analysis of the signals that are producible during inflation becomes much simpler. We will work in the context of the EFTofI as applied to single field inflation~\footnote{The same approach has been extended to cover multiple fields~\cite{Senatore:2010wk} and dissipative effects~\cite{LopezNacir:2011kk} in inflation. The formalisms that lead to the Effective Field Theory of Inflation were first constructed in~\cite{Creminelli:2006xe} to study alternative cosmology and violation of the null energy condition, and in particular dark energy. The application to dark energy has been subsequently re-taken and further developed in~\cite{Gubitosi:2012hu}, which gave the name to this application of this formalism already started in~\cite{Creminelli:2006xe} as Effective Field Theory of Dark Energy. Notice that while the presence of an additional degree of freedom is a necessary requirement in Inflation, in the case of the current acceleration of the universe this fact needs to be postulated.}, where we also impose an approximate shift symmetry that forces each power of $\pi$ to appear with a derivative acting on it and that makes therefore any interaction a higher-dimensional one. At leading order in the derivative interactions, there are two operators: $\dot\pi^3$ and $\dot\pi({\partial}_i\pi)^3$, and the signals that can be produced are well described by the equilateral~\cite{Creminelli:2005hu} and orthogonal templates~\cite{Senatore:2009gt}. Our study kicks off from a simple field theoretic fact that we explain in section~\ref{sec:naturalness}: a theory where the leading interactions have a certain number of derivatives acting on each $\pi$ will not induce, under renormalization, interactions with a smaller number of derivatives acting on each $\pi$. This allows us to construct a very large number of technically natural inflationary models where the leading interactions have many derivatives acting on each~$\pi$, while the interactions with a smaller number of derivatives are consistently suppressed. We also discuss a symmetry that can be imposed on the theory and that partially justifies these findings.
When applied to the EFTofI, with its own additional constraints coming from the nonlinear realization of Lorentz invariance, this sort of non-renormalization theorem opens up a plethora of technically natural inflationary models, each one with its own leading higher derivative operators, and distinguished by its own non-Gaussian signals. However, as we notice in section~\ref{indi}, many of these operators lead to identical shapes of non-Gaussianities at tree level, a fact that can be made explicit by performing appropriate field redefinitions. The degeneracy of signals becomes even more striking after we realize that many models which include operators that produce in-principle-novel shapes of non-Gaussianities, in reality induce a signal that is practically indistinguishable from a linear combination of standard templates, as we discuss in section~\ref{sec:new-templates}.
As we move to higher and higher numbers of derivatives, the complexity of the models becomes larger and larger. We therefore develop some statistical ways of exploring the parameter space of models, and include a new template only if there exist a natural model for which an order one fraction of the parameter space produces a signal that is not covered by the standard templates (we take a fraction to be order one if it is larger than about 10\%). This exploration concludes, since, as we move to higher derivative operators and ask for them to produce a detectable signal, the mass scale suppressing them becomes lower and lower, becoming dangerously close to Hubble scale. We, reasonably but somewhat arbitrarily, decide to stop at the level of 9-derivative operators, and decide that to consistently discuss models beyond this number of derivatives new light degrees of freedom should be included.
The result of this analysis is that we find that up to 6-derivative operators, there is no need to add any new template beyond the standard equilateral and orthogonal ones: $F_{\rm equil}$ and $F_{\rm orth}$. At 7-derivatives, we need to add one template, that we call $F_{\rm 7 der}$. These three templates are sufficient at 8-derivative level, while at the level of 9 derivatives we need to add one more template, labelled $F_{\rm 9 der}$. In summary, we find that a total of four templates is sufficient to analyze the signal produced by all technically natural single clock inflationary models.
Finally, in the last section~\ref{sec:analysis}, we perform the optimal analysis of the WMAP 9 year data for all the four templates, two of which have never been matched to the data before. The ``bottom line'' results are given by
\begin{eqnarray}
f_{NL}^{\rm eq} &=& 51 \pm 136 \hspace{1.94cm} \mbox{($-221 < f_{NL}^{\rm eq} < 323$ at 95\% CL)} \nonumber \ ,\\
f_{NL}^{\rm orth} &=& -245 \pm 100 \hspace{1.5cm} \mbox{($-445 < f_{NL}^{\rm orth} < -45$ at 95\% CL)} \nonumber \ ,\\
f_{NL}^{\rm 7der} &=& -34 \pm 56 \hspace{1.85cm} \mbox{($-146 < f_{NL}^{\rm 7der} < 78$ at 95\% CL)} \nonumber \ , \\
f_{NL}^{\rm 9der} &=& 30 \pm 16 \hspace{2.12cm} \mbox{($-1 < f_{NL}^{\rm 9der} < 62$ at 95\% CL)} \nonumber\ .
\end{eqnarray}
We also perform a joint analysis of multiple templates,
and find that deviations from Gaussianity are favored at 2--2.5$\sigma$
depending on the choice of parameter space.
This is not statistically significant, but could clearly become so with the Planck data.
The significance we find in the WMAP 9-year data is partially driven by the preference for nonzero $f_{NL}^{\rm orth}$ in WMAP9,
which is known to decrease in Planck~\cite{Ade:2013ydc}.
We do not analyze Planck data in this paper, since Monte Carlo simulations of the foreground-cleaned Planck maps
(used by the Planck team in the non-Gaussianity paper~\cite{Ade:2013ydc}) are not yet publicly available,
and would be impractical to construct due to the complexity of the Planck noise model.
It will be interesting to perform an analysis of Planck data in the future.
Higher derivative operators were already considered in the context of the EFTofI in~\cite{Bartolo:2010bj}, without giving explanations on how the models considered there would be technically natural, and in~\cite{Creminelli:2010qf}, where the authors use the Galileian symmetry to suppress the lower derivative operators. In both cases the authors stop at 6 derivative level, which we argue is already covered by the standard templates.
\section{The Effective Field Theory of Inflation\label{sec:naturalness}}
Let us begin with a review of the effective field theory of inflation (EFTofI)~\cite{Cheung:2007st}. The starting point is to choose constant time slices to coincide with constant clock slices (the so-called unitary gauge). Then, the most general single clock field theory of inflation can be described by the Einstein-Hilbert action plus terms that contain metric fluctuations and their derivatives, and are invariant under all but time diffeomorphisms \cite{Cheung:2007st}:
\begin{eqnarray}
S = \!\!\!\int \! d^4 x \; \sqrt{- g} \Big[ \frac12 M_{\rm
Pl}^2 R + M_{\rm Pl}^2 \dot H
g^{00} - M_{\rm Pl}^2 (3 H^2 + \dot H)\nonumber\\
\quad \!\!\!+ \frac{1}{2!}M_2(t)^4(g^{00}+1)^2
+ \frac{1}{3!}M_3(t)^4 (g^{00}+1)^3+\cdots \Big]\ .
\label{S}
\end{eqnarray}
Here, the coefficients of first three terms, which are the only ones which start linear in the fluctuations, are determined in terms of cosmological history, $H$ and $\dot H$, but those of the higher order terms are expected to be generic functions of time. One can restore a non-linearly realized full reparametrization invariance by performing a time-diff. $t\to t+\pi$ in \eqref{S}, and promoting $\pi$ to a new field which non-linearly shifts under time-diffs. It is then easily seen that on a quasi-de Sitter background (where $\epsilon=-\dot H/H^2 \ll 1$) and at energies of order and higher than $H$, $\pi$ decouples from metric perturbations and captures the dynamics of the inflaton field~\cite{Cheung:2007st}. The relevant part of the action \eqref{S} then becomes
\begin{eqnarray}\label{S1}
&&S_{\rm \pi} = \\ \nonumber
&&\ \ \int d^4 x \sqrt{- g} \left[ -M^2_{\rm Pl}\dot{H} \left(\dot\pi^2-\frac{ (\partial_i \pi)^2}{a^2}\right)
+ 2 M^4_2
\left(\dot\pi^2+\dot{\pi}^3-\dot\pi\frac{(\partial_i\pi)^2}{a^2}
\right) -\frac{4}{3} M^4_3 \dot{\pi}^3 +\ldots\right] .
\end{eqnarray}
The interaction terms in the above action, which lead to non-Gaussian correlation functions, are constrained by the requirement of non-linear realization of time diffs. That is to say, the fact that the most general action for $\pi$ must arise from \eqref{S} enforces that (a) all terms are linearly rotationally invariant, (b) once terms are non Lorentz invariant at linear level, there are connections between terms of different order in $\pi$ so that Lorentz invariance is non-linearly realized (e.g. the terms multiplied by $M_2^4$ in \eqref{S1}), and (c) interactions that contain $\pi$ without derivative acting on it (e.g. $\pi\dot\pi^2$) must be multiplied by time derivatives of the time-dependent coefficients in the Lagrangian. However, it is technically natural to imagine that these derivatives are proportional to slow-roll parameters and small on a quasi-de Sitter background. It therefore suffices to concentrate on the derivative interactions~\footnote{Resonant non-Gaussianity~\cite{Flauger:2010ja} models may seem as an exception to this rule, however they are shown to have non-Gaussian signals that are subleading with respect to the signal in the power spectrum~\cite{resonant}~(but see \cite{Daniel_Siavosh}).}.
As it is shown explicitly in \eqref{S1}, the cubic interactions that satisfy the above constraints and have the minimum number of derivatives, i.e. three, are $\dot\pi^3$ and $\dot\pi \pi_{,i}^2$. However, it is crucial to be able to fully explore the space of non-Gaussian signatures of inflation, as inflation is one of the pillars of the physics beyond the standard model, and non-Gaussianities are the probe of the interaction structure of the theory. It is also important to do this in light of the huge experimental effort in understanding the nature of the primordial fluctuations, both in the CMB and in Large Scale Structures. For this reason, in this paper we realize that higher derivative interactions can be the dominant source of non-Gaussianity, and decide to focus on them. Before even beginning to study these models, one should ask how, without tuning, it is possible for the higher derivative operators to be the leading ones, and not having observationally-more-important lower derivative operators. The first answer to this question is to actually realize that a theory where the leading interaction operator is a higher derivative one is technically natural. We explain this simple fact here for Lorentz invariant theories, and we discuss in App.~\ref{natural} how the argument extends to the EFTofI. Let us consider the following Lorentz Invariant theory of a scalar field in Minkowski space with a single higher derivative quartic interaction:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:theory1}
S=\int d^4x \left[\frac{1}{2}{\partial}_\mu\phi{\partial}^\mu\phi+ \frac{1}{\Lambda^8} ({\partial}_\nu{\partial}_\mu\phi{\partial}^\nu{\partial}^\mu\phi)^2\right]\ .
\end{equation}
At loop level, even in the case in which we integrate the internal momenta all the way up to the unitarity bound $\Lambda$, it is quite straightforward to realize that only operators with an higher number of derivatives acting on each $\phi$ will be generated, such as $ \frac{1}{\Lambda^{10}} ({\partial}_\rho{\partial}_\nu{\partial}_\mu\phi{\partial}^\rho{\partial}^\nu{\partial}^\mu\phi)({\partial}_\nu{\partial}_\mu\phi{\partial}^\nu{\partial}^\mu\phi)$, but {\it no} operator with a lower number of derivatives acting of $\phi$, such as $ \frac{1}{\Lambda^4} ({\partial}_\nu\phi{\partial}^\nu\phi)^2$. The proof of this fact at all orders in perturbation theory is rather straightforward. Let us imagine to evaluate the connected correlation function of $\langle \phi(k_1)\ldots\phi(k_n)\rangle_c$ by inserting an arbitrary number of times the interaction vertex. Each of the external $\phi(k_i)$'s will be contracted with one of the $\phi$'s in the vertex, which, being acted upon by two derivatives, will give rise to a factor of $k_{i}^\mu k_i^\nu$ (see Figure~\ref{fig:technical-diagram}). Neglecting the indexes, this means that the regularized (that is before renormalization) expression of the 1PI correlation function is
\begin{equation}
\langle \phi(k_1)\ldots\phi(k_n)\rangle_{\rm 1PI}= k_1^2 \ldots k^2_n\; f\left(k_1,\ldots k_n; \Lambda,\Lambda_{\rm cutoff}\right)
\end{equation}
where $\Lambda_{\rm cutoff}$ is the parameter of some form of UV regulator. If at some order $n$ in perturbation theory all divergent sub-diagrams that appear in the calculation of this correlation function are systematically renormalized, the divergent part of $f$ (in the limit $\Lambda_{\rm cutoff}\to \infty$) is guaranteed to be local. This means that, as we send {\it any} of the external momenta $k_i$ to zero, the correlation function vanishes at least as $k_i^2$. Therefore {\it any} counterterm that will be needed to renormalize the theory will have at least two derivative acting on each $\phi$, as we wanted to show. In formulas, this means that a technically natural version of the theory in (\ref{eq:theory1}) is
\begin{eqnarray}\label{eq:theory2}
&&S=\int d^4x \left[\frac{1}{2}{\partial}_\mu\phi{\partial}^\mu\phi+\frac{c_2}{\Lambda^2} {\partial}_\nu{\partial}_\mu\phi{\partial}^\nu{\partial}^\mu\phi+c_3 ({\partial}_\mu{\partial}^\mu\phi)^2\right.\\ \nonumber
&&\quad\qquad\qquad\left. +\frac{1}{\Lambda^8} ({\partial}_\nu{\partial}_\mu\phi{\partial}^\nu{\partial}^\mu\phi)^2+\frac{c_4}{\Lambda^8}({\partial}_\mu{\partial}^\mu\phi)^4\right.\\ \nonumber
&&\left.\quad\qquad\qquad+ \frac{c_5}{\Lambda^{10}} ({\partial}_\rho{\partial}_\nu{\partial}_\mu\phi{\partial}^\rho{\partial}^\nu{\partial}^\mu\phi)({\partial}_\nu{\partial}_\mu\phi{\partial}^\nu{\partial}^\mu\phi)+\ldots\right]\ ,
\end{eqnarray}
where $\ldots$ represents higher dimension operators and $c_i$ are order one numerical coefficients~\footnote{The field theoretic realization above makes it interesting to explore the possibility of models that have an higher unitary bound than in~(\ref{eq:theory2}) and that, in the low energy regime, reproduce our technically natural models. In fact, it is easy to realize that if we let the scalar field $\phi$ interact with a massive high spin particles, rotational invariance will force the leading interactions to have many derivatives acting at least on one of the $\phi$'s, so that, once we integrate out the massive particle, we can imagine to be left with a model like in~(\ref{eq:theory2}). The problem with this candidate UV complete model is that, due to the well known difficulties of UV completing theories with massive high spin particles, the unitarity bound of the new model turns out to be not higher than the one in~(\ref{eq:theory2}), at least for the cases we explored. A well known theory which is UV complete and contains high spin particles is string theory, and it is therefore tempting to try to UV complete these models directly into a string theory. We leave this study to future work; we, who are most interested in the connection with data, content ourselves in this paper with the Effective Field Theory.}. The purpose of this paper is to apply this novel quantum field theory fact to the theory of inflation, by studying the theoretical and observational implications of higher derivative operators. Being inflation a theory where Lorentz invariance is non-linearly realized, there are some constraints in applying this quantum field theory fact, as discussed in detail in Appendix~\ref{natural}.
The fact that at least a fraction of the lower derivative operators are not generated under renormalization by the higher derivative ones can be justified by imposing some symmetries that offer a generalization of the shift symmetry of the Galileon~\cite{Nicolis:2008in}. Indeed, one can impose the theory to be invariant under a shift
\begin{equation}
\phi(x)\quad\to\quad \phi(x) + C_{\mu_1\ldots\mu_n}\; x^{\mu_1}\ldots x^{\mu_n}\ .
\end{equation}
If the tensor $C$ is `traceless', in the sense that $C^\mu{}_{\mu\mu_2\mu_3\dots}=0$, then the kinetic term is left invariant, and the leading derivative interactions that are obviously allowed are those with $n+1$ derivatives acting on each $\phi$. The case $n=1$ is the so-called Galileon, for which this symmetry does not forbid some lower derivative operators, such as $({\partial}\phi)^2({\partial}_\mu{\partial}^\mu\phi)$, an operator that is connected to potential superluminal propagation of the fluctuation~\cite{Adams:2006sv}. Similar operators that involve $\phi$-legs with only $n$ derivatives acting on them may exist also for $n>1$~\footnote{Since this symmetry argument is alternative to our perturbation theory argument, we will not discuss it for the non-relativistic case, though it is possible that a non-relativistic generalization might be found.}.
\begin{figure}[t]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=10 cm, height= 8 cm]{no_renormalization_2.pdf}
\end{center}
\caption[]{The non-renormalization theorem that we explain in the text: it is impossible to generate operators with a lower number of derivatives acting on each $\phi$-leg.}
\label{fig:technical-diagram}
\end{figure}
Now that we have established that we can consider higher derivative operators as the leading ones, there is a next natural question related to the fact that it seems that now we have to analyze the observational consequences of an infinite number of operators. There is a very natural limit beyond which it is not worth to proceed. Consider a general cubic interaction with $n$ derivatives, schematically,
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{L3}
{\cal L}_3 = \frac{1}{\Lambda^{n-1}}\partial^n\pi_c^3\,,
\end{eqnarray}
where $\pi_c$ is the canonically normalized field and $\partial$ denotes either time or space derivative. $\Lambda$ is some mass scale representing the unitarity bound of the theory, and the high energy cutoff of the theory $\Lambda_{UV}$ must satisfy $\Lambda_{UV}\leq \Lambda$~\footnote{\label{cs} When $c_s<1$ some care should be taken in determination of the suppression scale $\Lambda$. Namely, one should first replace $\vec{x}\to \vec{\tilde{x}}= c_s\vec{x}$ in the EFTofI action of goldstone mode $\pi$ and then canonically normalize $\pi_c = (-2M_{\rm Pl}^2\dot H c_s)^{1/2}\pi$ to obtain the suppression $\Lambda$ in \eqref{L3} (see \cite{4point}).}. The non-Gaussianity generated by \eqref{L3} can be estimated by comparing ${\cal L}_3$ with the kinetic term ${\cal L}_2 = \dot\pi_c^2$ at the energy scale $H$, which yields
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{fnl}
f_{NL}\zeta \sim \frac{{\cal L}_3}{{\cal L}_2} \sim \left(\frac{H}{\Lambda}\right)^{n-1}\,,
\end{eqnarray}
where $\zeta = H^2/\sqrt{-4M_{\rm Pl}^2\dot Hc_s}\simeq 5\times 10^{-5}$ is the amplitude of scalar curvature fluctuations. It follows from \eqref{fnl} that in order to get a fixed level of non-Gaussianity ($f_{NL}=\rm{const}$), when increasing the number of derivatives, $\Lambda$ and consequently $\Lambda_{UV}$ must approach $H$. On the other hand, in order to have a reasonably local and weakly coupled theory at Hubble scale we must stop at some point. We, somewhat arbitrarily, choose $\Lambda \geq 3H$ which for $f_{NL}\zeta\sim 10^{-4}$ leads to $n\leq 9$. This is the maximum number of derivatives we wish to consider, even though, at least in principle, the analysis can be continued further. To consistently go beyond, however, we believe one should add an additional light degree of freedom.
It is clear from \eqref{fnl} that in the presence of a lower derivative operator suppressed by the same mass scale $\Lambda$ the higher derivative operators are irrelevant and negligible. Therefore, the interaction \eqref{L3} is important only if lower derivative operators are suppressed by a larger mass scale:
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{hierarchy}
{\cal L'}_3 = \frac{1}{(\Lambda')^{n-m-1}}\partial^{n-m}\pi_c^3\,,
\end{eqnarray}
with ${\Lambda'}^{n-m-1} > \Lambda^{n-1}/H^m $. We will explain in Appendix \ref{natural} when and how such a hierarchy of scales can be consistently realized in EFTofI, resulting in technically natural models in which high-derivative operators lead to large non-Gaussianity.
In the next section, starting from 4-derivative interactions, we increase the total number of derivatives and check for shapes of 3-point function that are significantly different from the ones analyzed so far. We will encounter some explicit consequences of the requirement of technical naturalness in our investigation.
\section{\label{indi} Independent higher derivative operators}
When studying the non-Gaussian signature induced by some higher derivative operators, it is important to realize that there are cases in which the induced shape is equal to a linear combination of shapes generated by lower derivative ones. For example, consider the following four-derivative interactions
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{4der}
\ddot\pi\dot\pi\dot\pi\ ,\qquad {\partial}^2\pi\pi_{,i}\pi_{,i}\ ,\qquad {\partial}^2\pi \dot\pi^2\,.
\end{eqnarray}
Since we are dealing with interactions with several derivatives, we adopt the shorthand $\pi_{,i}={\partial}_i\pi$ for spatial derivatives. According to the discussion of Appendix \ref{natural}, there are natural models in which these are the leading operators and 3-derivative interactions are either absent or suppressed by $H/\Lambda$. For instance, one can have a model in which the cubic Lagrangian is given by
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{4derL3}
\mathcal{L}^{(3)}= \frac{1}{\Lambda^3}(a_1 {\partial}^2\pi_c\dot\pi_c^2+ a_2 H \dot\pi^3)\ ,
\end{eqnarray}
with $a_i$'s being order one numerical coefficients, and where the suppression of the second term compared to the first is natural since they have different $t\to -t$ symmetry, which is softly broken by the background cosmology.
However, it is easy to see that all interactions in \eqref{4der} reduce to linear combinations of $H\dot\pi^3$ and $H\dot\pi\pi_{,i}^2$ via integration by parts, and ignoring terms that are proportional to the variation of the quadratic Lagrangian: $\delta\mathcal{L}^{(2)}/\delta\pi \propto \ddot\pi+3H\dot\pi-c_s^2{\partial}^2\pi$. The latter means that a given interaction term can be removed by performing a field redefinition that indeed removes this term from the cubic action and introduces new quartic and higher order interactions. In calculating the correlation functions of $\pi$ (or of the curvature perturbation $\zeta$, which is equal to $\zeta=-H\pi$ at linear level), one has to keep track of these field redefinitions~\cite{Maldacena:2002vr}, but since for us they always contain derivatives of fields, their contribution to the late time correlators exponentially decays, and we can therefore neglect it~\footnote{For instance, in \eqref{4derL3}, $\dot\pi_c^2{\partial}_i^2\pi_c$ can be replaced by $\dot\pi_c^2(\ddot\pi_c+3H\dot\pi_c)$ via the redefinition $\pi_c \to \pi_c+\dot\pi_c^2/\Lambda^3$, and $\dot\pi_c^2\ddot\pi_c$ is a total derivative which can be replaced by $-3H\dot\pi_c^3$. The quadratic term in the field redefinition $\dot\pi_c^2$ gives an exponentially small contribution for the late time correlation functions. This means that the operator $\dot\pi_c^2{\partial}_i^2\pi_c$ induces the same shape of the 3-point function as the operator $\dot\pi^3$.}.
One can use similar manipulations and induction at higher derivative level to show that the shapes of all interactions that respect the shift symmetry $\pi\to \pi+c$ can be reduced to linear combinations of the shapes induced by the following terms
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{t}
&\partial_t^n\pi\partial_t^n\pi\partial_t^m\pi\,,&\quad\text{with}\quad n\geq m\geq 1\,,\\
\label{i}
&\partial_t^{2n-1}\pi \pi_{,i}\pi_{,i}\,,&\quad\text{with} \quad n\geq 1.
\end{eqnarray}
We show this in Appendix~\ref{app:reduction}.
Hence, the shapes of these operators form a complete basis for 3-point function in single-field inflation as long as the kinetic term is of the form $\dot\pi^2-c_s^2\pi_{,i}^2$.
Let us now proceed to operators with at most five derivatives. According to (\ref{t},\ref{i}) there are two new independent operators at this level; namely, $\ddot\pi^2\dot\pi$ and $\tdot\pi\pi_{,i}^2$. However, theoretical considerations forbid both of them from being the leading interaction since if
\begin{eqnarray}
\mathcal{L}^{(3)}\supset \ddot\pi_c^2\dot\pi_c/\Lambda^4,
\end{eqnarray}
then the loops of this operator generate $\dot\pi_c^3/\Lambda^2$, which, without fine-tuning, dominates the 3-point function. On the other hand $\tdot\pi\pi_{,i}^2$ can only arise from quadratic unitary gauge operators such as
\begin{eqnarray}
\delta g^{00} {\partial^0}{\partial}^0g^{00} ,
\end{eqnarray}
which inevitably induce the high derivative term $\tdot\pi\dot\pi$ in the kinetic term. It is easy to see that in order for the non-Gaussianity to be detectably large the high time-derivative correction to the kinetic term must be dominant. This introduces an additional light degree of freedom, which is a ghost. So, we do not have new shapes at 5-derivative level either~ \footnote{In fact, even other 5-derivative interactions that are reducible and not included in \eqref{t} and \eqref{i} do not pass our theoretical criteria, because in all of them at least one $\pi$ must have only one derivative. If this is a $\dot\pi$, then loops generate $\dot\pi^3$, and if it is $\pi_{,i}$, the operator can only come from a quadratic unitary gauge operator.}.
Once the 6-derivative operators are considered, we not only get the new shape $\ddot\pi^3$ from~\eqref{t}, but also the 5-derivative terms can now arise in a technically natural way. For instance, one can have a model
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{6derL3}
\mathcal{L}^{(3)}= \frac{1}{\Lambda^5}(a_1 \ddot\pi_c^3+ a_2 H \ddot\pi_c^2\dot\pi_c+a_3 H^3 \dot\pi_c^3)\ ,
\end{eqnarray}
with $a_i$'s of order one, where now because of the $H/\Lambda$ suppression of $\ddot\pi^2\dot\pi$, its loops generate $\dot\pi^3$ with $H^3/\Lambda^3$ suppression, which leads to comparable level of non-Gaussianity as the higher derivative term. Moreover, there are 6-derivative interactions that come from cubic unitary gauge operators, and upon reduction to (\ref{t},\ref{i}) have a non-zero coefficient of $\tdot\pi\pi_{,i}^2$ (e.g. $\ddot\pi\pi_{,ij}^2$ which comes from $\partial^0g^{00}\delta E_{ij}^2$). One, therefore, expects to have three new shapes at this level. Similar arguments can be used to show that there are no new shapes at 7-, two at 8-, and two at 9-derivative levels.
While in a strict mathematical sense this is the right conclusion we will next argue that in practice the number of new shapes is much smaller since they are often very similar and observationally indistinguishable.
\section{New Templates\label{sec:new-templates}}
Consider a given cubic interaction $I$ (for instance $I$ can be $\dot\pi^3$). The shape of 3-point function, $s_I(k_1,k_2,k_3)$, produced by $I$ is defined in terms of the late time momentum space correlator
\begin{eqnarray}
\Expect{\pi_{\mbf{k}_1}\pi_{\mbf{k}_2}\pi_{\mbf{k}_3}}= s_I(k_1,k_2,k_3)(2\pi)^3\delta^3(\mbf{k_1}+\mbf{k_2}+\mbf{k_3})\ ,
\end{eqnarray}
which because of invariance of the theory under spatial translations and rotations is only a function of the lengths of the momenta of the three modes. The approximate scale invariance of the quasi-de Sitter background implies that $s_I(k_1,k_2,k_3)\simeq s_I(1,k_2/k_1,k_3/k_1)/k_1^6$; moreover, it is obviously invariant under permutations of $\{k_1,k_2,k_3\}$. Correlation functions of $\pi$ can easily be transformed into those of the gauge invariant scalar curvature $\zeta$ using $\zeta =-H\pi$ to leading order in the slow roll parameters.
To constrain an inflationary model that contains $I$ one can use $s_I$ as a template and convolve it with the data. However, two different shapes can be correlated, in which case a constraint on one also constrains the other. To quantify this concept one defines the inner product of two shapes $s$ and $s'$ according to~\cite{Babich:2004gb}
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{dot}
(s,s')=\int_{1/2}^1 \!\! dx_2\int_{1-x_2}^{x_2}\!\!\!\!\!dx_3\;x_2^4x_3^4\; s(1,x_2,x_3)\;s'(1,x_2,x_3)\ ,
\end{eqnarray}
and the norm of a shape as $|s|=\sqrt{(s,s)}$. The cosine between two shapes, which is a normalized measure of their correlation, is then
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{cosine}
\cos(s,s')=(s,s')/(|s||s'|)\,.
\end{eqnarray}
This notion can readily be generalized to the correlation (or maximum cosine) of a shape $s$ with a set of shapes (or templates) $\mathcal{T}=\{t_i\}$, which is defined as $\max\{\cos(s,\sum \alpha_i t_i)$ $|\forall\{\alpha_i\}\}$; it is given by
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{theta}
\cos \theta_{s,\mathcal{T}}\equiv\cos(s,\mathcal{T})= \sqrt{\mbf{v}^T \mbf{A}^{-1}\mbf{v}}/|s|\ ,
\end{eqnarray}
where $v_i=(s,t_i)$ and $A_{ij}=(t_i,t_j)$. The parallel $s_\parallel$ and perpendicular $s_\perp$ components of $s$ with respect to $\mathcal{T}$ are defined in terms of $\theta_{s,\mathcal{T}}$ in an obvious way.
Let us check the correlation of the three new shapes of $\ddot\pi^3,\tdot\pi\dot\pi^2,$ and $\tdot\pi\pi_{,i}^2$, which were found at 6-derivative level, with the shapes of the lowest order interactions $\dot\pi^3$ and $\dot\pi\pi_{,i}^2$. Rather surprisingly, we find that all the three shapes are more than 0.99 correlated with the set $\{s_{\dot\pi^3},s_{\dot\pi\pi_{,i}^2}\}$. This implies that unless we consider linear combinations of the operators with abnormally large coefficients, the new models are practically indistinguishable from the 3-derivative ones.
However, it is too soon to draw this conclusion since the process of reduction to the form (\ref{t},\ref{i}) does indeed produce large numerical factors, specially at high derivative levels. On the other hand, it seems unnatural to allow linear combinations of operators with arbitrarily large coefficients. One is, therefore, faced with the question of which linear combinations are realistic and which ones are not. To answer this question, we make from here on the explicit assumption that the coefficients of the operators in unitary gauge, apart from appropriate mass parameters, vary in an order one range. Thus, we avoid any reduction to (\ref{t},\ref{i}) but at each derivative level we list all cubic interactions that can be a dominant source of non-Gaussianity in a technically natural model. Call the set of all these shapes $\mathcal{U} =\{s_i\}$. Each technically natural model has a 3-point function which is a linear combination of a subset $\mathcal{S}\subset \mathcal{U}$, and our assumption about the coefficients of the unitary-gauge operators implies that the coefficients in these linear combinations are also~$\mathcal{O}(1)$.
We then enlarge the set of linearly independent templates $\mathcal{T}$ until {\it almost all} of the technically natural inflationary models with order one coefficients are {\it covered}. Note that making subjective choices to define `almost all' and `being covered' is unavoidable unless we take $\mathcal{T}$ to contain all operators that are given by (\ref{t},\ref{i}). Our criterion for a shape~$s$ to be considered covered is $s_\parallel>s_\perp$ or equivalently $\cos \theta_{s,\mathcal{T}}>0.7$. To have a notion of `almost all', one first needs to put a measure on the parameter space of the theory, for instance, by postulating that all order one coefficients are equally likely, and then set a threshold that we take to be of order 10\%. That is, if more than 90\% of the parameter space has a correlation larger than $0.7$ with $\mathcal{T}$, we do not enlarge $\mathcal{T}$.
To see an explicit example of how this program can in principle be accomplished, let us review the construction of the orthogonal shape \cite{Senatore:2009gt}. Consider the lowest derivative inflationary models with cubic Lagrangian $\alpha_1\dot\pi\pi_{,i}^2+\alpha_2 \dot\pi^3$, and suppose $\mathcal{T}$ contains only the equilateral shape, which is almost identical to the shape of $\dot \pi \pi_{,i}^2$. Since $\dot\pi^3$ is not exactly aligned with the equilateral shape (they have a cosine of $0.95$), a fraction of about 10\% of the parameter space is not covered by $\mathcal{T}=\{{\rm Equil.}\}$. Very explicitly: as one varies the coefficients $\{\alpha_1,\alpha_2\}$ in an order one range, in a fraction of about 10\% the overall shape of the model has cosine of less than $0.7$ with the equilateral shape. Thus, it is reasonable to enlarge $\mathcal{T}$ by adding an orthogonal template based on $s_{\dot\pi^3}$~\footnote{\label{(-1,1)}In practice we first normalize shapes and then vary the coefficients in the range $(-1,1)$. This differs from varying the coefficients of unitary gauge operators in $(-1,1)$ by the ratio of the norm of different shapes, which is expected to be usually of order one. The advantage is that all shapes are treated on equal footing, and the application of the geometric analysis of Appendix \ref{geo} is much easier.}.
While the procedure to determine the number of shapes to analyze that we just outlined is satisfactory (at least to us), as we move on to consider higher derivative operators, the number of operators and as a consequence the number of technically natural models rapidly grows, and the above direct approach becomes less and less feasible (recall that we avoid reduction to (\ref{t},\ref{i}) and consider almost all interactions). We, therefore, use an alternative method that allows us to carry out the analysis at higher orders. This is based on exploiting geometrical connections that exist between the non-covered portion of the parameter space of a model, and correlations of the individual shapes $\{s_i\}$ in that model. For instance, in the extreme case where all $s_i$ have very large correlations with~$\mathcal{T}$, we are ensured that no order one linear combination of them can lie noticeably outside $\mathcal{T}$. In Appendix \ref{geo} we study these geometric connections in more detail, and in Appendix \ref{templates} we use them to find new templates that must be added to $\mathcal{T}=\{{\rm Equil.,Ortho.}\}$ as we increase the number of derivatives one by one. Here, we only report the result: at 6-derivative level $\mathcal{T}=\{{\rm Equil.,Ortho.}\}$ is sufficient to cover the parameter space, at 7-derivative level we add one new template based on $\tdot\pi\pi_{,ij}^2$, at 8-derivative level the new 3-dimensional $\mathcal{T}$ is sufficient to approximately cover the parameter space, and finally, at 9-derivative level one new template based on the shape of $\tdot\pi\ddot\pi_{,i}^2$ is needed. Therefore, we propose the 4-dimensional $\mathcal{T}=\{{\rm Equil.,Ortho.},\tdot\pi\pi_{,ij}^2,\tdot\pi\ddot\pi_{,i}^2\}$ to search for inflationary models with up to 9-derivative interactions. In the next section, we perform the optimal search for those templates in the WMAP 9 year data.
\section{Analysis of the WMAP data\label{sec:analysis}}
In the former section, we have shown that the parameter space for inflationary non-Gaussianities in single clock model
should be enlarged to include two additional shapes. In the rest of the paper, we will precisely compute the additional
shapes and perform the optimal analysis of WMAP data to search for a signal.
For the sake of summary, we can say that the results of the former sections amount to us having to analyze the signatures of the following action:
\begin{eqnarray}
S &=& \int d^3x \, dt \, \sqrt{-g} \, \Big( -M_{\rm Pl}^2 \dot H \Big) \Bigg[
\frac{\dot\pi^2}{c_s^2} - \frac{(\partial_i\pi)^2}{a^2} \nonumber \\
&&\qquad \hspace{1cm}
+ {\mathcal C}_{\dot\pi^3} \frac{1}{c_s^2} \dot\pi^3
+ {\mathcal C}_{\dot\pi(\partial\pi)^2} \frac{1}{a^2} \dot\pi (\partial_i\pi)^2
\nonumber \\
&& \qquad\hspace{1cm}
+ {\mathcal C}_{\rm 7der} \frac{c_s^2}{a^4 H^4} \tdot\pi (\partial_i \partial_j \pi)^2
+ {\mathcal C}_{\rm 9der} \frac{1}{a^2 H^6} \tdot\pi \left( \partial_i \ddot\pi \right)^2
\Bigg] \label{eq:action}\ ,
\end{eqnarray}
which contains the new 7-derivative and 9-derivative cubic operators
in addition to the 3-derivative operators $\dot\pi^3$ and $\dot\pi (\partial_i\pi)^2$.
We have written the coefficient of each operator as a dimensionless number ${\mathcal C}$,
multiplied by a combination of parameters $c_s,a,H$ chosen so that the three-point function
$\langle \zeta^3 \rangle$ at the end of inflation will be proportional to ${\mathcal C}$
with no dependence on $c_s$.
Note however that in single-clock models, the
coefficient ${\mathcal C}_{\dot\pi(\partial\pi)^2}$
is always related to the sound speed by ${\mathcal C}_{\dot\pi(\partial\pi)^2} = -(1-c_s^2)/c_s^2$.
\subsection{In-in calculation}
\par\noindent
In this section we will calculate the three-point function $\langle \zeta_{{\bf k}_1} \zeta_{{\bf k}_2} \zeta_{{\bf k}_3} \rangle$
for the action~(\ref{eq:action}) to lowest order in slow-roll parameters.
In this approximation the curvature perturbation at the end of inflation
is $\zeta = -H\pi$ and the primordial power spectrum is scale invariant.
The free QFT has the solution:
\begin{eqnarray}
\pi_{{\bf k}}(\tau)
&=& \frac{H}{2 (-\dot H)^{1/2} M_{\rm Pl} c_s^{1/2} k^{3/2}} \left( u_0(ic_sk\tau)^* a_{{\bf k}} + u_0(ic_sk\tau) a_{{\bf k}}^\dag \right) \nonumber \\
&=& \frac{A_\zeta^{1/2}}{H k^{3/2}} \left( u_0(i c_s k \tau)^* a_{{\bf k}} + u_0(i c_s k \tau) a_{{\bf k}}^\dag \right)\ ,
\end{eqnarray}
where $A_\zeta$ is the power spectrum amplitude defined by $P_\zeta(k) = A_\zeta / k^3$,
and the mode function $u_0(x)$ is:
\begin{equation}
u_0(x) = (1 - x) e^x\ .
\end{equation}
For taking proper (not conformal) time derivatives, it is useful to define
\begin{equation}
u_n(x) = (-x \, d/dx)^n u_0(x)\ .
\end{equation}
Then $(d/dt)^n u_0(i c_s k \tau) = H^n u_n(i c_s k \tau)$.
For reference, the first few $u_i$'s are:
\begin{equation}
u_1(x) = x^2 e^x\ , \hspace{1cm}
u_2(x) = (-2x^2 - x^3) e^x\ , \hspace{1cm}
u_3(x) = (4x^2 + 5x^3 + x^4) e^x\ .
\end{equation}
Now a long but straightforward calculation using the in-in formalism gives:
\begin{equation}
\langle \zeta_{{\bf k}_1} \zeta_{{\bf k}_2} \zeta_{{\bf k}_3} \rangle
= \Big(
{\mathcal C}_{{\dot\pi}^3} F_{\dot\pi^3}
+ {\mathcal C}_{\dot\pi (\partial\pi)^2} F_{\dot\pi (\partial\pi)^2}
+ {\mathcal C}_7 F_7
+ {\mathcal C}_9 F_9
\Big) (2\pi)^3 \delta^3({\bf k}_1+{\bf k}_2+{\bf k}_3)\ ,
\end{equation}
where the $F$'s are the following functions of momenta $k_i$:
\begin{eqnarray}
F_{\dot\pi^3}({\bf k}_1,{\bf k}_2,{\bf k}_3) &=& -\frac{3 A_\zeta^2}{k_1^3 k_2^3 k_3^3} \int_{-\infty}^0 \frac{d\tau_E}{\tau_E^4} u_1(k_1\tau_E) u_1(k_2\tau_E) u_1(k_3\tau_E) \nonumber\ , \\
F_{\dot\pi (\partial\pi)^2}({\bf k}_1,{\bf k}_2,{\bf k}_3) &=& -A_\zeta^2 \frac{{\bf k}_2\cdot{\bf k}_3}{k_1^3 k_2^3 k_3^3}
\int_{-\infty}^0 \frac{d\tau_E}{\tau_E^2} u_1(k_1\tau_E) u_0(k_2\tau_E) u_0(k_3\tau_E) + \mbox{2 perm.} \nonumber \ ,\\
F_{\rm 7der}({\bf k}_1,{\bf k}_2,{\bf k}_3) &=& -A_\zeta^2 \frac{({\bf k}_2\cdot{\bf k}_3)^2}{k_1^3k_2^3k_3^3} \int_{-\infty}^0 d\tau_E \, u_3(k_1\tau_E) u_0(k_2\tau_E) u_0(k_3\tau_E) + \mbox{2 perm.} \nonumber \ , \\
F_{\rm 9der}({\bf k}_1,{\bf k}_2,{\bf k}_3) &=& -A_\zeta^2 \frac{{\bf k}_2\cdot{\bf k}_3}{k_1^3 k_2^3 k_3^3} \int_{-\infty}^0 \frac{d\tau_E}{\tau_E^2} u_3(k_1\tau_E) u_2(k_2\tau_E) u_2(k_3\tau_E) + \mbox{2 perm.}\ .
\label{eq:in_in}
\end{eqnarray}
We have expressed each $F$ as an integral over a Euclidean conformal time $\tau_E$
defined by $\tau_E = ic_s\tau$.
The integrals are straightforward to evaluate, but it will be convenient to leave them
unevaluated for reasons that will be apparent shortly.
The shapes of these four kinds of non-Gaussianities are given in Figure~\ref{fig:shapes}.
\begin{figure}[t]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=7 cm]{F_equil_shapes.jpg}
\includegraphics[width=7 cm]{F_orth_shapes.jpg}
\includegraphics[width=7 cm]{7_derivative_shapes.jpg}
\includegraphics[width=7 cm]{9_derivative_shapes.jpg}
\end{center}
\caption[]{The four shapes of non-Gaussianities from single-clock inflation.}
\label{fig:shapes}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Making the shapes factorizable}
Our WMAP analysis procedure will follow the framework of~\cite{Smith:2006ud}
(see also~\cite{Wang:1999vf,Komatsu:2003iq,Creminelli:2005hu,Creminelli:2006rz,Yadav:2007ny,Senatore:2009gt}).
We briefly outline the key steps, referring to~\cite{Smith:2006ud} for details.
The first step is to approximate each bispectrum shape $F(k_1,k_2,k_3)$ being analyzed
by a sum of terms which are ``factorizable'', in the sense that
each term takes the form $f(k_1) g(k_2) h(k_3) + \mbox{perm.}$.
This factorizability condition is needed for two reasons: to apply a fast algorithm
for calculating the angular CMB bispectrum $\langle a_{\ell_1m_1} a_{\ell_2m_2} a_{\ell_3m_3} \rangle$
from the initial curvature bispectrum $F$, and to apply a fast estimator for the bispectrum
amplitude given CMB data.
Several approaches have been proposed for finding factorizable approximations to a given
shape $F(k_1,k_2,k_3)$. For the 3-derivative shapes $(\dot\pi^3)$ and $\dot\pi(\partial\pi)^2$,
it is standard practice to approximate each shape by a linear combination of
the ``equilateral''~\cite{Creminelli:2005hu} and ``orthogonal''~\cite{Senatore:2009gt} templates:
\begin{eqnarray}
F_{\rm eq}(k_1,k_2,k_3) &=& \frac{3}{5} A_\zeta^2 \left( \frac{6}{k_1^3 k_2^2 k_3} - \frac{3}{k_1^3 k_2^3} - \frac{2}{k_1^2 k_2^2 k_3^2} \right) + \mbox{5 perm.} \nonumber \ , \\
F_{\rm orth}(k_1,k_2,k_3) &=& \frac{3}{5} A_\zeta^2 \left( \frac{18}{k_1^3 k_2^2 k_3} - \frac{9}{k_1^3 k_2^3} - \frac{8}{k_1^2 k_2^2 k_3^2} \right) + \mbox{5 perm.} \label{eq:templates}\ .
\end{eqnarray}
More precisely, we approximate the three-point function by:
\begin{equation}
\langle \zeta_{{\bf k}_1} \zeta_{{\bf k}_2} \zeta_{{\bf k}_3} \rangle = \Big(
f_{NL}^{\rm eq} F_{\rm eq}(k_1,k_2,k_3)
+ f_{NL}^{\rm orth} F_{\rm orth}(k_1,k_2,k_3)
\Big) (2\pi)^3 \delta^3({\bf k}_1+{\bf k}_2+{\bf k}_3) \label{eq:template_approximation}\ ,
\end{equation}
where $f_{NL}^{\rm eq}$ and $f_{NL}^{\rm orth}$ are related to the coefficients in the action by:
\begin{equation}
\left( \begin{array}{c}
f_{NL}^{\rm eq} \\
f_{NL}^{\rm orth}
\end{array} \right) =
\left( \begin{array}{cc}
-0.0785 & 0.276 \\
0.0163 & -0.0157
\end{array}
\right)
\left(
\begin{array}{c}
{\mathcal C}_{\dot\pi^3} \\
{\mathcal C}_{\dot\pi(\partial\pi)^2}
\end{array} \right)\ .
\end{equation}
Although the equilateral and orthogonal templates are not precisely equal to the
bispectra $F_{\dot\pi^3}$ and $F_{\dot\pi(\partial\pi)^2}$,
the template approximation in Eq.~(\ref{eq:template_approximation}) has been shown to
be accurate to $\approx 99$\% in the case where $f_{NL}^{\rm eq} \gg f_{NL}^{\rm orth}$
and to $\approx 90$\% when $f_{NL}^{\rm eq} \ll f_{NL}^{\rm orth}$~\footnote{A more precise template for $f_{NL}^{\rm orth}$ was provided in the appendix of~\cite{Senatore:2009gt}, whose use, given absence of detection, has not so far been needed in CMB studies. This template is more accurate in the squeezed limit, and it should be the one to use for studies of scale dependent bias in large scale structures.}.
One minor technical point.
So far we have assumed scale invariance, when writing down the equilateral and orthogonal templates
in Eq.~(\ref{eq:templates}) and when doing the in-in calculations in Eq.~(\ref{eq:in_in}).
In the analysis of WMAP data, we will use the following slight modification of these shapes:
\begin{eqnarray}
F_{\rm eq}(k_1,k_2,k_3) &=& \frac{3}{5} \bigg(
6 P_\zeta(k_1) P_\zeta(k_2)^{2/3} P_\zeta(k_3)^{1/3}
- 3 P_\zeta(k_1) P_\zeta(k_2) \nonumber \\
&& \hspace{1cm}
- 2 P_\zeta(k_1)^{2/3} P_\zeta(k_2)^{2/3} P_\zeta(k_3)^{2/3} \bigg) + \mbox{5 perm.} \nonumber \ , \\
F_{\rm orth}(k_1,k_2,k_3) &=& \frac{3}{5} \bigg(
18 P_\zeta(k_1) P_\zeta(k_2)^{2/3} P_\zeta(k_3)^{1/3}
- 9 P_\zeta(k_1) P_\zeta(k_2) \nonumber \\
&& \hspace{1cm}
- 8 P_\zeta(k_1)^{2/3} P_\zeta(k_2)^{2/3} P_\zeta(k_3)^{2/3} \bigg) + \mbox{5 perm.} \nonumber \ , \\
F_{\rm 7der}({\bf k}_1,{\bf k}_2,{\bf k}_3) &=&
-\frac{({\bf k}_2\cdot{\bf k}_3)^2}{k_1 k_2 k_3} P_\zeta(k_1)^{2/3} P_\zeta(k_2)^{2/3} P_\zeta(k_3)^{2/3} \nonumber \\
&& \hspace{1cm}
\times \int_{-\infty}^0 d\tau_E \, u_3(k_1\tau_E) u_0(k_2\tau_E) u_0(k_3\tau_E) + \mbox{2 perm.} \nonumber \ , \\
F_{\rm 9der}({\bf k}_1,{\bf k}_2,{\bf k}_3) &=&
-\frac{{\bf k}_2\cdot{\bf k}_3}{k_1 k_2 k_3} P_\zeta(k_1)^{2/3} P_\zeta(k_2)^{2/3} P_\zeta(k_3)^{2/3} \nonumber \\
&& \hspace{1cm} \times \int_{-\infty}^0 \frac{d\tau_E}{\tau_E^2} u_3(k_1\tau_E) u_2(k_2\tau_E) u_2(k_3\tau_E) + \mbox{2 perm.}\ . \label{eq:ns}
\end{eqnarray}
These definitions reduce to the previous one in the scale-invariant case $P_\zeta(k) = A_\zeta / k^3$, but
make sense if $P_\zeta(k)$ deviates slightly from scale invariance.
To represent the 7-derivative and 9-derivative shapes in factorizable form, rather than using templates, we use a physical approach
based on the observation that the in-in formalism automatically represents each shape as a conformal
time integral with factorizable integrand.
For each shape on the RHS of Eq.~(\ref{eq:in_in}), we first replace each factor of the form $({\bf k}_2\cdot{\bf k}_3)$ by
\begin{equation}
{\bf k}_2\cdot{\bf k}_3 \rightarrow \frac{1}{2}(k_1^2 - k_2^2 - k_3^2)\ ,
\end{equation}
and then replace the $\tau_E$ integral by a finite sum which approximates it.
This procedure formally represents the shape $F(k_1,k_2,k_3)$ as a sum of factorizable terms; the key issue is whether
the number of terms needed to obtain an accurate approximation to the integral is manageably small.
We discretize the $\tau_E$ integrals using linear spacing in $\log|\tau_E|$
with 5 sampling points per decade, starting at $\tau_{E\rm min} = -10^6$~Mpc
and ending at $\tau_{E\rm max} = -0.04$~Mpc, for a total of 38 sampling points.
We then take the resulting factorizable approximation to $F(k_1,k_2,k_3)$
and compute the angular CMB bispectrum $\langle a_{\ell_1m_1} a_{\ell_2m_2} a_{\ell_3m_3} \rangle$.
To show that this discretization of the $\tau_E$ integrals has converged,
we do the following end-to-end test.
We recompute the angular CMB bispectrum using a coarser $\tau_E$ sampling, larger
$\tau_{E\rm min}$, and smaller $\tau_{E\rm max}$.
We then verify that the two CMB bispectra agree (using the metric defined by the Fisher
matrix, which corresponds to observational distinguishability) at the $\approx 10^{-5}$ level.
We have done an analogous convergence test for other numerical parameters involved in the
bispectrum calculation: the CAMB~\cite{Lewis:1999bs} accuracy settings used to compute the CMB line-of-sight source function;
the spacing in the time integral used to compute the CMB transfer function $\Delta_\ell(k)$ from the source function; and
the endpoints/spacing of the $k$-integral and $r$-integrals used to compute the CMB angular bispectrum from the transfer function.
Taken together, these tests show that we have obtained factorizable representations for the 7-derivative and 9-derivative shapes
which allow the CMB bispectra to be approximated with negligibly small residual.
The above procedure represents the CMB bispectrum as a sum of terms which obey an angular
factorizability condition.
This representation contains a large number of terms but is redundant: most terms can be
approximated as linear combinations of a small subset of ``independent'' terms.
The optimization algorithm from~\cite{Smith:2006ud} takes advantage of this redundancy
to produce a more efficient factorizable representation while ensuring that
the bispectrum is unchanged within a small numerical threshold.
In Table~\ref{tab:nfact}, we show the improvement in the number of factorizable terms
$N_{\rm fact}$ which results from the optimization algorithm.
After optimization, the 7-derivative and 9-derivative shapes have factorizable representations
with $N_{\rm fact}$ of order a few hundred, which is small enough for practical data analysis.
Furthermore, every step of the procedure used to obtain these factorizable representations
is a controlled approximation in which the residual is guaranteed to be small~\footnote{We note that the same procedure could have been
applied to the $\dot\pi^3$ and $\dot\pi(\partial\pi)^2$ shapes, using the integral representations
in Eq.~(\ref{eq:in_in}) obtained from the in-in formalism. We have not done this in order to
facilitate comparison with previous results, which use the equilateral and orthogonal template
approximations. As previously remarked, these approximations are accurate at the $\approx$99\%
and $\approx$90\% level, so the difference is not very important for practical purposes.}.
\begin{table}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{|c||c|c|} \hline
Shape & $N_{\rm fact}$ (pre-optimization) & $N_{\rm fact}$ (post-optimization) \\ \hline\hline
Equilateral template & 1326 & 93 \\ \hline
Orthogonal template & 1326 & 120 \\ \hline
7-derivative shape & 126396 & 388 \\ \hline
9-derivative shape & 63198 & 222 \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\caption{Number of terms $N_{\rm fact}$ in the factorizable representations for the angular
CMB bispectrum $\langle a_{\ell_1m_1} a_{\ell_2m_2} a_{\ell_3m_3} \rangle$ for the four shapes
analyzed in this paper.}
\label{tab:nfact}
\end{table}
\subsection{WMAP results and interpretation}
We analyze WMAP data using the same pipeline and analysis parameters as in the WMAP9 results paper~\cite{Bennett:2012zja}.
This pipeline optimally combines data from $V$-band and $W$-band channels using inverse covariance weighting,
removes regions of large foreground contamination using the KQ75 mask, and projects out residual foregrounds
by marginalizing spatial templates for synchrotron, free-free and dust emission.
For more details of the pipeline, see \S8.1 of~\cite{Bennett:2012zja}.
We will analyze the equilateral, orthogonal, 7-derivative, and 9-derivative shapes.
The equilateral and orthogonal shapes have already been analyzed on the same data set in~\cite{Bennett:2012zja},
but we include them here since we will consider parameter spaces which include equilateral
and orthogonal non-Gaussianity in addition to our new shapes.
For historical reasons, it is conventional to normalize bispectrum coefficients by defining
$f_{NL}$ parameters so that $\langle \zeta_{{\bf k}_1} \zeta_{{\bf k}_2} \zeta_{{\bf k}_3} \rangle = (18/5) f_{NL} P_\zeta(k)^2$
on equilateral triangles satifying $k_1=k_2=k_3=k$.
The equilateral and orthogonal shapes have been defined in Eq.~(\ref{eq:ns}) so that they have this normalization.
To normalize our new shapes, we first
evaluate Eq.~(\ref{eq:ns}) on equilateral triangles, obtaining:
\begin{equation}
F_{\rm 7der}(k,k,k) = \frac{17}{162} P_\zeta(k)^2\ , \hspace{1.5cm}
F_{\rm 9der}(k,k,k) = \frac{8}{729} P_\zeta(k)^2\ ,
\end{equation}
so we define $f_{NL}$ parameters in terms of coefficients of the action~(\ref{eq:action}) by
\begin{equation}
f_{NL}^{\rm 7der} = \frac{85}{2916} {\mathcal C}_7 \ ,\hspace{1.5cm} f_{NL}^{\rm 9der} = \frac{20}{6561} {\mathcal C}_9\ .
\end{equation}
Using these definitions and the pipeline described above, our ``bottom line'' WMAP constraints on $f_{NL}$ parameters are:
\begin{eqnarray}
f_{NL}^{\rm eq} &=& 51 \pm 136 \hspace{1.94cm} \mbox{($-221 < f_{NL}^{\rm eq} < 323$ at 95\% CL)} \nonumber \\
f_{NL}^{\rm orth} &=& -245 \pm 100 \hspace{1.5cm} \mbox{($-445 < f_{NL}^{\rm orth} < -45$ at 95\% CL)} \nonumber \\
f_{NL}^{\rm 7der} &=& -34 \pm 56 \hspace{1.85cm} \mbox{($-146 < f_{NL}^{\rm 7der} < 78$ at 95\% CL)} \nonumber \\
f_{NL}^{\rm 9der} &=& 30 \pm 16 \hspace{2.12cm} \mbox{($-1 < f_{NL}^{\rm 9der} < 62$ at 95\% CL)} \label{eq:bottom_line}
\end{eqnarray}
As reported in~\cite{Bennett:2012zja}, there is a $2.5\sigma$ preference for nonzero $f_{NL}^{\rm orth}$.
Note that our estimates of $f_{NL}^{\rm eq}$ and $f_{NL}^{\rm orth}$ agree perfectly with~\cite{Bennett:2012zja},
since the maps and pipeline are identical.
Each ``bottom line'' constraint in Eq.~(\ref{eq:bottom_line}) is actually the value of an estimator $\hat f_{NL}$
which is constructed assuming that the other three shapes are absent. To analyze multiparameter spaces,
we need the correlation matrix of the four $\hat f_{NL}$ estimators, which we find using the WMAP pipeline to be:
\begin{equation}
\left( \begin{array}{cccc}
1 & 0.29 & -0.27 & 0.12 \\
0.29 & 1 & 0.51 & -0.73 \\
-0.27 & 0.51 & 1 & -0.58 \\
0.12 & -0.73 & -0.58 & 1
\end{array} \right) \label{eq:corr}\ .
\end{equation}
We can quantify the total deviation of all four $f_{NL}$ parameters from zero by computing
\begin{equation}
\chi^2 = (\hat f_{NL})^T C^{-1} (\hat f_{NL}) \label{eq:chi2}\ .
\end{equation}
Here, $(\hat f_{NL})$ is a vector containing the four best-fit values in Eq.~(\ref{eq:bottom_line}),
$C_{ij} = r_{ij} \sigma_i \sigma_j$ is the covariance matrix obtained by combining the $1\sigma$ errors $\sigma_i$ in Eq.~(\ref{eq:bottom_line})
and the correlation matrix $r_{ij}$ in Eq.~(\ref{eq:corr}).
For a partial parameter space with $N < 4$ shapes, we compute $\chi^2$ by reducing $C$ to an $N$-by-$N$
matrix (by removing rows and columns) before taking the matrix inverse in Eq.~(\ref{eq:chi2}).
\begin{table}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{|c||c|c|} \hline
Parameter space & $\chi^2 / \mbox{(d.o.f.)}$ & $p$-value \\ \hline\hline
$\{$Equil$\}$ & 0.14 / 1 & 0.71 \\
$\{$Equil, Orth$\}$ & 7.3 / 2 & 0.026 \\
$\{$Equil, Orth, 7der$\}$ & 9.7 / 3 & 0.022 \\
$\{$Equil, Orth, 7der, 9der$\}$ & 9.7 / 4 & 0.046 \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\caption{Statistical siginificance of deviation from Gaussian statistics,
as quantified by the $\chi^2$ statistic in Eq.~(\ref{eq:chi2}), for a sequence of
parameter spaces obtained by sequentially adding shapes with increasing numbers
of derivatives.}
\label{tab:chi2}
\end{table}
In Table~\ref{tab:chi2}, we show $\chi^2$ values for a sequence of parameter spaces
obtained by sequentially adding shapes with increasing numbers of derivatives.
The $p$-value associated with each $\chi^2$ is the probability that a Gaussian
simulation will give a $\chi^2$ larger than the WMAP data.
The small $p$-value in the second row of the table is driven by the preference
for nonzero $f_{NL}^{\rm orth}$ in WMAP9.
It is interesting to observe that the $p$-value in the third row is slightly lower,
i.e.~adding the 7-derivative shape to the $\{$Equil, Orth$\}$ parameter space
slightly increases the statistical evidence for non-Gaussianity.
However, the two $p$-values are similar enough that our interpretation of Table~\ref{tab:chi2}
is that the marginal evidence for non-Gaussianity in WMAP is mainly driven by $f_{NL}^{\rm orth}$.
\begin{figure}
\centerline{\includegraphics[width=12cm]{ellipses_v1.pdf}}
\caption{Error ellipses in the $(f_{NL}^{\rm 7der}, f_{NL}^{\rm 9der})$-plane,
with WMAP values shown (black point).
The ellipses labeled ``uncond.'' are 68\% and 95\% confidence regions
obtained from an ensemble of Gaussian simulations, and the ellipses labeled ``cond.''
are confidence regions obtained by postselecting only those simulations whose
values of $(f_{NL}^{\rm eq}, f_{NL}^{\rm orth})$ agree with the WMAP values.}
\label{fig:ellipses}
\end{figure}
There is one counterintuitive aspect of this table which deserves further comment.
The ``bottom line'' result in Eq.~(\ref{eq:bottom_line}) suggests that there is weaker
evidence for $f_{NL}^{\rm 7der}$ than $f_{NL}^{\rm 9der}$ ($0.6\sigma$ versus $2\sigma$),
whereas Table~\ref{tab:chi2} suggests the opposite ($\Delta\chi^2 = 2.4$
when the 7-derivative shape is added, versus $\Delta\chi^2 < 0.1$ for the 9-derivative shape).
This can be understood as follows.
In Fig.~\ref{fig:ellipses} we show two sets of error ellipses in the
$(f_{NL}^{\rm 7der}, f_{NL}^{\rm 9der})$ plane.
The first set (``uncond'') represents confidence regions that would be obtained from an ensemble
of Gaussian simulations, and the second set (``cond.'') represents confidence regions that would
be obtained by postselecting only those simulations whose values of $(f_{NL}^{\rm eq}, f_{NL}^{\rm orth})$
lie within narrow intervals centered on the WMAP values $(f_{NL}^{\rm eq}, f_{NL}^{\rm orth}) = (51, -245)$.
The two sets of ellipses differ significantly because $f_{NL}^{\rm orth}$ is nonzero at 2.5$\sigma$,
and the two higher-derivative shapes are significantly correlated with the orthogonal shape.
Depending on which set of ellipses one interprets the WMAP point $(f_{NL}^{\rm 7der}, f_{NL}^{\rm 9der}) = (-34,30)$
relative to, either $f_{NL}^{\rm 7der}$ or $f_{NL}^{\rm 9der}$ may appear to be more anomalous.
This explains the apparent discrepancy between Eq.~(\ref{eq:bottom_line}), where each shape is
estimated assuming the other three shapes are zero, and Table~\ref{tab:chi2}, where the total
statistical evidence for non-Gaussianity is accumulated accounting for correlations between shapes.
As mentioned in the introduction, we do not analyze Planck data since Monte Carlo simulations of the foreground-cleaned Planck maps
are not yet public, and would be impractical to construct due to complexity of the Planck noise model.
We note that the equilateral and orthogonal templates have been analyzed by the Planck collaboration in~\cite{Ade:2013ydc},
where it was found that the additional high-$\ell$ information degrades the 2.5$\sigma$ anomaly for $f_{NL}^{\rm orth}$ in WMAP9 data to $1.4\sigma$ in Planck:
\begin{eqnarray}
f_{NL}^{\rm eq, \; \rm Planck} &=& 63 \pm 57 \hspace{1.94cm} \mbox{($-51 < f_{NL}^{\rm eq, \; \rm Planck} < 177$ at 95\% CL)} \nonumber \\
f_{NL}^{\rm orth,\;\rm Planck} &=& -52 \pm 37 \hspace{1.5cm} \mbox{($-127 < f_{NL}^{\rm orth, \; \rm Planck} < 21$ at 95\% CL)} \nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
Given that the low $p$-value that we see in WMAP 9yr after including the 7- and 9-derivative shapes seems to be driven by the anomaly in the orthogonal shape,
it will be interesting to see the results of searching for the 7- and 9-derivative shapes in Planck data.
\section*{Acknowledgments}
We thank Andrei Gruzinov, Ami Katz, and Matias Zaldarriaga for useful discussions. The research of S.R.B is supported by the DOE under grant numbers DE-FG02-01ER-40676 and DE-FG02-01ER-40676. MM is supported by NSF Grant PHY-1314311.
L.S. is supported by DOE Early Career Award DE-FG02-12ER41854 and by NSF grant PHY-1068380.
Research at Perimeter Institute is supported by the Government of Canada
through Industry Canada and by the Province of Ontario through the Ministry of Research \& Innovation.
Some computations were performed on the GPC cluster at the SciNet HPC Consortium.
SciNet is funded by the Canada Foundation for Innovation under the auspices of Compute Canada,
the Government of Ontario, and the University of Toronto.
KMS was supported by an NSERC Discovery Grant.
|
\section{Introduction}
In this paper we study a problem of homogenization for a discrete crystalline flow. The analysis will be carried over by using the minimizing-movement scheme of Almgren, Taylor and Wang \cite{ATW83}. This consists in introducing a time scale $\tau$, iteratively defining a sequence of sets $E^\tau_k$ as minimizers of
\begin{equation}
\min \Bigl\{ P(E)+{\frac{1}{\tau}} D(E, E^\tau_{k-1})\Bigr\} ,
\end{equation}
\\
where $P$ is a perimeter energy and $D$ is a distance-type energy between sets, and $E^\tau_0$
is a given initial datum, and subsequently computing a time-continuous limit $E(t)$ of $\{E^\tau_k\}$ as $\tau\to0$, which defines the desired geometric motion related to the energy~$P$.
In recent papers by Braides, Gelli and Novaga \cite{BGN} and Braides and Scilla \cite{BraSci13}, the Almgren-Taylor-Wang approach has been used coupled to a homogenization procedure. In this case the perimeters and the distances depend on a small parameter $\varepsilon$ (interpreted as a space scale), and consequently, after introducing a time scale $\tau$, the time-discrete motions are the $E^{\tau,\varepsilon}_k$ defined iteratively by
\begin{equation}
E^{\tau,\varepsilon}_k \hbox{ is a minimizer of } \min \Bigl\{ P_\varepsilon(E)+{\frac{1}{\tau}} D_\varepsilon(E, E^{\tau,\varepsilon}_{k-1})\Bigr\}.
\end{equation}
The time-continuous limit $E(t)$ of $\{E^{\tau,\varepsilon}_k\}$ then may depend how mutually $\varepsilon$ and $\tau$ tend to $0$ (see Braides~\cite{Bra13}). In particular, if we have a large number of local minimizers then the limit motion will be pinned if $\tau<\!\!<\varepsilon$ suitably fast (in a sense, we can pass to the limit in $\tau$ first, and then apply the Almgren-Taylor-Wang approach, which clearly gives pinning when the initial data are local minimizers). On the contrary, if $\varepsilon<\!\!<\tau$ fast enough
and $P_\varepsilon$ $\Gamma$-converge to a limit perimeter $P$ (which is always the case by compactness) then the limit $E$ will be
the evolution related to the limit $P$ (again, in a sense, in this case we can pass to the limit in $\varepsilon$ first).
In \cite{BraSci13} the energies $P_\varepsilon$ are \emph{inhomogeneous ferromagnetic energies} defined on subsets $E\subset \varepsilon\mathbb{Z}^2$, of the form
\begin{equation*}
P_\varepsilon(E)= {\frac{1}{2}}\varepsilon\,\sum\{c_{ij}: i, j\in \mathbb{Z}^2,\varepsilon i\in E, \varepsilon j\not\in E, \ |i-j|=1\},
\end{equation*}
\\
(we use the notation $\sum\{x_a:a\in A\}=\sum_{a\in A}x_a$) where the coefficients $c_{ij}$ equal $\alpha>0$ except for some well-separated periodic square
inclusions of size $N_\beta$ where $c_{ij}=\beta>\alpha$. The periodicity cell is pictured in Fig.~\ref{fig:0}, where continuous lines represent $\beta$-bonds, dashed lines $\alpha$-bonds.
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\centering
\def150pt{100pt}
\input{fig0.pdf_tex}
\caption{The periodicity cell.}\label{fig:0}
\end{figure}
These inclusions are not energetically favorable (\emph{high\hbox{-}contrast} medium) and they can be neglected in the computation of the $\Gamma$-limit, which is the \emph{crystalline perimeter}
$$
P(E)=\alpha\int_{\partial E}\|\nu\|_1d\mathcal{H}^1,
$$
\\
where $\nu$ is the normal to $\partial E$ and $\|(\nu_1,\nu_2)\|_1=|\nu_1|+|\nu_2|$.
The {flat flow} of this perimeter is the motion by crystalline curvature in dimension two described by Taylor \cite{Ta}. In the case of initial datum a coordinate rectangle, the evolution by crystalline curvature is a rectangle with the same centre and sides of lengths $L_1, L_2$ governed by the system of ordinary differential equations
$$
\begin{cases}\displaystyle \dot L_1= -{\frac{4\alpha}{L_2}}\cr\cr
\displaystyle \dot L_2= -{\frac{4\alpha}{L_1}}.\end{cases}
$$
In \cite{BraSci13} all possible evolutions have been characterized as $\varepsilon, \tau\to 0$ showing that the relevant mutual scale is when $\tau/\varepsilon\to\gamma$. In the case of initial datum a coordinate rectangle the resulting evolution is still a rectangle. In the case of a unique evolution the side lengths $L_1(t), L_2(t)$ of this rectangle are governed by a system of `degenerate' ordinary differential equations
\begin{equation}
\begin{cases}\displaystyle \dot L_1= -{\frac{2}{\gamma}}f\left({\frac{\gamma}{L_2}}\right)\\ \cr
\displaystyle \dot L_2= -{\frac{2}{\gamma}}f\left({\frac{\gamma}{L_1}}\right),
\end{cases}
\label{systemdeg}
\end{equation}
\\
where the \emph{effective velocity function} $f$, obtained as solution of a one-dimensional homogenization problem, is a locally constant function on compact subsets of $(0,+\infty)$ which depends on $\alpha$, the period and size of the inclusions but not on $\gamma$ (neither on the value $\beta$). This function has been computed, by means of algebraic formulas, in the simpler cases $N_\beta=1$ and $N_\beta=2$, with varying $N_\alpha$. In particular, if $N_\alpha=N_\beta=1$, then the velocity function is given by
\begin{equation*}
\overline{f}(\gamma/L)=2\left\lfloor\frac{\alpha \gamma}{L}+\frac{1}{4}\right\rfloor,
\end{equation*}
\\
while in case of no inclusion (i.e., $\alpha=\beta$), it is given by
\begin{equation*}
\widetilde{f}(\gamma/L)=\left\lfloor\frac{2\alpha \gamma}{L}\right\rfloor.
\end{equation*}
\\
The dependence on the inclusions gives the \emph{pinning threshold} (i.e., the critical value of the side length above which it is energetically not favorable for a side to move)
$$
\overline L={\frac{4\alpha\gamma}{2+N_\beta}}
$$
\\
depending on the size of the inclusion $N_\beta$.
The inclusions can be considered as ``obstacles'' that can be bypassed when computing minimizers of $P_\varepsilon$; however their presence is felt in the minimizing-movement procedure since they may influence the choice of $E^{\tau,\varepsilon}_k$ through the interplay between the distance and perimeter terms. As a result the motion can be either decelerated or accelerated with respect to the homogeneous case (i.e., the case $\alpha=\beta$ described in \cite{BGN}).\\
Scope of this work is to give another example showing that the periodic microstructure can affect the limit evolution without changing the $\Gamma$-limit. To this end we perform a multi-scale analysis by introducing a \emph{contrast parameter} $\delta_\varepsilon$ and considering a \emph{low-contrast} medium, that is a periodic mixture of two homogeneous materials whose propagating properties are close to each other (see e.g. \cite{Milton}). One of them can be considered as a fixed background medium (described by $\alpha$-connections) and the other as a small (vanishing) perturbation from that one, that is with $\beta=\beta_\varepsilon=\beta(\varepsilon)$ and $\beta_\varepsilon-\alpha=\delta_\varepsilon\to0$ as $\varepsilon\to0$. With the same notation as in \cite{BraSci13} we restrict ourselves to the case $N_\alpha=N_\beta=1$ (see Fig.~\ref{fig:0}); despite of its simplicity, the choice of this particular geometry will suffice to show new features of the motion. The main result is the existence of a threshold value of the contrast parameter below which we have a new homogenized effective velocity, which takes into account the propagation velocities in both the connections $\alpha$ and $\beta$; above this threshold, instead, it is independent of the value of $\beta$ and the motion is obtained by considering only the $\alpha$\hbox{-}connections. The dependence of the effective properties on microstructure in low-contrast periodic media has been recently investigated for various physical problems (see e.g. \cite{Con}).
We first determine the correct scaling for $\delta_\varepsilon$ to have that a straight interface may stay on $\beta$-connections. To this end we consider a coordinate rectangle whose sides intersect only $\alpha$-bonds (\emph{$\alpha$-type rectangle}), we write the variation of the energy $\mathcal{F}_{\varepsilon,\gamma\varepsilon}^{\alpha,\beta_\varepsilon}$ (\ref{newenergy}) associated to the displacement by $\varepsilon$ of the upper horizontal side of length $L$ (see Fig.~\ref{heu}) and we impose it to be zero. We have that
\begin{equation*}
-2\alpha\varepsilon+(\beta_\varepsilon-\alpha)L+\frac{cL}{\gamma}\varepsilon=-2\alpha\varepsilon+\delta_\varepsilon L+\frac{cL}{\gamma}\varepsilon = 0,
\end{equation*}
\\
where $c=c(L)$ is a constant depending on $L$, from which we deduce that
\begin{equation*}
\delta_\varepsilon=\left(\frac{2\alpha}{L}-\frac{c}{\gamma}\right)\varepsilon=O(\varepsilon) \quad \text{as }\varepsilon\to0.
\end{equation*}
\\
This heuristic computation suggests that the correct scaling is
\begin{equation*}
\beta_\varepsilon-\alpha=\delta_\varepsilon=\delta\varepsilon
\end{equation*}
for some constant $\delta>0$.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\def150pt{250pt}
\input{heuristic.pdf_tex}
\caption{Displacement of a side from $\alpha$-connections to $\beta$-connections.}
\label{heu}
\end{figure}
As in \cite{BraSci13} we will assume that $\tau=\gamma\varepsilon$ and we will restrict the description of the motion to the case of initial data coordinate rectangles, since all other cases can be reduced to the study of this one. The evolution of a coordinate rectangle by minimization of the energy is again a coordinate rectangle.
We will show that there exists a threshold $\widetilde{\delta}=\frac{1}{2\gamma}$ such that if $\delta<\widetilde{\delta}$ (subcritical regime) then the evolution is a rectangle that may have some \emph{$\beta$-type side} (that is, a side intersecting only $\beta$\hbox{-}connections), while if $\delta\geq\widetilde{\delta}$ (supercritical regime) the $\beta$\hbox{-}connections are avoided as in the case $\beta>\alpha$. Note that this result gives information also for more general choices of the vanishing rate of $\delta_\varepsilon$: if $\delta_\varepsilon<\!<\!\varepsilon$ we reduce to the subcritical case, while if $\delta_\varepsilon >\!>\!\varepsilon$ we are in the supercritical case. The limit motion can still be described through a system of degenerate ordinary differential equations as in (\ref{systemdeg}) with a new effective velocity function $f=f_\delta$ depending on $\delta$. We also have a new effective pinning threshold given by
\begin{equation*}
\overline{L}_\delta=\max\left\{\frac{2\alpha\gamma}{\delta\gamma+1},\frac{4}{3}\alpha\gamma\right\}.
\end{equation*}
The paper is organized as follows. In Section~\ref{setting} we define all the energies that we will consider. We then formulate the discrete-in-time scheme analogous to the Almgren, Taylor and Wang approach. Section~\ref{rectangle} contains the description of the convergence of the discrete scheme in the case of a rectangular initial set. We show that the minimizers of this scheme are actually rectangles. Subsection~\ref{effveloc} deals with the definition of the effective velocity of a side by means of a homogenization formula resulting from a one-dimensional `oscillation-optimization' problem. This velocity can be expressed uniquely (up possibly to a discrete set of values) as a function of the ratio of $\gamma$ and the side length, and of $\delta$ (Definition~\ref{effvel}). Subsection~\ref{newpinning} contains the computation of the effective pinning threshold, showing that it is affected by microstructure because it also depends on the parameter $\delta$. In Subsection~\ref{computation} we compute explicitly the velocity function showing a comparison with the homogeneous case $\alpha=\beta$ and the high-contrast case $\beta>\alpha$. The description of the homogenized limit motion is contained in Subsection~\ref{limitmotion}. Section~\ref{periodic2} deals with the case of non-uniform inclusions distributed into periodic uniform layers.
\section{Notation and setting of the problem}\label{setting}
If $x=(x_1,x_2)\in\mathbb{R}^2$ we set $\|x\|_1=|x_1|+|x_2|$ and $\|x\|_\infty=\max\{|x_1|,|x_2|\}$. If $A$ is a Lebesgue\hbox{-}measurable set we denote by $|A|$ its two-dimensional Lebesgue measure. The symmetric difference of $A$ and $B$ is denoted by $A\triangle B$, their Hausdorff distance by $\text{d}_\mathcal{H}(A,B)$. If $E$ is a set of finite perimeter then $\partial^*E$ is its reduced boundary (see, for example \cite{Bra98}). The measure-theoretical inner normal to $E$ at a point $x$ in $\partial^*E$ is denoted by $\nu=\nu_E(x)$.
\subsection{Inhomogeneous `low-contrast' ferromagnetic energies}\label{inhom}
The energies we consider are interfacial energies defined in an inhomogeneous low-contrast environment as follows. Let $\alpha,\delta>0$ and we fix $\varepsilon>0$. We consider $2\varepsilon$-periodic coefficients $c_{ij}^\varepsilon$ indexed on \emph{nearest-neighbors} of $\varepsilon\mathbb{Z}^2$ (i.e., $i,j\in\varepsilon\mathbb{Z}^2$ with $|i-j|=\varepsilon$) defined for $i,j$ such that
\begin{equation*}
0\leq \frac{i_1+j_1}{2},\frac{i_2+j_2}{2}<2\varepsilon
\end{equation*}
\\
by
\begin{equation}
c_{ij}^\varepsilon=
\begin{cases}
\beta_\varepsilon=\alpha+\delta\varepsilon, &\quad \text{if }0\leq \displaystyle\frac{i_1+j_1}{2},\frac{i_2+j_2}{2}\leq\varepsilon\\
\alpha & \quad\text{otherwise.}
\end{cases}
\label{coeff}
\end{equation}
\\
These coefficients label the bonds between points in $\varepsilon\mathbb{Z}^2$, so that they describe a matrix of $\alpha$-bonds with $2\varepsilon$-periodic inclusions of $\beta$-bonds grouped in squares of side length $\varepsilon$. The periodicity cell is pictured in Fig.~\ref{fig1}. Here the continuous lines represent $\beta$-bonds while the dashed lines the $\alpha$ ones.
\begin{figure}
\center
\input{figra1.pdf_tex}
\caption{The periodicity cell.}
\label{fig1}
\end{figure}
Correspondingly, to coefficients (\ref{coeff}) we associate the energy defined on subsets $\mathcal{I}$ of $\varepsilon\mathbb{Z}^2$ by
\begin{equation}
\text{P}^{\alpha,\beta_\varepsilon}_\varepsilon(\mathcal{I})=\sum_{i,j}\left\{\varepsilon c_{ij}^\varepsilon: |i-j|=\varepsilon, i\in\mathcal{I},j\in\varepsilon\mathbb{Z}^2\backslash\mathcal{I}\right\},
\label{energy}
\end{equation}
where, as remarked in the Introduction, we use the notation $\sum\{x_a:a\in A\}=\sum_{a\in A}x_a$.
In order to study the continuous limit as $\varepsilon\to0$ of these energies, we will identify each subset of $\varepsilon\mathbb{Z}^2$ with a measurable subset of $\mathbb{R}^2$ in such a way that equi-boundedness of the energies implies pre-compactness of such sets in the sense of the sets of finite perimeter. This identification is as follows: if $\varepsilon>0$ and $i\in\varepsilon\mathbb{Z}^2$, we denote by $Q_\varepsilon(i)$ the closed coordinate square with side length $\varepsilon$ and centered in $i$. To a set of indices $\mathcal{I}\subset\varepsilon\mathbb{Z}^2$ we associate the set
\begin{equation}
E_\mathcal{I}=\bigcup_{i\in\mathcal{I}}Q_\varepsilon(i).
\end{equation}
The space of \emph{admissible sets} related to indices in the two-dimensional square lattice is then defined by
\begin{equation*}
\mathcal{D}_\varepsilon:=\{E\subseteq\mathbb{R}^2:\quad E=E_\mathcal{I}\text{ for some }\mathcal{I}\subseteq\varepsilon\mathbb{Z}^2\}.
\end{equation*}
For each $E=E_\mathcal{I}\in\mathcal{D}_\varepsilon$ we denote
\begin{equation*}
\text{P}_\varepsilon^{\alpha,\beta_\varepsilon}(E)=\text{P}_\varepsilon^{\alpha,\beta_\varepsilon}(\mathcal{I}).
\end{equation*}
We note that
\begin{equation}
\text{P}_\varepsilon^{\alpha,\beta_\varepsilon}(E)\geq\varepsilon\alpha\left\{(i,j): |i-j|=\varepsilon, i\in\mathcal{I},j\in\varepsilon\mathbb{Z}^2\backslash\mathcal{I}\right\}=\alpha\mathcal{H}^1(\partial E),
\end{equation}
which shows that sequences of sets $E_\varepsilon$ with $\sup_\varepsilon\text{P}^{\alpha,\beta_\varepsilon}_\varepsilon(E_\varepsilon)<+\infty$ are pre\hbox{-}compact with respect to the local $L^1$-convergence in $\mathbb{R}^2$ of their characteristic functions and their limits are sets of finite perimeter in $\mathbb{R}^2$.
Hence, this defines a meaningful convergence with respect to which compute the $\Gamma$\hbox{-}limit of $\text{P}^{\alpha,\beta_\varepsilon}_\varepsilon$ as $\varepsilon\to0$.
The energies $\text{P}_\varepsilon^{\alpha,\beta_\varepsilon}$ defined by (\ref{energy}) $\Gamma$\hbox{-}converge, as $\varepsilon\to0$, to the anisotropic cristalline perimeter functional
\begin{equation*}
\text{P}^\alpha(E)=\alpha\int_{\partial^*E}\|\nu\|_1\,d\mathcal{H}^1.
\end{equation*}
This can be shown with an analogous computation as in Braides-Scilla \cite{BraSci13}.
\subsection{A discrete distance}
For $\mathcal{I}\subset\varepsilon\mathbb{Z}^2$ we define the \emph{discrete $\ell^{\infty}$-distance} from $\partial\mathcal{I}$ as
\begin{equation*}
d_\infty^\varepsilon(i,\partial\mathcal{I})=
\begin{cases}
\inf\{\|i-j\|_\infty:j\in\mathcal{I}\}&\text{if $i\not\in\mathcal{I}$}\\
\inf\{\|i-j\|_\infty:j\in\varepsilon\mathbb{Z}^2\backslash\mathcal{I}\}&\text{if $i\in\mathcal{I}$}.
\end{cases}
\end{equation*}
Note that we have $d_\infty^\varepsilon(i,\partial\mathcal{I})=d_\infty(i,\partial E_\mathcal{I})+\displaystyle\frac{\varepsilon}{2}$, where $d_\infty$ denotes the usual $\ell^\infty$-distance. The distance can be extended to all $\mathbb{R}^2\backslash\partial E_\mathcal{I}$ by setting
\begin{equation*}
d_\infty^\varepsilon(x,\partial\mathcal{I})=d_\infty^\varepsilon(i,\partial\mathcal{I})\quad \text{if }x\in Q_\varepsilon(i).
\end{equation*}
In the following we will directly work with $E\in\mathcal{D}_\varepsilon$, so that the distance can be equivalently defined by
\begin{equation*}
d_\infty^\varepsilon(x,\partial E)=d_\infty(i,\partial E)+\frac{\varepsilon}{2},\quad \text{if }x\in Q_\varepsilon(i).
\end{equation*}
Note that this is well defined as a measurable function, since its definition is unique outside the union of the boundaries of the squares $Q_\varepsilon$ (that are a negligible set).
\subsection{Minimization scheme}\label{timemin}
We fix a time step $\tau>0$ and introduce a discrete motion with underlying time step $\tau$ obtained by successive minimization. At each time step we will minimize an energy $\mathcal{F}_{\varepsilon,\tau}^{\alpha,\beta_\varepsilon}:\mathcal{D}_\varepsilon\times\mathcal{D}_\varepsilon\to\mathbb{R}$ defined as
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{F}_{\varepsilon,\tau}^{\alpha,\beta_\varepsilon}(F,E)= \text{P}_\varepsilon^{\alpha,\beta_\varepsilon}(F)+\frac{1}{\tau}\int_{F\triangle E}d_\infty^\varepsilon(x,\partial E)\,dx.
\label{newenergy}
\end{equation}
Note that the integral can be indeed rewritten as a sum on the set of indices $\varepsilon\mathbb{Z}^2\cap(F\triangle E)$. More precisely, if $\mathcal{I}=E\cap\varepsilon\mathbb{Z}^2, \mathcal{J}=F\cap\varepsilon\mathbb{Z}^2$, then
\begin{equation*}
\begin{split}
\mathcal{F}_{\varepsilon,\tau}^{\alpha,\beta_\varepsilon}(\mathcal{J}, \mathcal{I})&=\text{P}_\varepsilon^{\alpha,\beta_\varepsilon}(\mathcal{J})+\frac{1}{\tau}\sum_{i\in\mathcal{J}\triangle\mathcal{I}}\varepsilon^2d_\infty^\varepsilon(i,\partial \mathcal{I})\\
&=\text{P}_\varepsilon^{\alpha,\beta_\varepsilon}(\mathcal{J})+\frac{1}{\tau}\left(\sum_{i\in\mathcal{I}\backslash\mathcal{J}}\varepsilon^2d_\infty(i,\mathcal{I})+\sum_{i\in\mathcal{I}\backslash\mathcal{J}}\varepsilon^2d_\infty(i,\varepsilon\mathbb{Z}^2\backslash\mathcal{I})\right).
\end{split}
\end{equation*}
Given an initial set $E^0_{\varepsilon}\in\mathcal{D}_\varepsilon$, we define recursively a sequence $E_{\varepsilon,\tau}^k$ in $\mathcal{D}_\varepsilon$ by requiring the following:
\begin{description}
\item[(i)] $E^0_{\varepsilon,\tau}=E^0_{\varepsilon}$;
\item[(ii)] $E_{\varepsilon,\tau}^{k+1}$ is a minimizer of the functional $\mathcal{F}_{\varepsilon,\tau}^{\alpha,\beta_\varepsilon}(\cdot,E_{\varepsilon,\tau}^k)$.
\end{description}
The \emph{discrete flat flow} associated to functionals $\mathcal{F}_{\varepsilon,\tau}^{\alpha,\beta_\varepsilon}$ is thus defined by
\begin{equation}
E_{\varepsilon,\tau}(t)=E_{\varepsilon,\tau}^{\lfloor t\slash\tau\rfloor},\quad t\geq0.
\label{disefo}
\end{equation}
Assuming that the initial data $E^0_{\varepsilon}$ tend, in the Hausdorff sense, to a sufficiently regular set $E_0$, we are interested in identifying the motion described by any converging subsequence of $E_{\varepsilon,\tau}(t)$ as $\varepsilon,\tau\to0$.
As remarked in the Introduction, the interaction between the two discretization parameters, in time and space, plays a relevant role in such a limiting process. More precisely, the limit motion depends strongly on their relative decrease rate to 0. If $\varepsilon\!<\!<\tau$ then we may first let $\varepsilon\to0$, so that $\text{P}_\varepsilon^{\alpha,\beta_\varepsilon}(F)$ can be directly replaced by the limit anisotropic perimeter $\text{P}^\alpha(F)$ and $\frac{1}{\tau}\int_{F\bigtriangleup E}d_\infty^\varepsilon(x,\partial E)\,dx$ by $\frac{1}{\tau}\int_{F\bigtriangleup E}d_\infty(x,\partial E)\,dx$. As a consequence, the approximated flat motions tend to the solution of the continuous ones studied by Almgren and Taylor \cite{AT95}. On the other hand, if $\varepsilon\!>\!>\tau$ then there is no motion and $E_{\varepsilon,\tau}^k\equiv E^0_{\varepsilon}$. Indeed, for any $F\neq E^0_{\varepsilon}$ and for $\tau$ small enough we have
\begin{equation*}
\frac{1}{\tau}\int_{F\bigtriangleup E^0_{\varepsilon}}d_\infty^\varepsilon(x,\partial E^0_{\varepsilon})\,dx\geq c\frac{\varepsilon}{\tau}>\text{P}_\varepsilon^{\alpha,\beta_\varepsilon}(E^0_{\varepsilon}).
\end{equation*}
In this case the limit motion is the constant state $E_0$. The meaningful regime is the intermediate case $\tau\sim\varepsilon$.
\section{Motion of a rectangle}\label{rectangle}
As shown in \cite{BGN} the relevant case is when $\varepsilon$ and $\tau$ are of the same order and the initial data are coordinate rectangles $E_\varepsilon^0$, which will be the content of this section.
We assume that
\begin{equation*}
\tau=\gamma\varepsilon\quad\text{for some }\gamma\in(0,+\infty),
\end{equation*}
and, correspondingly, we omit the dependence on $\tau$ in the notation of
\begin{equation*}
E_\varepsilon^k=E^k_{\varepsilon,\tau}(=E^k_{\varepsilon,\gamma\varepsilon}).
\end{equation*}
\begin{definition}
A side intersecting only $\alpha$-bonds (resp., $\beta$-bonds) will be called an \emph{$\alpha$-type side} (resp., \emph{$\beta$-type side}). A coordinate rectangle whose sides are $\alpha$-type sides will be called an \emph{$\alpha$-type rectangle}.
\end{definition}
The first result is that coordinate rectangles evolve into coordinate rectangles. This result will be more precise in the following. In fact, we will show that if $\delta<\frac{1}{2\gamma}$ then the evolution is a rectangle that may have some $\beta$-type side, while if $\delta\geq\frac{1}{2\gamma}$ it has only $\alpha$-type sides (Proposition~\ref{thresh}).
\begin{proposition}
Let $E_\varepsilon^0\in\mathcal{D}_\varepsilon$ be a coordinate rectangle. For all $\eta>0$, if $F$ is a minimizer for the minimum problem for $\mathcal{F}_{\varepsilon,\tau}^{\alpha,\beta_\varepsilon}(\cdot,E_\varepsilon^k),k\geq0$, the sides of $E_\varepsilon^k$ are larger than $\eta$ and $\varepsilon$ is small enough, then $F$ is a coordinate rectangle.
\end{proposition}
\proof
It will suffice to show it for $F=E_\varepsilon^1$. We subdivide the proof into steps.\\
{\bf Step 1: connectedness of $F$ and $\alpha$-rectangularization.} The connectedness of $F$ can be showed as in Braides, Gelli and Novaga \cite{BGN}, because the microstructure does not affect the argument therein. Now consider the maximal $\alpha$-type rectangle $R^\alpha$ with each side intersecting $F$. As in \cite{BraSci13} we call the set $F'=F\cup R^\alpha$ the \emph{$\alpha$-rectangularization} of $F$. This set is either an $\alpha$-type rectangle (and in this case we conclude) or it has some protrusions intersecting $\beta$-bonds. In both cases $\text{P}^{\alpha,\beta_\varepsilon}_\varepsilon(F')\leq\text{P}^{\alpha,\beta_\varepsilon}_\varepsilon(F)$, and the symmetric difference with $E_\varepsilon^0$ decreases. To justify this, note that the $\alpha$-rectangularization reduces (or leaves unchanged) $\text{P}^{\alpha,\alpha}_\varepsilon$ and it reduces the symmetric difference. Moreover, from this fact we deduce the \emph{a priori} estimate $\text{d}_\mathcal{H}(\partial E_\varepsilon^1,\partial E_\varepsilon^0)\leq c(L)\varepsilon$, where $c(L)$ is a constant depending on the length $L$ of the smaller side of $E_\varepsilon^0$.\\
{\bf Step 2: optimal profiles of protrusions on $\beta$-squares.} Now we describe the form of the optimal profiles of the boundary of $F$ intersecting $\beta$-squares. As noted in \cite{BraSci13}, $F$ contains an $\alpha$-type rectangle $R^\alpha=[\varepsilon m_1,\varepsilon M_1]\times [\varepsilon m_2,\varepsilon M_2]$ and is contained in the $\alpha$-type rectangle
\begin{equation*}
\widetilde{R}^\alpha=[\varepsilon(m_1-1),\varepsilon(M_1+1)]\times[\varepsilon(m_2-1),\varepsilon(M_2+1)],
\end{equation*}
whose sides exceed the ones of $R^\alpha$ by at most $2\varepsilon$. We will analyze separately the possible profiles of $F$ close to each side of $R^\alpha$; e.g., in the rectangle $[\varepsilon(m_1-1),\varepsilon(M_1+1)]\times[\varepsilon M_2,\varepsilon(M_2+1)]$ (i.e., close to the upper horizontal side of $R^\alpha$).
We first consider the possible behavior of the boundary of $F$ at a single $\beta$\hbox{-}square $Q$, assuming that $Q$ is not one of the two extremal squares. We claim that either $F\cap Q=\emptyset$ or $\partial F\cap Q$ is a horizontal segment. In fact, if a portion $\Gamma$ of $\partial F$ intersects two adjacent sides of $Q$ as in Fig.~\ref{rem}, then we may remove the $\varepsilon$-square whose center is in $Q\cap F$.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\def150pt{250pt}
\input{remove.pdf_tex}
\caption{Removal of an $\varepsilon$-square for $\delta$ `large'.}
\label{rem}
\end{figure}
In this case, the variation of energy is
\begin{equation}
-2(\beta_\varepsilon-\alpha)\varepsilon+\frac{1}{\gamma}c(L)\varepsilon^2=\left(-2\delta+\frac{1}{\gamma}c(L)\right)\varepsilon^2,
\label{var1}
\end{equation}
\\
which is negative, for $\varepsilon$ small, if and only if $\delta>c(L)/2\gamma$.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\def150pt{250pt}
\input{add.pdf_tex}
\caption{Adding of an $\varepsilon$-square for $\delta$ `small'.}
\label{add}
\end{figure}
If we add an $\varepsilon$-square as in Fig.~\ref{add}, instead, the variation of the energy is simply
\begin{equation}
-\frac{1}{\gamma}c(L)\varepsilon^2,
\label{var2}
\end{equation}
\\
which is negative. We note that the variation in (\ref{var1}) is strictly less than the one in (\ref{var2}) if and only if $\delta>c(L)/\gamma$.
The same analysis applies to the extremal squares, for which we deduce that $F\cap Q$, if non-empty, is a rectangle with one vertex coinciding with a vertex of $\widetilde{R}^\alpha$.
We now consider the interaction of consecutive $\beta$-squares. Let $Q_1,\dots,Q_K$ a maximal array of consecutive $\beta$-squares with $F\cap Q_k\neq\emptyset$ for $k=1,\dots,K$ and such that $Q_1$ is not a corner square.
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\def150pt{350pt}
\input{maximal.pdf_tex}
\caption{Interaction of consecutive $\beta$-squares.}
\label{maxim}
\end{figure}
If the subsequent $\beta$-squares $Q_{K+1},\dots,Q_{K+K'}$ are a maximal array not intersecting $F$, and $Q_{K+K'+1},\dots, Q_{K+K'+K''}$ are another maximal array with $F\cap Q_k\neq\emptyset$ for $k=K+K',\dots,K+K'+1$ and such that $Q_{K+K'+K''}$ is not a corner square (see Fig.~\ref{maxim}), then we may replace $F$ by $F\cup R$ (see Fig.~\ref{rep}), where $R$ is the rectangle given by the union of the $\varepsilon$-squares centered at the vertices of the $\beta$-squares $Q_{K+1},\dots,Q_{K+K'}$.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\def150pt{350pt}
\input{repl.pdf_tex}
\caption{The new profile after replacing $F$ by $F\cup R$.}
\label{rep}
\end{figure}
This operation leaves unchanged the $\text{P}_\varepsilon^{\alpha,\beta_\varepsilon}$ and reduces the symmetric difference with $E_\varepsilon^0$. We can repeat this procedure for any tern of such arrays. At this point, if we replace $F$ by $F\cup[\varepsilon m_1,\varepsilon M_1]\times[\varepsilon M_2, \varepsilon (M_2+1)]$, this strictly reduces $\text{P}_\varepsilon^{\alpha,\beta_\varepsilon}$ and the symmetric difference (see Fig.~\ref{fin}).
\begin{figure}
\centering
\def150pt{350pt}
\input{final.pdf_tex}
\caption{The new profile after replacing $F$ by $F\cup[\varepsilon m_1,\varepsilon M_1]\times[\varepsilon M_2, \varepsilon (M_2+1)]$.}
\label{fin}
\end{figure}
Note that, if the intersection of $F$ and the left (resp., right) corner square is not empty, then we can consider as a competitor $F\cup[\varepsilon (m_1-1),\varepsilon M_1]\times[\varepsilon M_2, \varepsilon (M_2+1)]$ (resp., $F\cup[\varepsilon m_1,\varepsilon (M_1+1)]\times[\varepsilon M_2, \varepsilon (M_2+1)]$); if $F$ has non empty intersection with both the corner squares, then we consider $F\cup[\varepsilon(m_1-1),\varepsilon(M_1+1)]\times[\varepsilon M_2,\varepsilon(M_2+1)]$.
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\def150pt{350pt}
\input{onlyone.pdf_tex}
\caption{The case of a single maximal array of intersecting $\beta$-squares.}
\label{only}
\end{figure}
If there exists only one maximal array $Q_1,\dots,Q_K$ and the intersection of $F$ and both the corner squares is empty (see Fig.~\ref{only}), then we may remove all the $\varepsilon$-squares centered at vertices of $Q_1,\dots,Q_K$ and the variation of energy is
\begin{equation}
-2\alpha\varepsilon+2K(\beta_\varepsilon-\alpha)\varepsilon+\frac{1}{\gamma}2c(L)K\varepsilon^2=-2\alpha\varepsilon-2K\delta\varepsilon^2+\frac{1}{\gamma}2c(L)K\varepsilon^2,
\label{comput}
\end{equation}
\\
which is negative for $\varepsilon\leq\frac{\alpha\gamma}{K(c(L)-\delta\gamma)}$ if $\delta<c(L)/\gamma$, any $\varepsilon$ if $\delta\geq c(L)/\gamma$.
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\def150pt{350pt}
\input{remonlyone.pdf_tex}
\caption{The profile after removing all the $\varepsilon$-squares.}
\label{remonly}
\end{figure}
Another possibility is that $F$ has a $\beta$-type side, that is the portion of $\partial F$ intersecting the $\beta$-squares is a horizontal segment, as in Fig.~\ref{albet}.
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\def150pt{350pt}
\input{allbeta.pdf_tex}
\caption{$F$ has a $\beta$-side.}
\label{albet}
\end{figure}
\noindent
{\bf Step 3: conclusion.} We can repeat this procedure for each side, and finally, again by $\alpha$-rectangularization, we obtain that either $F$ is an $\alpha$-type rectangle or it has some $\beta$-type side. In both cases, $F$ is a coordinate rectangle.
We note that all the estimates above can be iterated at each step and hold uniformly as long as the sides of $E_\varepsilon^k$ are larger than $\eta$ (just to avoid that the length of any side vanishes), since they depend only on $c(\eta)$.
\endproof
As shown in \cite{BGN}, the motion of each side of $E_\varepsilon^k$ can be studied separately remarking that the bulk term due to the small corner rectangles in Fig.~\ref{BNG-figure4} is negligible as $\varepsilon\to0$.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\centering
\def150pt{300pt}
\input{negligible.pdf_tex}
\caption{Picture of $E^{k+1}_\varepsilon$ inside $E^k_\varepsilon$}\label{BNG-figure4}
\end{figure}
As a consequence, we can describe the motion in terms of the length of the sides of $E_\varepsilon^k$. This will be done in the following sections.
\subsection{A velocity function depending on $\delta$}\label{effveloc}
By the previous remark, we can reduce to a one-dimensional problem.
Let $x_k$ represents the projection of the left-hand vertical side of $E_k=E_\varepsilon^k$ on the horizontal axis. The location of $x_{k+1}$ depends on a minimization argument involving $x_k$ and the length $L_k$ of the corresponding side of $E_k$. However, we will see that this latter dependence is locally constant, except for a discrete set of values of $L_k$. Indeed, for all $Y>0$ consider the minimum problems
\begin{equation}
\min\left\{g(N): N\in\mathbb{N}
\right\}
\label{minprob}
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
g(N)=
\begin{cases}
-2\alpha N+\displaystyle\frac{N(N+1)}{2Y},&\mbox{$N$ even,}\\
\\
-2\alpha N+\displaystyle\frac{\delta\gamma}{Y}+\displaystyle\frac{N(N+1)}{2Y},& \mbox{$N$ odd}.
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
\\
Then the set of $Y>0$ for which (\ref{minprob}) does not have a unique solution is discrete. To check this it suffices to remark that the function to minimize is represented (up to multiplying by $2Y$) by two parabolas
\begin{equation*}
-4\alpha YX+X(X+1)\quad \text{ and }\quad-4\alpha YX+X(X+1)+2\delta\gamma
\end{equation*}
with minimum at
\begin{equation*}
X=2\alpha Y-\frac{1}{2}.
\end{equation*}
The minimizers in (\ref{minprob}) are not unique in the case that
\begin{equation}
g(N-1)=g(N)\quad\text{ or }\quad g(N)=g(N+1),
\end{equation}
\\
that is for $Y=\displaystyle\frac{N+\delta\gamma}{2\alpha}$ or $\displaystyle Y=\frac{N+1-\delta\gamma}{2\alpha}$ if $N$ is odd, while for $Y=\displaystyle\frac{N-\delta\gamma}{2\alpha}$ or $Y=\displaystyle\frac{N+1+\delta\gamma}{2\alpha}$ if $N$ is even.
\begin{definition}
We define the \emph{singular set $S_\delta$} for problems (\ref{minprob}) as
\begin{equation}
S_\delta=\frac{1}{2\alpha}\left[\left(2\mathbb{Z}+1+\delta\gamma\right)\cup\left(2\mathbb{Z}-\delta\gamma\right)\right].
\label{singular}
\end{equation}
\end{definition}
\begin{proposition}\label{thresh}
Let $Y\in(0,+\infty)\backslash S_\delta$ be fixed and $\widetilde{N}$ be the solution of the corresponding minimum problem (\ref{minprob}). Then there exists a threshold value of the contrast parameter
\begin{equation}
\widetilde{\delta}:=\frac{1}{2\gamma}
\label{thr}
\end{equation}
such that if $\delta\geq\widetilde{\delta}$ then $\widetilde{N}$ is even, while if $\delta<\widetilde{\delta}$ then $\widetilde{N}$ may be any integer.
\end{proposition}
\proof
Let $\widetilde{N}$ be odd. $\widetilde{N}$ is the unique solution in (\ref{minprob}), so that it satisfies
\begin{equation}
\begin{cases}
\displaystyle \widetilde{N}-\frac{1}{2}<2\alpha Y-\frac{1}{2}<\widetilde{N}+\frac{1}{2},\\
\\
g(\widetilde{N})<g(\widetilde{N}-1)\\
\\
g(\widetilde{N})<g(\widetilde{N}+1)
\end{cases}
\label{systembeta}
\end{equation}
that is,
\begin{equation*}
\begin{cases}
\displaystyle\frac{\widetilde{N}}{2\alpha}<Y<\frac{\widetilde{N}+1}{2\alpha}\\
\\
Y>\displaystyle\frac{\widetilde{N}+\delta\gamma}{2\alpha}\\
\\
Y<\displaystyle\frac{\widetilde{N}+1-\delta\gamma}{2\alpha}.
\end{cases}
\end{equation*}
We note that it is
\begin{equation*}
\frac{\widetilde{N}+\delta\gamma}{2\alpha}<\frac{\widetilde{N}+1-\delta\gamma}{2\alpha},
\end{equation*}
so that the system (\ref{systembeta}) has solutions, if and only if $\delta<\widetilde{\delta}$.
\endproof
Now we examine the iterated minimizing scheme for $\gamma/L_k=\gamma/L\in(0,+\infty)\backslash S_\delta$ fixed, which reads
\begin{equation}
\begin{cases}
x_{k+1}^L=x_k^L+\overline{N},\quad k\geq0\\
x_0^L=x^0
\end{cases}
\label{system}
\end{equation}
\\
with $x^0\in\{0,1\}$ and $\overline{N}\in\mathbb{N}$ the minimizer of
\begin{equation}
\min
\begin{cases}
-2\alpha N+\displaystyle\frac{1}{\gamma}\frac{N(N+1)}{2}L,&\text{$N$ even},\\
\\
-2\alpha N+\delta L+\displaystyle\frac{1}{\gamma}\frac{N(N+1)}{2}L,&\text{$N$ odd},
\end{cases}
\label{minimization}
\end{equation}
\\
which is unique up to the requirement that $\gamma/L\not\in S_\delta$.
\begin{remark}\label{perino}
As a trivial remark, after at most two steps $\{x_{k}^L\}_{k\geq0}$ is \emph{periodic modulo} $2$, that is, there exist integers $\bar{k},M\leq2$ and $n\geq1$ such that
\begin{equation}\label{periodi}
x_{k+M}^L=x_{k}^L+2n
\qquad\hbox{ for all } k\geq\bar{k}.
\end{equation}
For this, we note that $\{x_{k}^L\}_{k\geq0}$ is an arithmetic sequence and the conclusion depends whether $\overline{N}$ is odd or even. Moreover, the quotient $n/M$ depends only on $\gamma/L$ and $\delta$. In particular, if $\delta\geq1/2\gamma$ then $\bar{k}=M=1$.
By Proposition~\ref{thresh}, this is a straightforward consequence of Proposition~3.6 in \cite{BraSci13} with $N_\alpha=N_\beta=1$.
\end{remark}
\begin{definition}[effective velocity] \rm
We define the \emph{effective velocity function}\\ $f_\delta:(0,+\infty)\setminus S_\delta\longrightarrow[0,+\infty)$ by setting
\begin{equation}
f_\delta(Y)=\frac{2n}{M},
\label{velocityfunction}
\end{equation}
with $M$ and $n$ in (\ref{periodi}) defined by $L$ and $\gamma$ such that $Y=\gamma/L$. By Remark~\ref{perino} this is a good definition.
\label{effvel}
\end{definition}
We recall some properties of the velocity function (for the proof see \cite{BraSci13}).
\begin{remark}[properties of the velocity function $f_\delta$] The velocity function $f_\delta$ has the following properties:
\begin{description}
\item[(a)] $f_\delta$ is constant on each interval contained in its domain;
\item[(b)] $f_\delta(Y)=0$ if $$
Y<\overline{Y}_\delta:=\min\left\{\frac{3}{4\alpha},\frac{\delta\gamma+1}{2\alpha}\right\},
$$
where $\overline{Y}_\delta=\gamma/\overline{L}_\delta$ and $\overline{L}_\delta$ is the pinning threshold (see Subsection~\ref{newpinning}).\\ In particular,
$$
\lim_{\gamma\to 0^+} {\frac{1}{\gamma}} f_\delta\Bigl({\frac{\gamma}{L}}\Bigr)=0\,;
$$
\item[(c)] $f_\delta(Y)$ is an integer value;
\item[(d)] $f_\delta(Y)$ is a non decreasing function of $Y$;
\item[(e)] we have
$$
\lim_{\gamma\to+\infty} {\frac{1}{\gamma}} f_\delta\Bigl({\frac{\gamma}{L}}\Bigr)={\frac{2\alpha}{L}}\,.
$$
\end{description}
\end{remark}
\subsection{The effective pinning threshold}\label{newpinning}
We now examine the case when the limit motion is trivial; i.e., all $E_k = E^k_\varepsilon$ are the same after a finite number of steps. This will be done by computing the \emph{pinning threshold}; i.e., the critical value of the side length $L$ above which it is energetically not favorable for a side to move.
If $0\leq\delta<\widetilde{\delta}$ to compute it we have to impose that it is not energetically favorable to move inward a side by $\varepsilon$. We then write the variation of the energy functional $\mathcal{F}^{\alpha,\beta_\varepsilon}_{\varepsilon,\tau}$ from configuration $A$ to configuration $B$ in Fig.~\ref{pinning2}, regarding a side of length $L$. If we impose it to be positive, we have
\begin{equation*}
-2\alpha\varepsilon+L(\beta_\varepsilon-\alpha)+\frac{1}{\tau}L\varepsilon^2=\varepsilon\left[-2\alpha+L\left(\delta+\frac{1}{\gamma}\right)\right]\geq0
\end{equation*}
and we obtain the pinning threshold
\begin{equation}
\widetilde{L}_\delta:=\frac{2\alpha\gamma}{\delta\gamma+1}.
\end{equation}
Note that if $\delta=0$ (i.e., $\beta_\varepsilon=\alpha$), then we recover the threshold of the homogeneous case
\begin{equation*}
\widetilde{L}_0=2\alpha\gamma.
\end{equation*}
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\def150pt{200pt}
\input{pinning2.pdf_tex}
\caption{If $\delta<\widetilde{\delta}$ the motion is possible if the side can move at least by $\varepsilon$.}
\label{pinning2}
\end{figure}
If $\delta\geq\widetilde{\delta}$, instead, by the condition that $E_k$ be an $\alpha$-type rectangle, we have to impose that it is not energetically favorable to move inward a side by $2\varepsilon$ (see Fig.~\ref{pinning3}). As shown in \cite{BraSci13}, this gives the pinning threshold
\begin{equation*}
\widetilde{L}_{\widetilde{\delta}}=\frac{4}{3}\alpha\gamma.
\end{equation*}
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\def150pt{200pt}
\input{pinning3.pdf_tex}
\caption{If $\delta\geq \widetilde{\delta}$ the motion is possible if the side can move at least by $2\varepsilon$.}
\label{pinning3}
\end{figure}
Hence, the \emph{effective pinning threshold} (see Fig.~\ref{threshold}) is given by
\begin{equation}
\overline{L}_\delta=\max\left\{\frac{2\alpha\gamma}{\delta\gamma+1},\frac{4}{3}\alpha\gamma\right\}.
\label{pinningeff}
\end{equation}
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=.90]{graph.pdf}
\caption{Effective pinning threshold.}
\label{threshold}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Computation of the velocity function}\label{computation}
In this section we compute explicitly the velocity function $f_\delta$ assuming, without loss of generality, that $\gamma=1$. We restrict ourselves to the case $\delta<1/2$, because if $\delta\geq1/2$ the velocity function is given by (see \cite{BraSci13}, Section~4)
\begin{equation}
\overline{f}(Y)=2\left\lfloor \alpha Y+\frac{1}{4}\right\rfloor.
\label{highvel}
\end{equation}
We denote by $\overline{N}$ the minimizer of the problem (\ref{minimization}) and subdivide the computation into different cases:
\\
\\
(a) $x_n$ is even and $Y\in\left(\displaystyle\frac{2k+1+\delta}{2\alpha},\frac{2k+2-\delta}{2\alpha}\right)$ for some $k\geq0$; in this case $\overline{N}=2k+1$ and $x_{n+1}= x_n+\overline{N}$ is odd. The next point is $x_{n+2}=x_{n+1}+\overline{N}=x_n+2\overline{N}$, which is even, so that the sequence $\{x_m\}$ oscillates between even and odd numbers (that is, the side is alternatively $\alpha$-type and $\beta$-type). In this case,
\begin{equation*}
f_\delta(Y)=\frac{x_{n+2}-x_n}{2}=\frac{2\overline{N}}{2}=2k+1=\lfloor 2\alpha Y\rfloor;
\end{equation*}
\\
(b) $x_n$ is odd and $Y\in\left(\displaystyle\frac{2k+1+\delta}{2\alpha},\frac{2k+2-\delta}{2\alpha}\right)$ for some $k\geq0$; in this case
$x_{n+1}=x_n+\overline{N}$ is even and $x_{n+2}=x_n+2\overline{N}$, is odd, so that as before
\begin{equation*}
f_\delta(Y)=2k+1=\lfloor 2\alpha Y\rfloor;
\end{equation*}
\\
(c) $x_n$ is even and $Y\in\left(\displaystyle\frac{2k-\delta}{2\alpha},\frac{2k+1+\delta}{2\alpha}\right)$ for some $k\geq0$; in this case $\overline{N}=2k$ and $x_{n+1}= x_n+\overline{N}$ is even. Therefore the sequence $\{x_m\}$ consists of only even numbers (that is, at each step the side is $\alpha$-type) and in this case the velocity function is given by
\begin{equation*}
f_\delta(Y)=x_{n+1}-x_n=\overline{N}=2k;
\end{equation*}
\\
(d) $x_n$ is odd and $Y\in\left(\displaystyle\frac{2k-\delta}{2\alpha},\frac{2k+1+\delta}{2\alpha}\right)$ for some $k\geq0$; in this case
$x_{n+1}= x_n+\overline{N}$ is also odd. Therefore the sequence $\{x_m\}$ consists of only odd numbers (that is, at each step the side is $\beta$-type) and in this case the velocity function is given again by
\begin{equation*}
f_\delta(Y)=x_{n+1}-x_n=N=2k.
\end{equation*}
\\
Note that, collecting all the cases, we can write the velocity function as
\begin{equation}
f_\delta(Y)=
\begin{cases}
0&\text{if }0<Y<\displaystyle\frac{\delta+1}{2\alpha},\\
\\
2k& \text{if }Y\in\left(\displaystyle\frac{2k-\delta}{2\alpha},\frac{2k+1+\delta}{2\alpha}\right),\qquad k\geq0\\
\\
2k+1& \text{if }Y\in\left(\displaystyle\frac{2k+1+\delta}{2\alpha},\frac{2k+2-\delta}{2\alpha}\right).
\end{cases}
\label{fdelta}
\end{equation}
It can be rewritten equivalently as
\begin{equation*}
f_\delta(Y)=
\begin{cases}
\lfloor 2\alpha Y\rfloor+1& \text{if }Y\in\left(\displaystyle\frac{2k-\delta}{2\alpha},\frac{2k}{2\alpha}\right),\\
\\
\lfloor 2\alpha Y\rfloor& \text{if }Y\in\left(\displaystyle\frac{2k}{2\alpha},\frac{2k+1}{2\alpha}\right),\\
\\
\lfloor 2\alpha Y\rfloor-1& \text{if }Y\in\left(\displaystyle\frac{2k+1}{2\alpha},\frac{2k+1+\delta}{2\alpha}\right),\\
\\
\lfloor 2\alpha Y\rfloor& \text{if }Y\in\left(\displaystyle\frac{2k+1+\delta}{2\alpha},\frac{2k+2-\delta}{2\alpha}\right).
\end{cases}
\end{equation*}
Therefore we notice accelerating and decelerating effects (due to the microstructure through $\delta$) with respect to the velocity function $\widetilde{f}$ obtained in the homogeneous case~\cite{BGN}, that is
\begin{equation*}
\widetilde{f}(Y)=
\begin{cases}
0&\text{if }0<Y<\displaystyle\frac{1}{2\alpha},\\
\\
\lfloor 2\alpha Y\rfloor &\text{if }Y\in\left(\displaystyle\frac{k}{2\alpha},\frac{k+1}{2\alpha}\right), k\geq1.
\end{cases}
\end{equation*}
Moreover, we recover $\widetilde{f}$ computing $f_\delta$ for $\delta=0$. If we choose $\delta=1/2$ (actually, any $\delta\geq1/2$), we recover the velocity function $\overline{f}$ (\ref{highvel}) which corresponds to the high\hbox{-}contrast case.\\
We conclude this section by writing the general formula of the velocity function $f_\delta$ valid for any $\delta$ and $\gamma$:
\begin{equation*}
f_\delta(Y)=
\begin{cases}
0&\text{if }0<Y<\displaystyle\frac{\min\{\delta\gamma,1/2\}+1}{2\alpha},\\
\\
2k& \text{if }Y\in\left(\displaystyle\frac{2k-\min\{\delta\gamma,1/2\}}{2\alpha},\frac{2k+1+\min\{\delta\gamma,1/2\}}{2\alpha}\right),\\
\\
2k+1& \text{if }Y\in\left(\displaystyle\frac{2k+1+\min\{\delta\gamma,1/2\}}{2\alpha},\frac{2k+2-\min\{\delta\gamma,1/2\}}{2\alpha}\right),
\end{cases}
\label{fdelta2}
\end{equation*}
with $k\geq0$.
\subsection{Description of the homogenized limit motion}\label{limitmotion}
The following characterization of any limit motion holds (see Theorem 3.11 in \cite{BraSci13}).
\begin{theorem}\label{limitmotion1}For all $\varepsilon>0$, let $E^0_\varepsilon\in\mathcal{D}_\varepsilon$ be a coordinate rectangle with sides $S^0_{1,\varepsilon},\dots,S^0_{4,\varepsilon}$. Assume also that
\begin{equation*}
\lim_{\varepsilon\to0^+}\emph{d}_\mathcal{H}(E^0_\varepsilon,E_0)=0
\end{equation*}
for some fixed coordinate rectangle $E_0$. Let $\delta,\gamma>0$ be fixed and let $E_\varepsilon(t)= E_{\varepsilon,\gamma\varepsilon}(t)$ be the piecewise-constant motion with initial datum $E^0_\varepsilon$ defined in {\rm(\ref{disefo})}.
Then, up to a subsequence, $E_\varepsilon(t)$ converges as $\varepsilon\to0$ to $E(t)$, where $E(t)$ is a coordinate rectangle with sides $S_i(t)$ and such that $E(0)=E_0$. Each $S_i$ moves inward with velocity $v_i(t)$ satisfying
\begin{equation}
v_i(t)\in\left[\displaystyle\frac{1}{\gamma}f_\delta\biggl({\frac{\gamma}{L_i(t)}}\biggr)^-,\displaystyle\frac{1}{\gamma}f_\delta\biggl({\frac{\gamma}{L_i(t)}}\biggr)^+\right],
\label{vl}
\end{equation}
where $f_\delta$ is given by Definition {\rm\ref{effvel}}, $L_i(t):=\mathcal{H}^1(S_i(t))$ denotes the length of the side $S_i(t)$, until the extinction time when $L_i(t)=0$, and $f_\delta(Y)^-,f_\delta(Y)^+$ are the lower and upper limits of the effective-velocity function at $Y\in (0,+\infty)$.
\end{theorem}
In case of a unique evolution, the limit motion is described as follows (see Theorem 3.12 in \cite{BraSci13}).
\begin{theorem}[unique limit motion]
Let $E_\varepsilon,E_0$ be as in the statement of Theorem {\rm \ref{limitmotion1}}. Assume in addition that the lengths $L^0_1,L^0_2$ of the sides of the initial set $E_0$ satisfy one of the following conditions (we assume that $L^0_1\leq L^0_2$):
\begin{itemize}
\item[\emph{(a)}] $L^0_1,L^0_2>\overline{L}_\delta$, $\overline{L}_\delta$ given by {\rm(\ref{pinningeff})} \emph{(total pinning)};
\item[\emph{(b)}] $L^0_1<\overline{L}_\delta$ and $L^0_2\leq\overline{L}_\delta$ \emph{(vanishing in finite time)};
\end{itemize}
then $E_\varepsilon(t)$ converges locally in time to $E(t)$ as $\varepsilon\to 0$, where $E(t)$ is the unique rectangle with sides of lengths $L_1(t)$ and $L_2(t)$ which solve the following system of ordinary differential equations
\begin{equation}\label{unita}
\begin{cases}\displaystyle
\dot{L}_1(t)=-{\frac{2}{\gamma}}\,f_\delta\left({\frac{\gamma}{L_2(t)}}\right)\\
\\ \displaystyle
\dot{L}_2(t)=-{\frac{2}{\gamma}}\, f_\delta\left({\frac{\gamma}{L_1(t)}}\right)
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
for almost every $t$, with initial conditions $L_1(0)=L^0_1$ and $L_2(0)=L^0_2$.
\end{theorem}
\section{The periodic case with $K$ contrast parameters}\label{periodic2}
In this section we study the same problem as before in a more general framework. We consider a medium with inclusions distributed into periodic uniform layers as follows.\\
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\def150pt{150pt}
\input{cell2.pdf_tex}
\caption{The periodicity cell for $K=2$.}
\label{cella2}
\end{figure}
Let $\varepsilon>0$ be fixed and $\delta_1,\delta_2,\dots,\delta_K,K\in\mathbb{N}$ be positive. We consider $2K\varepsilon$-periodic coefficients $c_{ij}^\varepsilon$ indexed on nearest-neighbors of $\varepsilon\mathbb{Z}^2$ and defined for $i,j$ such that
\begin{equation*}
0\leq \frac{i_1+j_1}{2},\frac{i_2+j_2}{2}<2K\varepsilon
\end{equation*}
by
\begin{equation}
c_{ij}^\varepsilon=
\begin{cases}
\alpha+\delta_r\varepsilon, & \text{if }\displaystyle\frac{i_1+j_1}{2},\frac{i_2+j_2}{2}=\left(2r-\frac{1}{2}\right)\varepsilon,\quad r=1,\dots,K\\
\\
\alpha, & \text{otherwise.}
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
In Fig.~\ref{cella2} the periodicity cell is pictured in the case $K=2$. Here the bonds with parameter $\delta_1$ are marked with a dot, the ones with parameter $\delta_2$ are marked with a square and the dashed lines represent the $\alpha$-bonds.
Correspondingly, to these coefficients we associate the energy $\text{P}^{\alpha,\beta_\varepsilon}_\varepsilon(\mathcal{I})$
defined on subsets $\mathcal{I}$ of $\varepsilon\mathbb{Z}^2$ as in (\ref{energy}). We consider the same discrete-in-time minimization scheme for the energy $\mathcal{F}_{\varepsilon,\tau}^{\alpha,\beta_\varepsilon}$ with $\tau=\gamma\varepsilon$ as in Subsection~\ref{timemin} and we restrict our analysis to rectangular evolutions as in Section~\ref{rectangle}. We will see that the minimization problem and the velocity function depend on the choice of $\delta_r,r=1,\dots,K$; in particular, on their relative position with respect to the critical value $\widetilde{\delta}$ defined by equation (\ref{thr}).
We will treat only the cases
\begin{equation}
\widetilde{\delta}\leq\delta_r\quad\text{for some $r\in\{1,\dots,K\}$}
\label{ass1}
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
0\leq\delta_r<\widetilde{\delta}, \quad \forall r=1,\dots,K,
\label{ass2}
\end{equation}
because if $\widetilde{\delta}\leq\delta_r$ for all $r$ then we are in the high-contrast case already described in \cite{BraSci13}.
\subsection{The pinning threshold}
For the computation of the pinning threshold we refer to Subsection~\ref{newpinning}.
Under assumption (\ref{ass1}), after a finite number of steps the side is pinned if it cannot move inward by $2\varepsilon$. In this case, the pinning threshold is given by
\begin{equation*}
\widetilde{L}_{\widetilde{\delta}}=\frac{4}{3}\alpha\gamma.
\end{equation*}
If (\ref{ass2}) holds, instead, after a finite number of steps the side is pinned if it cannot move inward by $\varepsilon$. In particular, the pinning threshold now depends on $\delta_{\bar{r}}=\displaystyle\min_{1\leq r\leq K}\{\delta_r\}$ and it is given by
\begin{equation*}
\widetilde{L}_{\delta_{\bar{r}}}=\frac{2\alpha\gamma}{\delta_{\bar{r}}\gamma+1}.
\end{equation*}
Hence, collecting the two cases we obtain the pinning threshold
\begin{equation}
\overline{L}_{\delta_1,\dots,\delta_K}=\max\{\widetilde{L}_{\delta_{\bar{r}}},\widetilde{L}_{\widetilde{\delta}}\}.
\end{equation}
\subsection{The effective velocity function}
We adopt the same notation as in Subsection \ref{effveloc}. For all $Y>0$ we consider the minimum problems
\begin{equation}
\min\left\{g(N): N\in\mathbb{N}\right\}
\label{minprob1}
\end{equation}
\\
where
\begin{equation}
g(N)=
\begin{cases}
-2\alpha N+\displaystyle\frac{N(N+1)}{2Y},& \text{if }[N]_{2K}=[2r-2]_{2K},\\
\\
-2\alpha N+\displaystyle\frac{\delta_r\gamma}{Y}+\displaystyle\frac{N(N+1)}{2Y},&\text{if } [N]_{2K}=[2r-1]_{2K},r=1,\dots,K,
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
\\
and $[z]_{2K}$ is the congruence class of $z$ modulo $2K$.
Then the set of $Y>0$ for which (\ref{minprob1}) does not have a unique solution is discrete. For this we remark that the function to minimize is represented by $K+1$ parabolas
\begin{equation*}
-4\alpha YX+X(X+1)\quad\text{ and }\quad-4\alpha YX+X(X+1)+2\delta_r\gamma\quad r=1,\dots,K
\end{equation*}
with {minimum at}
\begin{equation*}
X=2\alpha Y-\frac{1}{2}.
\end{equation*}
As a consequence of (\ref{singular}) we have that the minimizers in (\ref{minprob1}) are not unique in the case that $Y\in S_{\delta_r}, r=1,\dots,K$ where
\begin{equation}
S_{\delta_r}:={\frac{1}{2\alpha}}\left[(2(2r-1)K\mathbb{Z}+C_{\delta_r\gamma})\cup((2(2r-1)K\mathbb{Z}+1-C_{\delta_r\gamma})\right]
\label{sing}
\end{equation}
and $C_{\delta_r\gamma}=\min\{\delta_r\gamma,1/2\}, r=1,\dots,K$.
\begin{definition}
We define the \emph{singular set {$S_{\delta_1,\dots,\delta_K}$}} for problems (\ref{minprob1}) as
\begin{equation}
S_{\delta_1,\dots,\delta_K}=\displaystyle\bigcup_{r=1}^K S_{\delta_r}
\end{equation}where $S_{\delta_r}$ is defined by (\ref{sing}).
\label{singular2}
\end{definition}
We now examine the iterated minimizing scheme for $\gamma/L\in(0,+\infty)\backslash S_{\delta_1,\dots,\delta_K}$ fixed, which reads
\begin{equation}
\begin{cases}
x_{k+1}^L=x_k^L+\overline{N},\quad k\geq0\\
x_0^L=x^0
\end{cases}
\label{system2}
\end{equation}
with $x^0\in\{0,1,2,\dots,2K-1\}$ and $\overline{N}\in\mathbb{N}$ the minimizer of
\begin{equation*}
\min
\begin{cases}
-2\alpha N+\displaystyle\frac{1}{\gamma}\frac{N(N+1)}{2}L,& \text{if }[N]_{2K}=[2r-2]_{2K},\\
\\
-2\alpha N+\delta_r L+\displaystyle\frac{1}{\gamma}\frac{N(N+1)}{2}L,& \text{if }[N]_{2K}=[2r-1]_{2K},r=1,\dots,K,
\end{cases}
\label{minimization2}
\end{equation*}
which is unique up to the requirement that $\gamma/L\not\in S_{\delta_1,\dots,\delta_K}$. With an analogous argument as in Section~\ref{effveloc} we can prove that, after at most $2K$ steps, $\{x_{k}^L\}_{k\geq0}$ is periodic modulo $2K$. Hence, we can define the effective velocity function $f=f_{\delta_1,\dots,\delta_K}$ as in Definition~\ref{effvel}.
\subsection{Computation of the velocity function}
In this section we give the expression of the velocity function without proof, which follows by analogous computations as in Subsection~\ref{computation}.
For any $\gamma,\delta_1,\dots,\delta_K$, the velocity function $f=f_{\delta_1,\dots,\delta_K}$ is given by
\begin{equation*}
f(Y)=
\begin{cases}
0, & \text{if }0<Y<\gamma/\overline{L}_{\delta_1,\dots,\delta_K},\\
\\
2Kk, & \text{if }Y\in\left(\displaystyle\frac{2Kk-C_{\delta_K\gamma}}{2\alpha},\frac{2Kk+1+C_{\delta_1\gamma}}{2\alpha}\right),\\
\\
2Kk+1, & \text{if }Y\in\left(\displaystyle\frac{2Kk+1+C_{\delta_1\gamma}}{2\alpha},\frac{2Kk+2-C_{\delta_1\gamma}}{2\alpha}\right),\\
\\
2Kk+2, & \text{if }Y\in\left(\displaystyle\frac{2Kk+2-C_{\delta_1\gamma}}{2\alpha},\frac{2Kk+3+C_{\delta_2\gamma}}{2\alpha}\right),\\
\\
\quad\vdots&\quad\vdots\qquad\qquad\vdots\\
\\
2Kk+2K-1, & \text{if }Y\in\left(\displaystyle\frac{2K(k+1)-1+C_{\delta_K\gamma}}{2\alpha},\frac{2K(k+1)-C_{\delta_K\gamma}}{2\alpha}\right),
\end{cases}
\end{equation*}
with $k\geq0$.
\section*{Acknowledgments} I am grateful to Andrea Braides for suggesting this problem, and I would like to thank him for his advices. I acknowledge the anonymous referees for their interesting remarks leading to improvements of the manuscript.
|
\section{Introduction}
A triangulation of a manifold can be given a geometric structure by
assigning compatible geometric structures to its component
simplices. One of the easiest ways of doing this is to assign constant
curvature geometries to the simplices, as these simplices are uniquely
determined by their edge lengths. Such a structure
gives a finitely parametrized set of geometric structures on a closed
manifold.
In Thurston's formulation of the discrete Riemann mapping problem (see
\cite{Ste}) as well as in applied methods such as discrete exterior
calculus (see, e.g., \cite{DHLM}, \cite{DAOD}), it is important to not
only have a piecewise constant curvature metric assigned to simplices,
but also to give a structure to the Poincar\'e dual of the
triangulation. Such structures arise naturally as incircle duals in
Thurston's formulation of circle packings and as circumcentric duals
in discrete exterior calculus. For piecewise Euclidean surfaces and
3-manifolds, in \cite{G3} and \cite{G5} the first author gives an
axiomatic treatment of geometric duality structures that have
orthogonal intersections with the primal simplices, and also relates
these to discrete conformal variations.
The goal of the present work is to make precise the parametrization of
duality structures by partial edge lengths (giving a discrete analogue
of a Riemannian metric), define the general form of discrete conformal
structures based on an axiomatic development related to conformal
variation of angle, and derive a local classification of such
structures. The relationship between duality structures and discrete
metrics requires some understanding of possible geometric centers for
triangles, leading to the definition of the span of a triangle as the
space of possible geometric centers. The axiomatic development of
conformal structure follows that in \cite{G5} for piecewise Euclidean
surfaces, while the construction in piecewise hyperbolic and spherical
surfaces is new. The general formulas for angle and curvature
variation of piecewise hyperbolic and spherical surfaces is new
(however, see the parallel work in \cite{ZGZLYG}), generalizing circle
packings and other discrete conformal structures previously studied by
many authors (see Section \ref{sec: previous formulations} for
details). The local classification of discrete conformal structures,
giving explicit formulas for the structures, is new for each geometry
including Euclidean.
We will begin by making these geometric structures precise, and then give
precise statements of the main results.
\subsection{Geometric structures on triangulations}
In this section, we make precise some geometric structures.
\begin{definition}
A triangulated manifold $(M,T)$ is a topological manifold $M$
together with a triangulation $T$ of $M$. A (triangulated)
\emph{piecewise constant curvature manifold} $(M,T,\ell)$ \emph{with
background geometry $\mathbb{G}$} is a triangulated manifold $(M,T)$
together with a function $\ell$ on the edges of the triangulation
such that each simplex can be embedded in $\mathbb{G}$, a space of constant
curvature, as a (nondegenerate) simplex with edge lengths determined
by $\ell$.
When the background geometry is Euclidean ($\mathbb{G}=\mathbb{E}$), hyperbolic
($\mathbb{G}=\H$), or spherical ($\mathbb{G}=\S$), we call such a manifold
\emph{piecewise flat}, \emph{piecewise hyperbolic}, or
\emph{piecewise spherical}, respectively.
\end{definition}
When the background geometry is clear from context, we may omit
it. Note that part of the definition is that the simplices are
nondegenerate; this places inequality restrictions on the possible
edge lengths. For instance, in Euclidean background the restrictions
can be derived from Cayley-Menger determinants.
We will use $V=V(T)$ to denote the vertices in triangulation $T$ and
label them with numbers or letter such as $i\in V$. We will use
$E=E(T)$ to denote edges and label them as a set of vertices
$\{i,j\}\in E$, although most of this work could allow multiple edges
between the same vertices or edges between the same vertex. We will
use $E_+=E_+(T)$ to denote oriented edges and label them with ordered
pairs $(i,j)\in E_+$. Triangles will be denoted as a set of vertices,
such as $\{i,j,k\}$. In a piecewise constant curvature manifold, the
angle at vertex $i$ in a triangle $\{i,j,k\}$ will be denoted
$\gamma_i$. The set of real valued functions on $V$ or $E_+$ will be
denoted by $V^\ast$ and $E_+^\ast$, respectively. We will use $\sigma
< \tau$ to mean that $\sigma$ is a subsimplex of $\tau$.
\subsubsection{Duality structures}
The idea of a duality structure is that, in addition to the metric structure
of a piecewise constant curvature manifold, we can put a geometric structure
on the Poincar\'e dual cell complex by introducing geometric centers
for pieces of the dual complex. Motivated by the Euclidean background case,
we see that these geometric centers do not have to be
constrained to the simplex, but its affine span. In the more general
constant curvature case, we will need an analogue of the
affine span that defines the space of possible simplex centers.
Since a piecewise constant curvature manifold is subdivided by
simplices that can be embedded into the space $\mathbb{G}$, each simplex
$\sigma^k$ has a span defined as follows. First we need to define the
underlying space of the span in each geometry.
\begin{definition}
Given a constant curvature geometry $\mathbb{G}$, we define $\hat{\mathbb{G}}$ as follows:
\begin{itemize}
\item If $\mathbb{G}=\mathbb{E}^n$ then we take $\hat{\mathbb{G}}$ to be the underlying space $\mathbb{R}^n$.
\item If $\mathbb{G}=\H^n$ then we take $\hat{\mathbb{G}}$ to be the entire space of the Klein model, also described as the
extended hyperbolic plane in \cite{ChoKim}. Note that in this case, $\H^n \subset \hat{\H}^n$.
\item If $\mathbb{G}=\S^n$ then we take $\hat{\mathbb{G}}$ to be the quotient $\mathbb{RP}^n$ of the sphere.
\end{itemize}
\end{definition}
We note the following easy facts about $\hat{\mathbb{G}}$.
\begin{itemize}
\item In each case, the isometry group of $\mathbb{G}$ acts on $\hat{\mathbb{G}}$.
\item In each case, there is a notion of orthogonality between two
vectors, induced from the Euclidean dot product in the cases of
Euclidean space and the sphere, and the Lorentzian bilinear product
using the hyperboloid model of hyperbolic space and projecting to
the Klein model space.
\item In each case, any two points in $\hat{\mathbb{G}}$ can be connected by a line.
\end{itemize}
In what follows, we will assume that any simplex modeled on geometry $\mathbb{G}$ can be isometrically
embedded into $\hat{\mathbb{G}}$, and that embedding is unique up to isometry of $\mathbb{G}$. Note that, in the case
of spherical geometry, the fact that a simplex embeds is a restriction on how big it can be. We are now
ready to define the span.
\begin{definition}
Given a simplex $\sigma^k$ and an isometric embedding $\phi:
\sigma^k \to \hat{\mathbb{G}}$, the \emph{span of $\sigma^k$ under $\phi$},
denoted $S_\phi\sigma^k$, is the set
\begin{align*}
S_\phi\sigma^k = \bigcup_{\substack{p,q \in \phi(\sigma^k) \\ p \neq q}}{L_{p,q}}
\end{align*}
where $L_{p,q} \subset \hat{\mathbb{G}}$ is the line through the points $p$
and $q$.
The \emph{span of $\sigma^k$}, denoted $S\sigma^k$, is the quotient
space obtained from the disjoint union $\bigsqcup_\phi{S_\phi\sigma^k}$ by identifying
each pair of summands $S_\phi\sigma^k$ and $S_\rho \sigma^k$ by an
isometry of $\mathbb{G}$ that agrees with $\rho\circ\phi^{-1}$.
\end{definition}
We remark that our definition is analogous to the definition of
affine span in polytope theory (c.f., \cite{millerpak}). In both
definitions, the span is viewed as a (geodesic) hyperplane tangent to
the simplex/polytope-face as it sits in the ambient geometry.
The span has the property that for any points $x\in \sigma\subset
S\sigma$ and $y\in S\sigma$, there is a unique line between $x$ and
$y$ in $S\sigma \cong \hat{\mathbb{G}}$. The span also
has the property that if $\sigma <\sigma'$ then there is a natural way
in which $S \sigma \subset S\sigma'$.
\begin{definition}
Suppose $(M,T,\ell)$ is a piecewise constant curvature manifold with
background geometry $\mathbb{G}$.
A \emph{duality structure} for $(M,T)$ is a choice of one point
$C[\sigma] \in S\sigma$ from each simplex $\sigma^k$ of $T$, subject
to:
\begin{quote}
If $\sigma^\ell < \sigma^k$ then for any simplex
$\tau=\{C[\sigma^\ell], C[\sigma^{\ell+1}], \ldots,
C[\sigma^k]\}$, we have that $S\tau$ is orthogonal to
$S\sigma^\ell$ intersecting only at $C[\sigma^\ell]$.
\end{quote}
We say a duality structure is \emph{proper} if it has Euclidean or
spherical background or has hyperbolic background and the center of
each edge is in $\H$.
\end{definition}
Notice that in the case of spherical background, the centers lie in $\mathbb{RP}^n$ and so
correspond to two points in $\S^n$. We will often consider the span as $\S^n$ with pairs of
points instead of $\mathbb{RP}^n$. Proper duality structures are ones such that edge centers are
determined by signed distances from the vertices, as determined by the partial edge lengths
in the next section.
In general, we will denote the center of edge $\{i,j\}$ by $c_{ij}$ and the center of
triangle $\{i,j,k\}$ by $c_{ijk}$. These centers determine edge heights.
\begin{definition}
Given a proper duality structure on a triangle $\{i,j,k\}$, each edge $\{i,j\}$ has a corresponding
edge height $h_{ij}$ determined by one of the following:
\begin{itemize}
\item If the center $c_{ijk}$ is in the same half plane determined by the span $S\{i,j\}$
as the simplex $\{i,j,k\}$ is, $h_{ij}$ is the distance between $c_{ij}$ and $c_{ijk}$.
\item If the center $c_{ijk}$ is not in the same half plane determined by the span $S\{i,j\}$
as the simplex $\{i,j,k\}$ is, $h_{ij}$ is the negative of the distance between $c_{ij}$ and $c_{ijk}$.
\item If the center $c_{ijk}$ is in $\hat{\H}$ but not in $\H$, then the height is the distance from $c_{ij}$ to $c_{ijk}^\perp$ (see Section \ref{section:hyperbolic basics}) with the same sign convention.
\end{itemize}
\end{definition}
\subsubsection{Discrete metric structure}
The definition of duality structure requires choosing centers. For a more
explicit parametrization, we will
try to adjust the metric structure $\ell$ in some way to ensure a duality
structure. This is the role of metrics and pre-metrics.
The notion of a pre-metric is to reassign parts of the length function to
the vertices. This is motivated partly by the definition of Riemannian metrics
as tensor valued functions of the points of a manifold.
\begin{definition} \label{def: pre-metric}
Let $\left( M,T\right)$ be a triangulated manifold. A
\emph{pre-metric} is an element $d\in E_{+}\left( T\right) ^{\ast}$
such that $\left( M,T,\ell\right) $ is a piecewise constant
curvature manifold with background geometry $\mathbb{G}$ for the assignment
$\ell_{ij}=d_{ij}+d_{ji}$ for every edge $\left\{ i,j\right\}.$
\end{definition}
The $d_{ij}$ are sometimes called partial edge lengths, since one
considers the edge $\{i,j\}$ divided into two partial edges of length
$d_{ij}$ and $d_{ji}$. If the partial edge lengths are nonnegative,
there is a point on the edge that is distance $d_{ij}$ from vertex $i$
and distance $d_{ji}$ from vertex $j$, and this point is called the
edge center. Note that if one of the partial edge lengths is negative,
there is an interpretation in terms of signed distance, and there is
still a center, this time on the span of the edge.
We would like to restrict pre-metrics to those that generate
geometries on the Poincar\'e dual structure such that dual and primal
cells intersect orthogonally. If one considers the point $c_{ij}$ on
the span of an edge $\{i,j\}$ that is distance $d_{ij}$ from vertex
$i$ and $d_{ji}$ from vertex $j$ (distance can be considered with sign
so one partial edge length can be negative),
a center is determined. One can consider the plane
orthogonal to the span S$\{i,j\}$ through $c_{ij}$, and use the intersections of these planes to
construct more centers (e.g., if the planes of the three edges of a
triangle intersect at a point then we use that point as the center of
the triangle). This construction is explained in detail for Euclidean
background in \cite{G3}. We wish to characterize which
conditions on the pre-metrics guarantee that these centers exist and
give a duality structure. We call these metrics, and the actual
motivations for the following definitions are characterization
theorems given later. The main advantage of metrics over duality
structures is that the metrics entirely parametrize the geometry, and
so the space of metrics is relatively easy to describe.
\begin{definition}
\label{def: metric}
A \emph{discrete metric}, or \emph{metric}, on $\left( M,T\right)$ with background geometry $\mathbb{G}$
is a pre-metric $d$ such that for
every triangle $\left\{ i,j,k\right\} $ in $T$,
\begin{align}
d_{ij}^{2}+d_{jk}^{2}+d_{ki}^{2}&=d_{ji}^{2}+d_{kj}^{2}+d_{ik}^{2} &\text{if $\mathbb{G}=\mathbb{E}$,}
\label{d-euclidean condition}\\
\cosh( d_{ij} ) \cosh( d_{jk} ) \cosh( d_{ki} ) &=
\cosh( d_{ji} ) \cosh( d_{kj} ) \cosh( d_{ik} ) &\text{if $\mathbb{G}=\H$,}
\label{d-hyperbolic condition}\\
\cos( d_{ij} ) \cos( d_{jk} ) \cos( d_{ki} ) &=
\cos( d_{ji} ) \cos( d_{kj} ) \cos( d_{ik} ) &\text{if $\mathbb{G}=\S$.}
\label{d-spherical condition}
\end{align}
A \emph{piecewise constant curvature, metrized manifold} $\left( M,T,d\right)$ with background
geometry $\mathbb{G}$ is a triangulated manifold $\left( M,T\right)$ together with a metric $d$.
We denote the space of all metrics
with background geometry $\mathbb{G}$ on a given
triangulated manifold $\left( M,T\right)$ by
$\mathfrak{met_\mathbb{G}}\left(M,T\right)$.
\end{definition}
Note that the space of metrics $\mathfrak{met_\mathbb{G}}\left(M,T\right)$ on a finite triangulation is
determined as a subset of $\mathbb{R}^{|E_+|}$ by a number of equalities of the form above (one for each
triangle) and a number of inequalities (to ensure the simplices are nondegenerate).
\subsubsection{Discrete conformal structure}
A discrete conformal structure is a particular way of determining the
metric from information assigned to points (vertices). It is partly
motivated by this characterization of conformal change of a Riemannian
metric, and also by Thurston's formulation of conformal circle packing
structure. A general formulation for Euclidean background is described
in \cite{G5}, and there are a number of formulations of specific cases
of analogous structures in hyperbolic and spherical backgrounds (see
Section \ref{sec: previous formulations}).
Based on Propositions \ref{prop:euclidean compatibility},
\ref{prop:hyperbolic compatibility}, and \ref{prop:spherical
compatibility}, if we suppose that the pre-metric is determined by
weights on the vertex endpoints, there is a restriction that ensures
that the resulting pre-metric is actually a discrete metric, i.e., it
determines a duality structure. In addition, we want conformal
structures to have nice formulas for angle variations. This motivates
the following definition.
\begin{definition} \label{def:conformal structure}
A \emph{discrete conformal structure} $\mathcal{C}\left( M,T,U\right) $ on a
triangulated manifold $\left( M,T\right)$ with background geometry $\mathbb{G}$
on an open set $U\subset V\left(
T\right) ^{\ast}$ is a smooth map%
\[
\mathcal{C}\left( M,T,U\right):U \rightarrow \mathfrak{met_\mathbb{G}}\left(M,T\right)
\]
such that if $d=\mathcal{C}\left( M,T,U\right) \left[ f\right] $ then for
each $\left( i,j\right) \in E_{+}(T)$ and $k\in V(T)$,
\begin{align}
\frac{\partial\ell_{ij}}{\partial f_{i}} &=d_{ij} & \text{if $\mathbb{G}=\mathbb{E}$,}\\
\frac{\partial\ell_{ij}}{\partial f_{i}}&=\tanh d_{ij} &\text{if $\mathbb{G}=\H$,}\\
\frac{\partial\ell_{ij}}{\partial f_{i}}&=\tan d_{ij} &\text{if $\mathbb{G}=\S$,}
\end{align}
and
\[
\frac{\partial d_{ij}}{\partial f_{k}}=0
\]
if $k\neq i$ and $k\neq j$.
A \emph{conformal variation} of a metric $d=\mathcal{C}\left( M,T,U\right)[f]$ is the change of the
metric in the conformal class as $f$ changes,
and is determined by derivatives such as $\partial d_{ij}/\partial f_i$.
\end{definition}
We have chosen the parameter $f$ so that the variation formulas above are as simple as possible. However, we will
sometimes choose to parametrize the structures differently (see Theorem \ref{thm:functional}). Also note that with conformal variations, the choice
of the set $U$ is not particularly important; we only need the existence of a neighborhood around
any point in $U$.
\subsection{Main theorems}
In this paper, we study the relationships between duality structures, discrete metrics,
and conformal variations. The main new contributions are the
following: (1) a characterization of duality structures in hyperbolic
and spherical backgrounds, generalizing the notion of length structures arising from circles
with given radii and inversive distances, (2) calculation of the conformal variation of angles
in a triangle for hyperbolic and spherical backgrounds together with determining a functional making the
curvature variational, and (3) a classification theorem for
discrete conformal variations of Euclidean, hyperbolic, and spherical triangles,
including the formulation of the notion of discrete conformal variations from basic principles.
\subsubsection{Equivalence of duality and metric structures}
The following theorem characterizes duality structures on surfaces in each of the constant curvature backgrounds.
\begin{theorem} \label{thm:duality equals metric}
Let $(M,T,\ell)$ be a piecewise constant curvature 2-manifold. There is a one-to-one correspondence between
proper duality structures on $(M,T,\ell)$ and discrete metric structures on $(M,T,\ell)$.
\end{theorem}
This theorem follows from Propositions \ref{prop:euclidean compatibility}, \ref{prop:hyperbolic compatibility},
and \ref{prop:spherical compatibility}.
\subsubsection{Discrete conformal variations of angle}
The following theorem gives the variation of angle formulas. The Euclidean result is in \cite{G5}, and the
hyperbolic and spherical results are new (compare \cite{ZGZLYG}).
\begin{theorem}\label{thm: angle variation}
For any conformal variation of a metric $d=\mathcal{C}\left( M,T,U\right)[f]$ with background
geometry $\mathbb{G}$ of a surface $M^2$,
we have for any edge $\{i,j\}$ the following formulas.
\begin{itemize}
\item In Euclidean background,
\begin{align}
\frac{\partial \gamma_i}{\partial f_j} &= \frac{h_{ij}}{\ell_{ij}} \\
\frac{\partial \gamma_i}{\partial f_i} &= -\frac{h_{ij}}{\ell_{ij}}-\frac{h_{ik}}{\ell_{ik}}.
\end{align}
\item In hyperbolic background,
\begin{align}
\frac{\partial \gamma_i}{\partial f_j}
&= \frac{1}{\cosh d_{ji}}\frac{\tanh^\beta h_{ij}}{\sinh \ell_{ij}}
\label{eqn:angle variation ij} \\
\frac{\partial \gamma_i}{\partial f_i}
&= -\frac{1}{\cosh d_{ji}}\frac{\tanh^\beta h_{ij}}{\tanh \ell_{ij}}
-\frac{1}{\cosh d_{ki}}\frac{\tanh^\beta h_{ik}}{\tanh \ell_{ik}} \label{eqn:angle variation ii}
\end{align}
where $\beta$ is 1 if $c_{ijk}$ is timelike and -1 if $c_{ijk}$ is
spacelike.
\item In spherical background,
\begin{align}
\frac{\partial \gamma_i}{\partial f_j}
&= \frac{1}{\cos d_{ji}}\frac{\tan h_{ij}}{\sin \ell_{ij}}
\label{eqn:angle variation ij spherical} \\
\frac{\partial \gamma_i}{\partial f_i}
&=-\frac{1}{\cos d_{ji}}\frac{\tan h_{ij}}{\tan \ell_{ij}}
-\frac{1}{\cos d_{ki}}\frac{\tan h_{ik}}{\tan \ell_{ik}}\label{eqn:angle variation ii spherical}
\end{align}
\end{itemize}
\end{theorem}
This theorem follows from Theorems \ref{thm: Euclidean variation angle}, \ref{thm: hyperbolic angle variation},
and \ref{thm: spherical angle variation} together with Propositions \ref{prop:hyperbolic area deriv} and
\ref{prop: sphere area var}.
It turns out that although the variables $f$ for the conformal variations are quite natural,
a change of variables gives that the curvatures are the gradient of a functional, where the curvatures are defined
as
\[
K_i = 2\pi - \sum_{\{i,j,k\}} \gamma_i
\]
for each vertex $i$, where the sum is over all triangles containing $i$.
\begin{theorem} \label{thm:functional}
Consider a piecewise constant curvature, metrized 2-manifold
$(M,T,d)$, where $d=d(f)$ is determined by a conformal structure.
There is a change of variables $u=u(f)$ such that
\[
\frac{\partial \gamma_i}{\partial u_j}=\frac{\partial \gamma_j}{\partial u_i}
\]
and hence if we fix a $\bar{u}$ there is a functional
\[
F=2\pi\sum_{i\in V} u_i - \sum_{\{i,j,k\}}\int_{\bar{u}}^{u}(\gamma_i du_i+\gamma_j du_j+\gamma_k du_k)
\]
with the property that
\[
\frac{\partial F}{\partial u_i} = K_i.
\]
Furthermore, if all $d_{ij}>0$ and $h_{ij}>0$ and then this function is strictly convex if $\mathbb{G}=\H$ and
weakly convex (strictly convex except for scaling) if $\mathbb{G}=\mathbb{E}$.
\end{theorem}
This theorem follows from Theorems \ref{thm: Euclidean functional}, \ref{thm:hyp functional},
and \ref{thm:sphere functional}.
\subsubsection{Classification of discrete conformal structures}
The following theorems classify discrete conformal variations in each of the constant curvature backgrounds. The results
are new for all background geometries.
\begin{theorem} \label{thm:conformal classification}
Let $\mathcal{C}\left( M,T,U\right)$ be a discrete conformal class with background geometry $\mathbb{G}$ on a surface $M$. Then there exist $\alpha\in\mathbb{R}^{\left\vert V\right\vert }$
and $\eta\in\mathbb{R}^{\left\vert E\right\vert }$ such that the conformal
structure can be written as
\[
d_{ij}=\frac{\alpha_{i}e^{2f_{i}}+\eta_{ij}e^{f_{i}+f_{j}}}{\ell_{ij}}
\]
with
\[
\ell_{ij}^{2}=\alpha_{i}e^{2f_{i}}+\alpha_{j}e^{2f_{j}}+2\eta_{ij} e^{f_{i}+f_{j}}.
\]
if $\mathbb{G}=\mathbb{E}$,
\begin{align*}
\tanh d_{ij} & = \frac{\alpha_{i}e^{2f_{i}}}{\sinh
\ell_{ij}}\sqrt{\frac{1+\alpha_{j}e^{2f_{j}}}{1+\alpha_{i}e^{2f_{i}}}}
+\frac{\eta_{ij}e^{f_{i}+f_{j}}}{\sinh\ell_{ij}}
\end{align*}
with
\[
\cosh\ell_{ij}=\sqrt{\left( 1+\alpha_{i}e^{2f_{i}}\right)
\left( 1+\alpha_{j}e^{2f_{j}} \right) }+\eta_{ij}e^{f_{i}+f_{j}}.
\]
if $\mathbb{G}=\H$, or
\begin{align*}
\tan d_{ij} & =
\frac{\alpha_{i}e^{2f_{i}}}{\sin\ell_{ij}}\sqrt{\frac{1-\alpha_{j}e^{2f_{j}}}{1-\alpha_{i}e^{2f_{i}}}}
+\frac{\eta_{ij}e^{f_{i}+f_{j}}}{\sin\ell_{ij}}
\end{align*}
with
\begin{align*}
\cos\ell_{ij}=\sqrt{\left(1-\alpha_{i}e^{2f_{i}}\right) \left(1-\alpha_{j}e^{2f_{j}}\right)}
-\eta_{ij}e^{f_{i}+f_{j}}.
\end{align*}
if $\mathbb{G}=\S$.
\end{theorem}
This theorem is proven in each case in Sections \ref{section: eucl conf classify}, \ref{section: hyp conf classify},
and \ref{sec: sphere}.
In light of Theorem \ref{thm:conformal classification}, one can also calculate angle variations from
Theorem \ref{thm: angle variation} based on the conformal structures determined by
$\alpha$ and $\eta$. These conformal structures are sometimes referred to as $\mathcal{C}_{\alpha, \eta}$
(see, e.g., \cite{G6}).
\subsection{Comparison with previous formulations} \label{sec: previous formulations}
In this section we briefly compare our parametrizations with other parametrizations
of certain discrete conformal structures. The formulation in this paper
unifies the previous work into a single formula
for each background geometry and generalizes some of these. Independently,
\cite{ZGZLYG} derived a formula for the variation of angle that is essentially
the same as ours, though we express it and prove it in a different way. We note that
the Euclidean background case was treated in \cite{G5}, which also describes
the relationship of the general case to previous formulations.
The first formulation of the circle packing conformal structure (corresponding, in our
notation, to $\alpha_i=1$ and $\eta_{ij}=1$ for all vertices and edges) is
in Thurston's work \cite{Thurs}. Many of the relevant calculations
are followed through in \cite{MR}, and the first variational
formulation is due to Colin de Verdi\`{e}re in \cite{CdV}. In each of these
cases, the Euclidean and hyperbolic cases were treated, and the conformal structures
were either circles with given intersection angles between $0$ and $\pi/2$
(corresponding, in our notation, to $\alpha_i=1$ and $0 \leq \eta_{ij}\leq 1$ for all vertices and edges).
Additional work was done by Chow-Luo in \cite{CL}.
The case of circles with fixed inversive distances (corresponding, in our
notation, to $\alpha_i=1$ and $|\eta_{ij}|\geq 1$ for all vertices and edges) was
introduced by Bowers and Stephenson \cite{BoSte} and the variational perspective
was pursued by Guo in \cite{Guo} (this was anticipated by Springborn's work on
volumes of hyperideal simplices in \cite{Spr}).
The multiplicative conformal structure (corresponding, in our
notation, to $\alpha_i=0$ for all vertices)
was apparently first suggested in \cite{RW}, but most of the
mathematical ideas arose in work of Luo \cite{Luo1} and Springborn-Schrader-Pinkall \cite{SSP} in the
Euclidean case. Generalizing to the hyperbolic case was not obvious, but
work in this direction first appeared in work by Bobenko-Pinkall-Springborn \cite{BPS}.
It is notable that
the proper parametrization variable is not clear in this case, and
this issue is discussed in Section \ref{subsect:variational hyp}. The
unified case for Euclidean background is given in \cite{G5} and the
hyperbolic case was first described in this paper and independently
in \cite{ZGZLYG}. For more on some of these discrete conformal structures, see the books \cite{Ste}, \cite{DGL}, and \cite{ZG}.
Explicit calculation of the variation of angle coefficients in the Euclidean
circle packing case
is due to Z. He \cite{He}, and followed by the first author in \cite{G5}. The
coefficients are closely related to the discrete Laplacians found in \cite{Duf}, \cite{Chun},
\cite{PP}, \cite{Dub}, \cite{BS2}
\cite{G4}, \cite{DHLM}, \cite{HPW}, \cite{WBHZG}, \cite{WMKG}, and many other places.
There are close connections between these variational viewpoints and hyperbolic
volumes, as evidenced by work of Br\"agger \cite{Bra}, Rivin \cite{Riv}, Garret \cite{Gar}, Leibon \cite{Lei}, Bobenko-Springborn \cite{BS1}, Springborn \cite{Spr}, Springborn-Schröder-Pinkall \cite{SSP}, and Bobenko-Pinkall-Springborn \cite{BPS}, Fillastre-Izmestiev \cite{FI}, and Zhang et. al. \cite{ZGZLYG}.
Some of this work was generalized to discrete conformal structures in three
dimensions by Cooper-Rivin in \cite{CR} and the first author in \cite{G1} and \cite{G5}.
While the functionals whose variations lead to curvatures in two dimensions are
possibly related to the log determinant of the Laplacian and surface entropy (see \cite{Lei}),
in three dimensions
the functional is related to Regge's formulation of the Einstein-Hilbert (total scalar curvature)
functional. See, e.g., \cite{Reg}, \cite{CMS}, \cite{Ham}, \cite{CGY}, \cite{Izm1}, \cite{Izm2}.
\section{Euclidean geometry}
\subsection{Duality structures on Euclidean triangles}
Clearly, the choice of a pre-metric with Euclidean background determines
the geometry of each triangle $\{i,j,k\}$ and for any
isometric embedding, specifies the triangle's
sides $\set{e_{ij}}$ with lengths $\set{\ell_{ij}}$. Through each finite
edge $e_{ij}$ of the triangle we have a unique line $E_{ij}$, considered
in $\hat{\mathbb{E}}$.
Suppose we identify $E_{ij}$ with the real number line such that $v_i$
is at the origin and $v_j$ is on the positive $x$ axis. Given these
coordinates, we specify the edge centers $c_{ij}=c_{ji}=C(\{i,j\})$ to be the point $d_{ij}$ on the line.
Note that $d_{ji}$ denotes the distance between $c_{ij}$ and $v_j$, considered with
a sign determined by which side of $v_j$ in $E_{ij}$ contains $c_{ij}$.
For each edge $\{i,j\}$, there exists a unique line $P_{ij}$ that passes
through $c_{ij}$ and is orthogonal to $E_{ij}$.
In \cite{G3} (Proposition 4), the first author presented a necessary
and sufficient condition on the partial edges to guarantee the three
lines $\set{P_{ij}}$ meet at a single point:
\begin{proposition} \label{prop:euclidean compatibility}
Suppose $\set{d_{ij}}$ is a Euclidean pre-metric. Then the
perpendiculars $\set{P_{ij}}$ meet at a single point if and only if
\begin{align}\label{eqn:dij-reln}
d_{12}^2 + d_{23}^2 + d_{31}^2 = d_{21}^2 + d_{32}^2 + d_{13}^2.
\end{align}
\end{proposition}
This motivates the Euclidean case of Definition \ref{def: metric}
and proves the Euclidean case of Theorem \ref{thm:duality equals metric}.
\subsection{Conformal variation of angle}
The conformal structure is defined in such a way as to give the following variational formula.
\begin{theorem} \label{thm: Euclidean variation angle}
Given a conformal structure, we have
\[
\frac{\partial \gamma_i}{\partial f_j} = \frac{h_{ij}}{\ell_{ij}}
\]
if $i\neq j$ and
\[
\frac{\partial \gamma_i}{\partial f_i} = -\frac{h_{ij}}{\ell_{ij}}-\frac{h_{ik}}{\ell_{ik}}.
\]
\end{theorem}
This theorem is proven in \cite{G3}, generalizing the theorems in special cases given in
\cite{He} and \cite{G1}. It follows easily (see, e.g., \cite{G5}) that the curvature is variational
with respect to a convex functional.
\begin{theorem} \label{thm: Euclidean functional}
The partial derivatives of the angles in a triangle are symmetric, i.e.,
\[
\frac{\partial \gamma_i}{\partial f_j}=\frac{\partial \gamma_j}{\partial f_i}
\]
and hence if we fix a $\bar{f}$ there is a functional
\[
F=2\pi\sum_{i\in V} f_i - \sum_{\{i,j,k\}}\int_{\bar{f}}^{f}(\gamma_i df_i+\gamma_j df_j+\gamma_k df_k)
\]
with the property that
\[
\frac{\partial F}{\partial f_i} = K_i.
\]
Furthermore, if all $d_{ij}>0$ and $h_{ij}>0$ and then this function is
weakly convex (strictly convex except for scaling).
\end{theorem}
\subsection{Characterization of discrete conformal structures} \label{section: eucl conf classify}
In this section we prove the characterization theorem. Recall that the only assumptions are:
\begin{itemize}
\item The compatibility condition \ref{d-euclidean condition} for the triangle with vertices $v_i$, $v_j$, and $v_k$.
\item The assumption that $d_{ij}$ depends only on $f_i$ and $f_j$.
\end{itemize}
\begin{proof}[Proof of the Euclidean case of Theorem \ref{thm:conformal classification}]
We first note that
\begin{align}
\frac{\partial\ell_{ij}^{2}}{\partial f_{i}} & =\ell_{ij}^{2}+d_{ij}
^{2}-d_{ji}^{2}\label{l deriv}\\
\frac{\partial\ell_{ij}^{2}}{\partial f_{j}} & =\ell_{ij}^{2}-\left(
d_{ij}^{2}-d_{ji}^{2}\right) \nonumber
\end{align}
and that
\[
\frac{\partial^{2}}{\partial f_{i}\partial f_{j}}\left( d_{ij}^{2}-d_{ji}
^{2}\right) =0
\]
since for any triangle with vertices $v_{i},v_{j},v_{k}$ we have
\[
d_{ij}^{2}-d_{ji}^{2}=d_{ik}^{2}+d_{kj}^{2}-d_{jk}^{2}-d_{ki}^{2}.
\]
We can compute that
\[
\left( \frac{\partial}{\partial f_{i}}+\frac{\partial}{\partial f_{j}}\right) d_{ij}
=\frac{\partial d_{ij}}{\partial f_{i}}+\frac{\partial d_{ij}}{\partial f_{j}}
=\frac{\partial d_{ij}}{\partial f_{i}}+\frac{\partial d_{ji}}{\partial f_{i}}=d_{ij}
\]
since
\[
\frac{\partial d_{ij}}{\partial f_{j}}=\frac{\partial^{2}\ell_{ij}}{\partial f_{i}f_{j}}
=\frac{\partial d_{ji}}{\partial f_{i}}.
\]
It follows that
\[
\left( \frac{\partial}{\partial f_{i}}+\frac{\partial}{\partial f_{j}
}\right) \left( d_{ij}^{2}-d_{ji}^{2}\right)
=2\left( d_{ij}^{2}-d_{ji}^{2}\right)
\]
and so it follows that
\[
\frac{\partial^{2}}{\partial^{2}f_{i}}\left( d_{ij}^{2}-d_{ji}^{2}\right)
=2\frac{\partial}{\partial f_{i}}\left( d_{ij}^{2}-d_{ji}^{2}\right)
\]
and
\[
\frac{\partial^{2}}{\partial^{2}f_{j}}\left( d_{ij}^{2}-d_{ji}^{2}\right)
=2\frac{\partial}{\partial f_{j}}\left( d_{ij}^{2}-d_{ji}^{2}\right) .
\]
We can solve these equations, getting
\begin{align*}
\frac{\partial}{\partial f_{i}}\left( d_{ij}^{2}-d_{ji}^{2}\right) &
=2a_{ij}e^{2f_{i}},\\
\frac{\partial}{\partial f_{j}}\left( d_{ij}^{2}-d_{ji}^{2}\right) &
=-2a_{ji}e^{2f_{j}}%
\end{align*}
for constants $a_{ij}$ and $a_{ji}.$ Hence
\[
d_{ij}^{2}-d_{ji}^{2}=a_{ij}e^{2f_{i}}-a_{ji}e^{2f_{j}}.
\]
We can now use (\ref{l deriv}) to find that for a constant $\eta_{ij}$
\begin{align}
\ell_{ij}^{2}=a_{ij}e^{2f_{i}}+a_{ji}e^{2f_{j}}+2\eta_{ij}e^{f_{i}+f_{j}}. \label{eqn: l-eucl}
\end{align}
From this, we compute that
\[
d_{ij}=\frac{\partial\ell_{ij}}{\partial f_{i}}=\frac{a_{ij}e^{2f_{i}}%
+\eta_{ij}e^{f_{i}+f_{j}}}{\ell_{ij}}.
\]
We note that in a triangle, since
\[
d_{ij}^{2}-d_{ji}^{2}+d_{ki}^{2}-d_{ik}^{2}=d_{kj}^{2}-d_{jk}^{2}%
\]
and the right side is independent of $f_{i},$ differentiating with respect to
$f_{i}$ gives
\[
2\left( a_{ij}-a_{ik}\right) e^{2f_{i}}=0
\]
and hence $a_{ij}=a_{ik}$ and $a$ is independent of the edge, only depending
on the vertex, hence we rename $\alpha_i=a_{ij}=a_{ik}.$
To see that the $\alpha_i$ and $\eta_{ij}$ must be consistent across triangles,
consider Equation \ref{eqn: l-eucl} on both triangles and differentiate with respect to $f_i$ and
$f_j$ to see that the $\eta_{ij}$ agree and then $f_i$ to see that the $\alpha_i$ agree.
\end{proof}
\section{Basic calculations in hyperbolic geometry}
\label{section:hyperbolic basics}
Before we move to the hyperbolic versions of the previous work, we
will review some techniques for computing in hyperbolic geometry.
This section summarizes the elementary facts about the hyperbolic plane
$\H$ that we will
use in later calculations. All of the propositions in this section are
discussed in Chapter 3 of \cite{Ra}. See also \cite{Cho}. For the reader's convenience,
we have included some, but not all, proofs.
We use the hyperboloid model of $\H$ for the majority of our
calculations. In this model, the vector space $\mathbb{R}^3$ is equipped with a
Lorentzian inner product $\ast$ given by $u \ast v := u^TJv$ where $J$
is the diagonal matrix with entries 1,1,-1. We define a ``hyperbolic
magnitude'' $\|u\| := \sqrt{u \ast u}$; the only possible hyperbolic
lengths are nonnegative scalar multiples of 1 and $i$. $\H$
corresponds to those vectors $u = (u_1,u_2,u_3) \in \mathbb{R}^3$ satisfying
$u \ast u = -1$ and $u_3 > 0$.
\begin{definition}
A vector $u \in \mathbb{R}^3$ is termed
\emph{spacelike} if $u \ast u > 0$, \emph{lightlike} (or ``on the light cone'') if
$u \ast u = 0$, and \emph{timelike} if $u \ast u < 0$.
\end{definition}
The vector space structure on $(\mathbb{R}^3,\ast)$ gives us several ways to
describe a geodesic in $\H$:
\begin{itemize}
\item As a nonempty intersection $\H \cap \vecspan(p,q)$ for linearly
independent $p,q \in \mathbb{R}^3$.
\item As a nonempty intersection $\H \cap p^\perp$, where $p$ is a
spacelike vector and $p^\perp := \{ v \in \mathbb{R}^3 : p \ast v = 0 \}$.
\item As a path, parametrized by arclength, given by $\gamma(t) =
\cosh(t) p + \sinh(t) v$. In this form, $p \in \H$, $v \in p^\perp$
with $v \ast v = 1$. Note $p$ and $v$ encode the position and
direction of $\gamma$ at $t = 0$.
\end{itemize}
The second characterization becomes particularly useful when combined
with the Lorentzian cross product, which is given by $p \otimes q :=
J(x \times y)$. Clearly, the Lorentzian cross product has two useful
properties:
\begin{itemize}
\item $p \otimes q = 0$ if and only if $p$ and $q$ are linearly dependent.
\item $p \otimes q$ is $\ast$-orthogonal to both $p$ and $q$.
\end{itemize}
A consequence of the second observation is that given distinct points
$p,q \in \H$, one simple way to describe the geodesic through $p$ and
$q$ is $(p \otimes q)^\perp$.
In the sequel, we will use $d_\H(u,v)$ to denote the hyperbolic distance
between two timelike points, and $d_\H(u,v^\perp)$ to denote the hyperbolic
distance between a timelike point and a geodesic in hyperbolic space determined as
the orthogonal complement of a spacelike point.
When $u,v \in \mathbb{R}^3$ satisfy $|u \ast u|=|v \ast v| = 1$, we have the
following interpretations of the quantity $u \ast v$:
\begin{itemize}
\item If $u$ and $v$ are both timelike, then $u \ast v = - \cosh(d_\H(u,v))$.
\item If $u$ is timelike and $v$ is spacelike, then $u \ast v = \pm
\sinh( d_\H(u,v^\perp) )$ and the sign depends upon which of the
halfspaces bounded by $v^\perp$ contains $u$.
\item If $u$ and $v$ are both spacelike and $u^\perp$ and $v^\perp$
intersect in angle $\alpha$ within $\H$, $u \ast v = \cos(\alpha)$.
\end{itemize}
Notice that the last item implies that for spacelike $u$ and $v$,
$u^\perp$ and $v^\perp$ meet at a right angle if and only if $u \ast v
= 0$.
The following identities simplify calculations that involve Lorentzian
cross products. Suppose $x,y,z,w \in \mathbb{R}^3$:
\begin{align}\label{eqn:cross product ident1}
x \otimes y &= - y \otimes x, \\
(x \otimes y) \ast z &= \det( x, y, z ), \\
x \otimes (y \otimes z) &= (x \ast y) z - (z \ast x) y, \\
(x \otimes y) \ast (z \otimes w) &=
\begin{vmatrix}
x \ast w & x \ast z \\
y \ast w & y \ast z
\end{vmatrix}.\label{eqn:det formula}
\end{align}
We have already seen that several different kinds of data can be used
to specify a geodesic on $\H$. This allows us to extend our
understanding of where geodesics intersect.
\begin{definition}\label{definition intersection}
Given a geodesics $\gamma$ on $\H$, we will identify $\gamma$ with
the unique 2-dimensional subspace $P_\gamma$ of $\mathbb{R}^3$ such that
$P_\gamma \cap \H$ is the image of $\gamma$.
Given geodesics $\gamma,\omega$ on $\H$, we define their
\emph{intersection} to be their intersection as subspaces of $\mathbb{R}^3$,
namely $P_\gamma \cap P_\omega$.
\end{definition}
Readers familiar with the Klein model of $\H$ (the central projection
of $\H$ onto the plane $z=1$) should note that this definition is
simply a linear-algebraic way of formulating the notion of
intersecting 1-hyperplanes in the Klein model.
Introducing a broader notion of intersection allows us to generalize
familiar equations (like the law of cosines) and express them in terms
of linear algebra. Understanding how to interpret the Lorentzian inner
product is key to relating these different formulas. Often, the linear
algebraic interpretation allows us to efficiently treat several
seemingly different cases at once.
Recall the definition of a triangle (see Section 3.5 in \cite{Ra}),
which allows some of the vertices to be timelike, lightlike, or spacelike.
We will concentrate on triangles with at least two timelike vertices.
\begin{proposition}\label{proposition ratcliffe triangles}
Suppose $x \in \H$ and $y,z \in \mathbb{R}^3$ are either timelike or
spacelike. Then
\begin{align*}
(z \otimes x) \ast (x \otimes y) = -\|z \otimes x\| \cdot \|x \otimes y \| \cos(\alpha),
\end{align*}
where $\alpha$ is the angle at $x$ in the (clockwise oriented)
triangle $\{x,y,z\}$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proposition}[The Generalized Law of Cosines]\label{proposition
generalized law of cosines}
Suppose $x,y,z \in \mathbb{R}^3$, with $\|x\| = \|z\| = i$ and $\|y\| = 1$
or $i$, are the vertices of a triangle in
$\H$, with angle $\alpha$ at $x$. Then
\begin{align*}
z \ast y + (z \ast x)(x \ast y) = \| z \otimes x \| \| x \otimes y \| \cos(\alpha).
\end{align*}
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
Assume, without loss of generality, that $x,y,z$ label the vertices
of the triangle in clockwise order. Equation \ref{eqn:det formula}
implies
\begin{align*}
-(z \otimes x) \ast (x \otimes y) = (z \ast y) + (z \ast x)(x \ast y).
\end{align*}
Now apply Proposition \ref{proposition ratcliffe triangles} to
obtain the desired equality.
\end{proof}
By setting $\alpha = \pi/2$, we obtain a generalized version of the
Pythagorean theorem:
\begin{corollary}[The Generalized Pythagorean Theorem]
Suppose $x,y,z$ are the vertices of a right triangle, with the right
angle at $x$. Then:
\begin{align*}
-(z \ast y) = (z \ast x)(x \ast y).
\end{align*}
\end{corollary}
We will require formulas for performing trigonometry in a hyperbolic
right triangle where one of the vertices (not the one adjacent to the
right angle) may be spacelike or timelike. Suppose we have a right
triangle labeled like the one in Figure \ref{fig:right triangle}.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.5]{right_triangles.pdf}
\caption{Two (Generalized) Right Triangles in the Klein Model}
\label{fig:right triangle}
\end{figure}
\begin{proposition}\label{prop:trig}
Given a triangle labeled as in Figure \ref{fig:right triangle}, we
have:
\begin{align*}
\cos(\alpha) = \frac{\tanh(B)}{\tanh(C)},\hspace{0.25cm}
\sin(\alpha) = \frac{\sinh(A)}{\sinh(C)},\hspace{0.25cm}
\tan(\alpha) = \frac{\tanh(A)}{\sinh(B)}
\end{align*}
if $b$ is timelike and
\begin{align*}
\cos(\alpha) = \tanh(B)\tanh(C),\hspace{0.25cm}
\sin(\alpha) = \frac{\cosh(A)}{\cosh(C)},\hspace{0.25cm}
\tan(\alpha) = \frac{1}{\sinh(B)\tanh(A)}
\end{align*}
if $b$ is spacelike.
\end{proposition}
Deriving these formulas is an easy application of the generalized
Pythagorean theorem and the generalized law of cosines.
The next corollary generalizes the familiar formula for the
cosine of an angle in a hyperbolic right triangle.
\begin{corollary}\label{corollary cosine right triangle}
Suppose $x,y,z$ are the vertices of a right triangle (with the right
angle at $z$) satisfying the assumptions of Proposition
\ref{proposition generalized law of cosines}. Then
\begin{align*}
\cos(\alpha) = -\frac{x \ast y}{\| x \otimes y\|} \tanh( d_\H(z,x) ).
\end{align*}
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}
The right angle at $z$ means that:
\begin{align*}
0 &= (y \otimes z) \ast (z \otimes x) \\
&= -(y \ast x) - (y \ast z)(z \ast x)
\end{align*}
and so
\[
z \ast y = -\frac{y \ast x}{z \ast x}.
\]
Substituting this into the equation we obtain from the Law of
Cosines, we learn:
\begin{align*}
\| z \otimes x \| \| x \otimes y \| \cos(\alpha)
&= z \ast y + (z \ast x)(x \ast y) \\
&= -\frac{y \ast x}{z \ast x} + (z \ast x)(x \ast y) \\
&= (x \ast y)\frac{(z \ast x)^2 - 1}{z \ast x} \\
&= (x \ast y)\frac{\sinh^2(d_\H(z,x))}{-\cosh(d_\H(z,x))}.
\end{align*}
Using Equation \ref{eqn:det formula}, it is easy to
check $\| z \otimes x \| = \sinh(d_\H(z,x))$. Hence:
\begin{align*}
\cos(\alpha) = -\frac{x \ast y}{\| x \otimes y\|} \tanh( d_\H(z,x) ).
\end{align*}
\end{proof}
Because the Lorentzian inner product is nondegenerate, we have a well
defined notion of $\ast$-orthogonality and may apply the Gram-Schmidt
procedure to obtain a basis of mutually $\ast$-orthogonal vectors. This
procedure can be used to parametrize a geodesic given in the form $\H
\cap \vecspan(p,q)$ by arclength.
\begin{proposition}\label{proposition Gram-Schmidt}
Suppose $p \in \H$, and $q \in \mathbb{R}^3$. Then the geodesic $\H \cap
\vecspan(p,q)$ may be parametrized by arclength as:
\begin{align*}
\gamma(t) = \cosh(t) p + \sinh(t) \frac{q + (p \ast q)p}{\sqrt{q \ast q + (p \ast q)^2}}.
\end{align*}
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
The geodesic in question can be parametrized by arclength as
$\gamma(t) = \cosh(t)p + \sinh(t)v$ for some spacelike $v$ with $v
\ast v = 1$; we simply need to use the Gram-Schmidt procedure to
guarantee that $\vecspan(p,v) = \vecspan(p,q)$ and $v \in p^\perp$.
So consider the vector $q + (p \ast q) p$. Notice $-(p \ast q)p$ is
the $\ast$-projection of $q$ onto the subspace spanned by $p$, and
\begin{align*}
p \ast (q + (p \ast q) p) = p \ast q - p \ast q = 0.
\end{align*}
To find $v$, we only need to rescale this projection. Since
\begin{align*}
(q + (p \ast q) p) \ast (q + (p \ast q) p)
&= q \ast q + 2 (p \ast q)^2 + (p\ast q)^2 (p \ast p) \\
&= q \ast q + (p \ast q)^2
\end{align*}
the appropriate $v$ is
\begin{align*}
v = \frac{q + (p \ast q) p}{\sqrt{q \ast q + (p \ast q)^2}}.
\end{align*}
\end{proof}
\section{Duality structures on hyperbolic triangles}
\label{section:duality hyp}
We interpret a piecewise hyperbolic pre-metric as subdividing each
edge $\{i,j\}$ of length $\ell_{ij}$ into two portions of length $d_{ij}$ and $d_{ji}$, that are
assigned to the vertices $i$ and $j$ respectively.
\begin{definition}
\label{def:edge centers}
Given a pre-metric $d$ and an isometric embedding of a simplex
$\{i,j\}$ into $\H$:
\begin{itemize}
\item The \emph{vertices} $p_i,p_j \in \H$ of $\{i,j\}$ are the
images of $i$ and $j$ under the embedding.
\item The \emph{edge center $c_{ij}$ induced by $d$} is the unique
point along the line $E_{ij}$ through $p_i$ and $p_j$ such that
$c_{ij}$ is (signed) distance $d_{ij}$ from $p_i$ and $d_{ji}$ from $p_j$.
\item The \emph{edge perpendicular $P_{ij}$} is the line through
$c_{ij}$ that is orthogonal to $E_{ij}$.
\end{itemize}
\end{definition}
Unlike in the Euclidean setting, it is possible that the geodesics
$P_{ij}$ and $P_{jk}$ do not intersect within $\H$. However, these two
1-hyperplanes can be understood as intersecting in the more general
sense of Definition \ref{definition intersection}, namely the
two-dimensional subspaces of $(\mathbb{R}^3,\ast)$ associated to $P_{ij}$ and
$P_{jk}$ intersect in a one-dimensional subspace. One can then ask for
necessary and sufficient conditions on the pre-metric that guarantee
that for each simplex $\{i,j,k\}$
\begin{align}\label{eqn:duality intersections}
P_{ij} \cap P_{jk} = P_{jk} \cap P_{ki} = P_{ki} \cap P_{ij}
\end{align}
or, colloquially, the three perpendiculars of $\{i,j,k\}$ intersect in
a single point (this point is in the span of $\{i,j,k\}$).
This condition can also be interpreted in the Klein
model of hyperbolic space as the condition that the three lines
representing the geodesics intersect at the same point in the plane
of the Klein model.
\begin{proposition}
\label{prop:hyperbolic compatibility}
Suppose $d$ is a piecewise hyperbolic pre-metric. Equation
\ref{eqn:duality intersections} holds if and only if the following
\emph{compatibility equation}
\begin{align}\label{eqn:dijhyp-reln}
(p_i \ast c_{ij})(p_j \ast c_{jk})(p_k \ast c_{ki})
= (p_i \ast c_{ki})(p_j \ast c_{ij})(p_k \ast c_{jk})
\end{align}
is satisfied for every simplex $\{i,j,k\}$.
Since the vectors $p_i$ and $c_{ij}$ are timelike of length -1,
Equation \ref{eqn:dijhyp-reln} has the following equivalent
formulation:
\begin{align*}
\cosh( d_{ij} ) \cosh( d_{jk} ) \cosh( d_{ki} ) =
\cosh( d_{ji} ) \cosh( d_{kj} ) \cosh( d_{ik} ).
\end{align*}
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
To simplify our notation, we shall consider a single 2-simplex
$\{1,2,3\}$. The vertices of the embedded 2-simplex are linearly
independent vectors $p_1, p_2, p_3 \in \H$.
Consider that if $c$ is a point on the perpendicular $P_{ij}$, then
$P_{ij} = (c \otimes c_{ij})^\perp$. Likewise the span of edge $e_{ij}$ is given by $(p_i \otimes
p_j)^\perp$. Since $c_{ij}$ belongs to both $P_{ij}$ and $e_{ij}$,
the fact that $P_{ij}$ and $e_{ij}$ are perpendicular is equivalent
to the equation:
\begin{align*}
(c \otimes c_{ij}) \ast ( p_i \otimes p_j ) = 0.
\end{align*}
Identities \ref{eqn:cross product ident1}-\ref{eqn:det formula}
imply this is equivalent to the equation:
\begin{align*}
c \ast ( (c_{ij} \ast p_i)p_j - (c_{ij} \ast p_j)p_i) = 0.
\end{align*}
Hence, Equation \ref{eqn:duality intersections} holds for simplex
$\{1,2,3\}$ if and only if there is a nontrivial solution $c$ to the
system:
\begin{align*}
c \ast ( (c_{12} \ast p_1)p_2 - (c_{12} \ast p_2)p_1 ) &= 0 \\
c \ast ( (c_{23} \ast p_2)p_3 - (c_{23} \ast p_3)p_2 ) &= 0 \\
c \ast ( (c_{31} \ast p_3)p_1 - (c_{31} \ast p_1)p_3 ) &= 0
\end{align*}
This system can be reformulated as a matrix equation
\begin{align*}
\begin{bmatrix}
((c_{12} \ast p_1)p_2 - (c_{12} \ast p_2)p_1)^T\\
((c_{23} \ast p_2)p_3 - (c_{23} \ast p_3)p_2)^T\\
((c_{31} \ast p_3)p_1 - (c_{31} \ast p_1)p_3)^T
\end{bmatrix} \cdot J \cdot c = 0
\end{align*}
that has a nontrivial solution if and only if the determinant of the
first matrix is zero. Expanding that determinant and canceling the
(nonzero) factors of $\det(p_1,p_2,p_3)$ that arise yields Equation
\ref{eqn:dijhyp-reln}. The last statement follows easily.
\end{proof}
This proposition motivates the hyperbolic case of Definition \ref{def: metric}.
\begin{remark}
One can gain insight into how the Euclidean and
hyperbolic compatibility conditions are related by comparing
Equation \ref{d-euclidean condition} and Equation \ref{d-hyperbolic condition}
for small $d_{ij}$ in the same way one compares the Euclidean
Pythagorean Theorem with the hyperbolic version, $\cosh(c) =
\cosh(a)\cosh(b)$.
\end{remark}
\section{Conformal variations of hyperbolic triangles}
\label{section:conformal hyp}
Various formulations of conformal variations of hyperbolic
triangulations of surfaces have been studied in \cite{Thurs},
\cite{MR}, \cite{CdV}, \cite{CL}, \cite{Spr}, \cite{Guo},
\cite{BPS}, \cite{ZGZLYG}. We present a unified approach from the
perspective of the metric triangulations as defined above.
\subsection{Motivation and variation formula}
Suppose we wanted to generate a metric from weights assigned to vertices, so that
$d_{ij}=d_{ij}(f_i,f_j)$ for some function $f$ on the vertices. If this our starting
point for conformal structure, in order to compute conformal variations, we will consider what
happens to the metric on a triangle $\{1,2,3\}$
when the conformal parameter $f_3$ changes but the other two
do not, i.e., $\delta f_1=\delta f_2=0$. We will call this a
$f_3$-conformal variation in this section.
The next two propositions analyze the configuration shown in Figure
\ref{figure conformal variation}. We assume throughout that
$v_1,v_2,v_3$ are linearly independent in $\mathbb{R}^3$, with $v_i \ast v_i =
-1$.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.75]{variation.pdf}
\caption{Variation of a Hyperbolic Triangle}
\label{figure conformal variation}
\end{figure}
\begin{proposition}\label{prop:inner product identities}
Under an $f_3$-conformal variation:
\begin{align*}
v_1 \ast \delta v_3 &= -\sinh \ell_{13} \frac{\partial \ell_{13}}{\partial f_3} \delta f_3\\
v_2 \ast \delta v_3 &= -\sinh \ell_{23} \frac{\partial \ell_{23}}{\partial f_3} \delta f_3\\
v_3 \ast \delta v_3 &= 0
\end{align*}
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
Bilinearity of the Lorentzian inner product implies:
\begin{align*}
\delta ( v_1 \ast v_3 ) = v_1 \ast \delta v_3.
\end{align*}
However, since $v_1 \ast v_3 = - \cosh( \ell_{13} )$, we can also write:
\begin{align*}
\delta ( v_1 \ast v_3 ) =
-\sinh\ell_{13} \frac{\partial\ell_{13}}{\partial f_3} \delta f_3.
\end{align*}
Hence
\begin{align*}
v_1 \ast \delta v_3 = - \sinh \ell_{13} \frac{\partial\ell_{13}}{\partial f_3} \delta f_3.
\end{align*}
We get the formula for $v_2 \ast \delta v_3$ similarly.
Finally, since $v_3 \ast v_3 = -1$:
\begin{align*}
0 = \delta( v_3 \ast v_3 ) = 2 v_3 \ast \delta v_3.
\end{align*}
\end{proof}
The following proposition makes precise what we mean by the colloquial statement
that conformal variations give good angle variations.
\begin{proposition}\label{prop:conformal line}
Let $c_{123}$ denote the center of the triangle specified by the
vertices $v_i$ and the (compatible) partial edge lengths
$d_{ij}$. Suppose further that the edge centers on edges $\{1,3\}$
and $\{2,3\}$ are timelike. Then under a $f_3$-conformal variation,
the points $v_3', v_3$ and $c_{123}$ lie on a line in $\H$ if and
only if $\frac{\partial \ell_{ij}}{\partial f_i} = (\tanh d_{ij})
F(f_i)$, for some function $F(f_i)$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
Without loss of generality, assume $c_{123} \ast c_{123} = \pm
1$. Consider the geodesic through $v_3$ and $c_{123}$. As a set,
this geodesic can be described by $\H \cap \vecspan(v_3,c_{123})$, a
characterization we will use to parametrize the geodesic by
arclength as $\cosh(t) v_3 + \sinh(t) u$ for some $u \in v_3^\perp
\cong T_{v_3}\H$. Specifically, Proposition \ref{proposition
Gram-Schmidt} implies:
\begin{align*}
u = \frac{c_{123} + (v_3 \ast c_{123}) v_3} {\sqrt{c_{123}\ast
c_{123}+(v_3 \ast c_{123})^2}}
\end{align*}
The points $v_3', v_3$, and $c_{123}$ lie on a geodesic if and only
if $u$ and $\delta v_3$ are collinear. The three numbers $\{ \delta
v_3 \ast v_i \}_{i=1}^3$ completely characterize the vector $\delta
v_3 \in v_3^\perp \cong T_{v_3}\H$. Hence, $u$ and $\delta v_3$ are
collinear if and only if there exists $\lambda \in \mathbb{R}$ such that $u
\ast v_i = \lambda\, \delta v_3 \ast v_i$ for $i=1,2,3$. We already
know $v_3 \ast u = v_3 \ast \delta v_3 = 0$, so only $v_1 \ast u$
and $v_2 \ast u$ require consideration.
Consider our equation for $u$. The scalar in the denominator will
appear in both $v_1 \ast u$ and $v_2 \ast u$. To simplify our
notation, we will write $\lambda_3 := (c_{123} \ast c_{123} + (v_3
\ast c_{123})^2)^{-1/2}$. Now
\begin{align*}
v_1 \ast u = \lambda_3 ( c_{123} \ast v_1 + (v_3 \ast c_{123})(v_3 \ast v_1) )
\end{align*}
and we can apply the Generalized Law of Cosines (Proposition
\ref{proposition generalized law of cosines}) to the triangle
$\{v_1,v_3,c_{123}\}$ in order to rewrite this equation as
\begin{align*}
v_1 \ast u
&= \lambda_3 \|v_1 \otimes v_3\|\|v_3 \otimes c_{123}\|\cos(\alpha) \\
&= \lambda_3 \sinh(\ell_{13}) \|v_3 \otimes c_{123}\|\cos(\alpha).
\end{align*}
Next consider the right triangle with vertices $\{ c_{123}, c_{13},
v_3 \}$. By Corollary \ref{corollary cosine right triangle}, we
have
\begin{align*}
\| v_3 \otimes c_{123} \| \cos(\alpha) = -(v_3 \ast c_{123})\tanh( d_{31} ).
\end{align*}
A final substitution into our equation for $v_1 \ast u$ implies
\begin{align*}
v_1 \ast u = -(\lambda_3 \cdot v_3 \ast c_{123}) \sinh(\ell_{13})\tanh(d_{31}).
\end{align*}
A similar argument for $v_2$ yields
\begin{align*}
v_2 \ast u = -(\lambda_3 \cdot v_3 \ast c_{123}) \sinh(\ell_{23})\tanh(d_{32}).
\end{align*}
From Proposition \ref{prop:inner product identities},
we know that for $k=1,2$
\begin{align*}
v_k \ast \delta v_3 = -\sinh \ell_{k3} \frac{\partial
\ell_{k3}}{\partial f_3} \delta f_3.
\end{align*}
Comparing these two equations, we see that there exists $\lambda \in
\mathbb{R}$ so that $v_k \ast u = \lambda v_k \ast \delta v_3$ if and only
if there exists a smooth function $F(f_3)$ for which
$\frac{\partial \ell_{k3}}{\partial f_3} = \tanh(d_{3k})F(f_3)$.
\end{proof}
Proposition \ref{prop:conformal line} motivates the hyperbolic case of Definition
\ref{def:conformal structure}, where we have chosen to simplify to parameters
that make $F$ equal to the constant function $1$.
We will now study how the angles change under a conformal
variation. First we see the following.
\begin{theorem} \label{thm: hyperbolic angle variation}
Given a conformal structure, then for any simplex $\{i,j,k\}$
\begin{align}
\frac{\partial \gamma_i}{\partial f_j}
&= \frac{1}{\cosh d_{ji}}\frac{\tanh^\beta h_{ij}}{\sinh \ell_{ij}}
\label{eqn:angle variation ij thmcopy} \\
\frac{\partial \gamma_i}{\partial f_i}
&= -\frac{\partial A_{ijk}}{\partial f_i}
-\frac{\partial \gamma_j}{\partial f_i}
-\frac{\partial \gamma_k}{\partial f_i}
\label{eqn:angle variation ii thmcopy}
\end{align}
where $\beta$ is 1 if $c_{ijk}$ is timelike and -1 if $c_{ijk}$ is
spacelike.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
For simplicity, we shall consider the problem for a single simplex
$\{1,2,3\}$ labeled as in Figure \ref{figure conformal variation},
with $i = 1$, $j = 3$. We will address the case where $c_{123}$ is
timelike; the case where $c_{123}$ is spacelike is similar. Once
\ref{eqn:angle variation ij thmcopy} is proven, \ref{eqn:angle
variation ii thmcopy} follows immediately because of the area
formula for a hyperbolic triangle:
\begin{align*}
A_{123} = \pi - \gamma_1 - \gamma_2 - \gamma_3.
\end{align*}
Because the variation is conformal, $\delta \ell_{13} =
\tanh d_{31} \delta f_3$. Using the formula for a segment of a
circle in the hyperbolic plane, we have $\omega = \delta \gamma_1
\sinh \ell_{13}$.
By Proposition \ref{prop:conformal line}, under a conformal
variation $v_3,v_3'$ and $c_{123}$ are collinear. Consequently, the
angle adjacent to $v_3$ in the triangle with side lengths $\omega$,
$\delta l_{13}$ and $\delta v_3$ is $\pi/2 - \alpha$. This, together
with the formulas in Proposition \ref{prop:trig}, allows us to write:
\begin{align*}
\tan(\alpha) &= \frac{\tanh h_{13}}{\sinh d_{31}},\\
\cot(\alpha) &= \tan\left( \frac{\pi}{2} - \alpha \right) = \frac{\tanh\delta \ell_{13}}{\sinh \omega},\\
\frac{\tanh h_{13}}{\sinh d_{31}} &= \frac{\sinh \omega}{\tanh\delta \ell_{13}}
= \frac{\sinh(\delta \gamma_1 \sinh\ell_{13})}{\tanh(\delta f_3 \tanh d_{31})}.
\end{align*}
Using the Taylor series for $\sinh$ and $\tanh$, we have:
\begin{align*}
\frac{\tanh h_{13}}{\sinh d_{31}}
&= \frac{ \delta \gamma_1 \sinh\ell_{13}
+ O(\delta \gamma_1^3)}{\delta f_3 \tanh d_{31}+ O(\delta f_3^3)},
\end{align*}
and hence,
\begin{align*}
\frac{\delta \gamma_1}{\delta f_3}
&= \frac{1}{\cosh d_{31}}
\frac{\tanh h_{13}}{\sinh \ell_{13}}
\left(\frac{1 + O(\delta f_3^2)}{1 + O(\delta \gamma_1^2)}\right).
\end{align*}
\end{proof}
We can also compute the variation of area explicitly.
\begin{proposition} \label{prop:hyperbolic area deriv}
Given a conformal structure, then for any simplex $\{i,j,k\}$ with area
$A_{ijk}$.
\begin{align}
\frac{\partial A_{ijk}}{\partial f_k}
&= \frac{\partial \gamma_i}{\partial f_k} (\cosh \ell_{ik}-1)
+2\frac{\partial \gamma_j}{\partial f_k}(\cosh \ell_{jk}-1).
\end{align}
In particular, if the derivatives $\partial \gamma_i/\partial f_k$ are positive whenever
$k \neq i$, then the derivative of the area is positive.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
This follows from the formula for the area of a sector of circle as a function of the
radius for a hyperbolic surface, since in Figure \ref{figure conformal variation} we
find that the area of each of the small triangles is higher order, leaving only
the areas of the skinny triangles in the picture.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Characterization of discrete conformal structures}\label{section: hyp conf classify}
The proof of the hyperbolic case of Theorem \ref{thm:conformal classification}
is similar to the proof of the Euclidean case,
though the calculation is a bit harder in hyperbolic background.
\begin{proof}[Proof of the hyperbolic case of Theorem \ref{thm:conformal classification}]
We first note the following:
\begin{align}
\frac{\partial}{\partial f_{i}}\cosh\ell_{ij}
& =\cosh\ell_{ij}-\frac{\cosh d_{ji}}{\cosh d_{ij}}, \label{eq:coshder}\\
\frac{\partial}{\partial f_{j}}\cosh\ell_{ij}
& =\cosh\ell_{ij}-\frac{\cosh d_{ij}}{\cosh d_{ji}}. \label{eq:coshder2}
\end{align}
A straightforward calculations gives that
\[
\left( \frac{\cosh^{2}d_{ij}}{\cosh^{2}d_{ji}}\frac{\partial}{\partial f_{i}}
+\frac{\partial}{\partial f_{j}}\right)
\log\frac{\cosh^{2}d_{ij}}{\cosh^{2}d_{ji}}
=2\left( \frac{\cosh^{2}d_{ij}}{\cosh^{2}d_{ji}}-1\right)
\]
or if $H=\log\frac{\cosh^{2}d_{ij}}{\cosh^{2}d_{ji}}$ then
\[
\left( e^{H}\frac{\partial}{\partial f_{i}}+\frac{\partial}{\partial f_{j}}\right) H
=2\left( e^{H}-1\right).
\]
Since
\[
\frac{\partial^{2}H}{\partial f_{i}\partial f_{j}}=0
\]
it follows that
\[
e^{H}\frac{\partial^{2}H}{\partial f_{i}^{2}}+e^{H}\left( \frac{\partial
H}{\partial f_{i}}\right) ^{2}=2e^{H}\frac{\partial H}{\partial f_{i}}%
\]
and
\[
e^{-H}\frac{\partial^{2}H}{\partial f_{j}^{2}}-e^{-H}\left( \frac{\partial
H}{\partial f_{j}}\right) ^{2}=2e^{-H}\frac{\partial H}{\partial f_{j}}.
\]
One can then easily solve this ODE to obtain that:
\[
\frac{\partial H}{\partial f_{i}} = 2\frac{a_{ij} e^{2f_i}}{1 + a_{ij} e^{2f_i}}
\]
for some constant $a_{ij}$ and
\[
\frac{\partial H}{\partial f_{j}} = -2\frac{a_{ji} e^{2f_j}}{1 + a_{ji} e^{2f_j}}
\]
for some constant $a_{ji}$. It follows that
\begin{align}
\frac{\cosh^2 d_{ij}}{\cosh^2 d_{ji}}= D
\frac{1+a_{ij} e^{2f_{i}}}{1+a_{ji} e^{2f_{j}}}
\label{eqn:cosh dij by cosh dij}.
\end{align}
We can now use Equation \ref{eq:coshder} to see that
\begin{align*}
\cosh\ell_{ij}-\frac{\partial}{\partial
f_{i}}\cosh\ell_{ij} &=\frac{1}{D}\left( \frac{1+a_{ij} e^{2f_{i}}}{1
+a_{ji} e^{2f_{j}}}\right) ^{-1/2}\\
\cosh\ell_{ij}-\frac{\partial}{\partial
f_{j}}\cosh\ell_{ij} &=D\left( \frac{1+a_{ij} e^{2f_{i}}}{1
+a_{ji} e^{2f_{j}}}\right) ^{1/2}\\
\end{align*}
and so we find that $D=1$ and
\begin{align}
\cosh\ell_{ij}=\sqrt{\left( 1+a_{ji}e^{2f_{j}}\right) \left( 1+a_{ij}%
e^{2f_{i}}\right) }+\eta_{ij}e^{f_{i}+f_{j}} \label{eqn: hyp length}
\end{align}
for some constant $\eta_{ij}$.
The compatibility condition (\ref{d-hyperbolic condition}) implies that
$\log \frac{\cosh d_{ij}}{\cosh d_{ji}} + \log \frac{\cosh d_{ki}}{\cosh d_{ik}}$
is independent of $f_i$ and so we can use Equation \ref{eqn:cosh dij by cosh dij}
to see that $a_{ij}=a_{ik}$ and so we can define $\alpha_i=a_{ij}=a_{ik}$.
It follows that
\begin{align*}
\tanh d_{ij} &= \frac{1}{\sinh \ell_{ij}} \frac{\partial}{\partial f_i} \cosh \ell_{ij}\\
& = \frac{\alpha_{i}e^{2f_{i}}}{\sinh
\ell_{ij}}\sqrt{\frac{1+\alpha_{j}e^{2f_{j}}}{1+\alpha_{i}e^{2f_{i}}}}
+\frac{\eta_{ij}e^{f_{i}+f_{j}}}{\sinh\ell_{ij}}.
\end{align*}
Finally, we can use Equation \ref{eqn:cosh dij by cosh dij} again to write
$2\log \frac{\cosh d_{ij}}{\cosh d_{ji}}$ in terms of the coefficients determined
in the two triangles adjacent to edge $\{i,j\}$ and differentiate to see that the
$\alpha_i$ derived in each triangle must be equal. It then follows from Equation
\ref{eqn: hyp length} that the $\eta_{ij}$ derived in each triangle must be equal
as well.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Variational formulation for curvature}
\label{subsect:variational hyp}
While the formula (\ref{eqn:angle variation ij}) is not symmetric in $i$ and $j$, we can
reparametrize to get a symmetric variation formula. Notice that Equation \ref{eqn:cosh dij by cosh dij}
(recall that we proved $D=1$) implies that
\[
\frac{\sqrt{1+\alpha_i e^{2f_i}}}{\cosh d_{ij}}=\frac{\sqrt{1+\alpha_j e^{2f_j}}}{\cosh d_{ji}}.
\]
If we take new coordinates $u_i = u_i(f_i)$ such that
\[
\frac{\partial f_i}{\partial u_i} = \sqrt{1+\alpha_i e^{2f_i}}
\]
then we have the symmetry
\[
\frac{\partial \gamma_i}{\partial u_j}=\frac{\partial \gamma_j}{\partial u_i}.
\]
\begin{remark}
The function $u_i(f_i)$ can be computed explicitly. It is not hard to see that if $\alpha_i=0$ then
$u_i=f_i$ and if not then
\[
u_i = \frac12 \log \left| \frac{\sqrt{1+\alpha_ie^{2f_i}}-1}{\sqrt{1+\alpha_ie^{2f_i}}+1}\right|.
\]
If $\alpha_i <0$ then this is
\[
-\tanh u_i = \sqrt{1+\alpha_ie^{2f_i}}
\]
and if $\alpha_i >0$ then this is
\[
-\coth u_i = \sqrt{1+\alpha_ie^{2f_i}}.
\]
Compare to the formulations in \cite{Guo}, \cite{BPS}, and \cite{ZGZLYG}.
\end{remark}
It then follows that for a triangle $t=\{1,2,3\}$ the following form
is closed:
\begin{align}
\omega_{t} = \sum_{i=1}^3 \gamma_i d u_i. \label{eqn:omega_T}
\end{align}
We can now integrate to get a function on the whole triangulation, where we fix some $\bar{u}$:
\begin{align}
F(u)=2\pi \sum_i u_i - \sum_t \int_{\bar{u}}^u \omega_t. \label{eqn:F}
\end{align}
\begin{theorem}\label{thm:hyp functional}
The function $F$ has the property that
\[
\frac{\partial F}{\partial u_i} = K_i.
\]
Furthermore, if all $d_{ij}>0$ and $h_{ij}>0$ then this function is strictly convex.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
The first statement follows from the definition. The second follows from the facts that in a
triangle $\{1,2,3\}$,
\begin{align*}
\frac{\partial \gamma_i}{\partial u_j} &\geq 0 \\
\left| \frac{\partial \gamma_i}{\partial u_i} \right| &>
\frac{\partial \gamma_i}{\partial u_j}+\frac{\partial \gamma_i}{\partial u_k}
\end{align*}
for $\{i,j,k\}=\{1,2,3\}$ since
\[
\frac{\partial A_{123}}{\partial f_i}>0
\]
by Proposition \ref{prop:hyperbolic area deriv}. It follows that the matrix of partial derivatives
is diagonally dominant.
\end{proof}
\section{Spherical Geometry} \label{sec: sphere}
The arguments presented in the case of hyperbolic background geometry
can be adjusted for the case of spherical background
geometry. Essentially, this occurs because in the hyperbolic case we
are studying properties of the Lorentzian inner product $\ast$, while
in spherical geometry we study analogous properties of the Euclidean
inner product. Because the definitions and arguments in the spherical
case are so similar to those of previous sections, we will only state
the main results in the spherical case.
To work in the spherical case, we work with the usual dot product $\cdot$
on $\mathbb{R}^3$. Geodesics on the sphere correspond to planes in $\mathbb{R}^3$ and so
given a triangle $\{i,j,k\}$ in the sphere and a pre-metric, a given embedding
induces planes $P_{ij}$, etc. through edge centers and the condition for
inducing a duality structure is
\begin{align}\label{eqn:spherical duality intersections}
P_{ij} \cap P_{jk} = P_{jk} \cap P_{ki} = P_{ki} \cap P_{ij}
\end{align}
As in the hyperbolic case, this corresponds to a compatibility condition on the
partial edge lengths.
\begin{proposition}
\label{prop:spherical compatibility}
Suppose $d$ is a piecewise spherical pre-metric. Equation
\ref{eqn:spherical duality intersections} holds if and only if the
following \emph{compatibility equation}
\begin{align}\label{eqn:dij-reln spherical}
(p_i \cdot c_{ij})(p_j \cdot c_{jk})(p_k \cdot c_{ki})
= (p_i \cdot c_{ki})(p_j \cdot c_{ij})(p_k \cdot c_{jk})
\end{align}
is satisfied for every simplex $\{i,j,k\}$. Equation
\ref{eqn:dij-reln spherical} has the following equivalent formulation:
\begin{align*}
\cos( d_{ij} ) \cos( d_{jk} ) \cos( d_{ki} ) =
\cos( d_{ji} ) \cos( d_{kj} ) \cos( d_{ik} ).
\end{align*}
\end{proposition}
We can also look at discrete conformal structures. The angle variation
theorem takes the following form.
\begin{theorem} \label{thm: spherical angle variation}
Given a conformal structure, then for any simplex $\{i,j,k\}$:
\begin{align}
\frac{\partial \gamma_i}{\partial f_j}
&= \frac{1}{\cos d_{ji}}\frac{\tan h_{ij}}{\sin \ell_{ij}} \\
\frac{\partial \gamma_i}{\partial f_i}
&= \frac{\partial A_{ijk}}{\partial f_i}
-\frac{\partial \gamma_j}{\partial f_i}
-\frac{\partial \gamma_k}{\partial f_i}.
\end{align}
\end{theorem}
Note that although the heights $h_{ij}$ require choosing one of the two possible centers,
the term $\tan h_{ij}$ does not depend on this choice, since choosing the other center
leads to heights $h'_{ij}=-(\pi - h_{ij})$ and so $\tan h'_{ij}=\tan h_{ij}$
We can also compute the variation of area explicitly.
\begin{proposition}\label{prop: sphere area var}
Given a spherical conformal structure, then for any simplex
$\{i,j,k\}$ with area $A_{ijk}$, we have
\begin{align*}
\frac{\partial A_{ijk}}{\partial f_k}
= \frac{\partial \gamma_i}{\partial f_k}(1- \cos \ell_{ik})
+ \frac{\partial \gamma_j}{\partial f_k} (1-\cos \ell_{jk}).
\end{align*}
\end{proposition}
Using this theorem and the definition of a spherical conformal
structure, one can derive the spherical case of Theorem
\ref{thm:conformal classification}. As in the hyperbolic case, it is
desirable to change from the variables $f_i$ to variables $u_i =
u_i(f_i)$, so that one can recognize that $\partial \gamma_i
/ \partial u_j = \partial \gamma_j / \partial u_i$. The variables
$u_i$ are given by
\begin{align*}
\frac{\partial f_i}{\partial u_i} = \sqrt{1 - \alpha_i e^{2f_i}}
\end{align*}
Finally, we may define closed forms $\omega_t$ and a function $F$ as
in Equations \ref{eqn:omega_T} and \ref{eqn:F}. We have the following
analog to Theorem \ref{thm:hyp functional}.
\begin{theorem} \label{thm:sphere functional}
The function $F$ has the property that
\begin{align*}
\frac{\partial F}{\partial u_i} = K_i.
\end{align*}
\end{theorem}
Notice that we do not have a corresponding notion of convexity for
this functional, as we do in the cases of Euclidean and hyperbolic
backgrounds.
|
\section{Introduction}
The recent observation of a large B-mode signal in the CMB by BICEP2 \cite{bicep1,bicep2} may be an indication of a large tensor-to-scalar ratio $r \sim 0.1$ from inflation. The existence of a large primordial B-mode signal will be confirmed or excluded in the near future by Planck. This has focused attention on how inflation can naturally generate a large value for $r$. The Lyth bound \cite{lythb, antusch} shows that this requires a super-Planckian value for the inflaton field in single-field inflation\footnote{$M_{Pl} = (8 \pi G)^{-1/2}$.}, with typically\footnote{In \cite{hertzberg}, it is shown that a hybrid inflation model based on unification energy with $\phi \sim \sqrt{8 \pi} M_{Pl}$ can fit observations.} $\phi \sim 10 M_{Pl}$. This is difficult to understand theoretically, as we expect new physics to arise at the Planck scale which would be expected to introduce non-renormalizable terms into the inflaton potential, excluding super-Planckian values for the inflaton. This is particularly true in supersymmetry, since $M_{Pl}$ is a fundamental scale of supergravity and the existence of higher-order terms in the K\"ahler potential and superpotential appears to be natural. The problem might be solved by imposing a shift-symmetry which eliminates the potential terms. This must then be slightly broken to permit an inflaton potential, as in the models discussed in \cite{shift} and \cite{shift2} \footnote{For an alternative shift-symmetry mechanism motivated by extra-dimensions, see \cite{kaloper}.}.
Should such a "Planck barrier" exist, we will need to construct an inflation model where the field values are sub-Planckian
throughout. This can be done using a potential based on two or more fields, such that the inflaton trajectory can travel a super-Planckian distance while the fields remain sub-Planckian. This typically involves a spiralling trajectory in field space.
Models based on axion-like fields in string theory have been proposed to achieve this \cite{axmon,dantes}. (For a review of axion inflation models in general, see \cite{axinfrev}.) Alternatively, one can adopt a more direct approach to model building, introducing just what is necessary to produce sub-Planckian inflation. Models based on two axions with two anomalous gauge groups were proposed in \cite{peloso,nilles}. In this paper we will present a minimal sub-Planckian axion inflation model, based on a single complex field $\Phi$ interacting with a single strongly-coupled gauge group. We will show that in the case where all non-renormalizable interactions are suppressed by powers of the Planck scale, the most likely model is equivalent to a $\phi^{4/3}$ chaotic inflation model, with sub-Planckian values for $|\Phi|$ throughout the observable era of inflation.
\section{A minimal sub-Planckian axion inflation model with large $r$}
The model is similar to the heavy quark axion (KSVZ) model \cite{hqa}. We introduce a complex field $\Phi$, which is a gauge singlet, and a chiral $U(1)_{A}$ global symmetry. We also introduce a heavy fermion $Q$ in the fundamental representation of the gauge group, where $\Phi$ interacts with $Q$ via
\be{e1} h \Phi \overline{Q}_{R} Q_{L} + h.c. ~.\ee
The $\Phi$ scalar potential is
\be{e2} V(\Phi) = -\mu^2 |\Phi|^2 + \lambda |\Phi|^4 ~,\ee
where $\lambda \sim 1$ is expected dimensionally. $Q$ gains its mass from the VEV of $\Phi$. During inflation we can assume that $|\Phi| \gg \mu$. Therefore we will set $\mu = 0$ in the following and consider $V(\Phi) = \lambda |\Phi|^4$. $\Phi$ has charge $+1$ under $U(1)_{A}$ and $Q$ has charge $+1/2$. The phase $\theta$ of $\Phi \; (= \phi e^{i \theta}/\sqrt{2})$ in \eq{e1} can be rotated away via a local chiral transformation of the fermions. This results in a $U(1)_{A}$-breaking interaction of $\theta$ with the gauge fields due to the chiral anomaly,
\be{e3} \frac{g^2 \theta}{32 \pi^2} F \tilde{F} ~.\ee
Here $F\tilde{F} = F_{\mu \nu} \tilde{F}^{\mu \nu}$, $\tilde{F}^{\mu \nu} = \frac{1}{2} \epsilon^{\mu\nu\rho\sigma} F_{\rho \sigma}$ and $g$ is the gauge coupling of the strongly-coupled gauge sector. (Gauge indices are suppressed.)
In general, we can also include a $U(1)_{A}$-symmetric non-renormalizable interaction of the form
\be{e4} g^2 \xi \frac{|\Phi|^{m}}{M_{Pl}^m} F \tilde{F} ~,\ee
where $\xi$ is a dimensionless parameter.
The combination of \eq{e3} and \eq{e4} can then be written as
\be{e5} \frac{g^2}{32 \pi^2} \left( \frac{|\Phi|^m}{\Lambda^m} + \theta \right) F \tilde{F} ~,\ee
where $\Lambda = M_{Pl}/(32 \pi^{2} \xi)^{1/m}$. We define the strong coupling scale to be
$\Lambda_{sc}$. The potential term generated by the strongly-coupled gauge sector is then
\be{e6} V_{sc}(|\Phi|,\theta) = -\Lambda_{sc}^{4} \cos \left( \frac{|\Phi|^m}{\Lambda^m} + \theta \right) ~.\ee
Therefore we can define the full potential for $\Phi$ during inflation to be
\be{e7} V_{tot}(\Phi) = V(\Phi) + V_{sc}(\Phi) + \Lambda_{sc}^{4} = \lambda|\Phi|^4 + \Lambda_{sc}^{4} \left[1 - \cos \left( \frac{|\Phi|^m}{\Lambda^m} + \theta \right) \right] ~,\ee
where we have added a constant term $\Lambda_{sc}^4$ so that the potential equals zero at the global minimum\footnote{
In \cite{dantes}, a string-motivated two-axion model is considered which is equivalent \eq{e7} with $m=1$ and $V(|\Phi|)$ proportional to a general power of $|\Phi|$. Axion monodromy favours $V(\Phi) \propto |\Phi|$ \cite{axmon}.}.
This potential has a minimum which is aperiodic in $\theta$. Along the $\phi$ direction for a given $\theta$, the strong-coupling term modulates the $|\Phi|^4$ potential. For a range of parameters which we will determine below, there are local minimum of the potential as a function of $|\Phi|$, which correspond to the cosine term being close to 1. The value of $|\Phi|$ at these minima satisfies
\be{e8} \frac{|\Phi|^{m}}{\Lambda^{m}} \approx 2 n \pi - \theta ~,\ee
where $n$ is an integer. This results in a spiralling groove inscribed on the $|\Phi|^4$ potential in the complex $\Phi$ plane. Inflation can occur along this groove, allowing the field to traverse a long distance in field space while $|\Phi|$ remains sub-Planckian throughout.
The inflation dynamics of this model are the same as that of the model presented in \cite{mod1}, where a multiplicative modulation of the $|\Phi|^4$ potential was considered. The distance $a$ along the minimum in field space is related to $\theta$ by
\be{e9} da = \sqrt{\phi^{2} + \left(\frac{d\phi}{d\theta}\right)^{2} } d \theta ~,\ee From \eq{e8},
\be{e10} \frac{d \phi}{d \theta} = -\left( \frac{\sqrt{2} \Lambda}{\phi} \right)^{m} \frac{\phi}{m} ~.\ee
If $(\sqrt{2}\Lambda/\phi)^{2m} \ll 1$ then to a good approximation $da = \phi(\theta) d\theta$. In this case we can consider $a$ to be a canonically normalized field along the minimum of the potential. The model will behave as a single field inflation model if the field $\phi$ orthogonal to $a$ has a mass much larger than $H$. (We will derive the condition for this to be true later.) Using $da = \phi(\theta) d\theta$, we find
\be{e11} \int da = \int \phi \left( \frac{d \theta}{d \phi} \right) d \phi = \int -m \left(\frac{\phi}{\sqrt{2} \Lambda} \right)^{m} d \phi
~.\ee
Therefore
\be{e12} \phi =
\left( \left(\sqrt{2} \Lambda\right)^{m} \left(\frac{m+1}{m}\right) \right)^{\frac{1}{m+1}} \left( \left(\frac{m}{m+1}\right) \frac{\phi_{0}^{m+1}}{\left(\sqrt{2} \Lambda\right)^{m} } - a\right)^{\frac{1}{m+1}} ~,\ee
where we have defined $a = 0$ at $\phi = \phi_{0}$.
We can then define a new slow-roll field, $\hat{a}$, given by
\be{e13} \hat{a} = \frac{m}{\left(m+1\right)} \frac{\phi^{m+1}}{\left(\sqrt{2} \Lambda\right)^{m} } ~.\ee
Along the minimum ("groove"), the potential is
\be{e14} V(\hat{a}) = \frac{\lambda \phi^{4}(\hat{a})}{4} = \frac{\lambda}{4}
\left( \left(\sqrt{2} \Lambda\right)^{m} \left(\frac{m+1}{m}\right) \right)^{\frac{4}{m+1}} \hat{a}^{\frac{4}{m+1}} ~.\ee
The model will therefore have the same inflaton dynamics as a $\phi^{4/(m+1)}$ chaotic inflation model. The spectral index $n_{s}$ and the tensor-to-scalar ratio $r$ as a function of the number of e-foldings $N$ are therefore
\be{e15} n_{s} = 1 - \left(\frac{m+3}{m+1} \right) \frac{1}{N} ~\ee
and
\be{e16} r = \left(\frac{16}{m+1}\right) \frac{1}{N} ~.\ee
$\hat{a}$ and $\phi$ are related to $N$ by
\be{e17} \frac{\hat{a}}{M_{Pl}} = \left(\frac{8N}{m+1}\right)^{1/2} ~\ee
and
\be{e18} \left(\frac{\phi}{\sqrt{2} \Lambda}\right)^{m+1}
= \left(\frac{4\left(m+1\right)N}{m^2} \right)^{1/2} \frac{M_{Pl}}{\Lambda} ~.\ee
A case of particular interest is where the field $\Phi$ is the fundamental object out of which the effective theory is constructed, by which we mean that only integer powers of $\Phi$ and $\Phi^{\dagger}$ occur in the effective theory at low energies. This excludes, for example, terms proportional to $|\Phi|$. In this case the natural $U(1)_{A}$-invariant combination is the bilinear $\Phi^{\dagger}\Phi$. If Planck-scale physics generates a $U(1)_{A}$-symmetric interaction of the form $g^2 \xi f(\Phi^{\dagger}\Phi/M_{Pl}^{2})F \tilde{F}$, where $f(x)$ is assumed to be expandable with a leading-order term proportional to $x$ when $x \ll 1$, there will be a portal-like leading-order interaction of the form $\Phi^{\dagger}\Phi F \tilde{F}$, corresponding to \eq{e4} with $m = 2$.
In the following we will focus attention on the $m = 2$ model, which we consider to be the most likely form of coupling to the gauge sector.
The $m = 2$ model is equivalent to a $\phi^{4/3}$
chaotic inflation model. In this case the predictions for $N =55$ are $n_{s} = 1 -5/3N = 0.970$ and $r = 16/3N = 0.097$, with a negligible running of $n_{s}$. The spectral index is in reasonable agreement with the value determined by Planck, $n_{s} = 0.9624 \pm 0.0075$ (Planck + WP, assuming negligible running and including a tensor component \cite{planckinf}). The values $|\Phi|$ and $\Lambda$ are determined by the curvature perturbation power spectrum,
\be{e19} {\cal P}_{\zeta} = \frac{V}{24 \pi^2 \epsilon M_{Pl}^{4}} ~,\ee
where $P_{\zeta}^{1/2} = 4.8 \times 10^{-5}$.
Using \eq{e14} and \eq{e18} we obtain
\be{e19a} \frac{\Lambda}{M_{Pl}} = \left( \frac{24 \pi^2 P_{\zeta}}{(m+1) \lambda } \right)^{\frac{m+1}{4m}}
\left( \frac{m^2}{4(m+1)} \right)^{\frac{1}{2m}} \left( \frac{1}{N} \right)^{\frac{m+3}{4m}} ~\ee
and
\be{e21} \frac{|\Phi|}{M_{Pl}} = \left( \frac{4 (m+1) N}{m^{2}} \right)^{\frac{1}{2(m+1)}} \left( \frac{\Lambda}{M_{Pl}} \right)^{\frac{m}{m+1}} ~.\ee
For $m = 2$ and $N = 55$ these become
\be{e20} \frac{\Lambda}{M_{Pl}} = \left( \frac{8 \pi^2 P_{\zeta}}{\lambda} \right)^{3/8} \left( \frac{1}{3} \right)^{1/4}
\left( \frac{1}{N} \right)^{5/8} = 1.8 \times 10^{-4}\; \lambda^{-3/8} ~\ee
and
\be{e22} \frac{|\Phi|}{M_{Pl}} = \left(3 N\right)^{1/6} \left( \frac{\Lambda}{M_{Pl}} \right)^{2/3} = 0.0075 \; \lambda^{-1/4} ~.\ee
Thus we find that $|\Phi| \lae 0.01 M_{Pl}$ throughout the observable era of inflation when $\lambda \sim 1$. Therefore the model can produce a large value for the tensor-to-scalar ratio while remaining sub-Planckian throughout. The model also allows conventional particle physics strength $|\Phi|^4$ potentials with $\lambda \sim 1$ to serve as basis for the inflaton potential.
The value of $\Lambda$ is small compared with $M_{Pl}$ when $\lambda \sim 1$. This means that the dimensionless coupling $\xi$ is necessarily large\footnote{Such large dimensionless couplings are not without precedent in inflation models. In non-minimally coupled models of inflation based on a $|\Phi|^4$ potential \cite{salopek},
the coupling $\xi$ between $\Phi^{\dagger}\Phi$ and the Ricci scalar $R$ is given by $\xi \approx 10^{5} \sqrt{\lambda}$ \cite{salopek}. In both models, the large value of $\xi$ effectively replaces the small scalar coupling of conventional $\phi^4$ chaotic inflation models.}
when $\lambda \sim 1$,
\be{e23} \xi = \frac{M_{Pl}^2}{32 \pi^2 \Lambda^2} = 9.8 \times 10^{4} \; \lambda^{3/4} ~.\ee
The model is still significantly sub-Planckian even when $\xi \sim 1$. To show this, we can express $|\Phi|/M_{Pl}$ and $\lambda$ as functions of $\xi$,
\be{e22a} \frac{|\Phi|}{M_{Pl}} = 0.35 \; \xi^{-1/3} ~\ee
and
\be{e22b} \lambda = 2.2 \times 10^{-7} \; \xi^{4/3} ~.\ee
Therefore $\xi = 1$ implies that $|\Phi|/M_{Pl} = 0.35$.
However, if we expect the leading-order Planck correction to the potential to be of the order of $|\Phi|^6/M_{Pl}^2$, then this will dominate the $\lambda |\Phi|^4$ term due to the small value of $\lambda$. On the other hand, if we simply wish $|\Phi|$ to be sub-Planckian so that the potential is calculable with respect to Planck corrections (for example if $V(|\Phi|) = \lambda v(|\Phi|^{2}/M_{pl}^{2})$, where $v(x)$ can be expanded in $x$), then $\xi \sim 1$ is possible. We note that in this case the model with $\xi \sim 1$ can achieve a sub-Planckian $|\Phi|$ with far fewer new fields than in the case of N-flation, where, in order to have $\phi_{n} < \sqrt{2} \times 0.35 M_{Pl}$, it is necessary to have $N > 900$ scalar fields \cite{nflation}.
We next determine the conditions for the underlying assumptions of the model to be consistent. We have assumed that a local minimum in the radial direction exists. This requires that the derivative of the potential in the $\phi$ direction is dominated by the strong-coupling term, $V^{'}_{sc}(\phi) \gg V^{'}(\phi)$. This imposes a lower bound on $\Lambda_{sc}$,
\be{e24} \Lambda_{sc}^{4} \gg \frac{\sqrt{2}^{\; m} \lambda \Lambda^{m} \phi^{4 -m}}{m} ~.\ee
For $m = 2$ this becomes
\be{e25} \Lambda_{sc} > \lambda^{1/4} (\Lambda \phi)^{1/2} ~.\ee
Using \eq{e20} and \eq{e22} we obtain
\be{e26} \Lambda_{sc} > 1.4 \times 10^{-3} \lambda^{-1/16} M_{Pl} ~.\ee
We have also assumed that the effective mass squared at the minimum in the radial direction, which is dominated by the strong coupling term, is large enough to reduce the dynamics of the model to a single-field inflation model in the $\hat{a}$ direction. This requires that $V^{''}_{sc}(\phi) \gg H^2$ at the minimum. This also imposes a lower bound on $\Lambda_{sc}$,
\be{e27} \Lambda_{sc}^{4} \gg \frac{\lambda}{12} \frac{\left(\sqrt{2} \Lambda\right)^{2m}}{m^2} \frac{\phi^{6-2m}}{M_{Pl}^{2}} ~.\ee
For $m = 2$ this becomes,
\be{e28} \Lambda_{sc} > \left( \frac{\lambda}{12} \right)^{1/4} \left( \frac{\phi}{M_{Pl}}\right)^{1/2} \Lambda ~.\ee
Using \eq{e20} and \eq{e22} we obtain
\be{e30} \Lambda_{sc} > 1.0 \times 10^{-5} \; \lambda^{-1/4} M_{Pl} ~.\ee
This is a weaker lower bound than that from the existence of the minimum, \eq{e26}.
Therefore if $\Lambda_{sc} > 3.4 \times 10^{15} \lambda^{-1/16} \GeV$ then the $m = 2$ model can consistently account for sub-Planckian inflation while generating a large value for $r$. The assumptions underlying the model with $\lambda \sim 1$ will therefore be well-satisfied if\footnote{We note that these values of $\Lambda_{sc}$ are much larger than the value of $H$ at $N = 55$ ($ = 8 \times 10^{13} \lambda^{1/2} \GeV)$. Since $H$ characterises the energy of the inflationary fluctuations, the assumption of strong coupling is consistent.} $\Lambda_{sc} \gae 10^{16} \GeV$.
\section{Conclusions}
We have presented a minimal axion inflation model which is consistent with the observed value of $n_{s}$ and which can generate a large tensor-to-scalar ratio $r \sim 0.1$ while remaining sub-Planckian throughout. The model also allows $\lambda |\Phi|^4$ potentials with $\lambda \sim 1$ to serve as basis for the inflaton potential.
The model requires only a single complex field and a single strongly-coupled gauge group.
We emphasize that the model is constructed as a straightforward particle physics model, similar in construction to the KSVZ axion model, with the only new element being the direct coupling of the scalar field to the $F \tilde{F}$ term. This contrasts with models where a specific ultra-violet completion is required, in particular string theory, and where essential dynamics is outwith the sub-Planckian four dimensional effective field theory. For the case where the effective theory at low energies is constructed from integer powers of $\Phi$ and $\Phi^{\dagger}$ and all non-renormalizable terms are part of an expansion in inverse powers of the Planck scale, the most likely coupling of $\Phi$ to the gauge sector has the portal-like form $\Phi^{\dagger} \Phi F \tilde{F}$. In this case the model is dynamically equivalent to a $\phi^{4/3}$ chaotic inflation model, with $n_{s} = 0.970$ and $r = 0.097$.
While models of chaotic inflation with fractional powers have been proposed previously, it is unusual and significant that the specific power $n = 4/3$ is favoured by the model presented here. The model is explicitly sub-Planckian throughout the observable era of inflation, with $|\Phi| \lae 0.01 M_{Pl}$ for $N \lae 60$. The strong coupling scale must be greater than $10^{16} \GeV$ for the model to be consistent. If the $\lambda |\Phi|^{4}$ coupling takes the dimensionally natural value expected in conventional particle physics theories, $\lambda \sim 1$, then the dimensionless coupling $\xi$ of $\Phi^{\dagger}\Phi$ to the gauge fields must be large, $\xi \sim 10^{5}$, in order to reproduce the observed CMB temperature anisotropies. Values of $\xi \sim 1$ also result in sub-Planckian $|\Phi|$, with $|\Phi|/M_{Pl} = 0.35 \; \xi^{-1/3} M_{Pl}$. This case requires additional suppression of Planck corrections to the potential but allows the potential to be calculable with respect to such corrections.
\section*{Acknowledgements} This work was partially supported by STFC grant
ST/J000418/1.
\renewcommand{\theequation}{A-\arabic{equation}}
\setcounter{equation}{0}
|
\section{Introduction}
A stochastic process can be characterized by the distribution function. In many cases, the distribution function of a physical quantity is Gaussian and hence only two variables are enough to describe the distribution: its average and second cumulant. Due to the particle nature and quantum effect, electron noise spectrum is an intrinsic property that manifests in mesoscopic systems.\cite{Blanter} It was predicted theoretically that distribution of electron current is binomial, suggesting that all cumulants of current have to be included in order to fully characterize the electronic quantum transport process.\cite{Levitov1,Levitov2} The full-counting statistics (FCS) is an elegant way to study the current correlations in mesoscopic systems and yield not only the noise but all higher order cumulants.\cite{Levitov3} It calculates the probability distribution function of the number of electrons transferred through a particular terminal during given period of time that contains fundamental information about the current fluctuation in the system.\cite{Kampen}
The current and its fluctuations in mesoscopic systems have been studied extensively and are very important to characterize the physical mechanisms and correlations of a quantum transport systems.\cite{Blanter} For instance, the effective charge of quasi-particle can be determined from shot noise measurement in fractional quantum Hall effect.\cite{sam}
The cross current correlation can reveal statistical information such as whether the quasi-particle is fermionic or bosonic.
The study of correlation of entangled electron can be valuable in quantum information processing.\cite{loss}
A deep relationship has been found between entanglement and noise in terms of FCS providing new framework for quantum entanglement.\cite{klich} Furthermore, the equivalence between fidelity of quantum systems and generating function for FCS provides a link between fields of quantum transport and quantum information.\cite{lesovik} In addition, the measurement of cumulants to very high orders has been carried out experimentally for electronic transport in quantum point contact systems.\cite{exp1,exp2,exp3}So far, extensive investigation has been carried out on the FCS of charge transport, less attention has been paid to FCS of spin transport. It is the purpose of this paper to address this problem.
The key of FCS is to obtain the generating function (GF) from which the probability distribution $P(n,t)$ and all cumulants are calculated.\cite{Kampen} The GF can be calculated by various ways. Using a gedanken experiment scheme of a "charge counter" in the form of spin precession, Levitov and Lesovik,\cite{Levitov1,Levitov2,Levitov3} gave an analytical expression for the GF in the long-time limit which can be generalized to a general quantum mechanical variable.\cite{Nazarov} The GF has been obtained using the first quantization method\cite{wavepacket} which can be used to study FCS of dc and ac transport.\cite{albert2,flindt3} Using the nonequilibrium Green's function (NEGF)\cite{19,20} and path integral method (PI) in the two-time quantum measurement scheme\cite{RMP,twotime1,twotime2, twotime3,Schonhammer}, the GF has been calculated to study FCS of phonon transport\cite{JS1,JS2,JS3,JS4} and electric transport.\cite{gm}
In this paper, we generalize the existing formalism of FCS of charge transport in the two-measurement scheme to spin transport in the transient regime. In particular, we obtain GFs for spin polarized charge current, spin current, and spin transfer torque in the transient regime for a magnetic tunneling junction where the spin index is not a good quantum number. We have also extended this NEGF-PI method to quantum point contact systems for charge transport. As an application for this formalism, numerical results are given for FCS of charge transport in transient regime for a double quantum dot system.
The paper is organized as follows. In Sec. II, we give a basic definition of quantities needed in studying FCS, and in Sec. III, which is the central part of this paper, we present details on how to use the method of path integral together with NEGF to calculate the GF of FCS for lead-QD-lead system based on the two-time quantum measurement scheme. This formalism is designed for transient dynamics. The generalization of this formalism to spintronics in transient regime is provided in Sec. IV where we use the magnetic tunnel junction (MTJ) as an example. The GF for spin polarized charge transport, spin transport and spin transferred torque for MTJ are calculated. In Sec. V, we generalize the formalism to the quantum point contact system. Sec. VI is devoted to some numerical results where we apply the formalism to calculate various cumulants of transferred charge for a double quantum dot system. Finally concluding remarks are made in Sec. VII.
\section{Statistics}
The most important quantity in FCS is the GF, from which various quantities of interest can be obtained. In general GF is denoted as $Z(\lambda,t)$ where $\lambda$ is the counting field. The GF is defined as the Fourier transform of the probability distribution $P(\Delta n,t)$ of the number of transferred electrons $\Delta n=n_t-n_0$ which can be calculated from two-time quantum measurement scheme between time $t_0=0$ and $t$,\cite{Schonhammer}
\begin{equation} \label{eq1}
Z(\lambda,t)\equiv\left< e^{i\lambda\Delta n}\right>=\sum_{\Delta n}P(\Delta n,t)e^{i\lambda \Delta n} ,
\end{equation}
where $\Delta n$ can be either positive or negative. Various moments of transferred charge $\left<(\Delta n)^j\right>$ can be obtained by expanding $Z(\lambda,t)$ in terms of $\lambda$, we have
\begin{equation} \label{eq2}
Z(\lambda,t)=\sum_{j=0}^{\infty}\frac{(i\lambda)^j}{j!}\left<(\Delta n)^j\right> .
\end{equation}
The $j$th cumulant $\langle\langle(\Delta n)^j\rangle\rangle$ can be calculated by taking the $j$th derivative of the cumulant generating function (CGF) which is the logarithm of GF with respect to $\lambda$ at $\lambda=0$:
\begin{equation} \label{eq3}
\langle\langle(\Delta n)^j\rangle\rangle=\frac{\partial^j \ln Z(\lambda,t)}{\partial(i\lambda)^j}\bigg|_{\lambda=0} .
\end{equation}
It is well known that cumulants can be expressed by moments. For instance, the first cumulant (mean value) is defined as $\langle\langle\Delta n\rangle\rangle=\left<\Delta n\right>$, the second cumulant (variance) is given by $\langle\langle(\Delta n)^2\rangle\rangle=\left<(\Delta n)^2\right>-\left<\Delta n\right>^2$, and the third cumulant (skewness) is $\langle\langle(\Delta n)^3\rangle\rangle=\left<(\Delta n-\left<\Delta n\right>)^3\right>$.
With the GF, the distribution function for the number of the electrons $P(\Delta n,t)$ can be found through
\begin{equation} \label{eq4}
P(\Delta n,t)=\int_0^{2\pi}\frac{d\lambda}{2\pi} Z(\lambda,t) e^{-i\lambda\Delta n} .
\end{equation}
In particular, the idle time probability, the probability of no electrons measured at time $t$ is
\begin{equation} \label{eq5}
\Pi(t)=P(0,t)=\int_0^{2\pi}\frac{d\lambda}{2\pi} Z(\lambda,t) ,
\end{equation}
from which we can calculate the waiting times distribution for the electronic transport system in the transient regime.\cite{gm}
Now let us turn to the discussion of waiting time distribution (WTD). In the dc steady state transport, the WTD can be calculated through\cite{albert2} $\mathcal{W}_2(t) =\langle t \rangle \frac{d^2 \Pi(t)}{dt^2} $ where $\langle t \rangle$ is the averaged time and WTD depends only on $t$ because of the time-translational invariance in the dc case (steady state). In the presence of ac bias, averaging over a time period is needed so that WTD depends only on $t$ as well.\cite{flindt3} However, in the transient transport regime, time translational invariance does not exist and there is also no time periodicity like the ac case. As discussed in details in Ref.\onlinecite{gm} that in the transient regime, we ask how long we wait for the detection of the first transferred electron if we set $t_0=0$ as the starting point. We will use $\mathcal{W}_1$ to denote the WTD in the transient regime\cite{Kampen,gm}
\begin{equation} \label{eq6}
\mathcal{W}_1(t)=-\frac{d}{dt}\Pi(t) .
\end{equation}
\section{Model and Generating Function}
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=3.0in]{1LDL.eps}\\
\caption{Schematic diagram of the model: a central quantum dot coupled to the left and right lead. The two gates between the leads and the central quantum dot can be used to control the coupling between the leads and the quantum dot. In the theoretical derivation, we count the number of transferred electrons in the left lead. }
\label{fig1}
\end{figure}
\subsection*{a. Two-time quantum measurement}
We consider the system of a quantum dot denoted by $S$ connected by the left and right leads. The full Hamiltonian of the whole system can be written as
\begin{equation} \label{eq7}
H=H_0+H_T=H_{L}+H_{R}+H_{S}+H_T
\end{equation}
where $H_0$ consists of the Hamiltonian of the isolated leads and the isolated central quantum dot,
\begin{equation} \label{eq8}
H_S=\sum_{x\in n} \epsilon_{x} c_{x}^{\dag}c_{x}, \quad H_\alpha=\sum_{x\in k\alpha} \epsilon_{x} c_{x}^{\dag}c_{x},
\end{equation}
where we used the index $k\alpha$ to label the states of the lead $\alpha=L,R$ and the index $n$ for that of the quantum dot $S$. Here $\epsilon_{k\alpha}=\epsilon_{k\alpha}^{(0)}+q\Delta_{\alpha}$, where $\epsilon_{k\alpha}^{(0)}$ is the energy levels in the lead $\alpha$ and $\Delta_{\alpha}$ is the external voltage, $\epsilon_n$ is the energy levels of the quantum dot and $H_T$ is the Hamiltonian describing the coupling between the two leads and the quantum dot with the coupling constant $t_{k\alpha n}$,
\begin{equation} \label{eq9}
H_T=H_{LS}+H_{RS}=\sum_{k\alpha n}[t_{k\alpha n}c_{k\alpha}^{\dag}c_{n}+t_{nk\alpha}c_{n}^{\dag}c_{k\alpha} ]
\end{equation}
where $t_{nk\alpha}=t_{k\alpha n}^*$. The coupling between the two leads and the quantum dot can be controlled by the two gates between the leads and the central quantum dots as shown schematically in Fig.1.
To investigate full-counting statistics, we count the number of transferred electrons in the left lead, and the electrons flowing from the left lead to the quantum dot is defined as positive direction of the current. The current operator is given by ($q=1$)
\begin{equation} \label{eq10}
\hat{I}_L(t)=-\frac{d N^{(h)}_L(t)}{d t},
\end{equation}
where $N_L^{(h)}(t)=\sum_{k}c^\dag_{kL}(t)c_{kL}(t)$ is the electron number operator in the L-lead, and the superscript '($h$)' denotes the Heisenberg picture. $N_L^{(h)}(t)$ is related to the number operator in the Schrodinger picture $N_L(0)$ by,
\begin{equation} \label{eq11}
N^{(h)}_L(t)=U(0,t)N_L(0)U(t,0)
\end{equation}
where the evolution operator is
\begin{equation} \label{eq12}
U(t,t')=\mathcal{T}\exp\left\{-\frac{i}{\hbar}\int_{t'}^tH(t_1)dt_1\right\}, \quad (t>t'),
\end{equation}
and $\mathcal{T}$ is the time-ordering operator. The anti-time ordering operator $\mathcal{\widetilde{T}}$ should be used if $t<t'$ and $U^\dag(t,t')=U(t',t)$.
From the Heisenberg's equation of motion $\mathrm{d}A/\mathrm{d}t=-\frac{i}{\hbar}[A,H]$, we find,
\begin{equation} \label{eq13}
\hat{I}_L(t)=\frac{i}{\hbar}[N^{(h)}_L(t),H(t)]=\frac{i}{\hbar}\sum_{kn}t_{kLn}c^\dag_{kL}(t)c_n(t)+H.c..
\end{equation}
Now we discuss the two-time quantum measurement by counting the number of electrons in the L-lead. In the two-time measurement scheme we measure the physical quantity such as number operator $N_L$ at two different times, e.g., first at time $0$ and then at time $t$. After each measurement, the system is projected onto one of the eigenstates of the operator $N_L$ with the corresponding eigenvalue. We define the projection operator at time $0$ and $t$ as $P_0$ and $P_t$, respectively. Let us start from an initial state $|\Psi_0\rangle$ and assume that $|n_0\rangle$ forms a complete set of eigenstates of number operator at time $t=0$, we have
\begin{equation} \label{eq14}
N_L(0)|n_0\rangle=n_0|n_0\rangle, \ P_0=|n_0\rangle\langle n_0|.
\end{equation}
Obviously we have ${P_{0}^2}=P_{0}$ and $\sum_{n_0}P_{0}=1$ and similar relations hold for $P_t$.
After the first measurement at time 0, the wave function becomes $P_0|\Psi_0\rangle$ with a probability of finding this state equal to $\langle\Psi_0|P_0^2|\Psi_0\rangle$. After a time interval t, this state evolves to a new state $U(t,0)P_0|\Psi_0\rangle$ with an eigenvalue $n_t$. After the second measurement at time t, the wave function becomes $|\Psi_t\rangle=P_tU(t,0)P_0|\Psi_0\rangle$, where $P_t = |n_t\rangle\langle n_t|$.
Assuming that the initial state is a mixed state with the density operator,
\begin{equation} \label{eq15}
\rho(0)=\sum_{k}\omega_k|\psi_0^k\rangle\langle\psi_0^k|, \; \sum_{k}\omega_k=1 ,
\end{equation}
we find the joint probability to have measured $n_0$ electrons at time $0$ and $n_t$ electrons at time $t$,
\begin{align} \label{eq16}
P(n_t,n_0)&=\sum_k \omega_k\langle\psi_0^k|P_0U(0,t)P_t^2U(t,0)P_0|\psi_0^k\rangle \notag \\
&=\mathrm{Tr}[P_0\rho(0)P_0U(0,t)P_tU(t,0)]
\end{align}
Keep in mind that we should add a normalization constant to the joint probability and the GF, Eq.~(\ref{eq23}). We will normalize the GF when we come to the final result and use the fact that $Z(\lambda=0)=1$. The probability distribution for the number of electrons $\Delta n=n_t-n_0$ measured between two measurements is given by
\begin{equation} \label{eq17}
P(\Delta n)=\sum_{n_t,n_0}\delta[\Delta n-(n_0-n_t)]P(n_t,n_0),
\end{equation}
where $\delta(n)$ is the Kronecker $\delta$ symbol. Using Eq.~(\ref{eq14}), we have $n_0P_0=N_L(0)P_0$ and $n_tP_t=N_L(0)P_t$. The GF associated with the probability $P(\Delta n)$ is\cite{RMP,foot1}
\begin{align} \label{eq18}
&Z(\lambda,t) \equiv \sum_{\Delta n}P(\Delta n)e^{i\lambda \Delta n}=\sum_{n_t,n_0}e^{i\lambda(n_0-n_t)}P(n_t,n_0) \notag \\
&=\sum_{n_t,n_0}\mathrm{Tr}[e^{i\lambda N_L(0)}P_0\rho(0)P_0U(0,t)e^{-i\lambda N_L(t)}P_tU(t,0)] \notag \\
&=\left\langle e^{i\lambda N_L(0)}e^{-i\lambda N_L^{(h)}(t)}\right\rangle^\prime \notag \\
&=\left\langle e^{i\lambda N_L(0)/2}e^{-i\lambda N_L^{(h)}(t)}e^{i\lambda N_L(0)/2}\right\rangle^\prime
\end{align}
where $P_t$ disappears after the summation over $n_t$ and the prime indicates that the average is with respect to
\begin{equation} \label{eq19}
\rho^{\prime}(0)=\sum_{n_0}P_0\rho(0)P_0.
\end{equation}
To remove the projection operator $P_0$, we represent it using the Kronecker delta function
\begin{align} \label{eq20}
P_0&=|n_0\rangle\langle n_0| =\sum_n \int_0^{2\pi}\frac{d\xi}{2\pi}e^{-i\xi(n_0-n)}|n\rangle\langle n| \notag \\
&=\int_0^{2\pi}\frac{d\xi}{2\pi}e^{-i\xi(n_0-N_L(0))} ,
\end{align}
then we can easily express $\rho'(0)$ in an integral form,
\begin{equation} \label{eq21}
\rho'(0) =\int_0^{2\pi}\frac{d\xi}{2\pi} e^{i\xi N_L(0)}\rho(0)e^{-i\xi N_L(0)} .
\end{equation}
Using Eq.~(\ref{eq18}) and Eq.~(\ref{eq21}), we express the GF as follows,
\begin{align} \label{eq22}
Z(\lambda,t) =\int_0^{2\pi}\frac{d\xi}{2\pi}Z(\lambda,\xi,t) ,
\end{align}
with
\begin{equation} \label{eq23}
Z(\lambda,\xi,t) =\mathrm{Tr}\left\lbrace\rho(0)U_{\lambda /2-\xi}(0,t)U_{-\lambda /2-\xi}(t,0)\right\rbrace,
\end{equation}
where $U_\gamma$ with $\gamma=\lambda /2-\xi$ or $-\lambda /2-\xi$ is the modified evolution operator ($t\geqslant t'$),
\begin{align} \label{eq24}
U_\gamma(t,t')
&=e^{i\gamma N_L(0)}U(t,t')e^{-i\gamma N_L(0)} \notag \\
&=\mathcal{T}\exp\left\{-\frac{i}{\hbar}\int_{t'}^tH_\gamma(t_1)dt_1\right\}
\end{align}
with
\begin{equation} \label{eq25}
H_\gamma(t)=e^{i\gamma N_L(0)}H(t)e^{-i\gamma N_L(0)}.
\end{equation}
As mentioned before, the anti-time-ordering operator should be used here if $t<t'$.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=3.50in]{2contour_dot.eps}\\
\caption{Complex contour defined from time $-\infty$ to time $t$ and then back to time $-\infty$ in Keldysh space. When we consider the case of the transient regime, in which the subsystems are connected at time $t_0=0$, the complex contour should be from time $t_0=0$ to time $t$ and then back to time $t_0=0$ in Keldysh space. }
\label{fig2}
\end{figure}
Since $U_{-\lambda /2-\xi}(t,0)$ is from $0$ to $t$ and $U_{\lambda /2-\xi}(0,t)$ is from $t$ to $0$, we can use the Keldysh contour as shown in Fig.~(\ref{fig2}) to combine $U_{\lambda /2-\xi}(0,t)U_{-\lambda /2-\xi}(t,0)$, where for the upper branch of the Keldysh contour
\begin{equation} \label{eq26}
\gamma_+(t)=(-\lambda/2-\xi) \theta(t),
\end{equation}
and for the lower branch
\begin{equation} \label{eq27}
\gamma_-(t)=(\lambda/2-\xi) \theta(t),
\end{equation}
and $\theta(t)$ is the step function due to the fact that the first measurement starts at $t=0$. Note that for a time $t$ in the upper branch and a time $t'$ in the lower branch, we always have
$t<t'$. In terms of Keldysh contour, we can express $Z(\lambda,\xi,t)$ as:
\begin{equation} \label{eq28}
Z(\lambda,\xi,t)=\mathrm{Tr}\left\{\rho(0)\mathcal{T}_C\exp\left[-\frac{i}{\hbar}\int_C H_\gamma(t_1)dt_1 \right]\right\},
\end{equation}
where $\mathcal{T}_C$ is the contour-ordering operator on Keldysh contour which has upper and lower branches discussed above.
Noticing the fact that $N_L(0)$ commutes with every term except the coupling term $H_{LS}$ in Eq.(\ref{eq9}) and from the Baker-Hausdorff lemma
\begin{equation}\label{baker}
e^X Y e^{-X} =Y+[X,Y]+\frac{1}{2!}[X,[X,Y]]+\cdots ,
\end{equation}
we have $e^{i\gamma N_L(0)}c_{kL}e^{-i\gamma N_L(0)}=e^{-i\gamma N_L(0)}c_{kL}$, we obtain
\begin{align} \label{eq29}
H_\gamma(t)=&\sum_{x\in k\alpha ,n}\epsilon_x c^\dag_x c_x+\sum_{kRn}t_{kRn}c^\dag_{kR} c_n +\sum_{kRn}t_{nkR}c^\dag_n c_{kR} \notag \\
&+e^{i\gamma}\sum_{kLn} t_{kLn}c^{\dag}_{kL} c_n+ e^{-i\gamma}\sum_{kLn} t_{nkL}c^{\dag}_n c_{kL} .
\end{align}
Note that in the modified Hamiltonian the counting field $\gamma$ only enters the coupling term between the central quantum dot and the L-lead where we count the number of electrons.
Consider a system where the interaction between the quantum dot and the two leads is adiabatically switched on from $t=-\infty$ to $t=0$, the nonequilibrium state $\rho(0)$ can be obtained by evolving the system from the initially decoupled state $\rho(-\infty)=\rho_L\otimes\rho_S\otimes\rho_R$ at $t=-\infty$. This process can be described by
\begin{equation} \label{eq30}
\rho(0)=U(0,-\infty)\rho(-\infty)U(-\infty,0) ,
\end{equation}
We can rewrite Eq.~(\ref{eq23}) as
\begin{align} \label{eq31}
Z(\lambda,t)&=\int_0^{2\pi}\frac{d\xi}{2\pi}\mathrm{Tr}\left\lbrace\rho(-\infty)U_{\gamma_-}(-\infty,t)U_{\gamma_+}(t,-\infty)\right\rbrace \notag \\
&=\int_0^{2\pi}\frac{d\xi}{2\pi}Z(\lambda,\xi,t),
\end{align}
Similarly, in terms of Keldysh contour, we can express $Z(\lambda,\xi,t)$ as:
\begin{equation} \label{eq32}
Z(\lambda,\xi,t)=\mathrm{Tr}\left\lbrace\rho(-\infty)\mathcal{T}_K\exp\left\lbrace-i\int_K H_\gamma(t_1)dt_1 \right\rbrace\right\rbrace,
\end{equation}
where we have used 'K' to denote the contour, from $t_0=-\infty$ to $t$ and then back to $t_0=-\infty$, for this adiabatic process. In contrast, $t_0$ is $0$ in the previous contour 'C'. In general, we can discuss the following two initial conditions.\cite{JS2} \\
(1) Measurement Regime. The system starts at $t=-\infty$ with the three different regions (L,R,S) disconnected. The coupling between them and the dc bias voltage are switched on adiabatically after $t=-\infty$ and the system evolves to steady state up to time $t=0$. This is the dc transport regime and the current is independent of time in the steady state.
In this case we introduce projector $P_0$ to make the first measurement. This measurement is mathematically done by simply introducing a parameter $\xi$ in Eq.~(\ref{eq20}). \\
(2) Transient regime. In this regime, the coupling between the leads and the quantum dot is switched on at $t_0=0^+$. As shown in Fig.1, two gate voltages are applied to control the coupling between leads and central scattering region. By changing these gate voltages, we can turn on and off the coupling at will. The density matrix at $t=0$, $\rho(0)$, is the product of initial states of decoupled subsystems $\rho(-\infty)=\rho_L\otimes\rho_S\otimes\rho_R$. We will see later that the above parameter $\xi$ will not appear under this regime. Obviously, the contour 'C' should be used in the transient regime.
There is a fundamental question in FCS: how to probe the state of the system in a noninvasive way. As we will see below that after the first measurement, the quantum state of the system is altered. This means that the subsequence measurement will give a different result from what we should get if the system were not perturbed due to the first measurement. This has been noted in the early work of Levitov and Lesovik where a measuring device is attached to the right lead of the system so that the current can be measured from the rotating angle of the spin. As pointed out by Levitov and Lesovik, their measurement is non-invasive only in the sense that the reflection amplitude is unchanged and the transmission amplitude changes by a phase.\cite{Levitov3} However, there are important consequences due to this phase change. For instance, although the FCS at long times is correctly represented by the generating function derived from this approach, the second and higher order cumulants of current at short times will be different from the true value. This is a known problem in the FCS community.
The transient regime is different. This is because in the transient regime, the density matrix of the system at $t=0$ is a direct product of the three regions $\rho(0) = \rho_L \otimes\rho_D\otimes\rho_R$, the system will not be perturbed if the first measurement is performed at $t=0$. As a result the first measurement at $t=0$ is not necessary and hence only one measurement is needed. Therefore the quantum system will not be altered using the two-measurement scheme in the transient regime.
\subsection*{b. Keldysh formalism}
Now we introduce the Keldysh formalism\cite{20,Ka1,Ka2} to derive GF. For this purpose it is convenient to use the Grassmann algebra whose basic knowledge is presented in Appendix A. We divide the Keldysh contour from $t=-\infty$ to $t$ and then back to $-\infty$ in Eq.~(\ref{eq31}) into $2N$ equal time intervals $\delta t$, such that $t_1=t_{2N}=-\infty$ and $t_N=t_{N+1}=t$. We will use the relation of over-completeness of the Fermion coherent state Eq.~(\ref{eqA15}) and insert it at each time slice $i=1,2,...,2N$ along the contour.\cite{Ka1,Ka2} It is important to note that the Grassmann fields $\overline{\phi}$ and $\phi$ are completely independent fields.
Introducing the abbreviation for evolution operator over $\delta t$, $U(\delta t_j)\equiv U(t_0+ j \delta t,t_0+ (j-1)\delta t)$ and using Eq.~(\ref{eqA13}),
we find ($\hbar=1$):
\begin{align} \label{eq33}
&\langle\phi_{j+1}|U(\delta t_j)|\phi_{j}\rangle=\exp\left\{-i\delta t_j\left[\sum_{x\in k\alpha, n}\epsilon_x \overline{\phi}_{(j+1)x}\phi_{jx}
\right. \right. \notag \\
&+\sum_{kL,n} \left( e^{i\gamma_j}t_{kLn}\overline {\phi}_{(j+1)kL}\phi_{jn}+e^{-i\gamma_j} t_{nkL} \overline{\phi}_{(j+1)n}\phi_{jkL} \right) \notag \\
&\left. \left. +\sum_{kR,n} \left( t_{kRn}\overline{\phi}_{(j+1)kR}\phi_{jn}+t_{nkR}
\overline{\phi}_{(j+1)n}\phi_{jkR} \right) \right] \right\} \langle\phi_{j+1}|\phi_{j}\rangle
\end{align}
where the $\delta t_j=+\delta t$ indicates the forward-time branch and $\delta t_j=-\delta t$ is for the backward-time branch and we use the index $k\alpha$ to label the states of the lead $\alpha$ and the index $n$ the quantum dot. Remember that $\gamma_j=\gamma_+$ if $j=1,2,\cdots ,N$ and $\gamma_j=\gamma_-$ if $j=N,N+1,\cdots ,2N$. From Eq.~(\ref{eqA14}) one finds $\langle \phi_1| \hat{\rho}(-\infty)|-\phi_{2N}\rangle =\exp\{-\overline{\phi}_1\phi_{2N}\rho(-\infty) \} $. \cite{foot3}
Substituting Eq.~(\ref{eq33}) into Eq.~(\ref{eq32}) and using Eq.~(\ref{eqA16}) of the trace formula expressed in coherent states, we obtain the GF
\begin{equation} \label{eq34}
Z(\lambda,\xi,t)=\int\mathcal{D}[\overline{\phi}\phi]e^{iS[\overline{\phi}\phi]},
\end{equation}
with the action
\begin{align} \label{eq35}
& S[\overline{\phi}\phi]=\sum_{j=1}^{2N-1}\left\{\sum_{x\in k\alpha, n}\overline{\phi}_{(j+1)x}\left[ i\frac{\phi_{(j+1)x}-\phi_{jx}}{\delta t_j}-\epsilon_x \phi_{jx}\right] \right. \notag \\
& - \sum_{kL,n} \left[ e^{i\gamma_j}\overline{\phi}_{(j+1)kL}t_{kLn}\phi_{jn}
+e^{-i\gamma_j} \overline{\phi}_{(j+1)n}t_{nkL}\phi_{jkL}\right] \notag \\
&\left. -\sum_{kR,n}\left[ \overline{\phi}_{(j+1)kR}t_{kRn} \phi_{jn}+ \overline{\phi}_{(j+1)n}t_{nkR}\phi_{jkR} \right] \right\} \delta t_j \notag \\
&+i\overline{\phi}_1(\phi_1 +\rho(-\infty)\phi_{2N}),
\end{align}
where the term $i\overline{\phi}_{(j+1)x}\phi_{(j+1)x}/\delta t_j$ in Eq.(\ref{eq35}) comes from the relation of over completeness of Fermion coherent states, Eq.~(\ref{eqA15}). The term $i\overline{\phi}_{(j+1)x}\phi_{(j)x}/\delta t_j$ in the above equation that contains two time indices is due to $\langle\phi_{j+1}|\phi_{j}\rangle$ in Eq.(\ref{eq33}) after using Eq.~(\ref{eqA12}). To avoid integration along the closed time contour, we split the Grassmann field into upper and lower branches of the contour, respectively.\cite{Ka2} Here, we use $+$ and $-$ to differentiate the upper and lower branches. Setting $N\rightarrow\infty$ and $\delta t_j\rightarrow 0$, we can obtain the continuous expression for the action
\begin{align} \label{eq36}
&S[\overline{\phi}\phi] \notag \\
=&\int_{-\infty}^t d\tau\sum_{x\in k\alpha, n}\left[\overline{\phi}_{x+}(i\partial_t-\epsilon_x)\phi_{x+}-\overline{\phi}_{x-}(i\partial_t-\epsilon_x)\phi_{x-}\right] \notag \\
&-\sum_{k,n}\left[e^{i\gamma_+}\overline{\phi}_{kL+}t_{kLn}\phi_{n+}-
e^{i\gamma_-}\overline{\phi}_{kL-}t_{kLn}\phi_{n-} \right. \notag \\
&\left. \qquad \ +e^{-i\gamma_+}\overline{\phi}_{n+}t_{nkL}\phi_{kL+}-e^{-i\gamma_-}\overline{\phi}_{n-}t_{nkL}\phi_{kL-} \right] \notag \\
&-\sum_{k,n}\left[\overline{\phi}_{kR+}t_{kRn}\phi_{n+}
-\overline{\phi}_{kR-}t_{kRn}\phi_{n-} \right. \notag \\
&\left. \qquad \ +\overline{\phi}_{n+}t_{nkR}\phi_{kR+}-
\overline{\phi}_{n-}t_{nkR}\phi_{kR-} \right].
\end{align}
The last term $-\rho(-\infty)$ in Eq.~(\ref{eq35}) is responsible for the boundary condition at the $-\infty$ to connect the upper and lower branches and this will be easily seen in Eq.~(\ref{eq39}) later. \cite{Ka2}
Now, we want to express Eq.~(\ref{eq36}) in terms of Keldysh Green's function. To do that, we consider the free action of the quantum dot or the leads in the absence of coupling between them or external fields in Eq.~(\ref{eq35})
\begin{align} \label{eq37}
S_0=& \sum_{j=1}^{2N-1} \overline{\phi}_{(j+1)}\left[ i\frac{\phi_{(j+1)}-\phi_{j}}{\delta t_j}-\epsilon \phi_{j}\right]{\delta t_j} \notag \\
& +i\bar{\phi}_1(\phi_1 +\rho(-\infty)\phi_{2N})
\equiv\sum_{j,j'}^{2N}\bar{\phi}_j g_{jj'}^{-1}\phi_{j'} .
\end{align}
where $g_{jj'}^{-1}$ has double time indices. From the basic property of the Gaussian integral for Grassmann algebra we have
\begin{equation} \label{eq38}
\langle \phi_j\bar{\phi}_{j'}\rangle =\frac{\int \mathcal{D}[\bar{\phi}\phi] \phi_j\bar{\phi}_{j'} \exp(iS_0)}{\int \mathcal{D}[\bar{\phi}\phi] \exp(iS_0)}=ig_{jj'}
\end{equation}
From Eq.~(\ref{eq37}) we can write the matrix $ig_{jj'}^{-1}$ in the following form (when $N=3$)
\begin{equation} \label{eq39}
i g_{jj'}^{-1}=
\left(
\begin{array}{ccc}
-1 & & \\
h_- & -1 & \\
& h_- & -1 \\
\hline
& & 1 \\
& & \\
& &
\end{array}
\vline
\begin{array}{ccc}
& & -\rho \\
& & \\
& & \\
\hline
-1 & & \\
h_+ & -1 & \\
& h_+ & -1
\end{array}
\right)
\end{equation}
where $h_{\pm}\equiv 1 \mp i\epsilon \delta_t$. As shown in Ref.\onlinecite{Ka1,Ka2}, we can get the discrete form Green's function of the free quantum dot or the lead by inverting the matrix in Eq.(\ref{eq39}). The continuous version of the Green's function can be obtained by taking the $N\rightarrow \infty$ limit while keeping $N\delta_t$ constant and also $(h_+ h_-)^N \rightarrow 1$.
Then the four correlation functions in the continuum limit are\cite{Ka2}
\begin{align} \label{eq40}
& \langle \phi^+(t)\bar{\phi}^-(t') \rangle =i g^<(t,t')= -n_F\exp\{-i\epsilon (t-t')\} \notag \\
& \langle \phi^-(t)\bar{\phi}^+(t') \rangle =i g^>(t,t')= (1-n_F)\exp\{-i\epsilon (t-t')\} \notag \\
& \langle \phi^+(t)\bar{\phi}^+(t') \rangle =i g^t(t,t')= \theta(t-t')ig^>+\theta(t'-t)ig^< \notag \\
& \langle \phi^-(t)\bar{\phi}^-(t') \rangle =i g^{\bar{t}}(t,t')= \theta(t'-t)ig^> +\theta(t-t')ig^<
\end{align}
where $n_F=\rho/(1+\rho)$ is the Fermi occupation number.
Now we perform the Keldysh rotation. Define the new fields as:
\begin{equation} \label{eq41}
\phi_{a1}=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(\phi_{a+}+\phi_{a-});\;
\phi_{a2}=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(\phi_{a+}-\phi_{a-}),
\end{equation}
whereas "bar" fields transform differently:
\begin{equation} \label{eq42}
\overline{\phi}_{a1}=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(\overline{\phi}_{a+}-\overline{\phi}_{a-});\;
\overline{\phi}_{a2}=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(\overline{\phi}_{a+}+\overline{\phi}_{a-}).
\end{equation}
The effect of this rotation is to transform the matrix form of contour-ordered function $A$ into an upper triangular matrix as follows:
\begin{equation} \label{eq43}
\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
A^{t}(t,t') & A^{<}(t,t') \\
A^{>}(t,t') & A^{\bar{t}}(t,t')
\end{array}
\right)
\longrightarrow
\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
A^r(t,t') & A^k(t,t') \\
0 & A^a(t,t')
\end{array}
\right)
\end{equation}
with the following relation:
\begin{align} \label{eq44}
&\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
A^r & A^k \\
0 & A^a
\end{array}
\right)
= Q \sigma_z
\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
A^{t} & A^{<} \\
A^{>} & A^{\bar{t}}
\end{array}
\right) Q^T \notag \\
&=\frac{1}{2}
\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
A^t-A^{\bar{t}}-A^{<}+A^{>} & A^t+A^{\bar{t}}+A^{<}+A^{>} \\
A^t+A^{\bar{t}}-A^{<}-A^{>} & A^t-A^{\bar{t}}+A^{<}-A^{>}
\end{array}
\right) ,
\end{align}
where $Q=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}
\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
1 & -1 \\
1 & 1
\end{array}
\right)
$
and
$\sigma_z= \left(
\begin{array}{cc}
1 & 0 \\
0 & -1
\end{array}
\right)
$ are orthogonal matrices. Here, $A^r(t,t')$ and $A^a(t,t')$ are, respectively, the usual retarded and advanced Green's function. For Green's functions or self-energies without counting parameter or other parameters involved, we have
\begin{align} \label{eq45}
A^t+A^{\bar{t}} &=A^{<}+A^{>} , \notag \\
A^k &=2A^{<}+A^{r}-A^{a} .
\end{align}
Introducing
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{cc}
\overline{\psi}_x^T(\tau)=\left(\overline{\phi}_{x+}(\tau),\,\overline{\phi}_{x-}(\tau) \right), &
\psi_x^T(\tau)=\left({\phi}_{x+}(\tau),\,{\phi}_{x-}(\tau)\right)
\end{array} \nonumber
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{cc}
\overline{\phi}_x^T(\tau)=\left(\overline{\phi}_{x1}(\tau),\,\overline{\phi}_{x2}(\tau) \right), &
\phi_x^T(\tau)=\left({\phi}_{x1}(\tau),\,{\phi}_{x2}(\tau)\right)
\end{array} \nonumber
\end{equation}
we have from Eq.(\ref{eq41}) and (\ref{eq42})
\begin{eqnarray}
&&\overline{\psi}_x=Q \overline{\phi}_x \nonumber \\
&&\psi_x= \sigma_z Q \phi_x \label{eq44a}
\end{eqnarray}
The second and third terms of Eq.(\ref{eq36}) (denoted as $S_1$) can be written as
\begin{align} \label{eq36a}
&S_1[\overline{\phi}\phi] \notag \\
=&-\int_{-\infty}^t d\tau \sum_{k,n}\left[ t_{kLn}\overline{\psi}_{kL}^T {\bf V} \psi_{n} + t_{nkL}\overline{\psi}_{n}^T {\bf V}^* \psi_{kL}\right. \notag \\
&\left.+ t_{kRn}\overline{\psi}_{kR}^T \sigma_z \psi_{n} + t_{nkR}\overline{\psi}_{n}^T \sigma_z \psi_{kR}\right].
\end{align}
where ${\bf V} = (e^{i\gamma_+}-e^{i\gamma_-})/2+\sigma_z (e^{i\gamma_+}+e^{i\gamma_-})/2$. Substituting Eq.(\ref{eq44a}) into (\ref{eq36a}), we can rewrite the action of Eq.~(\ref{eq36}) after Keldysh rotation as follows:
\begin{align} \label{eq46}
&S[\overline{\phi}\phi]=S_{L}+S_{R}+S_{S}+S_{LS}+S_{RS} \notag \\
=&\int_{-\infty}^td\tau\int_{-\infty}^td\tau' \sum_{x,x'\in k\alpha n}\overline{\phi}_x^T(\tau) g_{xx'}^{-1}(\tau,\tau') \phi_{x'}(\tau') \notag \\
-&\sum_{k,n}\left[t_{kLn}\overline{\phi}_{kL}^T(\tau)\Lambda(\gamma) \phi_{n}(\tau)
+t_{nkL}\overline{\phi}_n^T(\tau)\Lambda^*(\gamma) \phi_{kL}(\tau) \right] \notag \\
-&\sum_{k,n}\left[t_{kRn}\overline{\phi}_{kR}^T(\tau) \phi_{n}(\tau)
+t_{nkR}\overline{\phi}_{n}^T(\tau)\phi_{kR}(\tau) \right] ,
\end{align}
where we have introduced the abbreviated notation
\begin{align} \label{eq48}
\Lambda(\gamma)&=Q^T {\bf V} \sigma_z Q \notag \\
&=\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
(e^{i\gamma_+}+e^{i\gamma_-})/2 & (e^{i\gamma_+}-e^{i\gamma_-})/2 \\
(e^{i\gamma_+}-e^{i\gamma_-})/2 & (e^{i\gamma_+}+e^{i\gamma_-})/2
\end{array}
\right) \notag \\
&=
\begin{cases}
\exp(-i\xi)\exp\left(-\frac{i\lambda}{2}\sigma_x \right) , & \tau \geq 0 \\
\mathrm{identity \ matrix}, & \tau <0
\end{cases}
\end{align}
with $\exp\left(-\frac{i\lambda}{2}\sigma_x \right)= \left(
\begin{array}{cc}
\cos\frac{\lambda}{2} & -i\sin\frac{\lambda}{2} \\
-i\sin\frac{\lambda}{2} & \cos\frac{\lambda}{2}
\end{array} \right) $. Here, the Green's function in Keldysh formalism is given by
\begin{equation} \label{eq49}
g_{xx'}(t,t')=\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
g_{xx'}^{r}(t,t') & g_{xx'}^{k}(t,t') \\
0 & g_{xx'}^{a}(t,t')
\end{array}
\right) ,
\end{equation}
where $(i\partial_t-\epsilon_x)g_{xx'}^{k}(t,t')=0$ and $(i\partial_t-\epsilon_x)g_{xx'}^{r,a}(t,t')=\delta(t-t')\delta_{x,x'}$. We point out that the coupling coefficients $t_{kLn},t_{kLn}^*,t_{kRn},t_{kRn}^*$ can also depend on $\tau$ in Eq.~(\ref{eq46}).
Now, we write Eq.~(\ref{eq46}) in a matrix form
\begin{equation} \label{eq50}
S[\overline{\phi}\phi]=\int_{-\infty}^td\tau \int_{-\infty}^td\tau'
\overline{\bf \Phi}^{T}(\tau) \mathcal{M}(\tau,\tau') {\bf \Phi}(\tau'),
\end{equation}
where we have used the notation $\overline{\bf \Phi}^{T}(\tau)=(\overline{\phi}_{kL}^{T}(\tau), \overline{\phi}_{n}^{T}(\tau),\overline{\phi}_{kR}^{T}(\tau)) $ and
\begin{equation} \label{eq51}
\mathcal{M}=
\left(
\begin{array}{ccc}
g_{kk' L}^{-1}(\tau,\tau') & -t_{kLn'}(\tau,\tau)\Lambda (\tau) & 0 \\
-\Lambda^*(\tau)t_{nk'L}(\tau,\tau) & g_{nn'}^{-1}(\tau,\tau')
& -t_{nk'R}(\tau,\tau) \\
0 & -t_{kRn'}(\tau,\tau) & g_{kk' R}^{-1}(\tau,\tau')
\end{array}
\right),
\end{equation}
where the matrix $\mathcal{M}(\tau,\tau')$ contains Keldysh time space, $k-$space, and orbital space. Note that $t_{k\alpha n}$ and $t_{nk\alpha}$ are diagonal matrices in Keldysh space which means that $t_{k\alpha n}^r=t_{k\alpha n}^a$ and $t_{k\alpha n}^<=0$. The upper bound for $\tau$ and $\tau'$ should be $t$, at which we take the second measurement.
Using functional integration of the Gaussian integral for independent Grassmann fields described by Eq.~(\ref{eqA11}) and taking into the normalization condition $Z(\lambda=0,t)=1$ and the fact $\Lambda(\lambda=0)=1$ into consideration, we can express the GF as follows,
\begin{equation} \label{eq52}
Z(\lambda,t)=\frac{\det \mathcal{M}(\lambda)}{\det \mathcal{M}(\lambda=0)} .
\end{equation}
Defining the diagonal matrix
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{P}=\left( \begin{array}{ccc}
g_{k'k L}(\tau,\tau') & 0 & 0 \\
0 & I & 0 \\
0 & 0 & g_{k'k R}(\tau,\tau')
\end{array} \right),
\end{equation}
we have
\begin{align}
\mathcal{PM}(\lambda)&=\left( \begin{array}{ccc}
1& -g_{k'k L}t_{kLn'}\Lambda & 0 \\
-\Lambda^* t_{nk'L} & g^{-1}_{n n'} & -t_{nk'R} \\
0 & -g_{k'k R}t_{kRn'} & 1
\end{array} \right) \notag \\
&\equiv \left( \begin{array}{ccc}
A & B \\
C & D
\end{array} \right)
\end{align}
where
\begin{equation}
D \equiv \left( \begin{array}{ccc}
g^{-1}_{n n'} & -t_{nk'R} \\
-g_{k'k R}t_{kRn'} & 1
\end{array} \right)
\end{equation}
and $A=1$. Here the summation on repeated indices is implied. Using the identity
\begin{equation} \label{eqnew}
{\rm det}\left( \begin{array}{ccc}
A& B \\
C & D
\end{array} \right) = {\rm det}(A) ~ {\rm det}(D-C A^{-1} B)
\end{equation}
we find
\begin{equation}
{\rm det}[\mathcal{PM}(\lambda)] = {\rm det}\left( \begin{array}{ccc}
g^{-1}_{n n'}-{\widetilde \Sigma}_L & -t_{nk'R} \\
-g_{k'k R}t_{kRn'} & 1
\end{array} \right)
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation} \label{eq53}
\Sigma_L(\tau,\tau') =
\sum_{k,k'}t_{nk'L} g_{k'k L}(\tau,\tau')t_{k L n'} ,
\end{equation}
and ${\widetilde\Sigma}_L(\tau,\tau')=\Lambda^*(\tau)\Sigma_L(\tau,\tau') \Lambda(\tau')$.
Using Eq.(\ref{eqnew}) again, we have ${\rm det}[\mathcal{PM}(\lambda)] = {\rm det}(g^{-1}_{nn'}-{\widetilde \Sigma}_L-{\Sigma}_R)$.
Finally from $Z(\lambda,\xi,t)=\det [\mathcal{P}\mathcal{M}(\lambda)]/\det [\mathcal{P}\mathcal{M}(\lambda=0)]$,
we obtain the normalized generating function in a compact form
\begin{equation} \label{eq54}
Z(\lambda,\xi,t)=\det(G \widetilde{G}^{-1}) =\det[I-G (\widetilde{\Sigma}_L-\Sigma_L)]
\end{equation}
where the determinant can be calculated in discretized time slice and real space grid.
In the above equation, we have introduced the following notation:
\begin{equation} \label{eq55}
\widetilde{G}^{-1}=g^{-1}-\widetilde{\Sigma}_L-\Sigma_R ,\quad
G^{-1}=g^{-1}-\Sigma_L-\Sigma_R ,
\end{equation}
where $G$ is the Green's function of the quantum dot and $g=g_{nn'}(\tau,\tau')$ denotes the Green's function of the isolated quantum dot, and
\begin{equation} \label{eq56}
\widetilde{\Sigma}_L(\tau,\tau')
= \Lambda^*(\gamma(\tau))
\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
\Sigma^{r}_L & \Sigma^{k}_L \\
0 & \Sigma^{a}_L
\end{array}
\right) _{(\tau,\tau')}
\Lambda(\gamma(\tau')) ,
\end{equation}
where $\Lambda(\gamma(\tau'))$ and $\Lambda^*(\gamma(\tau))$ is defined in Eq.(\ref{eq48}) and the Green's function and self-energy are written in the Keldysh space in time domain. We can see that the counting field only appears in the self-energy of the left lead in which we count the numbers of the electrons. When $\lambda=\xi=0$, we have $\widetilde{\Sigma}_L=\Sigma_L$.
The Green's function G satisfies the Dyson equation defined on the Keldysh contour from $-\infty$ to $t$ and then back to $-\infty$ with the following relation (for transient regime we should replace $-\infty$ with $0$):
\begin{equation} \label{eq57}
G(\tau',\tau)=g(\tau',\tau)+\int_{-\infty}^{t}d\tau_1 d\tau_2 g(\tau',\tau_1)\Sigma(\tau_1,\tau_2)G(\tau_2,\tau) ,
\end{equation}
where $\Sigma(\tau_1,\tau_2)=\Sigma_L(\tau_1,\tau_2)+\Sigma_R(\tau_1,\tau_2)$.
We can write it explicitly as follows
\begin{align} \label{eq58}
G^{r,a}&=g^{r,a}+g^{r,a}\Sigma^{r,a} G^{r,a} \notag \\
G^k&=(1+G^r\Sigma^r)g^k(1+\Sigma^a G^a)+G^r\Sigma^k G^a .
\end{align}
We point out that if we want to investigate the current correlation between the left and right leads, we should introduce two counting parameters $\lambda_L, \lambda_R$, one for the self-energy of the left lead and another for the right lead, and calculate GF with two counting parameters $Z(\lambda_L,\lambda_R,t)$. For instance, we have $\langle n_L n_R\rangle =\frac{\partial^2 Z(\lambda_L,\lambda_R,t)}{\partial(i\lambda_L)\partial(i\lambda_R)}\big|_{\lambda_L=\lambda_R=0}$. We can also generalize the GF to systems with multiple leads.
The self-energy $\widetilde{\Sigma}_L(\tau,\tau')$ in the presence of the counting field should be calculated separately at four different time regimes. We find from Eqs.(\ref{eq48}) and (\ref{eq56}) that when $-\infty<\tau<0, 0<\tau' <t$, $\widetilde{\Sigma}_L(\tau,\tau')$ is ($\Sigma^{r}_L=0$):
\begin{equation} \label{eq59}
\widetilde{\Sigma}_L(\tau,\tau')
= e^{-i\xi} \left(
\begin{array}{cc}
-i\sin\frac{\lambda}{2}\Sigma^{k}_L & \cos\frac{\lambda}{2}\Sigma^{k}_L \\
-i\sin\frac{\lambda}{2}\Sigma^{a}_L & \cos\frac{\lambda}{2}\Sigma^{a}_L
\end{array}
\right) ,
\end{equation}
and when $0<\tau<t,-\infty<\tau'<0$, we can write $\widetilde{\Sigma}_L(\tau,\tau')$ as ($\Sigma^{a}_L=0$):
\begin{equation} \label{eq60}
\widetilde{\Sigma}_L(\tau,\tau')
= e^{i\xi} \left(
\begin{array}{cc}
\cos\frac{\lambda}{2}\Sigma^{r}_L & \cos\frac{\lambda}{2}\Sigma^{k}_L \\
i\sin\frac{\lambda}{2}\Sigma^{r}_L & i\sin\frac{\lambda}{2}\Sigma^{k}_L
\end{array}
\right) ,
\end{equation}
and when $0<\tau,\tau' <t$,
\begin{equation} \label{eq61}
\widetilde{\Sigma}_L(\tau,\tau')= \exp(i\sigma_x \frac{\lambda}{2}) \Sigma_L(\tau,\tau') \exp(-i\sigma_x \frac{\lambda}{2}) .
\end{equation}
Finally, when $-\infty<\tau, \tau'<0$, we have $\lambda=0$ and $\widetilde{\Sigma}_L(\tau,\tau')=\Sigma_L(\tau,\tau')$. We can see that in transient regime, we only have the case $0<\tau,\tau' <t$, and the parameter $\xi$ does not appear.
Now, we turn to the cumulants of transferred electrons between $t_0=0$ and time $t$ and current of the transient regime. In the transient regime, using the relation $\ln \det \Omega=\mathrm{Tr} \ln \Omega$ we can write the CGF as
\begin{align} \label{eq62}
\ln Z(\lambda ,t) &=\mathrm{Tr} \ln [I-G (\widetilde{\Sigma}_L-\Sigma_L)] \notag \\
&=\mathrm{Tr} \ln [I-G M (e^{-i\sigma_x \lambda}-I)] ,
\end{align}
where $I$ is the identity matrix and $M$ is given by
\begin{equation} \label{eq63}
M(\tau,\tau')
= \frac{1}{2}\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
-\Sigma^a_L +\Sigma^r_L & \Sigma_L^k \\
-\Sigma_L^k & \Sigma^a_L -\Sigma^r_L \\
\end{array}
\right)_{(\tau,\tau')} .
\end{equation}
Taking the derivative of the CGF with respect to $\lambda$ and using the relation $\mathrm{Tr} \ln (I-\Omega)=-\sum_{j=1}\Omega^j/j$, we can get various cumulants from Eq.~(\ref{eq3}). The first cumulant, the mean number of transferred charge, can be expressed as follows
\begin{align} \label{eq64}
&\langle\langle \Delta n_L(t) \rangle\rangle \notag \\
&= \int_{0}^{t}d\tau\int_{0}^{\tau}d\tau'\mathrm{Tr}
[G^r(\tau,\tau')\Sigma_L^<(\tau',\tau)+G^<(\tau,\tau')\Sigma_L^a(\tau',\tau)] \notag \\
&- \int_{0}^{t}d\tau\int_{0}^{\tau}d\tau'\mathrm{Tr}
[G^a(\tau',\tau)\Sigma_L^<(\tau,\tau')+G^<(\tau',\tau)\Sigma_L^r(\tau,\tau')] ,
\end{align}
which can be written in a more compact form:
\begin{equation} \label{eq65}
\langle\langle \Delta n_L \rangle\rangle
= {\rm Tr}[(G^r-G^a) \Sigma^<_L + G^< (\Sigma^a_L-\Sigma^r_L)]
\end{equation}
where the trace is over both time space and real space. Similarly, the charge-charge correlation (the second cumulant) is found to be\cite{gm}
\begin{equation} \label{eq66}
\langle\langle (\Delta n_L)^2 \rangle \rangle= -{\rm Tr}[(G M \sigma_x)^2+GM].
\end{equation}
From $\langle\langle \Delta n_L(t) \rangle\rangle=\int_0^t I_L(\tau) d\tau$, we find the current at time $t$,
\begin{align} \label{eq67}
I_L(t) = \int_{0}^{t}d\tau {\rm Tr}[G^r(t,\tau)\Sigma_L^<(\tau,t)+G^<(t,\tau)\Sigma_L^a(\tau,t)]+H.c..
\end{align}
The current here is quite different from Cini's approach (the partition free approach), where the coupling between leads and the central quantum dot is turned on in the infinite past while the bias is applied at $t_0=0$. \cite{28,29,Cini} In our approach, both the coupling and the bias are turned on at $t_0=0$.
It is not difficult to prove that we obtain exactly the same expression for the average current as in Eq.(\ref{eq67}) in the measurement regime where two measurements are performed in the dc case. However, the second and higher cumulants in the measurement regime are not the same as those of the transient regime. This confirms the fact that the first measurement does perturb the system and therefore the current under dc bias is not a constant after the measurement. Similar behavior has been found previously in the case of phonon transport.\cite{JS1,JS2}
We can derive the long-time behavior of the generating function which recovers the famous Levitov-Lesovik formula.\cite{Levitov2,Levitov3,Klich,Levitov4}. This has been discussed in detail in the papers of M.~Esposito \textit{et al.} \cite{RMP} and Agarwalla \textit{et al.}.\cite{JS2} For completeness of this paper, we just give a brief summary here about how to get the long-time limit from the FCS in the transient regime. For convenience we assume that we switch on the interaction between the subsystems at $-t/2$ and we are interested in the behavior between time $-t/2$ and $t/2$. When $t\rightarrow \infty$, the interval becomes $(-\infty, \infty)$, and the Green's function and the self-energy in the time domain are invariant under the time translation. The CGF, the logarithm of the determinant of Eq.~(\ref{eq54}), in the energy space in the long-time limit is
\begin{equation} \label{long1}
\ln Z_s(\lambda ,t)=t\int \frac{d\omega}{2\pi} \ln\det\left\{ 1-G(\omega)[\widetilde{\Sigma}_L(\omega)-\Sigma_L(\omega)] \right\} .
\end{equation}
If we use the first equality of the determinant of Eq.~(\ref{eq54}), CGF in the energy space in the long-time limit can be expressed as,
\begin{align} \label{long2}
&\ln Z_s(\lambda ,t)=t\int \frac{d\omega}{2\pi}\ln\det\left[ \left( \begin{array}{cc}
G^r & 0 \\ 0 & G^a
\end{array} \right) \times \right. \notag \\
&\left. \left( \begin{array}{cc}
(g^r)^{-1}-\widetilde{\Sigma}_{L}^{11}-\Sigma_{R}^r
& -\widetilde{\Sigma}_L^{12}-\Sigma_{R}^k \\
-\widetilde{\Sigma}_L^{21} & (g^a)^{-1}-\widetilde{\Sigma}_{L}^{22}-\Sigma_{R}^a
\end{array} \right) \right] ,
\end{align}
where we ignore $G^k$ in the determinant since the Green's function is an upper-triangle block matrix in the Keldysh space, and $\widetilde{\Sigma}_{L}^{11}$.
Using the relations $(G^r)^{-1}-(G^a)^{-1}=\Sigma^a-\Sigma^r$ and Eq.(\ref{eqnew}), we have
\begin{align} \label{long3}
\ln Z_s(\lambda ,t)=& t\int \frac{d\omega}{2\pi}\ln\det [ I+G^r(\Sigma_R^r-\Sigma_R^a)G^a(e^{i\lambda}-1)\Sigma_L^< \notag \\
&+G^r\Sigma_R^< G^a(e^{-i\lambda}-1)(\Sigma_L^r-\Sigma_L^a) \notag \\
&+G^r\Sigma_R^<G^a(e^{i\lambda}+e^{-i\lambda}-2)\Sigma_L^< ]
\end{align}
Further using the relations $\Sigma_{\alpha}^r-\Sigma_{\alpha}^a =-i\Gamma_{\alpha}$ and $\Sigma_{\alpha}^<=i\Gamma_{\alpha}f_{\alpha}$, we obtain the CGF in the long-time limit as
\begin{align} \label{long4}
\ln Z_s(\lambda)=& t\int \frac{d\omega}{2\pi}{\rm Tr} \ln \{ I+T(\omega)[(e^{i\lambda}-1)(1-f_R(\omega))f_L(\omega) \notag \\
& +(e^{-i\lambda}-1)(1-f_L(\omega))f_R(\omega)] \}
\end{align}
with the transmission coefficient for the quantum dot $T(\omega)=G^r\Gamma_L G^a\Gamma_R$. Next we get the current generating function $S_s(\lambda)$
\begin{align} \label{long5}
S_s(\lambda)=&\lim_{t\rightarrow \infty}\frac{\ln Z_s(\lambda)}{t} \notag \\
=& \int \frac{d\omega}{2\pi}{\rm Tr}\ln \left\{ I+T(\omega)[(e^{i\lambda}-1)(1-f_R(\omega))f_L(\omega) \right. \notag \\
& \left. +(e^{-i\lambda}-1)(1-f_L(\omega))f_R(\omega)] \right\}
\end{align}
which is the celebrated Levitov-Lesovik formula. Taking the derivative of the current generating function with respect to $\lambda$ at $\lambda=0$, we get the current of the steady state in the long-time limit which is the Landauer-Buttiker formula.\cite{L-B}
\begin{equation} \label{long6}
I(t)=\int \frac{d\omega}{2\pi}T(\omega)[f_L(\omega)-f_R(\omega)] .
\end{equation}
Finally, we wish to emphasize that the formalism discussed here cannot be used to study the short time full-counting statistics in dc steady state quantum transport since the first measurement is not non-invasive. A formalism of short time FCS in dc steady state within nonequilibrium Green's function formalism is still unknown.
\section{Generalization to Magnetic Tunnel Junction}
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=3.0in]{3MNM.eps}\\
\caption{Schematic diagram of a magnetic tunnel junction (MTJ) in which the left and right ferromagnetic leads are coupled to the non-magnetic scattering region which is a quantum dot in our case. The magnetic moment $\mathbf{M}$ of the left lead is along the $z-$axis, while the magnetic moment of the right lead is at an angle of $\theta$ to the $z-$axis, which is along the $z'$ axis. }
\label{fig3}
\end{figure}
In this section, we generalize the formalism discussed above to FCS in spintronics. As an example we study a magnetic tunnel junction (MTJ) in which the left and right ferromagnetic leads are coupled to the non-magnetic scattering region which is a quantum dot. The magnetic moment $\mathbf{M}$ of the left lead is along the $z-$axis, while the magnetic moment of the right lead is at an angle of $\theta$ to the $z-$axis, which is along the $z'$ axis (such that the coordinate system $x' y' z'$ is obtained by rotating the coordinate system $xyz$ by an angle $\theta$ along the $y$ direction), the electric current flows in the $y-$direction (see Fig.{\ref{fig3}}). The relative orientation of the magnetizations (parallel or anti-parallel) in the two electrodes will induce the tunnel magnetoresistance (TMR) effect. \cite{TMR1,TMR2,TMR3} The magnetization switching probability by non-Gaussian spin-torque shot noise is recently studied by taking FCS into consideration and using the fluctuation theorem. \cite{switching} Here, we present a formalism using NEGF which is suitable to study the FCS of transient behaviors in MTJ. Treating $xyz$ coordinate system as the frame of reference, the Hamiltonian of the whole system reads as
\begin{equation} \label{mtj1}
H=H_L+H_R+H_{dot}+H_{T}
\end{equation}
where $H_L$ and $H_R$ describe the Hamiltonian of the left and right leads:
\begin{align} \label{mtj2}
H_L=&\sum_{kL\sigma}(\epsilon_{kL}-\sigma M_L )C_{kL\sigma}^{\dag}C_{kL\sigma} \notag \\
H_R=&\sum_{kR\sigma}(\epsilon_{kR}-\sigma M_R\cos\theta)C_{kR\sigma}^{\dag}C_{kR\sigma} \notag \\
&- M_R\sin\theta C_{kR\sigma}^{\dag}C_{kR\bar{\sigma}} ,
\end{align}
$H_{dot}$ describes the non-magnetic scattering region (quantum dot),
\begin{equation} \label{mtj3}
H_{dot}=\sum_{n\sigma} \epsilon_n C_{n\sigma}^{\dag}C_{n\sigma} ,
\end{equation}
$H_T$ is the Hamiltonian that models the coupling between leads and the quantum dot with hopping matrix.
\begin{align} \label{mtj4}
H_T&=H_{LS\uparrow}+H_{LS\downarrow}+H_{RS\uparrow}+H_{RS\downarrow} \notag \\
&=\sum_{k\alpha n\sigma}[t_{k\alpha n} C_{k\alpha\sigma}^{\dag}C_{n\sigma}+H.c.] .
\end{align}
In these representations, $\alpha$ represents $L$ or $R$, $C_{k\alpha \sigma}^{\dag}$ (with $\sigma =\uparrow, \ \downarrow$ or $\pm 1$, and $\bar{\sigma}=-\sigma$) is the creation operator of electrons at energy level $k$ with spin index $\sigma$ inside the left or right lead. Similarly, $C_{n\sigma}^{\dag}$ is the creation operator of electrons at energy level $n$ with spin index $\sigma$ inside the quantum dot.
To diagonalize the Hamiltonian of the right lead, we apply the following Bogoliubov transformation to the creation and annihilation operator of the right lead, \cite{Bogoliubov}
\begin{equation} \label{mtj5}
C_{kR}=R \ c_{kR} ,\qquad C_{kR}^\dag= c_{kR}^{\dag} \ R^\dag
\end{equation}
where we have used the abbreviation $C_{k\alpha}=\left(
\begin{array}{c}
C_{kR\uparrow} \\ C_{kR\downarrow}
\end{array}
\right) , c_{k\alpha}=\left(
\begin{array}{c}
c_{kR\uparrow} \\ c_{kR\downarrow}
\end{array}
\right)$, and $R=\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
\cos \frac{\theta}{2} & -\sin \frac{\theta}{2} \\
\sin \frac{\theta}{2} & \cos \frac{\theta}{2}
\end{array}
\right)$ in the transformation, while the creation and annihilation operators of the left lead and central quantum dot remain unchanged, then we can get the effective Hamiltonian
\begin{align} \label{mtj6}
&H_{\alpha} =
\sum_{k\alpha} (\epsilon_{k\alpha}- \sigma M) c_{k\alpha\sigma}^{\dag} c_{k\alpha\sigma} \notag \\
&H_{dot} = \sum_{n} \epsilon_n c_n^{\dag} c_n \notag \\
&H_{T} =\sum_{k\alpha n}(c_{k\alpha}^{\dag} t_{k\alpha n} R^{\dag} c_n +H.c.)
=\sum_{k\alpha n}(c_{k\alpha}^{\dag}\mathbf{T}_{k\alpha n} c_n +H.c.)
\end{align}
where we used the abbreviation $c_{k\alpha}=\left(
\begin{array}{c}
c_{k\alpha\uparrow} \\ c_{k\alpha\downarrow}
\end{array}
\right)$, $c_n=\left(
\begin{array}{c}
c_{n\uparrow} \\ c_{n\downarrow}
\end{array}
\right)$, $\mathbf{T}_{kLn}=t_{kLn}$ and $\mathbf{T}_{kRn}=t_{kR n} R^{\dag}$ in the expression of $H_T$. From now on, we use capital cases $C_{k\alpha}^{\dag}$, $C_{k\alpha}$, $C_{n}^{\dag}$, $C_{n}$ to denote the creation and annihilation operators of the leads and quantum dot before Bogoliubov transformation while use $c_{k\alpha}^{\dag}$, $c_{k\alpha}$, $c_{n}^{\dag}$, $c_{n}$ to denote the creation and annihilation operators after the transformation.
\bigskip
{\noindent \bf FCS of transferred charge with a particular spin direction}
\bigskip
Now we count the number of electrons with spin-up and spin-down in $z$ direction in the left lead separately under the transient regime. For the right lead, we count the number of electrons with spin-up and spin-down in $z'$ direction. For convenience, we just consider the spin-up case and the case for spin-down is self-evident. As was demonstrated in the last section that the counting field just enters the coupling term between quantum dot and the particular lead so the modified Hamiltonian $H_{\gamma}$ with regard to the spin-up number operator $\hat{N}_{\alpha\uparrow}^{(h)}(t)=\sum_{k} c_{k\alpha\uparrow}^{\dag}(t)c_{k\alpha\uparrow}(t)$ can be written as follows,
\begin{align} \label{mtj7}
H_{\gamma}(t)&=e^{i\gamma N_{\alpha\uparrow}(0)}H(t)e^{-i\gamma N_{\alpha\uparrow}(0)} \notag \\
&=H_{lead}+H_{dot}+H_{\bar{\alpha}S}
+\mathrm{diag}(e^{i\gamma} , 1)\sum_{k} c_{k\alpha}^{\dag} \mathbf{T}_{k\alpha n} c_{n} \notag \\
&+\mathrm{diag}(e^{-i\gamma},1)\sum_{k} c_{n}^{\dag} \mathbf{T}_{nk\alpha}c_{k\alpha},
\end{align}
where $\bar{\alpha}=R$, if $\alpha=L$ and vice versa, $\mathbf{T}_{nkL}=t_{nkL}$, $\mathbf{T}_{nkR}=R t_{nkR}$.
If we are working in the $xyz$ coordinate system for the left lead, we have the modified self-energy of the left lead
\begin{equation} \label{mtj8}
\widetilde{\Sigma}_L(\tau,\tau')=\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
\Lambda^* \Sigma_{L\uparrow} \Lambda & 0 \\
0 & \Sigma_{L\downarrow}
\end{array}
\right)
\end{equation}
where $\Sigma_{\alpha\sigma}$ is defined as
$\Sigma_{\alpha\sigma}(\tau,\tau') =
\sum_{k,k'}t_{nk\alpha} g_{kk'\alpha\sigma}(\tau,\tau')t_{k'\alpha n'} $, $\Lambda^*$ and $\Lambda$ act on the Keldysh space. $\Lambda$ is almost the same as Eq.(\ref{eq48}),
\begin{equation} \label{mtj9}
\Lambda =\exp\left(-\frac{i\lambda}{2} \sigma_x \right)
= \left(
\begin{array}{cc}
\cos\frac{\lambda}{2} & -i\sin\frac{\lambda}{2} \\
-i\sin\frac{\lambda}{2} & \cos\frac{\lambda}{2}
\end{array} \right) ,
\end{equation}
due to the fact that in the transient regime, $\Lambda$ doesn't depend on time and the parameter $\xi$ disappears. The normalized GF can be written as:
\begin{equation} \label{mtj10}
Z_{L\uparrow}(\lambda,t)=\det (G \widetilde{G}^{-1})
\end{equation}
where
\begin{align} \label{mtj11}
\widetilde{G}^{-1}&=g^{-1}-\widetilde{\Sigma}_L-R\Sigma_R R^\dag \notag \\
G^{-1}&=g^{-1} -\Sigma_L -R \Sigma_R R^\dag .
\end{align}
The Green's function $g$ is for the diagonalized Hamiltonian of the central quantum dot, $R$ and $R^\dag$ act on the spin space. Similar expression of GF can be obtained for spin-down electrons of the left lead by modification of Eq.(\ref{mtj8}).
Similar to case of the left lead, if we count the number of electrons with spin-up in $z'$ direction $\sum_{k}c_{kR\uparrow}^\dag c_{kR\uparrow} $ in the right lead, the normalized GF can be written as:
\begin{equation} \label{mtj12}
Z_{R\uparrow}(\lambda,t)=\det (G \widetilde{G}^{-1}) ,
\end{equation}
where
\begin{align} \label{mtj13}
\widetilde{G}^{-1}&=g^{-1}-\Sigma_L-R \widetilde{\Sigma}_R R^\dag , \notag \\
G^{-1}&=g^{-1} -\Sigma_L -R \Sigma_R R^\dag
\end{align}
with
\begin{equation} \label{mtj14}
\widetilde{\Sigma}_R(\tau,\tau')=\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
\Lambda^* \Sigma_{R\uparrow} \Lambda & 0 \\
0 & \Sigma_{R\downarrow}
\end{array}
\right) .
\end{equation}
Here we point out that the GF for the spin-up electrons $\sum_{k}C_{kR\uparrow}^\dag C_{kR\uparrow}$ in the $z$ direction of the right lead is totally different from that of $z'$. For the spin-up electrons $\sum_{k}C_{kR\uparrow}^\dag C_{kR\uparrow}$ in the $z$ direction of the right lead, the corresponding modified Hamiltonian is
\begin{align*}
H_{\gamma}(t)
=H_{lead}+H_{dot}+H_{LS}
+\left( \sum_{k n}C_{kR}^{\dag} \tilde{t}_{kR n} C_n +H.c. \right)
\end{align*}
with $\tilde{t}_{kR n}=\left( \begin{array}{cc}
e^{i\gamma}t_{kRn} & 0 \\ 0 & t_{kRn}
\end{array} \right) $. After Keldysh rotation, $\tilde{t}_{kR n}$ becomes $\bar{t}_{kR n}=\left( \begin{array}{cc}
t_{kRn} \Lambda & 0 \\ 0 & t_{kRn}
\end{array} \right) $.
Because of this we have
\begin{align*}
&\widetilde{G}^{-1}
= g^{-1}-\Sigma_L-
\sum_{kk'}\bar{t}_{nkR}
R \ g_{kk'} \ R^{\dag}
\bar{t}_{k'R n} \notag \\
&= g^{-1}-\Sigma_L \notag \\
&-\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
\Lambda^* (\cos^2\frac{\theta}{2}\Sigma_{R\uparrow}+\sin^2\frac{\theta}{2}\Sigma_{R\downarrow}) \Lambda &
\frac{1}{2}\sin\theta \Lambda^* (\Sigma_{R\uparrow}-\Sigma_{R\downarrow}) \\
\frac{1}{2}\sin\theta (\Sigma_{R\uparrow}-\Sigma_{R\downarrow}) \Lambda &
\sin^2\frac{\theta}{2}\Sigma_{R\uparrow}+\cos^2\frac{\theta}{2}\Sigma_{R\downarrow}
\end{array}
\right)
\end{align*}
where we have used the short notation $g_{kk'}=\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
g_{kk'R\uparrow} & 0 \\ 0 & g_{kk'R\downarrow}
\end{array} \right) $.
\bigskip
{\noindent \bf FCS of transferred charge current and spin current}
\bigskip
We know that the total charge current operator through lead $\alpha$ is
\begin{equation} \label{mtj15}
\hat{I}_{\alpha}=\hat{I}_{\alpha\uparrow}+\hat{I}_{\alpha\downarrow} ,
\end{equation}
while the spin current operator should be
\begin{equation} \label{mtj16}
\hat{I}_{\alpha}^s=\frac{\hbar}{2q}(\hat{I}_{\alpha\uparrow}-\hat{I}_{\alpha\downarrow}) ,
\end{equation}
with $\hat{I}_{\alpha\sigma}=q\frac{d\hat{N}_{\alpha\sigma}}{dt}$, $\hat{N}_{\alpha\sigma}=\sum_k \hat{c}_{k\alpha\sigma}^\dag \hat{c}_{k\alpha\sigma}$
and we can set $\hbar=q=1$ here. The modified self-energy in the GF of the number of total charge transferred in the lead $\alpha$ is (when $\alpha=L (R)$ we consider $z$ ($z'$)direction)
\begin{equation} \label{mtj17}
\widetilde{\Sigma}_\alpha (\tau,\tau')=\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
\Lambda^* \Sigma_{\alpha\uparrow} \Lambda & 0 \\
0 & \Lambda^* \Sigma_{\alpha\downarrow} \Lambda
\end{array}
\right)
\end{equation}
and modified self-energy in the GF of the total spin transferred
\begin{equation} \label{mtj18}
\widetilde{\Sigma}_\alpha(\tau,\tau')=\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
\bar{\Lambda}^* \Sigma_{\alpha\uparrow} \bar{\Lambda} & 0 \\
0 & \bar{\Lambda} \Sigma_{\alpha\downarrow} \bar{\Lambda}^*
\end{array}
\right)
\end{equation}
with short notation $\bar{\Lambda} =\exp\left(-\frac{i\lambda}{4} \sigma_x \right) $.\cite{foot2}
Note that GF for the total transferred charge (or total transferred spin) $Z\neq Z_{\alpha\uparrow} Z_{\alpha\downarrow}$ since the statistics for spin-up and spin-down transferred electrons are not independent of each other because of the presence of spin flip mechanism. Hence we cannot directly use the GF for the spin-up and spin-down to obtain the GF for the statistics of the total transferred charge or spin. Similar to Eq.(\ref{long3}), the CGF in the long-time limit in the energy space for the number of total transferred charge or spin in the right lead can be expressed as
\begin{align} \label{long7}
\ln Z_s(\lambda ,t)=& t\int \frac{d\omega}{2\pi}\ln\det [ I \notag \\
&+G^r(\Sigma_L^r-\Sigma_L^a)G^a R \Upsilon \Sigma_R^< R^\dag \notag \\
&+G^r\Sigma_L^< G^a R \Upsilon^\dag (\Sigma_R^r-\Sigma_R^a) R^\dag \notag \\
&+G^r\Sigma_L^<G^a R (\Upsilon+\Upsilon^\dag)\Sigma_R^< R^\dag ]
\end{align}
where for the total transferred charge we take $\Upsilon=\mathrm{diag}(e^{i\lambda}-1, e^{i\lambda}-1)$ while for the total transferred spin we take $\Upsilon=\mathrm{diag}(e^{i\lambda/2}-1, e^{-i\lambda/2}-1)$.
\bigskip
{\noindent \bf FCS of spin-transfer torque}
\bigskip
The total spin torque operator can be derived from the total spin along the $x'$ direction in the right ferromagnetic electrode, \cite{GangSu, YunjinYu,foot18}
\begin{equation} \label{mtj19}
\hat{S}_{x'}=\frac{\hbar}{2}\sum_{k} c_{kR}^{\dag} \sigma_x c_{kR}
=\frac{\hbar}{2}
\sum_{k}\left(c_{kR\uparrow}^{\dag}c_{kR\downarrow}+c_{kR\downarrow}^{\dag}c_{kR\uparrow}
\right) .
\end{equation}
The spin transfer torque operator is
\begin{align} \label{mtj20}
\hat{\tau}_R = \frac{i}{\hbar}[\hat{H},\hat{S}_{x'}]
= -\frac{i}{2} \sum_{k} t_{kRn} c_{kR}^\dag \bar{R} c_n +H.c.
\end{align}
with $\bar{R}=\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
-\sin \frac{\theta}{2} & \cos \frac{\theta}{2} \\
\cos \frac{\theta}{2} & \sin \frac{\theta}{2}
\end{array}
\right)$.
Now, we can write the modified Hamiltonian $H_{\gamma}$ with regard to the total spin operator $\hat{S}_{x'}$ using the Baker-Hausdorff lemma Eq.(\ref{baker})($\hbar=1$),
\begin{align} \label{mtj21}
H_{\gamma}(t)
&=e^{i\gamma \hat{S}_{x^{\prime}}(0)}H(t)e^{-i\gamma \hat{S}_{x^{\prime}}(0)} \notag \\
&=H_{lead}+H_{dot}+H_{LS} \notag \\
&+\left\{ \frac{e^{i\gamma/2}+e^{-i\gamma/2}}{2} \sum_{kRn}c_{kR}^\dag t_{kRn}R^\dag c_n +H.c. \right\} \notag \\
&+\left\{ \frac{e^{i\gamma/2}-e^{-i\gamma/2}}{2} \sum_{kRn}c_{kR}^\dag t_{kRn}\bar{R} c_n +H.c. \right\} .
\end{align}
Comparing with Eq.(\ref{eq29}) for the case of number of transferred charges, we can easily write the normalized GF for the total spin (whose time derivative is spin transfer torque) as follows:
\begin{equation} \label{mtj22}
Z_{x'}(\lambda,t)=\det (G \widetilde{G}^{-1})
\end{equation}
where
\begin{align} \label{mtj23}
\widetilde{G}^{-1}=g^{-1}&-\Sigma_L \notag \\
&-R \widetilde{\Sigma}_{R1} R^\dag
-R \widetilde{\Sigma}_{R2} \bar{R}
-\bar{R} \widetilde{\Sigma}_{R3} R^\dag
-\bar{R} \widetilde{\Sigma}_{R4} \bar{R}
\notag \\
G^{-1}=g^{-1} &-\Sigma_L
-R \Sigma_R R^\dag
\end{align}
with
\begin{align} \label{mtj24}
\widetilde{\Sigma}_{R1}(\tau,\tau') &=\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
\Xi_1^* \Sigma_{R\uparrow} \Xi_1 & 0 \\
0 & \Xi_1^* \Sigma_{R\downarrow} \Xi_1
\end{array}
\right) \notag \\
\widetilde{\Sigma}_{R2}(\tau,\tau') &=\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
\Xi_1^* \Sigma_{R\uparrow} \Xi_2 & 0 \\
0 & \Xi_1^* \Sigma_{R\downarrow} \Xi_2
\end{array}
\right) \notag \\
\widetilde{\Sigma}_{R3}(\tau,\tau') &=\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
\Xi_2^* \Sigma_{R\uparrow} \Xi_1 & 0 \\
0 & \Xi_2^* \Sigma_{R\downarrow} \Xi_1
\end{array}
\right) \notag \\
\widetilde{\Sigma}_{R4}(\tau,\tau') &=\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
\Xi_2^* \Sigma_{R\uparrow} \Xi_2 & 0 \\
0 & \Xi_2^* \Sigma_{R\downarrow} \Xi_2
\end{array}
\right)
\end{align}
and
\begin{align} \label{mtj25}
\Xi_1 &= \frac{\bar{\Lambda} + \bar{\Lambda}^* }{2}
=\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
\cos\frac{\lambda}{4} & 0 \\
0 & \cos\frac{\lambda}{4}
\end{array}
\right) \notag \\
\Xi_2 &= \frac{\bar{\Lambda} - \bar{\Lambda}^* }{2}
=\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
0 & -i\sin\frac{\lambda}{4} \\
-i\sin\frac{\lambda}{4} & 0
\end{array}
\right) .
\end{align}
Here, we point out that $\Xi_1,\ \Xi_1^* , \ \Xi_2, \ \Xi_2^*$ act on the Keldysh space while $R, \ R^\dag, \ \bar{R}$ act on the spin space of self-energy in the GF. Note that $\bar{R}=\left(\begin{array}{cc} 0 & 1 \\ 1 & 0 \end{array}\right)R^\dag$; we can rewrite $ \widetilde{G}^{-1}$ in Eq.(\ref{mtj23}) in the following form:
\begin{equation} \label{mtj26}
\widetilde{G}^{-1}=g^{-1}-\Sigma_L -R \widetilde{\Sigma}_R R^\dag
\end{equation}
with
\begin{equation} \label{mtj27}
\widetilde{\Sigma}_R =
\left( \begin{array}{cc}
\Xi_1^* & \Xi_2^* \\ \Xi_2^* & \Xi_1^*
\end{array} \right)
\left( \begin{array}{cc}
\Sigma_{R\uparrow} & 0 \\ 0 & \Sigma_{R\downarrow}
\end{array} \right)
\left( \begin{array}{cc}
\Xi_1 & \Xi_2 \\ \Xi_2 & \Xi_1
\end{array} \right) .
\end{equation}
Just like Eq.~(\ref{long1}), we can get the expression of CGF of the spin-transfer torque in the energy space in the long-time limit as
\begin{align} \label{mtj28}
&\ln Z_s(\lambda ,t) \notag \\
&=t\int \frac{d\omega}{2\pi}{\rm Tr}\ln\det[1-G(\omega)R(\widetilde{\Sigma}_R(\omega)-\Sigma_R(\omega))R^{\dag}] .
\end{align}
It can be easily shown that the spin-transfer torque from this equation is the same as that derived from Ref.\onlinecite{GangSu}.
\section{Quantum Point Contact}
In this section, we extend the formalism further to the quantum point contact (QPC) system which is the simplest in mesoscopic systems and its transport properties have been studied extensively. The difference between the QPC and the quantum dot system studied in the previous sections is that in QPC, two electrodes are connected directly by the hopping term; this is experimentally achieved by a narrow constriction between the electrodes. Examples of two electrodes involved are conductor-superconductor (N-S) and superconductor-superconductor (S-S) systems. \cite{Cuevas}
Such a system can be described by the following simple Hamiltonian:
\begin{equation} \label{qpc1}
H=H_0+H_T=H_{L}+H_{R}+H_T
\end{equation}
where $H_0$ consists of the Hamiltonian of the isolated electrodes,
\begin{equation} \label{qpc2}
H_0=\sum_{x\in k\alpha} \epsilon_{x} c_{x}^{\dag}c_{x},
\end{equation}
where we use the index $k\alpha$ to label the states of the electrode $\alpha$. Here, $\epsilon_{k\alpha}=\epsilon_{k\alpha}^{(0)}+q\Delta_{\alpha}(t)$, where $\epsilon_{k\alpha}^{(0)}$ is the energy levels in electrode $\alpha$ and $\Delta_{\alpha}(t)$ is the external voltage, and $H_T$ is the Hamiltonian describing the direct hopping between the nearest-neighbor sites in the two electrodes with a coupling constant $t_{LR}=t_{RL}^*$:
\begin{equation}
H_T= t_{LR} c_{L}^{\dag}c_{R}+t_{RL}c_{R}^{\dag}c_{L} .
\end{equation}
We count the number of transferred electrons in the left electrode, and the electrons flow from the left electrode to the right one is defined as positive direction of the current. Following the discussion of the quantum dot system in Sec. III,
in accordance with Eqs.(\ref{eq51}) and (\ref{eq52}) we can express the GF as follows:
\begin{equation} \label{qpc3}
Z(\lambda,t)=\frac{\det \mathcal{M}(\lambda)}{\det \mathcal{M}(\lambda=0)}
\end{equation}
with
\begin{equation} \label{qpc4}
\mathcal{M}=
\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
g_{L L}^{-1}(\tau,\tau') & -t_{LR}(\tau,\tau)\Lambda \\
-\Lambda^* t_{RL}(\tau,\tau) & g_{RR}^{-1}(\tau,\tau')
\end{array}
\right),
\end{equation}
where $\Lambda$ is the same as Eq.(\ref{mtj9}) for the transient regime. For convenience, we introduce the following abbreviated notation:
\begin{equation} \label{qpc6}
\mathbf{\widetilde{G}}^{-1}=\textbf{g}^{-1}-\mathbf{\tilde{t}}, \qquad
\mathbf{G}^{-1}=\textbf{g}^{-1}-\mathbf{t}
\end{equation}
with
\begin{align} \label{qpc7}
\mathbf{t}=
\left( \begin{array}{cc}
& t_{LR} \\ t_{RL} &
\end{array} \right) ,&\ \
\mathbf{\tilde{t}}=
\left( \begin{array}{cc}
& t_{LR}\Lambda \\ \Lambda^* t_{RL} &
\end{array} \right) ,\notag \\
\textbf{g}^{-1}=&
\left( \begin{array}{cc}
g_{LL}^{-1} & \\ & g_{RR}^{-1}
\end{array} \right) .
\end{align}
As mentioned in Sec. III, $g_{LL}^{-1}$ and $g_{RR}^{-1}$ contain the Keldysh components and $t_{LR}$ and $t_{RL}$ are diagonal matrices in Keldysh space. Then, we write GF as
\begin{equation} \label{qpc8}
Z(\lambda,t)=\det(\mathbf{G} \mathbf{\widetilde{G}}^{-1} )
=\det[\mathbf{I}-\mathbf{G}(\mathbf{\tilde{t}}-\mathbf{t})] .
\end{equation}
For Green's function, we have the following Dyson equation in Keldysh space
\begin{equation}
\mathbf{G}=\mathbf{g}+\mathbf{g}\mathbf{t}\mathbf{G} .
\end{equation}
We can write the Dyson equation explicitly as \cite{Cuevas}
\begin{align} \label{qpc9}
\mathbf{G}^{r,a}=\mathbf{g}^{r,a}+\mathbf{g}^{r,a}\mathbf{t}^{r,a}\mathbf{G}^{r,a} ,
\notag \\
\mathbf{G}^{k}
=(\mathbf{I}+\mathbf{G}^{r}\mathbf{t}^{r})\mathbf{g}^{k}(\mathbf{I}+\mathbf{t}^{a}\mathbf{G}^{a}) , \notag \\
\mathbf{G}^{<}
=(\mathbf{I}+\mathbf{G}^{r}\mathbf{t}^{r})\mathbf{g}^{<}(\mathbf{I}+\mathbf{t}^{a}\mathbf{G}^{a})
\end{align}
with
\begin{align} \label{qpc10}
\mathbf{G}^{r,a,k} &=
\left( \begin{array}{cc}
G_{LL}^{r,a,k} & G_{LR}^{r,a,k} \\ G_{RL}^{r,a,k} & G_{RR}^{r,a,k}
\end{array} \right) ,\quad
\mathbf{g}^{r,a,k} =
\left( \begin{array}{cc}
g_{LL}^{r,a,k} & 0 \\ 0 & g_{RR}^{r,a,k}
\end{array} \right) ,\qquad \notag \\
\mathbf{t}^{r,a} &=
\left( \begin{array}{cc}
t_{LL}^{r,a} & t_{LR}^{r,a} \\ t_{RL}^{r,a} & t_{RR}^{r,a}
\end{array} \right) =
\left( \begin{array}{cc}
0 & t_{LR} \\ t_{RL} & 0
\end{array} \right) ,
\end{align}
and $\mathbf{t}^{k}=0$ as previously mentioned that $\mathbf{t}$ is diagonal in Keldysh space.
Now, we turn to the cumulants of transferred electrons between $t_0=0$ and time $t$ and current of transient regime. In the transient regime, from the fact $\ln \det \Omega=\mathrm{Tr} \ln \Omega$ we can write the CGF as
\begin{equation} \label{qpc11}
\ln Z(\lambda ,t) =\mathrm{Tr} \ln [\mathbf{I}-\mathbf{G}(\mathbf{\tilde{t}}-\mathbf{t})] .
\end{equation}
Taking the derivative of the CGF with respect to $\lambda$ and using the relation $\mathrm{Tr} \ln (I-\Omega)=-\sum_{j=1}\Omega^j/j$, we can get various cumulants from Eq.~(\ref{eq3}). Using the relations ${\rm Tr}\ t_{LR}G_{RL}^r ={\rm Tr}\ t_{RL}G_{LR}^r $ and $G^k=2G^<+G^r-G^a$, the first cumulant, the mean number of transferred charge, can be expressed as,
\begin{align} \label{qpc12}
\langle\langle \Delta n_L \rangle\rangle
&= {\rm Tr}\left[-\mathbf{G}\frac{\partial\mathbf{\tilde{t}}}{\partial(i\lambda)} \right]\bigg|_{\lambda=0} \notag \\
&={\rm Tr} \left( \frac{1}{2}t_{LR}G_{RL}^k -\frac{1}{2}t_{RL}G_{LR}^k \right) \notag \\
&=\int_0^{t}d\tau \left( t_{LR}G_{RL}^<(\tau,\tau) -t_{RL}G_{LR}^<(\tau,\tau) \right) ,
\end{align}
Hence, from $\langle\langle \Delta n_L(t) \rangle\rangle=\int_0^t I_L(\tau) d\tau$, we can get the transient current at time $t$:
\begin{align} \label{qpc13}
I_L(t) = t_{LR}G_{RL}^<(t,t) -t_{RL}G_{LR}^<(t,t) .
\end{align}
We note that a similar expression has been obtained in the dc case.\cite{Cuevas} We point out that the derivation above can be easily generalized to a QPC system with multiple electrodes, or the systems with spin configuration such as N-S or S-S system.
\section{Numerical Results}
We now apply the formalism discussed above to a system in which two single-level quantum dots are in series and connected to the left and right leads respectively. The Hamiltonian of such a system reads as
\begin{equation} \label{nr1}
H_0=\epsilon_1 d_1^\dag d_1 + \epsilon_2 d_2^\dag d_2 + t_{12}d_1^\dag d_2 +t_{21} d_2^\dag d_1,
\end{equation}
where $\epsilon_1$ and $\epsilon_2$ are the two energy levels of the quantum dots and they are, respectively, coupled to the left and right leads, and the two energy levels are also connected with coupling strength $t_{12}$ ($t_{21}=t_{12}^*$). In this system, we have the Rabi frequency between the two dots,
\begin{equation}
\Delta \omega = 2\sqrt{ \frac{\Delta \epsilon^2}{4} +|t_{12}|^2}
\ , \qquad \Delta \epsilon =|\epsilon_1-\epsilon_2 | ,
\end{equation}
which is actually the difference between the two eigenvalues of the Hamiltonian of Eq. ({\ref{nr1}}).
Taking the band structure of the left and right leads into consideration, we assume that the leads have finite band-width in a Lorentzian form \cite{29} ${\bf \Gamma}_{\alpha}(\epsilon)=\frac{\Gamma_{\alpha} W^2}{\epsilon^2+W^2} $ where $\Gamma_{\alpha}$ is the linewidth amplitude of the left or right lead with $\Gamma_L=\Gamma_R=\Gamma/2$ and we further assume that both leads have the same bandwidth $W$. During the numerical calculation, the energies are measured in the unit of $\Gamma$ so that $1/\Gamma$ and $e\Gamma$ are the units of the time and current, respectively. In this paper, the bandwidth is chosen to be $W=10\Gamma$, the energy levels of the left and the right quantum dots are $\epsilon_1=6\Gamma$ and $\epsilon_2=4\Gamma$, respectively. At $t=0^-$ the system is disconnected. At $t=0^+$, the system is connected and the
Fermi level of the left lead is $\Delta_L=10\Gamma$ and the Fermi level of the right is zero.
For the double quantum dot system, the GF shall be written as
\begin{equation}
Z(\lambda ,t)=\det G \det \left(
\begin{array}{cc}
g_1^{-1}-{\Sigma}_L & -t_{12} \\
-t_{21} & g_2^{-1}-\widetilde{\Sigma}_R
\end{array} \right),
\end{equation}
so that we are measuring electrons in the right lead. We also assume that the initial electron occupation of the energy level of the left quantum dot is zero and the initial occupation of the energy level of the right dot is one, then $g_1^{<}=0$ and $g_2^{<}(t_1,t_2)=i\exp[-i\epsilon_2(t_1-t_2)]$. The detailed description of the calculation of the GF which is actually a determinant in the time domain is presented in Appendix B.
In Fig.{\ref{fig4}}, we show the first-sixth cumulants of transferred charges which are counted from time $t_0=0$ to the time $t$ in the right lead of the system. The figure shows the cumulants as a function of time under different coupling strengths between the two dots with $t_{12}=1.5\Gamma, 3.0\Gamma$, and $6.0\Gamma$ at zero temperature, and we also show the influence of temperature on the cumulants at a temperature $k_B T=5\Gamma$ when the coupling strength $t_{12}=3.0\Gamma$, where $k_B$ is the Boltzmann constant. We can see from Fig.{\ref{fig4}} especially Figs.{\ref{fig4}}(e)-{\ref{fig4}}(f) that there are two kinds of oscillations in the cumulants: one is the overall oscillation, and the other one is the local oscillation with a specific period. Overall, there are more oscillations of the cumulants $\langle\langle n^j \rangle\rangle$ as one increases $j$, which shows the phenomenon of universal oscillations in FCS. The universal oscillations of the cumulants in the Coulomb blockade regime have been revealed experimentally by Flint \textit{et al.}.\cite{exp1} The local oscillation is caused by two serial quantum dots, since the electron in the quantum dots will oscillate between the two energy levels and the period of the local oscillations is $T_{osc}=2\pi/(2\Delta\omega)$.
The oscillation depends on the ratio of coupling strength between two dots and the coupling between the right dot and the right lead. If this ratio is small, the oscillation will not be so obvious, since it is easier for the electron in the right dot to tunnel to the right lead. This can be confirmed from Fig.{\ref{fig4}} that the oscillation of the cumulants of the system with a coupling strength $t_{12}=1.5\Gamma$ is weaker than the other two cases at zero temperature. However, if the coupling strength between the dots is strong enough, the first cumulant as in the case of
$t_{12}=6.0\Gamma$ in the figure may have negative values at short times, since the electron tends to oscillate between the dots and is unwilling to flow to the right lead. This in turn creates a vacancy in the right dot and hence a larger possibility for the electron in the right lead to tunnel into the right dot giving rise to a negative current. It is found that the first and second cumulants, which are mean values and the variance, do not have too many local oscillations and are smooth at longer times.
Regarding the influence of the temperature, we compared the cumulants between zero temperature and $k_B T=5\Gamma$ when coupling strength $t_{12}=3.0\Gamma$. The temperature will reduce the probability that an electron transfer from the right quantum dot to the right lead and enhance the probability that an electron tunnel from the right lead to the right quantum dot. Both the overall oscillation and the local oscillation are smeared due to the temperature effect.
\begin{widetext}
\begin{figure*}
\includegraphics[width=7.1in]{cumulants.eps} \\
\caption{Cumulants ((a) 1st cumulant, (b) 2nd, (c) 3rd, (d) 4th, (e) 5th, (f) 6th) of transferred charges in the right lead of a system consisting of two single-level quantum dots connected to the left and right lead at time $t_0=0$. The numbers of the transferred charges are counted from time $t_0=0$ to $t$. The initial electron occupation of the energy level of the left quantum dot is zero and the initial occupation of the energy level of the right dot is one. $\hbar=e=\Gamma=1$, the energies are measured in the unit of $\Gamma$ and $1/\Gamma$ is the unit of time. The bandwidth is chosen to be $W=10\Gamma$, the energy levels of the left and the right quantum dot are $\epsilon_1=6\Gamma$ and $\epsilon_2=4\Gamma$, respectively. The figure shows the cumulants as a function of time at different coupling strengths between the two dots with $t_{12}=1.5\Gamma$, $3.0\Gamma$ and $6.0\Gamma$ at zero temperature, and we show the influence of temperature over the cumulants at a temperature $k_B T=5\Gamma$ when the coupling strength $t_{12}=3.0\Gamma$ as well, where $k_B$ is the Boltzmann constant. }
\label{fig4}
\end{figure*}
\end{widetext}
In Fig. {\ref{fig5}}, we calculated the WTD ($W_1$) in the right lead in the transient regime, which is the probability distribution that the first electron transfer to the right lead at different times after we turn on the interaction between the leads and the quantum dots at $t=0$. The WTD of the system with parameters $\Delta \epsilon=2\Gamma ,\ t_{12}=3.0\Gamma$ at zero temperature and $\ k_B T=5\Gamma$ are presented. Except from the first peak of each curve, we can see from Fig.{\ref{fig5}} that WTD exhibit an oscillation with a period $T_{osc}=2\pi/(2\Delta\omega)$ again due to Rabi oscillation. The temperature does not influence the oscillation period but it smears the oscillation amplitude since temperature only influences the electronic distribution in two leads.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=3.5in]{WTD.eps}\\
\caption{WTD ($W_1$) of the two quantum dot system. The initial electron occupation of the energy level of the left quantum dots is zero and the initial occupation of the energy level of the right dot is one. The bandwidth is chosen to be $W=10\Gamma$, the energy levels of the left and the right quantum dot are $\epsilon_1=6\Gamma$ and $\epsilon_2=4\Gamma$, respectively. We compare WTD at $k_B T=0$ and $5\Gamma$ with the coupling strength $t_{12}=3.0\Gamma$. }
\label{fig5}
\end{figure}
\section{Conclusion}
Using the technique of path integral and Keldysh nonequilibrium Green's function, we express the GF in a compact form in terms of Green's function and self-energy in the time domain. This formalism is suitable for studying FCS in the transient regime. For the dc steady state regime, two measurements are needed to collect to investigate the finite-time FCS. As we have shown in this paper, the first measurement actually perturbs the system and hence FCS after the measurement does not reflect information of real system. Therefore, this formalism can not be used to study finite-time FCS for the dc steady state. We have generalized the formalism to the magnetic tunnel junction to study FCS of spin-polarized charge current, spin current, and spin-transfer torque. Moreover, we have calculated GF for the quantum point contact system in the transient regime. We have applied our theory to study FCS of a double quantum dot system. Both global and local oscillations are revealed. We attribute the global oscillation to the universal oscillation as observed experimentally in the Coulomb blockade regime. The local oscillation can be understood from the Rabi oscillation.
Future work may involve transient FCS of charge transport in quantum point contact systems such as conductor-superconductor (N-S) and superconductor-superconductor (S-S) systems. In addition, the transient FCS of spin transport in a mesoscopic system with spin-orbit interaction is also worth studying.
Finally, we note that the theoretical framework presented here can not be applied in the presence of strong electron-electron interactions. Although exact result cannot be obtained, we think that the perturbative approach can be used in dealing with the interactions. This is an interesting research topic which we will pursue in the near future.
\begin{acknowledgements}
We thank J.-S. Wang for useful discussions. This work was financially supported by the RGC (Grant No. HKU 705212P) and the UGC (Contract No. AoE/P-04/08) of the Government of the HKSAR, the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant No. 11374246).
\end{acknowledgements}
\section*{APPENDIX A: FERMIONIC COHERENT STATES}
The fermionic coherent states are defined in terms of the linear superposition of the vacuum state $|0\rangle$ and occupied state $|1\rangle$ parametrized by two unrelated complex numbers $\phi$ and $\overline{\phi}$ which are called Grassmann variables,\cite{37}
\begin{equation} \label{eqA1}
|\phi\rangle \equiv |0\rangle -\phi|1\rangle
=(1- \phi c^{\dag})|0\rangle \tag{A1}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation} \label{eqA2}
\langle\phi| \equiv \langle 0|-\langle 1|\overline{\phi}
=\langle 0|(1-c\overline{\phi}) . \tag{A2}
\end{equation}
The coherent states are the eigenstates of the annihilation operator:
\begin{equation} \label{eqA3}
c|\phi\rangle = \phi |\phi\rangle . \tag{A3}
\end{equation}
Similarly,
\begin{equation} \label{eqA4}
\langle\phi|c^{\dag} =\langle\phi| \overline{\phi} . \tag{A4}
\end{equation}
The Grassman variables satisfy the following equations:
\begin{equation} \label{eqA5}
(\phi)^2=(\overline{\phi})^2=0 , \qquad \{\phi,\overline{\phi} \}_+=0 . \tag{A5}
\end{equation}
From Eq.~(\ref{eqA5}) we know that any function of the Grassmann algebra is at most of the second-order
\begin{equation} \label{eqA6}
f(\phi,\overline{\phi})=A+B\phi +C\overline{\phi}+D\phi\overline{\phi} . \tag{A6}
\end{equation}
Integrations of the Grassmann variables are defined as
\begin{equation} \label{eqA7}
\int d\phi \ 1=\int d\overline{\phi} \ 1=0, \qquad
\int d\phi \ \phi =\int d\overline{\phi} \ \overline{\phi}=1. \tag{A7}
\end{equation}
Differentials of the Grassmann variables are defined as
\begin{equation} \label{eqA8}
\frac{\partial}{\partial\phi} f(\phi,\overline{\phi})=B+D\overline{\phi}, \qquad
\frac{\partial}{\partial\overline{\phi}} f(\phi,\overline{\phi})=C-D\phi. \tag{A8}
\end{equation}
This implies that
\begin{equation} \label{eqA9}
\frac{\partial}{\partial\phi}\frac{\partial}{\partial\overline{\phi}}
=-\frac{\partial}{\partial\overline{\phi}}\frac{\partial}{\partial\phi} . \tag{A9}
\end{equation}
Performing the integral of $f(\phi,\overline{\phi})$ with respect to $\phi$ or $\overline{\phi}$ and comparing with Eq.~(\ref{eqA8}), we obtain the operator identities
\begin{equation} \label{eqA10}
\int d\phi=\frac{\partial}{\partial\phi}, \qquad
\int d\overline{\phi}=\frac{\partial}{\partial\overline{\phi}} . \tag{A10}
\end{equation}
Using Eqs.~(\ref{eqA7}) and~(\ref{eqA10}), we obtain the functional Gaussian integral for the Grassmann variables for any invertible complex $N\times N$ matrix $M$:
\begin{align} \label{eqA11}
&\int \mathcal{D}(\overline{\phi}\phi)\exp\left[- \sum_{i,j}\overline{\phi}_i M_{ij} \phi_j+ \overline{\kappa}_i\phi_i+ \overline{\phi}_i\kappa_i \right] \notag \\
=& \det M \exp\left[ \sum_{ij}
\overline{\kappa}_i(M^{-1})_{i,j}\kappa_j \right] ,
\tag{A11}
\end{align}
where $\mathcal{D}(\overline{\phi}\phi)=\prod_{i=1}^{N}d\overline{\phi}_id\phi_i$. If we set $\overline{\kappa}_i=\kappa_i=0$, we arrive at $\int \mathcal{D}(\overline{\phi}\phi)\exp\left[- \sum_{i,j}\overline{\phi}_i M_{ij} \phi_j \right] =\det M $.
Using Eqs.~(\ref{eqA1}),~(\ref{eqA2}), and~(\ref{eqA5}), we find the overlap between any two coherent states as
\begin{equation} \label{eqA12}
\langle \phi| \phi^{\prime}\rangle =1+\overline{\phi}\phi^{\prime} =\exp\{\overline{\phi}\phi^{\prime}\} \tag{A12} .
\end{equation}
From Eqs.~(\ref{eqA3}),~(\ref{eqA4}), and~(\ref{eqA6}), the matrix elements of a {\it normally ordered} operator, such as the Hamiltonian, take the form
\begin{equation} \label{eqA13}
\langle \phi| H(c^{\dag},c)|\phi^{\prime}\rangle =H(\overline{\phi},\phi^{\prime}) \langle \phi| \phi^{\prime}\rangle =H(\overline{\phi},\phi^{\prime}) \exp\{\overline{\phi}\phi^{\prime}\} . \tag{A13}
\end{equation}
Similarly,\cite{foot3}
\begin{equation} \label{eqA14}
\langle \phi| e^{\kappa c^{\dag}c}|\phi^{\prime}\rangle =\exp\{\overline{\phi}\phi^{\prime} e^{\kappa}\} . \tag{A14}
\end{equation}
The differential elements $d\phi$ and $d\overline{\phi}$ anticommute with each other. Using Eqs.~(\ref{eqA1}),~(\ref{eqA2}),~(\ref{eqA7}), and~(\ref{eqA12}), it is straightforward for us to get the over-completeness of the fermion coherent state
\begin{equation} \label{eqA15}
1=\int d\overline{\phi} d\phi \exp(-\overline{\phi}\phi)|\phi \rangle \langle \phi|
=\int d\phi d\overline{\phi} \exp(\overline{\phi}\phi)|\phi \rangle \langle \phi| .
\tag{A15}
\end{equation}
The trace of an operator, $\hat{A}$, is calculated as:
\begin{equation} \label{eqA16}
\mathbf{Tr}\hat{A}=\int\int d\overline{\phi} d\phi e^{-\overline{\phi}\phi}\langle \phi |\hat{A}|-\phi\rangle .
\tag{A16}
\end{equation}
\section*{APPENDIX B: Numerical details}
Here we present detailed description on how to calculate the generating function which is a functional determinant described by Green's function and self-energy in the transient regime. Since the functional determinant is expressed in the time domain, we should make a discretization of the time indices. The determinant can be calculated through Eq.(\ref{eq62}), and we should keep in mind that both the Green's functions and self-energies have different Keldysh components. The Green's function can be obtained through the Dyson equation, which is Eq.(\ref{eq58}) on the matrix level. For the retarded Green's function, we should first discretize $G^r, \ g^r$, and $\Sigma^r$ which have two time indices with a time slice $\Delta t$, and by the rule of matrix multiplication, we have
\begin{equation*}
\underline{G}^r=\underline{g}^r +\underline{g}^r \underline{\Sigma}^r \underline{G}^r \Delta t^2 ,
\end{equation*}
where we have used the underlined Green's function and self-energy to denote the Green's function and self-energy in the matrix form. Given the self-energy and the Green's function $g$ of the isolated central system, we can calculate the Green's function of the system using
\begin{equation*}
\underline{G}^r=(I-\underline{g}^r\underline{\Sigma}^r \Delta t^2)^{-1} \underline{g}^r ,
\end{equation*}
where $I$ is the identity matrix. From Eq.(\ref{eq62}), we obtain $\underline{G}^<$ which allows us to calculate the generating function $Z(\lambda ,t)$. However, this method is time consuming, since at every time step, we should do a matrix inversion to get $\underline{G}^r$.
Following, we introduce a method to make the calculation much more efficient. First we calculate the isolated Green's function of the central system and self-energy with different Keldysh components in the time domain.\cite{Yuzhu}
For the quantum dot with single energy level $\epsilon_0$, $g^r(\tau_1,\tau_2)=-i\theta(\tau_1-\tau_2)\exp[-i\epsilon_0(\tau_1-\tau_2)]$, where $\theta(\tau_1-\tau_2)$ is the Heaviside step function and $g^a$ is the Hermitian conjugate of $g^r$. $g^{<}(\tau_1,\tau_2)$ is zero if the initial occupation of the energy level is empty while if the energy level is initially occupied with one electron $g^{<}(\tau_1,\tau_2)=i\exp[-i\epsilon_0(\tau_1-\tau_2)]$. Then $g^k(\tau_1,\tau_2)$ is found through the relation $g^k=2g^<+g^r-g^a$.
The equilibrium self-energies are chosen to be energy dependent with a finite band width $W$,
\begin{equation} \label{eqB1}
\bar{\Sigma}_{\alpha}^r(\omega)=\frac{\Gamma_{\alpha} W}{2(\omega+iW)} , \tag{B1}
\end{equation}
so that the linewidth function is the following Lorentzian form:
\begin{equation} \label{eqB2}
{\bf \Gamma}_{\alpha}(\epsilon)=\frac{\Gamma_{\alpha} W^2}{\epsilon^2+W^2} \tag{B2}
\end{equation}
where $\Gamma_{\alpha}$ is the linewidth amplitude.
The self-energy in the time domain is defined as
\begin{equation} \label{eqB3}
\Sigma_{\beta}^{r,<}(\tau_1,\tau_2)=\int \frac{d\omega}{2\pi} e^{-i\omega(\tau_1-\tau_2)}\bar{\Sigma}_{\beta}^{r,<}(\omega) e^{ -i\int_{\tau_2}^{\tau_1}\Delta_{\beta}(t) dt } \tag{B3}
\end{equation}
where $\bar{\Sigma}_{\beta}^{r,<}$ is the equilibrium self-energy in the energy domain and $\Delta_\beta$ is the external bias voltage in the lead $\beta$. Using Eq.(\ref{eq3}), we find the retarded self-energy of the left lead:
\begin{equation} \label{eqB4}
\Sigma_L^r(\tau_1,\tau_2)=-\frac{i}{4}
\theta(\tau_1-\tau_2)\Gamma W e^{-(i\Delta_L+W)(\tau_1-\tau_2)} \tag{B4}
\end{equation}
where we have assumed $\Gamma_L=\Gamma_R=\Gamma/2$.
For the lesser self-energy
\begin{equation} \label{eqB5}
\Sigma_L^<(\tau_1,\tau_2)=i\int\frac{d\omega}{2\pi} e^{-i\omega(\tau_1-\tau_2)}
e^{-i\Delta_L(\tau_1 -\tau_2)}f(\omega){\bf \Gamma}_L(\omega) \tag{B5}
\end{equation}
with $f(\omega)=1/\left[e^{\beta(\omega-E_F)}+1\right]$ and $E_F=0$.
At zero temperature, note the following:
\begin{align} \label{eqB6}
\Sigma_L^<(\tau_1,\tau_2)
&=i e^{-i\Delta_L(\tau_1 -\tau_2)} \int_{-\infty}^{0}\frac{d\omega}{2\pi} e^{-i\omega(\tau_1-\tau_2)}\frac{\Gamma_L W^2}{\omega^2+W^2} \tag{B6}
\end{align}
\\
1. If $\tau_1=\tau_2$,
\begin{equation} \label{eqB7}
\Sigma_L^<(\tau_1,\tau_2)=\frac{i}{8}\Gamma W \tag{B7}
\end{equation}
2. If $\tau_1>\tau_2$, let $\tau=\tau_1-\tau_2$,
\begin{align} \label{eqB8}
\Sigma_L^<(\tau_1,\tau_2) &=\frac{i}{8}\Gamma W
\left\{\frac{i}{\pi} e^{(W-i\Delta_L)\tau} E1(W\tau) \right. \notag \\
&\left. +e^{-(W+i\Delta_L)\tau} \left[2-\frac{i}{\pi}E1(-W\tau) \right]\right\}
\tag{B8}
\end{align}
where $E1(x)=\int_x^{\infty}\frac{e^{-t}}{t}dt$.
At non-zero temperature,
1. if $\tau_1=\tau_2$, the integral is actually Hilbert transformation of the Fermi distribution function.\cite{36}
\begin{equation} \label{eqB9}
\Sigma_L^<(\tau_1,\tau_2)=\frac{i\Gamma W}{8} \tag{B9}
\end{equation}
2. if $\tau_1>\tau_2$, it has poles $\frac{-i(2n+1)\pi}{\beta}$ and $-iW$, where $n=0,1,2,3...$, we have
\begin{align} \label{eqB10}
&\Sigma_L^<(\tau_1,\tau_2)=
\frac{i\Gamma_L W\exp[-(W+i\Delta_L)(\tau_1-\tau_2)]}{2\exp(-i\beta W)+2}
-\frac{1}{\beta} \times \notag \\
&\sum_{n=0}^{+\infty}\exp\left\{-[\frac{(2n+1)\pi}{\beta}+i\Delta_L](\tau_1-\tau_2) \right\}\frac{\Gamma_L W^2}{W^2-[\frac{(2n+1)\pi}{\beta}]^2} . \tag{B10}
\end{align}
Using the relation $\Sigma_L^<(\tau_1,\tau_2)\big|_{\tau_1<\tau_2}=-[\Sigma_L^<(\tau_1,\tau_2)\big|_{\tau_1>\tau_2}]^*$, we obtain the full expression of $\Sigma_L^<(\tau_1,\tau_2)$. The expression of $\Sigma_R^<(\tau_1,\tau_2)$ can be obtained similarly. Finally, using the relation $\Sigma^k=2\Sigma^<+\Sigma^r-\Sigma^a$, we could know $\Sigma^k(\tau_1, \tau_2)$.
We know that a contour ordered matrix $A$ could be written in the upper triangular form $\left( \begin{array}{cc}
A^r & A^k \\ 0 & A^a
\end{array} \right)$ in the Keldysh space after Keldysh rotation. Since $G$, which does not contain the counting parameter, possesses the upper triangular form in Keldysh space, and its retarded and advanced components are lower triangular and upper triangular matrices, respectively, in the time domain, we can just simplify it to a diagonal matrix. So, we can just directly calculate GF by calculating the determinant of the matrix $\delta(g^{-1}-\widetilde{\Sigma}_L-\Sigma_R)$ which is a block toeplitz matrix where $\delta$ is the diagonal matrix to satisfy the normalization condition $Z(\lambda=0,t)=1$.
|
\section{Introduction}
\label{intro}
The high density of colour charges, present in a plasma of quarks and gluons (QGP) created in heavy-ion
collisions, is expected to screen the binding between heavy (charm or beauty) $Q$ and $\overline Q$ quarks,
suppressing the production of quarkonium states with respect to the production in \mbox{pp}~\cite{Mat86}.
In this scenario, the different binding energies of the various $Q\overline Q$ states should lead to a sequential suppression pattern, where, in case of charmonium resonances, the more loosely bound $\psi(\rm 2S)$\ melts at lower temperatures with respect to the more tightly bound \rm J/$\psi$.
The NA50 experiment has indeed observed a stronger $\psi(\rm 2S)$\ suppression relative to the \rm J/$\psi$\ one in \mbox{Pb-Pb} collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}=17$ GeV~\cite{Ale07}.
However, a strong modification of the $\psi(\rm 2S)$\ yields was measured also in \mbox{p-A} collisions~\cite{Ale06, Lei00,Abt07}, where no QGP formation is expected. In particular, a stronger $\psi(\rm 2S)$\ suppression relative to the \rm J/$\psi$\ was observed at central rapidity ($y$), while at forward-$y$ the two resonances followed a similar trend.
This behaviour is interpreted in terms of cold nuclear matter (CNM) effects, such as nuclear parton shadowing, energy loss and $c\overline c$ break-up in interactions with nucleons.
While the first two mechanisms are not expected to significantly depend on the charmonium state,
the $c\overline c$ break-up probability is sensitive to the size of the object crossing the medium.
More in details, while the coloured $c\overline c$ pair produced by gluon fusion evolves first into a colour neutral object and eventually into a fully formed resonance~\cite{Arl00}, its size grows, increasing the break-up
probability. If the charmonium formation time ($\tau_{\rm f}$) is smaller than the nucleus crossing time ($\tau_{\rm c}$), the object experiencing the nuclear medium is a fully formed resonance which can be suppressed according to its binding energy.
On the contrary, if the resonance forms outside the nucleus, i.e. if a $c\overline c$ pair not yet evolved into a
\rm J/$\psi$\ or $\psi(\rm 2S)$\ crosses the medium, a similar behaviour is expected, independently of the final charmonium state.
As the collision energy increases, the time spent by the $c\overline c$ pair inside the nucleus
decreases due to its large Lorentz-$\gamma$ factor. The $c\overline c$ break-up contribution
becomes negligible and a similar \rm J/$\psi$\ and $\psi(\rm 2S)$\ suppression is envisaged. In contrast to these expectations,
the PHENIX Collaboration has observed a stronger $\psi(\rm 2S)$\ suppression relative to the \rm J/$\psi$\ in \mbox{d-Au} collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}} = 200$ GeV~\cite{Ada13}.
ALICE has now addressed the study of the $\psi(\rm 2S)$\ production in \mbox{p-A}
collisions at LHC energies to shed some light on this observation and to clarify the role of CNM effects.
\section{Analysis and physics results}
\label{analysis}
The ALICE Collaboration has studied both \rm J/$\psi$\ and $\psi(\rm 2S)$\ production in \mbox{p-Pb} collisions at
$\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}} = 5.02$ TeV~\cite{Abe04,Abe04pA}. Charmonium resonances are measured, through their dimuon decay channel, in the
Muon Spectrometer, covering the pseudorapidity range $-4<\eta_{\rm lab} <-2.5$.
The two innermost layers of the Inner Tracking System provide the vertex identification,
and two scintillator hodoscopes (VZERO) are used for triggering purposes. A set of Zero Degree
Calorimeters (ZDC) helps to remove de-bunched collisions and to determine the event activity.
Details on the ALICE experimental apparatus can be found in~\cite{Aam08}.
Data have been collected under two different configurations, inverting the direction of
the p and Pb beams. In this way both forward ($2.03<y_{\rm cms}<3.53$) and backward ($-4.46<y_{\rm cms}<-2.96$)
centre of mass rapidities could be accessed, with the positive $y$ defined in the direction of the proton beam.
The difference in the covered $y$ ranges reflects the shift of the centre of mass of the nucleon-nucleon collisions ($\Delta y = 0.465$) with respect to the laboratory frame, induced by the different energies per nucleon of the colliding beams.
The resonance yields are extracted by fitting the dimuon invariant mass distributions with a superposition of signals and background shapes. For the signal pseudo-Gaussian or Crystal Ball functions, with asymmetric tails on both sides of the resonance peak, are used, while for the background a Gaussian with a mass-dependent width or polynomial $\times$ exponential functions are adopted.
The $\psi(\rm 2S)$\ yield and its statistical uncertainty is obtained as the average of the results of the fits performed combining the various signal and background shapes, while the systematic uncertainty is given by the RMS of the distribution of the fit results.
A total number of $N_{\rm \psi(2S)}$=1069$\pm$130(stat)$\pm$102(syst) is obtained at forward-$y$, while at backward-$y$ the corresponding figure is $N_{\rm \psi(2S)}$=697$\pm$111(stat)$\pm$65(syst).
The $\psi(\rm 2S)$\ yields are then divided by the acceptance $\times$ efficiency ($A\times\epsilon$) evaluated using Monte-Carlo simulations.
The $\psi(\rm 2S)$\ $A\times\epsilon$ values, averaged over $p_{{\mathrm T}}$\ and $y$, are $(27.0 \pm 1.4)$\% and $(18.4 \pm 1.3)$\% at forward and backward $y$ respectively, where the quoted uncertainties are systematic.
Details on the signal extraction, $A\times\epsilon$ correction and systematic uncertainties can be found in ~\cite{Abe04,Abe04pA}.
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics*[width=0.45\textwidth]{2014-May-16-Fig3_Psi2S_JPsi_doubleratio_integrated_PhenixBlack}
\includegraphics*[width=0.45\textwidth]{2014-May-16-Fig4_Psi2S_RpA_integrated}
\caption{
Left: Double ratios $[\sigma_{\psi(\rm 2S)}/\sigma_{\rm J/\psi}]_{\rm pPb}/[\sigma_{\psi(\rm 2S)}/\sigma_{\rm J/\psi}]_{\rm pp}$
for \mbox{p-Pb}, as a function of $y$, compared to the corresponding PHENIX result~\cite{Ada13}.
The horizontal bars show the width of the $y$ regions under study. For ALICE, the vertical error bars correspond to statistical uncertainties, the boxes (shaded areas) to uncorrelated (correlated) systematic uncertainties.
Right: $\psi(\rm 2S)$\ and \rm J/$\psi$\ $R_{\mathrm{pPb}}$\ versus $y$ compared to theoretical models. Vertical error bars correspond to statistical uncertainties, boxes to uncorrelated systematic uncertainties, and shaded areas to partially correlated uncertainties.
The filled box on the right, centered on $R_{\mathrm{pPb}}$=1, corresponds to fully correlated uncertainties between \rm J/$\psi$\ and $\psi(\rm 2S)$.
}
\label{fig:fig1}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
The $\psi(\rm 2S)$\ production cross section times the branching ratio is computed as $ {\rm B.R.}\cdot\sigma^{\rm \psi(\rm 2S)}_{\rm pPb}=N^{\rm cor}_{\rm \psi(\rm 2S)}/N_{\rm MB}\times{\sigma^{\rm MB}_{\rm pPb}}$, where ${N^{\rm cor}_{\psi(\rm 2S)}}$ is the number of $\psi(\rm 2S)$\ corrected for $\rm{A}\times \epsilon$, $N_{\rm MB}$ is the number of minimum bias (MB) events and $\sigma^{\rm MB}_{\rm pPb}$ is the cross section for the occurrence of the MB condition~\cite{Abe04pA}.
The $\psi(\rm 2S)$\ production cross section in \mbox{p-Pb} is compared to the \rm J/$\psi$\ one and to the corresponding quantities in \mbox{pp} interactions in terms of double ratio
$[\sigma_{\psi(\rm 2S)}/\sigma_{\rm J/\psi}]_{\rm pPb}/[\sigma_{\psi(\rm 2S)}/\sigma_{\rm J/\psi}]_{\rm pp}$.
Since no \mbox{pp} data are available at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}} = 5.02$ TeV, the results obtained at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}} = 7$ TeV, in $2.5<y_{\rm cms}<4$, have been used~\cite{Lop14}.
A 8\% systematic uncertainty on the double ratio is included to take into account the different $\sqrt{s}$
and $y$ range~\cite{Abe04pA} where the $[\sigma_{\psi(\rm 2S)}/\sigma_{\rm J/\psi}]$ is measured.
Results obtained at forward and backward $y$ are shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:fig1}(left), where a strong decrease of the $\psi(\rm 2S)$\ yields, relative to the \rm J/$\psi$, is observed in both $y$ ranges.
The $\psi(\rm 2S)$\ to \rm J/$\psi$\ double ratio is also compared to the result obtained by PHENIX in \mbox{d-Au} collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}} = 200$ GeV~\cite{Ada13}.
ALICE results show that, compared to pp, the $\psi(\rm 2S)$\ is more suppressed than the J/$\psi$ to a 2.1$\sigma$ (3.5$\sigma$) level at forward (backward) $y$, while the PHENIX value shows a similar feature, at a 1.3$\sigma$ level.
The charmonium suppression with respect to the corresponding \mbox{pp} yield is quantified through the nuclear modification factor $R_{\mathrm{pPb}}$. The $\psi(\rm 2S)$\ $R_{\mathrm{pPb}}$\ is obtained from the aforementioned double ratio and from the \rm J/$\psi$\
$R_{\mathrm{pPb}}$~\cite{Abe04pA}, as $R^{\psi(\rm 2S)}_{\rm pPb}=R^{{\rm J}/\psi}_{\rm pPb}/\big[(\sigma^{\psi(\rm 2S)}_{\rm pPb}/
\sigma^{{\rm J}/\psi}_{\rm pPb})\cdot(\sigma^{{\rm J}/\psi}_{\rm pp}/\sigma^{\psi(\rm 2S)}_{\rm pp})\big]$.
Results, shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:fig1}(right), indicate a stronger $\psi(\rm 2S)$\ suppression with respect to the \rm J/$\psi$, reaching a factor 2 relative to \mbox{pp}.
$R_{\mathrm{pPb}}$\ are also compared to theoretical calculations based on nuclear shadowing~\cite{Alb13} or coherent energy loss, with or without shadowing contribution~\cite{Arl13}.
Since the kinematic distributions of gluons producing the \rm J/$\psi$\ or the $\psi(\rm 2S)$\ are rather similar and since the coherent energy loss does not depend on the final quantum numbers of the resonances, the same theoretical calculations hold for both \rm J/$\psi$\ and $\psi(\rm 2S)$.
Theoretical models predict a $y$ dependence which is in fair agreement with the \rm J/$\psi$\ data, but in
strong contradiction with the $\psi(\rm 2S)$\ result, indicating that other mechanisms should be invoked to describe
the $\psi(\rm 2S)$\ production in \mbox{p-Pb}.
The resonance break-up cross section in the medium depends on the binding energy of the charmonium state and could be, in principle, a natural explanation for the experimental observation of the different \rm J/$\psi$\ and $\psi(\rm 2S)$\ suppression, as for low energy results.
However, this process can only play a role if the charmonium formation time is smaller than the time spent by the $c\overline c$ in the nucleus, defined as $\tau_{\rm c}=\langle L\rangle/(\beta_{\rm z}\gamma)$~\cite{McG13}, where $\langle L\rangle$ is the average length of nuclear matter crossed by the pair and $\beta_{\rm z}$ is the velocity of the $c\overline c$ along the beam direction in the nucleus rest frame.
Thus, at forward-$y$, the value of $\tau_{\rm c}$ is about 10$^{-4}$ fm/$c$, while at backward-$y$ the corresponding quantity
is $\tau_{\rm c}$$\sim$7$\cdot10^{-2}$ fm/$c$.
Estimates for $\tau_{\rm f}$ range between 0.05 and 0.15 fm/$c$~\cite{Arl00,McG13}. Under these assumptions, no break-up effects can be expected at forward-$y$, and even at backward-$y$ the similar $\tau_{\rm c}$ and $\tau_{\rm f}$ can hardly accomodate the large discrepancy observed.
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics*[width=0.45\textwidth]{2014-May-16-Fig7a_p-Pb_Psi2S_RpA_differential}
\includegraphics*[width=0.45\textwidth]{2014-May-16-Fig7b_Pb-p_Psi2S_RpA_differential}
\caption{
$\psi(\rm 2S)$\ and \rm J/$\psi$\ $R_{\mathrm{pPb}}$\ $p_{{\mathrm T}}$\ dependence compared to theoretical calculations in the forward (left) and backward (right) $y$ regions. The uncertainty definition is the same as in Fig.~\ref{fig:fig1}(right).}
\label{fig:fig2}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
The $\psi(\rm 2S)$\ production has also been investigated as a function of the transverse momentum ($p_{{\mathrm T}}$). The $R_{\mathrm{pPb}}$\ computed at backward and forward $y$ are shown versus $p_{{\mathrm T}}$\ in Fig.~\ref{fig:fig2}.
The $\psi(\rm 2S)$\ $R_{\mathrm{pPb}}$\ shows at both rapidities a strong suppression, with a slightly more evident $p_{{\mathrm T}}$\ dependence at backward-$y$.
The $\psi(\rm 2S)$\ is more suppressed than the \rm J/$\psi$, as already observed for the $p_{{\mathrm T}}$-integrated
result. Theoretical calculations, that fairly describe the \rm J/$\psi$\ behaviour, overestimate the $\psi(\rm 2S)$\ $R_{\mathrm{pPb}}$\ pattern.
As the $p_{{\mathrm T}}$\ increases, the $c\overline c$ pair crossing time decreases and, in particular for backward production, $\tau_{\rm c}$ varies by a factor 2 from $\sim$0.07 (at $p_{\rm T}=0$) to $\sim$0.03 fm/$c$ (at $p_{\rm T}=8$ GeV/$c$). The role of the break-up is therefore expected to be more important at low $p_{{\mathrm T}}$, but, even if a hint for an increasing trend can be seen in Fig.~\ref{fig:fig2} (right), no firm conclusion can be drawn from the data given the experimental uncertainties.
Finally, the $\psi(\rm 2S)$\ production is studied versus the event activity, as shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:fig3}.
The event activity is determined by sampling the energy released in the neutron ZDC (ZN) and
the link with the geometry of the collisions is established assuming, for example, that the mid-$y$ particle multiplicity scales with the number of participants nucleons~\cite{Alb04}.
To underline the fact that the centrality determination in \mbox{p-Pb} collisions can be biased by the choice of the estimator, the nuclear modification factor is, in this case, named $Q_{\mathrm{pPb}}$~\cite{Alb04}.
The $\psi(\rm 2S)$\ $Q_{\mathrm{pPb}}$\ shows a strong suppression, which increases with increasing event activity, and is
rather similar in both the forward and the backward $y$ regions.
The \rm J/$\psi$\ $Q_{\mathrm{pPb}}$\ shows a similar decreasing trend at forward-$y$ as a function of the event activity.
On the contrary, the \rm J/$\psi$\ and $\psi(\rm 2S)$\ $Q_{\mathrm{pPb}}$\ patterns, observed at backward-$y$, are rather different, with the $\psi(\rm 2S)$\ significantly more suppressed for large event activity classes, again pointing to additional final state effects suppressing the most weakly bound $\psi(\rm 2S)$.
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics*[width=0.45\textwidth]{2014-May-14-QpA_JPsi_Psi2S_EvActivity}
\includegraphics*[width=0.45\textwidth]{2014-May-14-QAp_JPsi_Psi2S_EvActivity}
\caption{
\rm J/$\psi$\ and $\psi(\rm 2S)$\ $Q_{\mathrm{pPb}}$\ versus event activity in \mbox{p-Pb} at forward (left) and backward (right) $y$. The uncertainties definition is the same as in Fig.~\ref{fig:fig1} (right). The bin 0-5\% is not shown since it might by largely contaminated by pile-up.}
\label{fig:fig3}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\section{Conclusions}
We have presented the inclusive $\psi(\rm 2S)$\ production in \mbox{p-Pb} collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}} = 5.02$ TeV. The double ratio $[\sigma_{\psi(\rm 2S)}/\sigma_{\rm J/\psi}]_{\rm pPb}/[\sigma_{\psi(\rm 2S)}/\sigma_{\rm J/\psi}]_{\rm pp}$ and the
$\psi(\rm 2S)$\ and \rm J/$\psi$\ $R_{\mathrm{pPb}}$\ ($Q_{\mathrm{pPb}}$), obtained at forward and backward $y$, have been studied as a function of $p_{{\mathrm T}}$\ (event activity).
Both quantities indicates that the $\psi(\rm 2S)$\ is significantly more suppressed than the \rm J/$\psi$, with a feeble $p_{{\mathrm T}}$\ dependence, but with a visible decrease towards
large event activity classes.
Initial state effects alone cannot account for the observed difference between the \rm J/$\psi$\ and the $\psi(\rm 2S)$\ behaviour and final state effects
as the break-up by interaction with cold nuclear matter seems unlikely, given the short time spent by the $c\overline c$ pair in the medium, in particular at forward rapidity. Other final state effects as
$c\overline c$ interaction with the final state hadronic medium created in \mbox{p-Pb} collisions
should probably be considered to explain the unexpected observation.
|
\section{Introduction}
One of the major breakthroughs in astronomy has been the discovery of high energy neutrinos by the IceCube detector at the South Pole. The story started with two PeV neutrino events announced in 2012~\cite{Aartsen:2013bka} as a consequence of changing the search strategy, over 28~events with deposited energies greater than 30~TeV announced in 2013~\cite{Aartsen:2013jdh}, to 37~events in the current three year data analysis~\cite{Aartsen:2014gkd}. While about 15 of these 37 events are expected from the backgrounds of atmospheric muons and neutrinos, the excess over the background currently constitutes more than $5\sigma$. Clearly, high-energy neutrino astronomy is emerging as a new discipline with IceCube at the forefront, which is expected to collect 100-200 events (within the current analysis scheme) during its lifetime. While this is significant statistics, it may not be sufficient for resolving individual sources~\cite{Ahlers:2014ioa} and for precision studies of spectrum and flavor composition. Therefore, the next generation experiments are being discussed, such as a volume upgrade of the IceCube detector (IceCube high-energy extension HEX) and the KM3NeT experiment in the Mediterranean~\cite{Katz:2006wv}. The results of the IceCube experiment during this and the coming years will have to serve as input for the optimization of these future options.
On the theoretical side, there have been many speculations where these neutrinos would be coming from, see {\it e.g.}\ Ref.~\cite{Anchordoqui:2013dnh} for a recent review. It is probably fair to say that there is no general answer on that question yet. Instead, the current state-of-the-art can be recast in a number of conceptual questions:
\begin{itemize}
\item
What is the role of atmospheric neutrinos, especially prompt neutrinos?
\item
Are there any directional or time-wise clusters, or is the flux isotropic? Are there any correlations with known objects or events?
\item
Are some of the events of Galactic origin?
\item
Why are there no events above a few PeV?
\item
Can the neutrinos stem from the sources of the ultra-high energy cosmic rays?
\item
Are the observed neutrinos coming from one source class or more? Which ones?
\item
Is the flavor composition what is expected, or are there deviations indicative for either physics beyond the Standard Model or non-conventional compositions at the source?
\item
Is there a particle physics origin of these neutrinos, such as dark matter?
\end{itemize}
In this study, we focus on the conceptual interpretation of the observed events in terms of the spectral shape of the observed flux. That is, we assume that the neutrinos come from one source population with similar properties which is of extra-galactic origin, as there is not yet any evidence for directional clusters. We furthermore assume that the source population is cosmologically distributed such that it roughly follows the star formation rate. We postulate that the neutrinos are produced from interactions between nuclei and matter. This is, in a way, the simplest possible class of models, as the neutrino spectrum directly follows the non-thermal spectrum of the accelerated nuclei; for interactions with radiation, the obtained spectral shape of the neutrinos depends on both the spectra of the interacting nuclei and the target photons, see {\it e.g.}\ Ref.~\cite{Winter:2013cla} for target photons produced by synchrotron radiation of co-accelerated electrons. However, we do take into account magnetic field effects on the secondary muons and pions, which can significantly alter the neutrino spectra and flavor composition, see {\it e.g.}\ Refs.~\cite{Kachelriess:2007tr,Lipari:2007su,Hummer:2010ai} especially in the context of gamma-ray bursts~\cite{Kashti:2005qa,Murase:2005hy,Baerwald:2011ee} and microquasars~\cite{Reynoso:2008gs,Baerwald:2012yd}; see Ref.~\cite{Winter:2012xq} for a review.
While most of these studies discuss interactions between protons and photons, the secondaries produced by interactions between nuclei and matter will be affected by magnetic fields as well, see {\it e.g.}\ Ref.~\cite{Reynoso:2008gs}. In the context of a possible cutoff at PeV energies in recent IceCube observations, magnetic field effects on the secondaries may be a way to decouple the maximal proton from the maximal neutrino energy, see Ref.~\cite{Winter:2013cla} for a more detailed discussion. Finally, there seems to be condensing evidence for a heavier composition of the UHECRs~\cite{Abraham:2010yv}. We therefore take into account the composition of the nuclei in the sources. We especially discuss if the cutoff at PeV neutrino energies can be consistent with the UHECR paradigm if heavier nuclei are accelerated to higher energies within the sources. In fact, we will demonstrate that one can learn something about the acceleration mechanism in that scenario. Note that the interpretation of the obtained neutrino flux normalization in terms of source luminosity and column depth will be discussed elsewhere.
\section{Model and methods}
\begin{table}[t]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{lll}
\hline
Parameter & Description & Unit \\
\hline
$\alpha$ & Spectral index of primary nuclei & none \\
$E_{\mathrm{max}}$ & Maximal energy & GeV \\
$B$ & Magnetic field & Gauss (G) \\
$A$ & Mass number & none \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\caption{\label{tab:params} Main parameters of the model.}
\end{table}
The interaction model used in this work is based on the Kelner et al.~\cite{Kelner:2006tc} parameterization for proton-proton interactions, where we take into account the charged pion production explicitly to allow for secondary cooling. For the extension to heavier nuclei $Ap$ interactions, see Ref.~\cite{Joshi:2013aua}.
The secondary production $Q_\pi$ [$\mathrm{cm^{-3} \, s^{-1} \, GeV^{-1}}$] is given from the non-thermal nucleon density in the source $N_A$ [$\mathrm{cm^{-3} \, GeV^{-1}}$] and the target nucleon density $n_p$ [$\mathrm{cm^{-3}}$] by
\begin{eqnarray}
Q_{\pi}(E_{\nu}) & = & c \, n_p \, \int\limits_{0}^{1} \sigma_{Ap}\left(\frac{E_\nu}{x_A} \right) \, N_A \left( \frac{E_\nu}{x_A} \right) \nonumber \\
& & \qquad \times A \, f\left(A x_A,\frac{E_\nu}{A x_A}\right) \, \frac{dx_A}{x_A} \, , \label{equ:int}
\end{eqnarray}
where $x_A=x/A$ is the fraction of the nucleus' energy going into the neutrino and $f$ are the scaling functions from Ref.~\cite{Kelner:2006tc} (SIBYLL-based versions) and $\sigma_{Ap}=A^{3/4} \times \sigma_{pp}$~\cite{Anchordoqui:2006pe}. If the target material is heavier than hydrogen, one may superimpose the nuclei $n_p \simeq A \times n_A$. There are, however, corrections to that, but, as we do not discuss the normalization in this study, that does not affect our results. Note that \equ{int} can be re-written in terms of the column density $L \, n_p$, where the interpretation of $L$ in terms of the size of the interaction region depends on the scenario. For example, injecting nuclei into the interaction region with the rate $Q_A$, one can estimate that $N_A \simeq Q_A \, t_{\mathrm{esc}}$ in the absence of disintegration and cooling, and therefore $L \, n_p = c \, t_{\mathrm{esc}} \, n_p$ is the column density which determines the normalization of \equ{int}.
The pion and consequent muon decays are computed in the usual way including the helicity dependence of the muon decays, see Ref.~\cite{Hummer:2010ai}. Flavor mixing is taken into account with the best-fit values from Ref.~\cite{GonzalezGarcia:2012sz} (first octant solution).
The main parameters of the model are listed in Tab.~\ref{tab:params}. We start with $N_A(E) \propto E^{\alpha} \, \exp(-E/E_{\mathrm{max}})$ in \equ{int}, where $\alpha$ is the initial spectral index, which is expected to be $\alpha \sim 2$ from Fermi shock acceleration. The maximal energy $E_{\mathrm{max}}$ is typically obtained from equating the acceleration timescale with the dominant escape and energy loss timescales in a specific scenario. Since this derivation is highly model-dependent, we keep $E_{\mathrm{max}}$ as a model parameter. Note that $E_{\mathrm{max}}$ can also be used to simulate a spectral break in the initial spectrum, as it may come from an energy-dependent escape time frequently discussed for starburst galaxies~\cite{Loeb:2006tw}, see also Refs.~\cite{Anchordoqui:2014yva,Chang:2014hua,Tamborra:2014xia}. In addition, in \equ{int}, $N_A$ already corresponds to the result including disintegration and other cooling and escape processes. That means that $E_{\mathrm{max}}$ could also describe a spectral break from a cooling process, energy-dependent escape, or photo-disintegration. The secondary muons and pions are assumed to undergo synchrotron losses and decay governed by the magnetic field $B$, which impacts spectral shape and flavor composition see Refs.~\cite{Hummer:2010ai,Baerwald:2011ee}. Note that there could be other cooling or escape processes affecting the secondaries, such as adiabatic cooling (see {\it e.g.}\ \cite{Hummer:2011ms}) or re-acceleration~\cite{Klein:2012ug,Winter:2014tta,Reynoso:2014yoa}. These effects are, however, model-dependent and typically not the dominant ones shaping the neutrino spectra. Finally, we have the composition $A$ as parameter. In fact, \equ{int} allows to use an energy-dependent (average) composition $A(E_A)=A(E_\nu/x_A)$, which we will use below. Note that for a power law with $\alpha=-2$, the composition would not affect our results. However, both the cutoff and varying composition will change that conclusion.
For the sake of simplicity, we furthermore assume that the sources do not have large Doppler factors, and that they are cosmologically distributed following the star formation rate by Hopkins and Beacom~\cite{Hopkins:2006bw}, {\it i.e.}, $E^2 \phi_\nu \propto \int_z Q_\nu(E(1+z)) \, H(z) \, dV/dz \, (4 \pi d_L^2)^{-2} dz$ for steady sources with $H(z)$ the source density normalized to the local source density ($H(0) \equiv 1$), $\Omega_m=0.27$ and $\Omega_\Lambda=0.73$. For transients, there will be another factor $1+z$ in the denominator of the integrand; we find however that the results depend very little on the details of the cosmological source distribution.
For the fit, we follow Ref.~\cite{Winter:2013cla}, using the up-to-date three year data from Ref.~\cite{Aartsen:2014gkd}. We use eight bins: four in the {\em reconstructed} neutrino energy 30 to 200~TeV, 200 TeV to 1 PeV, 1 to 3 PeV, and 3 PeV to 100 PeV, and one bin for muon tracks and cascades within each energy slot. For the sake of simplicity, we assume that the electromagnetic equivalent energy is roughly 25\% of the incident neutrino energy for a muon track, and 75\% for a cascade~\cite{Laha:2013lka}; cascades from neutral current interactions are assumed to be suppressed by the cross sections, the lower fiducial mass (see Fig.~7 in Ref.~\cite{Aartsen:2013jdh}), and the fact that only a fraction of the initial neutrino energy is deposited in the detector~\cite{Aartsen:2013bka}.
The (Poissonian) $\chi^2$ is obtained by bin-wise comparing the observed 36~events, for which energy information is available, with the prediction. The prediction with a free overall normalization is obtained from folding the three flavored neutrino fluxes for one set of model parameters with the corresponding exposures derived from the effective areas in Ref.~\cite{Aartsen:2013jdh}. Then the atmospheric backgrounds are added. The atmospheric neutrino background is derived from the IceCube observation of muon neutrinos~\cite{Abbasi:2010ie,Abbasi:2011jx}, and for the atmospheric muons we assume the same shape. The measurement of the atmospheric electron neutrino background is much more uncertain. We therefore extrapolate it from the muon neutrino background, roughly consistent with the flavor composition in \cite{Sinegovskaya:2013wgm}. We obtain 3.6 background muon tracks from neutrinos, 3.2 cascades from neutrinos, and 8.6 muon tracks from atmospheric muons, matching the publically available information on the IceCube analysis. This means that the predicted number of muon tracks is slightly higher than the observation (eight), a fact which discussed in detail in Ref.~\cite{Mena:2014sja} (see also Ref.~\cite{Chen:2013dza} for some discussion). While this unavoidable tension increases the minimal $\chi^2$ of our fit, it hardly affects the $\Delta \chi^2$, and therefore if of little relevance for the results in this study. As a final step the $\chi^2$ between predicted and observed rates are summed over all bins and minimized over the free normalization of the astrophysical flux to obtain the best-fit for the chosen parameters.
\section{Results for proton-matter interactions}
\begin{figure*}[t!]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.8\textwidth]{icecube.png}
\end{center}
\caption{\label{fig:model} Allowed fit regions to neutrino data at $1\sigma$, $2 \sigma$, and $3 \sigma$ (2 d.o.f.) in a three parameter ($\alpha$, $B$, $E_{\mathrm{max}}$) model for protons only, where one of the parameters is fixed in each panel (sections shown). Here only events used by the IceCube collaboration fit~\cite{Aartsen:2014gkd} in terms of deposited energy $60 \, \mathrm{TeV} \le E_{\mathrm{dep}} \le 3 \, \mathrm{PeV}$ have been used. Dashed contours refer to including a generic bound by Murase, Ahlers, Lacki (MAL)~\cite{Murase:2013rfa} on the $\gamma$-ray emission from $\pi^0$s co-produced with charged pions if the spectrum extends down to $100 \, \mathrm{GeV}$, where it has to obey the Fermi isotropic background bound~\cite{Abdo:2010nz}. The best-fit (for the solid contours) is marked by the dot.}
\end{figure*}
Here we first reproduce the IceCube spectral fit in Ref.~\cite{Aartsen:2014gkd}, which is based on a sub-sample of the 37 events with $60 \, \mathrm{TeV} \le E_{\mathrm{dep}} \le 3 \, \mathrm{PeV}$. All following figures will be based on the full data sample.
In \figu{model}, the allowed fit region (filled contours) are shown for in a three parameter ($\alpha$, $B$, $E_{\mathrm{max}}$) model for protons only, where one of the parameters is fixed in each panel. Most noteworthy, for $B \le 10^2 \, \mathrm{G}$, we obtain a spectral index $\alpha = -2.3 \pm 0.3$ in consistency with the collaboration results.
Thus, although our procedure qualitatively deviates from internal analyses of the IceCube collaboration in a few ways ({\it e.g.}, mapping from deposited to reconstructed energy/energy reconstruction, details on background model, systematical errors), we can roughly reproduce their results in order to test more complicated models. For instance, one can read off from this figure that $E_{\mathrm{max}}$ and $B$ can produce a cutoff as alternative to softer spectra. For instance, strong enough $B$, a spectral index $\alpha=-2$ is allowed. Note that in the following, we will use the full set of events to make the full use of statistics.
An interesting observation was made by Murase, Ahlers, and Lacki (MAL)~\cite{Murase:2013rfa}: the production of gamma-rays from $\pi^0$ decays in the sources, which are co-produced with the charged pions, may violate the Fermi isotropic background measurements~\cite{Abdo:2010nz}. The highest energy data points are at about 100~GeV, which is significantly below the measured neutrino energies and requires some extrapolation of the spectrum. In addition, gamma-rays may come from higher energies by the initiated electromagnetic cascade. While the details are somewhat model-dependent, we compute the gamma-ray flux injected at the sources based on Ref.~\cite{Kelner:2006tc}. We add a penalty $\chi^2$, imposing that $\left. E^2 \phi_\gamma \right|_{100 \, \mathrm{GeV}} = 8^{+2}_{-\infty} \, 10^{-8} \, \mathrm{GeV cm^{-2} s^{-1} sr^{-1}}$, {\it i.e.}, an upper bound. The effect of this penalty can be seen as dashed curves in \figu{model}: it leads to a lower cutoff $\alpha \gtrsim -2.2$ ($1 \sigma$). This result is consistent with Ref.~\cite{Murase:2013rfa}, where $\alpha \gtrsim -2.18$ was found.
Note that for the chosen star formation evolution of the sources, the main contribution will come from $z \sim 1$, where the optical depth at $100 \, \mathrm{GeV}$ is still small enough such that most gamma-rays can reach us without being attenuated in photon background fields during their propagation. However, the gamma-ray constraint can be at least partially avoided if a spectral break or lower cutoff in the energy spectrum of the non-thermal nucleons is introduced. We therefore discuss it separately in this study.
\begin{figure*}[t!]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.8\textwidth]{allfit.png}
\end{center}
\caption{\label{fig:allfit} Allowed fit regions to neutrino data at $1\sigma$, $2 \sigma$, and $3 \sigma$ (2 d.o.f.) in a three parameter ($\alpha$, $B$, $E_{\mathrm{max}}$) model for protons only, including the full data set. The filled contours represent sections, {\it i.e.}, the third (not shown) parameter in each panel is fixed to the depicted value. The overall minimum is shown as dot, and three additional test points are marked as well (see \figu{spec}). The lines in the upper right panel are discussed in the main text. }
\end{figure*}
Let us now take into account all 36~events with energy information.
The fit result is shown in \figu{allfit} for a proton composition, where one of the parameters is fixed in each panel (parameter space ``section''). The minimal $\chi^2$ is about $9$ in the left-panels, and the $\chi^2/\mathrm{d.o.f.}$ is about two. This relatively large value comes from the above mentioned tension between muon track prediction and observation, and can in principle be avoided using a different background model. However, given the small number of bins (eight), it should not be over-emphasized. Comparing to \figu{model}, we note that the spectral index $\alpha$ shifts to softer values ($\alpha=-2.7 \pm 0.2$, $1\sigma$ for 1 d.o.f.), see upper left panel for small $B$. Apart from a better matching at low energies, the information beyond $3 \, \mathrm{PeV}$ leads to stronger constraints because no neutrinos have been seen there. However, while there is a tendency towards softer spectra $\alpha \ll -2.3$ (for the best-fit) in all tested cases, the exact best-fit value of $\alpha$ depends on details of how the (steep) atmospheric backgrounds are implemented.
We also have a clear limit in the $E_{\mathrm{max}}$-$B$ plane (upper right panel), where the lower right corner is excluded because it would produce too many high-E events. In that panel, two distinctive regions appear at the $1 \sigma$ confidence level: one can either produce the cutoff with $10^7 \, \mathrm{GeV} \lesssim E_{\mathrm{max}} \lesssim 10^8 \, \mathrm{GeV}$, or with $B \sim 10^4 \, \mathrm{G}$. It is noteworthy that these regions can be potentially discriminated by the flavor composition of the neutrinos: Roughly on the r.h.s. of the dashed-dotted line, the neutrino production will be dominated by pion decays at the highest energies, whereas the muons lose energy faster than they decay (``muon damped source''). As a consequence, only muon neutrinos and antineutrinos will be produced at the source, which leads to a deviation from the canonical $(\nu_e:\nu_\mu:\nu_\tau) \sim (1:1:1)$ flavor composition at the detector including flavor mixing~\cite{Learned:1994wg}; see Ref.~\cite{Winter:2012xq} for a review.
A potential theoretical constraint comes from proton synchrotron losses: not necessarily all of the regions shown in \figu{allfit} can be reached, as protons may lose energy in magnetic fields faster than they can be accelerated. This can be quantified using an acceleration rate for shock acceleration~\cite{Hillas:1985is}
\begin{equation}
t^{-1}_{\mathrm{acc}}=\eta \frac{c^2 Z e B}{E} \, , \label{equ:acc}
\end{equation}
which corresponds to a constant fractional energy gain per cycle $\eta$. For efficient acceleration, one typically assumes $\eta \simeq 1$. Synchrotron losses are governed by
\begin{equation}
t^{-1}_{\mathrm{synchr}} = \frac{Z^4 e^4 B^2 E}{9 \pi \varepsilon_0 m^4 c^5} \, , \label{equ:synchr}
\end{equation}
which means that they take over at high enough energies. Equating \equ{acc} with \equ{synchr}, one obtains
\begin{equation}
E_{\mathrm{max}} \propto \frac{m^2}{Z^{3/2}} \sqrt{\frac{\eta}{B}} \propto \sqrt{A} \, \sqrt{\frac{\eta}{B}} \, , \label{equ:emaxsynchr}
\end{equation}
where in the latter step $m \propto A \propto Z$ was assumed, which is a good approximation for elements heavier than hydrogen. For hydrogen and $\eta=1$, the region where synchrotron losses dominate is on the r.h.s. of the dashed line in \figu{allfit}, upper right panel. That is, for shock acceleration and and moderately efficient acceleration, that region cannot be reached. We will consider the impact of this theoretical constraint on the fit below. Note that we do not assume relativistic boosting here. For example for gamma-ray bursts, $E_{\mathrm{max}} \simeq 10^9 \, \mathrm{GeV}$ can be reached for $100 \, \mathrm{kG}$ in the shock rest frame, which translates into $E_{\mathrm{max}} \sim 10^{11} \, \mathrm{GeV}$ in the observer's frame. Note that an additional constraint comes from the size of the acceleration region (Hillas criterium), which is however difficult to interpret for highly relativistic sources due to relativistic length contraction and energy boosting. We do not explicitly discuss this constraint here, as it involves another parameter (size of the acceleration region) which can be interesting for the interpretation of the signal in terms of specific source classes, but only adds limited new information to our generic fit.
\begin{figure}[t!]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.95\columnwidth]{spec.png} \\
\hspace*{0.2cm}\includegraphics[width=0.95\columnwidth]{flavor.png}
\end{center}
\caption{\label{fig:spec} Spectra (upper panel) and flavor composition at detector (lower panel) corresponding to the points~1 to~3 marked in \figu{allfit}, where the normalization represents the best-fit to IceCube data. Point~1 refers to $\alpha=-2$, $E_{\mathrm{max}}=10^9 \, \mathrm{GeV}$, and $B=10^4 \, \mathrm{G}$, point~2 to $\alpha=-2$, $E_{\mathrm{max}}=10^{7.5} \, \mathrm{GeV}$, and $B \lesssim 1 \, \mathrm{G}$, and point~3 to $\alpha=-2.5$, $E_{\mathrm{max}}=10^{11} \, \mathrm{GeV}$, and $B \lesssim 1 \, \mathrm{G}$. Point~4 refers to the heavier composition model $\alpha=-2$, $E_{\mathrm{max}}=10^{10.1} \, \mathrm{GeV}$, $B \lesssim 1 \, \mathrm{G}$, and $\beta=0.4$, see \figu{comp}.
}
\end{figure}
So what kind of options to we have to describe the data? In order to illustrate that, three test points in the $1\sigma$ region are marked in \figu{allfit}. We show the obtained best-fit spectra for these test points and electron neutrinos in \figu{spec}, upper panel. Furthermore, we show the flavor ratio of muon to electron and tau neutrinos at the detector, which corresponds to the ratio between induced muon tracks and cascades (without efficiencies), in the lower panel. We can identify three options:
\begin{description}
\item[Point 1.] High $E_{\mathrm{max}}$ are allowed together with strong magnetic fields. The magnetic fields lead to a cutoff and some characteristic wiggles in the spectrum, which come together with a change of the flavor composition at PeV energies from pion beam to muon damped source, see lower panel of \figu{spec}.
\item[Point 2.] For small $B$, the cutoff can be achieved by an appropriate maximal proton energy, as discussed above.
\item[Point 3.] Alternatively, a soft enough spectrum can describe data for small $B$ and large $E_{\mathrm{max}}$; see also Ref.~\cite{Anchordoqui:2013qsi}.
\end{description}
We will discuss Point~4 in the next section. Note that in all cases, the normalization (which is a result of the fit) is about $1.5 \, 10^{-8} \, \mathrm{GeV \, cm^{-2} \, s^{-1} \, sr^{-1}}$ at $30 \, \mathrm{TeV}$.
It is, of course, interesting to discuss what this information tells us about the sources. Point~1 corresponds to sources with strong magnetic fields, such as low luminosity gamma-ray bursts~\cite{Murase:2008mr}, ``chocked'' gamma-ray bursts~\cite{Razzaque:2004yv,Ando:2005xi,Razzaque:2005bh}, or (extra-galactic) micoquasars or pulsars. Point~2 may correspond to starburst galaxies~\cite{Loeb:2006tw}, galaxy clusters/groups~\cite{Murase:2013rfa} or radio galaxies~\cite{Tjus:2014dna}. And Point~3 may come from any extra-galactic population, where the main challenge is to accommodate $\alpha \ll -2.2$ with the theory of Fermi acceleration. On possibility is the effect of turbulence on Fermi shock acceleration which may cause such effects~\cite{Lemoine:2006gg}, another one is that the overall spectral index comes from convoluting a harder spectrum with an appropriate luminosity distribution function~\cite{Kachelriess:2005xh}.
Maybe even more interesting is the conceptual question if these neutrinos can come from the sources of the UHECRs. Considering Point~1, which is taking into account the synchrotron loss constraint in \figu{allfit}, the maximal energy can only be high enough to reach the UHECR range $E > 10^{10} \, \mathrm{GeV}$ if large Lorentz boosts are involved. Point~2, on the other hand, cannot be accommodated with the UHECR paradigm, because $E_{\mathrm{max}}$ is too low. For Point~3, the discussion is much more complicated: While it can be in principle accommodated with the UHECR paradigm, the soft spectrum tends to lead to neutrino overproduction at PeV energies if one normalizes the UHECR range to normalization. This is discussed for gamma-ray bursts in Refs.~\cite{Ahlers:2011jj,Baerwald:2014zga}, and, in a more generic context, in Ref.~\cite{Katz:2013ooa}. A model-independent ``proof'' seems, however, more difficult.
\begin{figure*}[t!]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.8\textwidth]{allfit_theory.png}
\end{center}
\caption{\label{fig:allfit_th} Allowed fit regions to neutrino data at $1\sigma$, $2 \sigma$, and $3 \sigma$ (2 d.o.f.) in a three parameter ($\alpha$, $B$, $E_{\mathrm{max}}$) model for protons only. Here the full parameter degeneracy is taken into account, {\it i.e.}, the $\chi^2$ is minimized over the third parameter in each panel. Here theoretical exclusion limits are included as $\chi^2$ penalties: the Murase-Ahlers-Lacki bound on $\gamma$-ray observations, and the region unreachable because of synchrotron losses dominating the maximal proton energy as a cutoff.}
\end{figure*}
In \figu{allfit_th}, we take into account multi-parameter correlations. That is, we show the projections including the minimization of the parameter not shown in each panel. This increases the fit region regions dramatically. On the other hand, we include the Murase-Ahlers-Lacki bound, which leads to $\alpha \gtrsim -2.2$, and the synchrotron loss constraint, explicitly shown in the upper right panel. These theoretical constraints reduce the size of the fit regions. The main result, which can be read off from the left panels, is that spectral indices compatible with Fermi acceleration are preferred in combination with a cutoff of the maximal proton energy, whereas a wide range of magnetic fields are possible. The best-fit at $\alpha \simeq 2$ and $E_{\mathrm{max}} \simeq 2 \, 10^9 \, \mathrm{GeV}$ points towards conventional scenarios of Fermi shock acceleration together with a maximal proton energy cutoff compatible with the ankle of the cosmic ray spectrum observed in our Galaxy. It is therefore plausible that the neutrinos are produced under similar conditions, such as in starburst galaxies.
\section{Nuclei-matter interactions, and the UHECR paradigm}
Adding the composition to the parameters of the model increases the complexity to a level such that no meaningful information can be obtained from current data due to limited statistics. We therefore focus on the key issue, the proton composition has not been convincingly successful to describe: can the potential cutoff at PeV energies be reconciled with the UHECR paradigm, taking into account that the composition could be as heavy as iron at the highest energies~\cite{Abraham:2010yv}?
Let us assume that the magnetic fields are small enough such that magnetic field effects on the secondaries are negligible. That is a necessary condition such that the maximal energies are not suppressed by synchrotron losses in our standard scenario (apply, for instance, \equ{emaxsynchr} to dashed curve in \figu{allfit} for $E_{\mathrm{max}}=10^{11} \, \mathrm{GeV}$). Let us furthermore assume that $\alpha \simeq -2$ in consistency with the argument in Ref.~\cite{Katz:2013ooa}, and that $A(E_{\mathrm{max}})=56$ (iron). We then assume that the maximal energy is element-dependent,
which leads to an energy-dependent composition parameterized as
\begin{equation}
A(E) = \mathrm{max} \left( 1, \, 56 \times \left(\frac{E}{E_{\mathrm{max}}} \right)^\beta \right) \, ,
\label{equ:a}
\end{equation}
{\it i.e.}, $A(E) \ge 1$ and $A(E_{\mathrm{max}})=56$. The coefficient $\beta$ describes how $A$ scales with energy, and we treat it as a continuous parameter.
It is, however, useful to consider a few examples:
\begin{description}
\item[Rigidity scaling.] This is the most often used approach, also known as necessary condition formulated by Hillas~\cite{Hillas:1985is}: the Larmor radius has to be smaller than the acceleration region. This can be also described using \equ{acc} by $t^{-1}_{\mathrm{acc}}=t^{-1}_{\mathrm{lim}} \simeq c/R$, where $R$ is the size of the region and $t^{-1}_{\mathrm{lim}}$ the limiting timescale determined by the size of the region (typically the dynamical timescale, escape timescale, or adiabatic cooling timescale). As a consequence, $E/Z$ (the rigidity) is constant for constant $B$ and $R$, which means that higher energies can be reach for higher charges. Since $Z \sim A/2$, one has $\beta \simeq 1$.
\item[Synchrotron-loss dominated $\boldsymbol{E_{\mathrm{max}}}$.] From \equ{emaxsynchr} describing a shock acceleration scenario, we can immediately read off that $A \propto E^2$, {\it i.e.}, $\beta=2$, if the maximal energy is limited by synchrotron losses.
\end{description}
It is generically difficult to obtain coefficients $\beta < 1$ unless the timescale constraining the maximal energy slightly drops with energy and does not scale with rigidity. This may be achieved in scenarios where {\it e.g.}\ photo-disintegration dominates the highest energies~\cite{Murase:2008mr}. However, note that the composition has been observed to be light at $10^9 \, \mathrm{GeV}$~\cite{Abbasi:2009nf,Abraham:2010yv}, which gives a constraint $E_{\mathrm{max}}(\beta)$ which can be easily derived from \equ{a} using $A(10^9 \, \mathrm{GeV})=1$.
\begin{figure}[tp]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.8\columnwidth]{comp.png}
\end{center}
\caption{\label{fig:comp} Allowed fit region to neutrino data at $1\sigma$, $2 \sigma$, and $3 \sigma$ (2 d.o.f., filled contours) as a function of $\beta$ and $E_{\mathrm{max}}$ for $\alpha=-2$, and $B$ small enough such that magnetic field effects on the secondaries can be neglected. Here the composition is chosen to be iron at the highest energy $E_{\mathrm{max}}$, and the composition is assumed to be energy dependent with $A(E) = \mathrm{max}(1, \, 56 \times (E/E_\mathrm{max})^\beta)$. The vertical lines correspond to different acceleration scenarios, as discussed in the main text. If the composition is to be dominated by protons at $10^9 \, \mathrm{GeV}$, the dotted curve has to be matched.
}
\end{figure}
The current best-fit region in terms of $\beta$ and $E_{\mathrm{max}}$ is shown in \figu{comp} for fixed $\alpha=-2$. It is clear from the figure that $E_{\mathrm{max}} \gg 10^{10} \, \mathrm{GeV}$, required to describe UHECR observations, implies that $\beta<1$. Extremely high energies are allowed for $0.05 \lesssim \beta \lesssim 0.35$, which requires unconventional assumptions for the acceleration-radiation scenarios -- as discussed above. This scenario neither requires strong enough magnetic fields, nor a spectral index softer than $\alpha=-2$; the cutoff is instead produced by a change of the composition.
Note that neutrino data can in that case be used to infer on the acceleration of the heavier elements itself, or to model the injected UHECR composition from the sources in propagation codes.
The spectrum corresponding to test point~4 is also shown in \figu{spec} (upper panel). It peaks at somewhat higher energies than the other spectra. It is probably noteworthy that, because of $\alpha=-2$, there are no issues with the MAL-bound in this case, as we have explicitly tested. However, this scenario is in slight tension with the observed light composition at $10^9 \, \mathrm{GeV}$, which is for protons (extreme case) shown as dotted curve in \figu{comp}. If slightly heavier compositions are admitted at $10^9 \, \mathrm{GeV}$, such as helium, the dotted curve moves closer to the fit contours.
\section{Future expectations for IceCube performance}
\begin{figure}[t]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.8\columnwidth]{extr.png}
\end{center}
\caption{\label{fig:extra} Extrapolation of $3 \sigma$-allowed region as a function of $E_{\mathrm{max}}$ and $B$ (section for protons and $\alpha=-2$, corresponding to \figu{allfit}, upper right panel, but including the MAL bound). ``IceCube 2014'' corresponds to current data (37 events), ``IceCube-86 final'' to four times the current exposure, and ``IceCube-HEX'' to a possible high-energy extension with fourty times the current exposure (factor ten larger mass operated over about a decade). The best-fit is marked by a dot.
}
\end{figure}
We finally discuss what can be learned from future upgrades of IceCube. As an example, let us choose the the $3 \sigma$-allowed region as a function of $E_{\mathrm{max}}$ and $B$ corresponding to \figu{allfit}, upper right panel (but including the MAL bound). The outer (red) curve shows the constraint from current data, the middle green region the expected result from IceCube-86 over about a decade (four times current exposure), the blue region the expected result from a future high-energy extension (HEX) with about ten times the size of IceCube, operated over about a decade. This figure illustrates that while better information will be available in a few years from now with upcoming data, high precision will require an upgrade of IceCube. In this particular case IceCube-86 cannot discriminate between a cutoff from magnetic field effects or a cutoff in the proton spectrum, corresponding to test points~1 and~2. However, the precision in IceCube-HEX will even allow to exploit the transition in the flavor composition expected by magnetic field effects, and discriminate between these regions. This is evident from the event rates. Consider {\it e.g.}\ Point~1 and the muon track and cascade bins between 1 and 2~PeV. For current statistics, the expectations are 0.6 tracks and 0.9 cascades for these bins, whereas for IceCube-HEX, the expectations are 24 muon tracks and 37 cascades.
This leads to a statistical relative error of about $1/\sqrt{24} \simeq 20\%$
The muon track to shower ratio is about 20\% increased in the muon damped case (coinciding with this energy range for the chosen test point) compared to the pion beam case after flavor mixing, see \figu{spec} (lower panel, between 1~and 2~PeV), which means that the statistics between muon tracks and showers becomes meaningful. This is a significant qualitative advance compared to the full statistics IceCube-86 analysis.
\section{Summary and discussion}
We have studied the interpretation of IceCube data in the production scenario of nuclei-matter interactions, for which the neutrino spectrum follows the non-thermal spectrum of the nuclei. Compared to earlier studies, we have taken into account possible magnetic field effects on the secondary muons and pions and the composition of the accelerated nuclei. We have especially focused on the reproduction of the spectrum, where the flavor composition (cascades versus muon tracks) has been implied as well. We have essentially identified four different options for the initial spectrum of the protons/nuclei to reproduce current data, which can all avoid the overproduction of events beyond a few PeV:
\begin{enumerate}
\item
An unbroken power law with $\alpha \sim -2$ and magnetic fields $B \sim 10^4 \, \mathrm{G}$ in the source, leading to magnetic field effects on the secondary muons and pions. This may be realized in certain populations of gamma-ray bursts or (extra-galactic) micoquasars or pulsars.
\item
A power law with $\alpha \sim -2$ with a break or cutoff about $10^7$ to $10^8 \, \mathrm{GeV}$ (for protons). This option may be favorable for models of starburst galaxies, galaxy clusters/groups, or radio galaxies.
\item
An unbroken power law significantly softer than $E^{-2}$, where we find best-fit values for $\alpha$ between $-2.7$ and $-2.3$ depending on analysis range and atmospheric background model. This option is the simplest possible one, also mentioned in the recent IceCube three-year analysis~\cite{Aartsen:2014gkd}, where we typiclly find softer indices because of the larger analysis energy range. A major drawback has been pointed out by Murase, Ahlers, and Lacki (MAL)~\cite{Murase:2013rfa}: the spectrum consequently exceeds the isotropic gamma-ray background at lower energies, unless a low-energy break is introduced.
\item
An unbroken power law with $\alpha \sim -2$ and a flat enough change of the composition of the non-thermal spectra in the source from lighter to heavier elements at the highest energies, which can be potentially as high as $10^{12} \, \mathrm{GeV}$.
\end{enumerate}
While options~1 to~3 have been identified in similar forms in the literature, option~4 is entirely new. Note that regarding options~1 and~2, similar possibilities are obtained for photohadronic interactions producing neutrinos, for which the spectral shape is determined by both the nuclei and target photon spectra; see Ref.~\cite{Winter:2013cla}.
We have been especially interested in which of the above options can be reconciled with the question that the observed neutrinos stem from the sources of the UHECRs, see also discussion in Refs.~\cite{Liu:2013wia,Kistler:2013my}. Option 2) is obviously incompatible with this assumption if the break or cutoff can be also found in the escaping proton spectrum injected into the intergalatic medium. Exceptions could be scenarios with energy-dependent diffusive escape, as in that case the steady proton spectrum (responsible for neutrino production) can have a break, whereas the escaping proton spectrum can be different; see {\it e.g.}\ Ref.~\cite{Liu:2013wia} for hypernova remnants. Option 1) faces the problem that synchrotron losses typically limit the maximal proton energy, and do not allow for high enough maximal energies (unless strong Lorentz boosts are involved, such as in gamma-ray bursts). Option 3), on the other hand, tends to lead to an overproduction of neutrinos at PeV energies exceeding the current IceCube observations when normalized to the UHECR observations, see Ref.~\cite{Katz:2013ooa} for a generic discussion -- while it also violates the MAL bound. We have therefore identified option 4) as the most promising one, especially in the light of recent Auger observation pointing towards a heavier composition at the highest energies. It is generically compatible with the UHECR paradigm, as the acceleration energies can be high enough to describe observations, and it is also compatible with the MAL bound. In fact, we have demonstrated that neutrino data can be used to test the acceleration mechanism in that scenario. The result from neutrino observations may, on the other hand, serve as an input for the UHECR injection at the sources in UHECR propagation models. However, the scenario is in slight tension with a very light composition at $10^9 \, \mathrm{GeV}$.
Finally, we have pointed out that future precision measurements will require significant volume upgrades, such as an high-energy extension of IceCube or KM3NeT in the Mediterranean. While this statement is most certainly generically true, we have shown that the current IceCube experiment will not be sufficient to exploit the flavor information from muon tracks versus cascades in a statistically meaningful manner to discriminate between pion beam and muon damped sources. The reason is that the flavor transition is expected at high enough energies to describe the cutoff at PeV energies, where the event rates are very low. A significantly larger (about a factor of ten) volume upgrade would, however, allow for a discrimination between options 1) and 2), where the flavor information will be {\bf the} qualitatively new ingredient. It is therefore important to optimize an upgrade in a way to preserve the flavor or topology identification capability.
\subsection*{Acknowledgments}
I would like to thank Markus Ackermann, Sergio Palomares-Ruiz, Karl Mannheim, Lars Mohrmann, Julia Tjus, Xiang-Yu Wang, and Nathan Whitehorn for useful discussions and comments on aspects of this work, and Lars Mohrmann for reading the manuscript.
I would like to acknowledge support from DFG grants WI 2639/3-1 and WI 2639/4-1, the ``Helmholtz Alliance for Astroparticle Physics HAP'', funded by the Initiative and Networking fund of the Helmholtz
association. I would also like to acknowledge support from the Nordita program ``News in neutrino physics'' from April 21-May 2, 2014, where parts of this work were carried out.
\vspace*{0.5cm}
|
\section{Introduction and observations}\label{s:intro}
\noindent
In current astrophysics, a marked disconnection exists between theoretical works focusing on the vicinity of supermassive black holes (SMBHs) and those studying the large-scale properties of the host (a massive elliptical, galaxy group or cluster).
The former often employ idealized, constant boundary conditions, while the latter are forced to rely on
semianalytic subgrid models. The intermediate zone, between a few 10 kpc of the host galaxy and the
sub-pc core, is however a crucial region that often determines the fueling and feeding
of the black hole.
\citeauthor{Gaspari:2013_cca} (2013; hereafter G13) aimed to fill this gap, showing that realistic turbulence, cooling, and heating affecting the hot gaseous halo, can dramatically change the accretion flow on to black holes, departing from the idealized picture of Bondi (\citeyear{Bondi:1952}) formula. As the cooling time becomes relatively low compared with the dynamical time ($t_{\rm cool}\stacksymbols{<}{\sim}{2.5}{.2}\,10\, t_{\rm ff}$), cold clouds and filaments condense out of the hot phase via nonlinear thermal instability (TI). Chaotic collisions promote the funneling of the cold phase toward the BH, leading to episodic spikes in the accretion rate up to $\sim100\times$ the Bondi rate.
For the more poetic minds, chaotic cold accretion (CCA) can be viewed as `raining on to black holes'.
Because of the simplicity of the Bondi formula, it is tempting to exploit it
in theoretical and observational studies (e.g., \citealt{Reynolds:1996, Loewenstein:2001, Churazov:2002, Baganoff:2003, DiMatteo:2003, DiMatteo:2005, Springel:2005, Allen:2006, Croton:2006,Hopkins:2006, Rafferty:2006, Cattaneo:2007, Sijacki:2007, Hardcastle:2007, Booth:2009, Cattaneo:2009, Barai:2014,Nemmen:2015}).
Knowing the black hole mass $M_\bullet$ and the gas entropy at large radii ($K\propto T/\rho^{\gamma-1}$, where $\gamma$ is the adiabatic index, $\rho$ the gas density, and $T$ the gas temperature) allows us to immediately retrieve the accretion rate via
\begin{equation}\label{e:MdotB}
\dot M_{\rm B} = \lambda\, 4\pi (GM_\bullet)^2\frac{\rho_{\infty}}{c^3_{{\rm s}, \infty}} \propto K_\infty^{-3/2},
\end{equation}
where $\lambda$ is a factor of order unity (varying as a function of $\gamma$ and the accretor radius; cf.~G13, Sec.~1).
However, Eq.~\ref{e:MdotB} can only be used if the hydrodynamic flow is adiabatic (no heating or cooling), unperturbed, spherically symmetric, with steady boundary conditions at infinity.
If one of these conditions is violated, then Bondi derivation and formula cannot be applied.
Bondi himself
warns in the first line of his 1952 abstract that
he is investigating a special accretion problem.
In the last decade, observations and simulations of gas in galaxies, groups, and clusters have proven that atmospheres are turbulent (e.g., \citealt{Norman:1999,Schuecker:2004, Dolag:2005, Kim:2005, Nagai:2007,Lau:2009, Vazza:2009, Borgani:2011,DePlaa:2012,Sanders:2013,Gaspari:2013_coma,Banerjee:2014,Gaspari:2014_coma2}; see also interstellar medium studies, \citealt{Elmegreen:2004}), while continuously shaped by the competition of cooling and heating processes (e.g., \citealt{Vikhlinin:2006, McNamara:2007,McNamara:2012,Diehl:2008b, Rasmussen:2009, Sun:2009a,Gaspari:2014_scalings}).
Tracking the realistic accretion rate and dominant mode of SMBH fueling is fundamental to understand and model the impact of AGN (`active galactic nucleus') feedback. The energy released by a SMBH can reach $10^{62}$ erg, which is able to affect the host galaxy and the surrounding group or cluster gaseous halo (e.g., \citealt{Gaspari:2011a,Gaspari:2011b,Gaspari:2012a,Gaspari:2012b}).
The AGN feedback can address many astrophysical problems, such as heating cooling flows, quenching star formation, forming buoyant bubbles and shocks, or ejecting metals and low-entropy gas at large radii (\citealt{Gaspari:2013_rev}, for a brief review). Overall, SMBHs can be seen as the thermostats regulating the baryonic structures throughout the cosmic evolution.
In recent times, it has become clear that most, if not all, massive galaxies retain a hot, X-ray emitting atmosphere
down to galaxies with stellar masses $M_\ast\sim10^{11}\ \msun$
(\citealt{Anderson:2015}; see also \citealt{Planck:2013_YM}, Fig.~4),
including spirals (e.g., \citealt{Anderson:2011_NGC1961,Dai:2012}). Therefore, cold gas condensation and accretion is expected to play central role in the evolution of SMBHs and their host galaxies, as supported by other works
(e.g., \citealt{Pizzolato:2005,Soker:2006,Soker:2009,Barai:2012}).
Although we focus in this study on a massive early-type galaxy (with inefficient star formation),
CCA is also expected to be relevant in high-redshift and disk galaxies.
These systems host large reservoir of cold gas and thus do not necessitate TI condensation from a hot halo
to ignite CCA. On top of that, cold accretion can be augmented via cosmic-web inflows, and the related large-scale disk instabilities or tidal torques (e.g., \citealt{Dekel:2009,Hopkins:2010}).
Chaotic collisions via minor mergers can also boost cold accretion (e.g., \citealt{King:2006}).
Observations of multiphase gas ($T<10^6$ K)
embedded in the hot, X-ray emitting plasma of massive halos
have exponentially grown over the last decade. These observations detect
extended ionized gas in optical
H$\alpha$+[NII] (\citealt{Heckman:1989,Macchetto:1996,Crawford:1999,McDonald:2009,McDonald:2010,McDonald:2011a,McDonald:2012_Ha,Werner:2014}; \S\ref{s:comp}),
which is typically cospatial with infrared H$_2$ (e.g., \citealt{Jaffe:2005,Hatch:2005,Wilman:2009,Wilman:2011,Oonk:2010}), molecular gas traced by CO (\citealt{Lim:2000,Edge:2001,Salome:2003,Combes:2007,Salome:2008,Hamer:2014}),
far-infrared [CII], [OI] (\citealt{Mittal:2012,Werner:2013}),
and far-ultraviolet CIV (\citealt{Sparks:2012}).
These data strongly favor the scenario of in-situ condensation via TI, as opposed to
gas stripping from infalling galaxies.
Recently, the unprecedented resolution and sensitivity of ALMA has further proven
the central role of condensed cold gas in the form of clouds, turbulent disks, and outflows
(\citealt{Combes:2013,Combes:2014,David:2014,McNamara:2014, Russell:2014}).
Remarkably, most cool-core systems with $t_{\rm cool}<1$ Gyr contain filamentary multiphase gas
(\citealt{Cavagnolo:2008,Rafferty:2008}) and central radio sources (\citealt{Mittal:2009}), indicating that
the cooling gas is the main driver of AGN feedback.
The increase of radio-loud AGN with more massive halos (\citealt{Best:2007}), which have
higher cooling rates (\citealt{Shabala:2008}) and slower rotation, further supports the fueling via CCA.
It shall be noted that molecular gas does not need to be strictly correlated with AGN bubbles, jets, or outflows (e.g., \citealt{Werner:2014}), since CCA quickly consumes the infalling cold gas. Powerful AGN feedback can also drag it out of the galaxy (e.g., \citealt{Canning:2013}).
After the initial study by G13,
many features of the newly proposed CCA remain to be tackled,
in this and future investigations.
One important open question concerns the role of rotation in being able to suppress accretion,
in combination with cooling, heating, and turbulence (see also \citealt{Proga:2003,Krumholz:2005,Krumholz:2006,Pizzolato:2010,Hobbs:2011,Narayan:2011,Li_Ostriker:2013}).
Current surveys using integral-field spectroscopy \citep{Emsellem:2007,Emsellem:2011}
show that early-type galaxies display slow or fast rotating stellar kinematics,
likely reflecting separate formation and evolution histories.
While low-luminosity galaxies are typically fast rotators,
massive galaxies (as brightest cluster or group galaxies), the focus of the present work, belong to the `slow' rotator
family (e.g., \citealt{Jimmy:2013}; \citealt{Kormendy:2009} for a review).
Recurrent gas-poor (dry) mergers (e.g., \citealt{Bois:2011}) or AGN outflows
(e.g., \citealt{Gaspari:2012b}) can both contribute in reducing angular momentum.
Slow rotators or massive ellipticals have angular momentum parameter $\lambda_{R_{\rm e}}\sim0.1$\,-\,$0.3$
(\citealt{Emsellem:2007}), corresponding to stellar rotational velocities $v_{\ast, {\rm rot}} \sim 0.1$\,-\,$0.3\, \sigma_\ast$
(\citealt{Binney:1990,Caon:2000,Pinkney:2003,Jimmy:2013}).
A notable example with significant rotation is NGC 4649.
Compared with the stellar kinematics, the rotation of the gas in observed massive ellipticals is more uncertain.
Roughly 70\% of the hot gas within the effective radius likely comes
from stellar mass loss (e.g., \citealt{Brighenti:1999a}), thereby gas rotation is expected to share
similar specific angular momentum as the local stars,
$v_{\rm rot}\sim 0.1$\,-\,$0.3\, \sigma_\ast$ (e.g., \citealt{Caon:2000}).
Evidence for gas rotation in the inner part of
the galaxy is given by the X-ray ellipticity, typically $\lta0.2$, which steadily declines below that of the stars
at $r\stacksymbols{>}{\sim}{2.5}{.2} 1$ kpc (\citealt{Diehl:2007,Brighenti:2009}). The negative slope of the X-ray ellipticity is typically moderate (\citealt{Diehl:2007}), suggesting that transport processes,
such as turbulence, are required to circularize the isophotes and to prevent the rapid spin-up of the gas due to cooling flows (e.g., \citealt{Brighenti:1996,Brighenti:2000_rot}).
Nonzero gas angular momentum can also be associated with subsonic sloshing motions and cold fronts due to infalling substructures (\citealt{Markevitch:2007,ZuHone:2013}) or with galaxy peculiar velocity
(e.g., \citealt{Zabludoff:1993}).
In this study, we perform astrophysical experiments,
dissecting each physics in a methodical way to disentangle its impact on the hot and cold
accretion flow affected by rotation in a massive early-type galaxy.
The key objective is to further unveil and understand CCA,
rather than covering any possible accretion scenario.
In \S\ref{s:init}, we review the physical and numerical ingredients of the simulations.
In \S\ref{s:adi}, we study the rotating flow in the adiabatic galactic atmosphere.
In \S\ref{s:cool}, we analyze pure cooling and the related cold thin disk.
Section \ref{s:stir} shows the impact of realistic turbulence in the rotating hot flow.
In \S\ref{s:stir_cool}, we combine cooling and stirring, while in \S\ref{s:heat} we present the complete CCA
evolution in a rotating halo, including heating and varying levels of turbulence.
In \S\ref{s:comp}, we compute synthetic H$\alpha$ images and compare them with the most recent observations
obtained with the SOAR telescope (\citealt{Werner:2014}).
In \S\ref{s:disk}, we summarize and discuss our findings in the context of the long-term AGN feedback loop.
Remarkably, CCA is unhindered as long as a key dimensionless quantity, which we define as `turbulent Taylor'\footnote{This quantity shares similarities with the classic Taylor number, which characterizes the importance of centrifugal forces relative to viscous forces, i.e., ${\rm Ta} = \omega^2 R^4/\nu^2$, where $\omega$ is the angular velocity, $R$ is the cylindrical radius, and $\nu$ is the kinematic viscosity. Notice that ${\rm Ta}\propto {\rm Ta_t}^2$.} number, remains below unity, i.e.,
\begin{equation}\label{e:Tt}
{\rm Ta_t} \equiv \frac{v_{\rm rot}}{\sigma_v} < 1,
\end{equation}
where $v_{\rm rot}$ and $\sigma_v$ are the rotational velocity and turbulent velocity dispersion of the gas, respectively.
\section[]{Physics and numerics} \label{s:init}
\noindent
The implemented physics and numerics are described in depth in G13 (Sec.~2).
Here we summarize the essential features and new ingredients, such as rotation (\S\ref{s:init1}).
\subsection{Initial conditions and rotation} \label{s:init1}
\noindent
We study the accretion flow in a typical massive elliptical galaxy (NGC 5044) embedded in the gaseous intragroup medium.
The initial temperature and gravitational potential profiles are unchanged compared with our previous work. The $T$ profile is directly derived from {\it Chandra} and {\it XMM} observations (\citealt{Gaspari:2011b}).
Since we focus on a virialized galaxy, we use a
static potential $\phi$, which is given by the central SMBH ($M_\bullet=3\times10^9$ $\msun$), the galactic stellar component ($M_{\ast}\simeq 3.4\times10^{11}$ $\msun$, with effective radius $\simeq10$ kpc), and a
dark matter Navarro-Frenk-White (\citeyear{Navarro:1996}) halo
with virial mass $M_{\rm vir} \simeq 3.6\times10^{13}$ $\msun$ and concentration $\simeq 9.5$.
The Schwarzschild and Bondi radii are $R_{\rm S}\equiv 2GM_\bullet/c^2 \simeq 3\times10^{-4}$ pc and $r_{\rm B}\equiv GM_\bullet/c_{\rm s, \infty}^2 \simeq 85$ pc, respectively (the sound speed is $c_{\rm s, \infty}\simeq390$ km s$^{-1}$ near 1 kpc). We integrate the system for a long-term evolution, $\sim200\,t_{\rm B}$, where
$t_{\rm B}\equiv r_{\rm B}/c_{\rm s, \infty}\simeq 210$ kyr.
The density profile is retrieved from hydrostatic equilibrium (neglecting the black hole).
We test the gas rotation, which induces a centrifugal force, effectively lowering the gravitational acceleration $g$ along $R\equiv (x^2 + y^2)^{1/2}$. This partially changes the stratification of the hot gaseous halo.
The new hydrostatic equilibrium can be better visualized and set up separating the two main directions, $R$ and $z$,
as follows:
\begin{equation}\label{e:HSER}
\frac{\partial}{\partial R}\ln\rho = - \left(\frac{\partial\phi}{\partial R} - \frac{v^2_{\rm rot}}{R} \right)\,c^{-2}_{\rm s,i} - \frac{\partial}{\partial R}{\ln T},
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}\label{e:HSEz}
\frac{\partial}{\partial z}\ln\rho = - \frac{\partial\phi}{\partial z}\,c^{-2}_{\rm s,i} - \frac{\partial}{\partial z}{\ln T},
\end{equation}
where $c_{\rm s,i}^2=k_{\rm b} T/\mu m_{\rm p}$ is the isothermal sound speed (the mean particle weight is $\mu\simeq0.62$).
As is customary (e.g., \citealt{Strickland:2000}), the rotational velocity of the gas is parametrized as a fraction of the circular velocity,
\begin{equation}\label{e:vrot}
v_{\rm rot}(R) \equiv e_{\rm rot}\;v_{\rm circ} (R,0) = e_{\rm rot}\,\left(R\,\frac{\partial\phi(R,0)}{\partial R}\right)^{1/2},
\end{equation}
where $e_{\rm rot}$ is a free parameter ranging between 0 and 1, the latter corresponding to full rotational support.
We first integrate the hydrostatic equilibrium along $R$ (Eq.~\ref{e:HSER}), then along the $z$ direction (Eq.~\ref{e:HSEz}), linearly interpolating the retrieved 2D matrix in the discretized 3D domain.
The central density normalization is the same as in G13. The initial profiles are shown in Figure \ref{f:pure_prof}.
As suggested by observations, the resultant rotational velocity is fairly constant with $R$ (outside the Keplerian influence region of the SMBH);
at 26 kpc $v_{\rm rot}$ is just $\sim$30\% higher than at 1 kpc. Using constant specific angular momentum at large radii ($v_{\rm rot}\propto R^{-1}$) should be thus avoided as an initial condition.
We discuss now the reference $e_{\rm rot}$.
The Jeans equation for a spherically symmetric, isotropic stellar system in equilibrium can be written as
\begin{equation}\label{e:jeans}
v^2_{\ast,\rm rot}-\sigma_{\ast,r}^2 \left(\frac{\partial\ln\rho_\ast}{\partial\ln r} + \frac{\partial\ln\sigma^2_{\ast, r}}{\partial \ln r}\right) = v^2_{\rm circ}.
\end{equation}
Neglecting rotation, the radial stellar velocity dispersion for our simulated galaxy peaks at $\sigma_{\ast, r}\simeq 230$ km s$^{-1}$ (the 3D velocity dispersion is $\sigma_\ast=\sqrt{3}\,\sigma_{\ast, r}$).
For weak rotation, the stellar velocity dispersion is a good proxy for the circular velocity.
Massive elliptical galaxies are known to have irregular velocity profiles,
at best with mild coherent rotation, in particular for the gas component (e.g., \citealt{Caon:2000}).
As discussed in \S\ref{s:intro}, gas rotation can typically reach $v_{\rm rot}\lta0.3\, \sigma_\ast$.
To maximize the impact of rotation, we thus adopt $e_{\rm rot} = 0.3$ as reference, leading to an average gas rotational velocity $v_{\rm rot}\approx100$ km s$^{-1}$
($r$\,$\sim$\,1\,-\,13 kpc).
Adopting slower rotation has negligible impact on the CCA dynamics, resembling G13 models, since $v_{\rm rot} \ll \sigma_v$. As faster rotation flattens the density profile and isophotes too much (\S\ref{s:intro}),
it is better to compare models with fixed $e_{\rm rot}$ and varying $\sigma_v$ (the cooling rate also remains the same),
albeit ${\rm Ta_t}$ defines the self-similar dynamics in both cases (\S\ref{s:heat}).
\subsection{Hydrodynamics and source terms} \label{s:init2}
\noindent
We use a modified version of the adaptive-mesh-refinement code FLASH4 (\citealt{Fryxell:2000}) to integrate the well-known equations of hydrodynamics (e.g., \citealt{Gaspari:2011b}),
adopting a very large dynamical range. The maximum resolution is $\simeq\,$0.8 pc, with radially concentric fixed meshes in cartesian coordinates (G13, Sec.~2.1).
The box width reaches 52 kpc ($\sim\,$$600\ r_{\rm B}$), an extension of almost a factor $10^5$ (see G13, for further details on resolution and convergence). Notice that using $e_{\rm rot}=0.3$ implies that the circularization radius is $r_{\rm circ} = (v_{\rm rot}/v_{\rm circ})\,r_{\rm init} = 0.3\,r_{\rm init}$. Even considering the steepening of $v_{\rm circ}$ due to the SMBH potential ($\sim$\,4000 km s$^{-1}$ at 1 pc), we can resolve circular motions down to a few 10 pc. Thermal instabilities form up to several kpc, hence we can clearly assess whether the cold gas is accreted or circularizes (see the thin disk evolution in \S\ref{s:cool}).
In addition to hydrodynamics, we add the source terms related to the black hole sink, turbulence driving, radiative cooling, and distributed heating, testing step by step the contribution of each physics to the accretion process. Using the pseudo-relativistic \citet{Paczynski:1980} BH potential, the sonic point (for adiabatic index $\gamma=5/3$) is not located at $r=0$, but at a finite distance near the pc scale. This justifies the use of a central gas sink or void region ($\rho\simeq10^{-35}$ g\,cm$^{-3}$ and $v=0$) with $\approx$\,3 cells radius (which avoids artificial overpressure bounces), since the internal region is causally disconnected (G13, Sec.~2.2).
Self-gravity is here not included; the cold clouds are not massive enough to overcome the external potential (see G13, end of Sec.~7.3 for an extended discussion).
Turbulence is implemented via a spectral forcing scheme, based on an Ornstein-Uhlenbeck random process, which drives a time-correlated and zero-mean acceleration field, reproducing experimental high-order structure functions (\citealt{Fisher:2008}).
The source of turbulence can be galaxy motions, substructure mergers, supernovae, or AGN feedback (e.g., \citealt{Norman:1999,Lau:2009,Vazza:2009,Gaspari:2012b}). We keep the subsonic turbulent velocity used in G13 as reference, $\sigma_v\sim150$ km s$^{-1}$ (3D Mach number ${\rm Ma}$\,$\sim$\,0.35), stirring the gas at injection scales $L\stacksymbols{>}{\sim}{2.5}{.2} 4$ kpc, and allowing the gas to naturally develop a Kolmogorov-like cascade.
Long-term AGN feedback simulations typically retrieve such turbulence characteristics (e.g., \citealt{Gaspari:2012b,Vazza:2012}). Mergers inject higher kinetic energy at 100s kpc; however, velocities decay through the Kolmogorov cascade and, below 10 kpc, $\sigma_v$ reaches again a few 100 km\,s$^{-1}$ (\citealt{Gaspari:2014_coma2}).
The reference turbulence model has Taylor number ${\rm Ta_t}\sim0.7$, as we use $e_{\rm rot}=0.3$.
In \S\ref{s:stir}-\ref{s:heat},
we test weaker turbulence, i.e., ${\rm Ta_t}=1.5$ and 3.
Turbulent heating (with timescale $\propto {\rm Ma}^{-2}$) is subdominant during our entire evolution.
The hot plasma cools via X-ray radiation mainly because of Bremsstrahlung at $T \stacksymbols{>}{\sim}{2.5}{.2} 10^7$ K and line emission at lower temperature. The radiative emissivity is $\mathcal{L}=n_{\rm e}n_{\rm i}\,\Lambda$, where $n_{\rm e}$ and $n_{\rm i}$ are the electron and ion number density, respectively.
The cooling function $\Lambda(T)$ is modeled following \citet{Sutherland:1993}, adopting solar metallicity.
As is customary, the cold phase has temperature floor at $10^4$ K where the abrupt recombination of hydrogen and the steepening of $\Lambda$ (with slope $\gg 2$) induces a thermally stable region (\citealt{Field:1965}).
The initial ratio of the cooling time, $t_{\rm cool}\equiv1.5\,n k_{\rm B}T/ n_{\rm e} n_{\rm i} \Lambda$, and free-fall time, $t_{\rm ff}\equiv(2r/g)^{1/2}$
has a minimum $\sim\,$4\,-\,5 near 250 pc.
As $t_{\rm cool}/t_{\rm ff}<10$ thermal instability can grow nonlinearly (\citealt{Gaspari:2012a, McCourt:2012, Sharma:2012}; for classic studies on TI see \citealt{Field:1965, Krolik:1983, Balbus:1989,Pizzolato:2005}).
AGN feedback, in conjunction with stellar heating and mergers (e.g., \citealt{Brighenti:2003,Gaspari:2011a,Gaspari:2011b,Barai:2014}), acts to maintain the cool core of galaxies, groups, and clusters in global thermal quasiequilibrium ($\stacksymbols{<}{\sim}{2.5}{.2}$\,10 percent), preserving core temperatures at $\sim$\,1/3 of the virial temperature (e.g., \citealt{Vikhlinin:2006, Diehl:2008b, Rasmussen:2009, Sun:2009a}).
We do not model AGN outflows or jets as in \citet{Gaspari:2012a,Gaspari:2012b}, since this is computationally unfeasible.
In the final models (\S\ref{s:heat}), we inject distributed heating, mimicking a post-outburst phase, when the feedback heating has been properly deposited (\citealt{Gaspari:2012a}, Fig.~9). Computationally, we set the heating rate (per unit volume) to be equal to the average radiative emissivity in finite radial shells at each timestep, $\mathcal{H}\approx\langle\mathcal{L}\rangle$.
\section[]{Adiabatic accretion} \label{s:adi}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\subfigure{\includegraphics[scale=0.31]{pure_BHAR_msunyr.pdf}}
\subfigure{\includegraphics[scale=0.31]{pure_BHAR_Bondi_e015_e03.pdf}}
\caption{Adiabatic rotating accretion: evolution of the accretion rate (1 Myr average).
Top: Accretion rate in $\msun$ yr$^{-1}$ units, for the rotating ($e_{\rm rot} = 0.3$; solid) and nonrotating atmosphere (dot-dashed; see G13). Bottom: Accretion rate normalized to the runtime Bondi rate
(averaged over $r\approx\,$1-2 kpc as in large-scale simulations) for the reference rotation $e_{\rm rot} = 0.3$ (solid) and $e_{\rm rot}=0.15$ (dotted).
The central rotational barrier forming within $r_{\rm B}$
suppresses accretion by a factor $\sim$\,3
compared with the spherically symmetric accretion flow.}
\label{f:pure_mdot}
\end{figure}
\noindent
Following the procedure presented in G13, we test step by step the impact of each physical process.
We begin analyzing the model purely based on classic hydrodynamics.
No cooling, heating, or turbulence is affecting the accretion flow. The adiabatic flow shares
tight connection with \citet{Bondi:1952} accretion, albeit the spherical symmetry is broken by the initial gas rotation
($e_{\rm rot} = 0.3$, i.e., $v_{\rm rot}\approx100$ km s$^{-1}$; see \S\ref{s:init1}).
\subsection{Accretion rate} \label{s:adi_mdot}
\noindent
In Fig.~\ref{f:pure_mdot}, we show the main diagnostic plot: the temporal evolution of the accretion rate during 40 Myr ($\sim$\,200$\,t_{\rm B}$).
The impact of rotation (solid line; top) is to suppress the accretion rate by a factor $\sim$\,3 compared with the nonrotating atmosphere (dashed line; Sec.~3.1 in G13), reaching $\dot M_\bullet\simeq0.025$ $\msun$ yr$^{-1}$.
The average rate is slightly decreasing due to the presence of the galactic gradients, progressively altering the `boundary' conditions at a few $r_{\rm B}$ ($\dot M_{\rm B}\propto K_\infty^{-3/2}$; the Bondi boundary conditions at infinity have no meaning in stratified atmospheres).
Beside such minor trend, the accretion rate is solely stifled by the central rotationally-supported barrier,
reaching statistical steady state in a few 10 $t_{\rm B}$.
In the bottom panel (Fig.~\ref{f:pure_mdot}), the accretion rate is normalized to the Bondi rate (Eq.~\ref{e:MdotB}), averaged over $r\approx\,$1$\,$-$\,$2 kpc, as customarily employed in large-scale or cosmological simulations.
Comparing the reference run with $e_{\rm rot}=0.3$ (solid) and the model with $e_{\rm rot}=0.15$ (dotted) indicates that
the final accretion rate is weakly lowered with increasing rotation.
Interestingly, adopting the Bondi formula at large radii predicts a fairly realistic accretion rate,
within a factor $\stacksymbols{<}{\sim}{2.5}{.2}$\,2.
Therefore, boosting the Bondi accretion rate by a large factor ($\sim\,$100; e.g., \citealt{DiMatteo:2005,Booth:2009}) is not required, even if $r_{\rm B}$ is under-resolved, at least in the regime of a hot and rotating atmosphere (a similar conclusion applies in the presence of turbulence, but not if cooling is dominant).
\subsection{Dynamics} \label{s:adi_dyn}
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\subfigure{\includegraphics[scale=0.45]{pure_2kpc_T.pdf}}
\caption{Adiabatic accretion with $e_{\rm rot}=0.3$: $x$-$y$ rotational plane cross-section (2 kpc$^2$) of the mass-weighted temperature at final time; the normalization of the velocity field is $2000$ km s$^{-1}$ (such unit arrow is 1/8 of the image width). The gas progressively circularizes toward the equatorial plane, stifling accretion. Within the Bondi radius, the pressure-supported toroidal structure is variable, experiencing recurrent mild expansions and contractions, thus forming the pinwheel configuration.
}
\label{f:pure_T}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\subfigure{\includegraphics[scale=0.28]{pure_prof_ne.pdf}}
\subfigure{\includegraphics[scale=0.28]{pure_prof_T.pdf}}
\caption{Adiabatic accretion with $e_{\rm rot}=0.3$: evolution of the mass-weighted electron density (top; $n_e\simeq \rho/1.93\times10^{-24}$ cm$^{-3}$) and temperature (bottom) radial profiles, sampled every 1 Myr (from dark blue to cyan). The cuspy profiles are similar to the classic Bondi solution (G13), smoothly joining the galactic gradients at large $r$.}
\label{f:pure_prof}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\subfigure{\includegraphics[scale=0.4]{dM_dlz_pure.pdf}}
\caption{Adiabatic accretion with $e_{\rm rot}=0.3$: mass `probability' distribution function (PDF) per bin of specific angular momentum along the rotation axis $z$ ($M_\odot$ per kpc km s$^{-1}$), for the gas within $r<8$ kpc. The color coding is the same as for the radial profiles (Fig.~\ref{f:pure_prof}), covering 40 Myr. With no additional physics, the system overall preserves the initial angular momentum distribution (coherent counter-clockwise rotation).
}
\label{f:pure_lz}
\end{figure}
\noindent
The suppression of accretion is related to the formation of a central toroidal structure, where gas with relatively high angular momentum circularizes, further blocking part of the inflow solid angle.
The hot gas can only accrete along the polar funnel perpendicular to the equatorial ($x$-$y$) plane.
The circulation within the toroidal region is variable, as reflected by the mild oscillations in $\dot M_\bullet$.
The configuration is partially unstable: the polar flow is inflowing, while the equatorial region is partially outflowing or circulating, leading to recurrent expansions and contractions (Fig.~\ref{f:pure_T}).
The `pinwheel' and toroidal configuration, as well as the suppression of the accretion rate,
are consistent with the results of \citet{Proga:2003} and \citet{Krumholz:2005},
although our flow is embedded in galactic gradients. For low or moderate vorticity as in our typical system (hot plasma in most galaxies has subsonic and sub-Keplerian velocities\footnote{If the gas velocities are super Keplerian near $r_{\rm B}$, accretion is driven by the action of shock dissipation allowing the gas to become bound; in this regime, the higher the vorticity, the lower $\dot M_\bullet$, typically with a very small and stable torus
(cf.~\citealt{Krumholz:2005}).}),
the accretion rate is weakly dependent on the initial angular momentum (Fig.~\ref{f:pure_mdot}, bottom), since the suppression in the final stage is related to the geometrically thick toroidal structure, which eventually builds up with similar shape.
Its typical radius is the BH influence radius $\sim r_{\rm B}$ with height $H\sim r_{B}$ -- for a Keplerian disk $H=c_{\rm s}/\omega=(r^3/r_{\rm B})^{1/2}$.
The polar funnel can be thus approximated as a cone with half-opening angle $\theta\sim \pi/4$, allowing gas accretion within a solid angle $\Omega=2\pi(1-\cos\theta)\simeq1.84$. Considering the two cones, the funnel has $\Omega\sim1/3$ of the spherical solid angle, broadly consistent with the simulated $\dot M_\bullet$ suppression (Fig.~\ref{f:pure_mdot}, top).
\subsection{Radial profiles and $l_z$ distribution} \label{s:adi_prof_pdf}
\noindent
In Fig.~\ref{f:pure_prof}, we show the mass-weighted radial profiles of electron gas density $n_{\rm e}$ (top) and temperature $T_{\rm m}$ (bottom), sampled every 1 Myr (dark blue to cyan color).
The cuspy profiles are similar to the classic Bondi solution (e.g., $T\propto r^{-1}$; G13), smoothly joining the galactic gradients at large radii. The slight central $n_{\rm e}$ decrease partly occurs
due to the variable boundary conditions near $r_{\rm B}$, and partly due to rotation.
Since the hot flow is mainly dominated by pressure, the toroidal region has large height ($H=c_{\rm s}/\omega$)
and is smooth, without a net demarcation line as in the radiative run forming a cold thin disk (\S\ref{s:cool}).
The X-ray emission-weighted profiles (not shown) are not dissimilar because of the absence of the cold phase. Therefore, X-ray observations would see peaked gas temperature in the nucleus of the galaxy, if the hot mode is the currently dominant regime of accretion (typically occurring after AGN feedback has overheated the system; see \S\ref{s:disk}).
In Fig.~\ref{f:pure_lz}, we present another important diagnostic tool: the mass distribution function (PDF) of specific angular momentum along the rotation axis $l_z$, during the 40 Myr evolution. Since the model has no heating, cooling, or turbulence, and the accretion is substantially inhibited, the system overall conserves the angular momentum distribution. Notice that the PDF of $l_z$ has only positive values, the mark of coherent counter-clockwise rotation (the right tail is decreasing since we consider the gas within $r<8$ kpc).
Reshaping the angular momentum distribution via other physical processes is crucial to trigger boosted accretion.
\section[]{Accretion with cooling} \label{s:cool}
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\subfigure{\includegraphics[scale=0.31]{cool_BHAR_msunyr.pdf}}
\subfigure{\includegraphics[scale=0.31]{cool_BHAR_Bondi.pdf}}
\end{center}
\caption{Accretion with cooling and $e_{\rm rot} = 0.3$ (blue): evolution of the accretion rate (physical and normalized to the kpc-scale, runtime Bondi rate -- top and bottom panel, respectively).
The dashed line is the average cooling rate (related to the gas with $T<10^5$ K). Solid black line is the adiabatic rotating model (\S\ref{s:adi}).
Despite the substantial cooling rates, $\dot M_{\rm cool}\sim 15\ \msun$ yr$^{-1}$, the final accretion rate is two orders of magnitude lower because of the formation of a rotationally-supported thin disk. }
\label{f:cool_mdot}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\subfigure{\includegraphics[scale=0.432]{cool_2kpc_T_z_A.pdf}}
\subfigure{\includegraphics[scale=0.432]{cool_2kpc_T_x_B.pdf}}
\caption{Accretion with cooling and $e_{\rm rot} = 0.3$: temperature cross-sections (2x2 kpc$^2$) through $z=0$ (top) and $x=0$ (bottom), after 2 and 4 $t_{\rm cool}$, respectively.
The velocity field normalization is $6000$ km s$^{-1}$ (unit arrow is 1/8 of the image width). The maps show the formation of a symmetric cold thin disk, which quickly condenses out of the hot phase and inhibits accretion.}
\label{f:cool_T}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\subfigure{\includegraphics[scale=0.28]{cool_prof_ne.pdf}}
\subfigure{\includegraphics[scale=0.28]{cool_prof_T.pdf}}
\subfigure{\includegraphics[scale=0.28]{cool_prof_T_ew.pdf}}
\end{center}
\caption{Accretion with cooling and $e_{\rm rot} = 0.3$: 3D mass- and emission-weighted radial profiles of density and temperature (cf.~Fig.~\ref{f:pure_prof}). The $T_{\rm ew}$ profile has X-ray threshold of 0.3 keV and is computed in larger radial bins (emulating a {\it Chandra} observation). The cold thin disk keeps growing via condensation.
The X-ray temperature is overall insensitive to the presence of the cold disk.
\label{f:cool_prof}}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\subfigure{\includegraphics[scale=0.4]{dM_dlz_cool.pdf}}
\caption{Accretion with cooling and $e_{\rm rot} = 0.3$: mass PDF per bin of specific angular momentum $l_z$, for the cold phase (full evolution from blue to cyan lines). Cold gas is related to $T<10^5$\,K.
The PDF of the hot phase (not shown) is analogous to that in Fig.~\ref{f:pure_lz}, albeit shifting by $\sim\,$15 percent to higher normalization and $l_z$. The cold phase emerges out of this distribution, adding during time higher $l_z$ gas, and thus widening the PDF.
}
\label{f:cool_lz}
\end{figure}
\noindent
In the next model, the reference rotating accretion flow experiences cooling due to radiation (mainly Bremsstrahlung in the X-ray band and line cooling below 1 keV) with emissivity $\mathcal{L}= n_{\rm e}n_{\rm i}\,\Lambda(T)$.
No source of heating or turbulence affects the dynamics.
\subsection[]{Accretion rate} \label{s:cool_mdot}
\noindent
The central result is the decoupling between the accretion rate and the cooling rate (Fig.~\ref{f:cool_mdot}, top), no more closely tracking each other as in the spherically symmetric cooling flow (G13; Sec.~4).
The dense gas quickly loses pressure support via radiative emission (initial minimum $t_{\rm cool}$ is $\approx$\,8 Myr)
and forms a rotationally-supported thin disk.
The fast condensation affects first the inner and denser gas with lower angular momentum,
which can be quickly accreted ($\dot M_\bullet\simeq0.5\ \msun\ {\rm yr^{-1}}$).
After 10 Myr, the cold phase arises from the hot gas with high angular momentum. Falling from $r> r_{\rm B}$ toward the center, this cooling gas rapidly increases the rotational velocity and circularizes, damping the accretion rate.
At final time, $\dot M_\bullet\simeq0.15\ \msun\ {\rm yr^{-1}}$ (blue) and the cooling rate\footnote{The cooling rate is computed as $\Delta M_{\rm cold}/\Delta t$, where $M_{\rm cold}$ is the cold gas mass in the box related to gas with $T<10^5$\, K, not yet sinked by the BH.}
is $\dot M_{\rm cool}\simeq15\ \msun\ {\rm yr^{-1}}$ (dashed), a difference of two orders of magnitude.
The normalized accretion rate is also low, roughly four times the Bondi rate at the kpc scale.
Compared with the adiabatic run (solid black), the accretion rate is about $6\times$ higher, since the weakened pressure support increases the effective inflow, in particular along the polar region.
The presence of a condensing hot halo thus alters the classic thin disk picture,
where the cold gas is the only entity.
\subsection[]{Dynamics} \label{s:cool_dyn}
\noindent
Figure \ref{f:cool_T} shows the formation of the symmetric thin disk in more detail.
The hot gas loses internal energy and thus pressure, but it is still balanced by rotation along $R$, leading to the infall toward the direction perpendicular to the $x$-$y$ plane, where the low-entropy gas finds a new rotational equilibrium. Because of the multiphase stratification and transonic inflow, the disk experiences shocks (see, e.g., \citealt{Tejeda:2012})
and hydrodynamical instabilities, such as Kelvin-Helmoltz and Rayleigh-Taylor.
The overall picture is very different from a spherically symmetric cooling flow (G13), since $\dot M_\bullet \ll \dot M_{\rm cool}$. Along the polar funnel, the transonic flow is not inhibited by rotation and gas can quickly accrete.
Massive galaxies which are dominated by cooling (due to weak or no heating)
are thus expected to show a rotationally supported cold disk, arising from the fast spin-up of the gas.
The X-ray ellipticity greater than that of the stellar component in the inner 1 kpc may be a sign of this phenomenon
(e.g., NGC 4649), albeit moderate turbulence is still required to avoid markedly flat isophotes inconsistent with observations (\citealt{Diehl:2007}; see also \citealt{Brighenti:2000_rot}).
\subsection[]{Radial profiles and $l_z$ distribution} \label{s:cool_prof}
\noindent
The mass-weighted radial profiles in Fig.~\ref{f:cool_prof} reveal the presence of the highly dense ($10^{3}$ cm$^{-3}$) and cold thin disk, which has condensed out of the hot atmosphere.
At variance with $T_{\rm m}$,
the X-ray temperature ($T$ weighted by X-ray emissivity using {\it Chandra} sensitivity; bottom panel)
only has a mild decline from large to 1 kpc radius, where it starts to stabilize around $10^7$ K.
The cold disk keeps growing through time because of the continuous condensation of higher angular momentum gas.
The rotating structure is thin, with slightly expanding dense lobes where the warm gas is still condensing
($H=c_{\rm s}/\omega$; Fig.~\ref{f:cool_T}), which can be tracked in the radial profiles.
The disk extends to $\sim\,$1 kpc after 40 Myr of evolution.
Its growth diminishes as the cooling rate saturates
(Fig.~\ref{f:cool_mdot}).
During periods of weak heating and turbulence, this could be a common regime,
facilitating the development of
the rotating cold disks observed in many massive elliptical galaxies (e.g., NGC 6868, NGC 7049, and NGC 4261 -- \citealt{Werner:2014}; see also
\citealt{Mathews:2003,Young:2011,Alatalo:2013}).
The retrieved size of the disk (e.g., via ALMA or {\it Herschel}) may point out how long the cooling-dominated phase has lasted, setting constraints on the AGN feedback duty cycle
(albeit we note that a clumpy rotational structure can be present during CCA and significant feedback; \S\ref{s:heat}).
Figure \ref{f:cool_lz} shows the $l_z$ distribution of the cold phase.
The PDF of the hot phase is analogous to that in Fig.~\ref{f:pure_lz}, shifting by $\sim\,$15 percent to higher normalization and $l_z$ due to the large-scale inflow of gas losing pressure. The cold phase emerges out of the hot gas distribution, progressively accumulating higher $l_z$ gas coming from larger radii, and thus widening the PDF while the disk grows (blue to cyan). As in the previous adiabatic run, $l_z$ is only positive, the mark of coherent rotation, albeit now in the form of a cold thin disk. Again, such a distribution of angular momentum implies substantially suppressed $\dot M_\bullet$.
\section[]{Adiabatic accretion with turbulence} \label{s:stir}
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\subfigure{\includegraphics[scale=0.31]{stir_pure_BHAR_msunyr_Mfour.pdf}}
\end{center}
\caption{Adiabatic accretion with subsonic turbulence and $e_{\rm rot}=0.3$ (brown: ${\rm Ma}$\,$\sim$\,0.35, i.e., ${\rm Ta_t}$\,$\sim$\,0.75; orange: 1/4 lower Mach number, i.e., ${\rm Ta_t}$\,$\sim$\,3): evolution of the accretion rate.
The accretion rate is suppressed by a factor $\sim\,$3 compared with the nonrotating model (dot-dashed), as in the purely rotating run (solid black; \S\ref{s:adi}), since turbulence still induces local (but not global) vorticity. The chaotic eddies generate however higher variability, as long as ${\rm Ta_t < 1}$. In the opposite regime, rotation drives the dynamics. }
\label{f:stir_mdot}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\subfigure{\includegraphics[scale=0.45]{stir_pure_2kpc_T.pdf}}
\end{center}
\caption{Adiabatic accretion with subsonic turbulence (reference ${\rm Ma}$\,$\sim$\,0.35) and $e_{\rm rot}=0.3$: mid-plane temperature cut (cf.~Fig.~\ref{f:pure_T}). The equatorial plane does not display coherent rotation, since the gas cannot properly circularize in the presence of significant turbulence ($\sigma_v > v_{\rm rot}$).
The central vortical motions stifle again accretion.
\label{f:stir_T}}
\end{figure}
\noindent
Cosmic systems are rarely (if ever) in perfect hydrostatic equilibrium. The hot gas in galaxies, groups, and clusters is continuously stirred by the action of AGN, supernovae feedback, galaxy motions, and mergers.
We thus probe the effect of turbulence on the rotating and adiabatic flow, testing intrinsic\footnote{The rotational velocity can be cleanly removed calculating the mean in cylindrical coordinates, $v_{\rm rot} = -v_x \,y/R + v_y\, x/R$.} velocity dispersion in the range of $\sigma_v$\,$\sim$\,40\,-\,150 km s$^{-1}$.
\subsection[]{Accretion rate and dynamics} \label{s:stir_mdot}
\noindent
Figure \ref{f:stir_mdot} shows the evolution of the accretion rate for the reference ${\rm Ma}$\,$\sim$\,0.35 (brown)
and for 1/4 lower Mach number (${\rm Ta_t}\sim3$; orange). In both runs, the suppression of $\dot M_\bullet$ is $\sim\,$1/3 compared with the nonrotating Bondi flow (dashed line; see also G13). Remarkably, the
suppression is analogous to that retrieved in the purely rotating run (black; \S\ref{s:adi}).
While turbulence with $\sigma_v > v_{\rm rot}$ is able to disrupt the coherent rotation and to prevent the full circularization, its basic action is to transport momentum.
No total angular momentum is created, however, turbulence induces prograde or retrograde vorticity {\it locally} (Fig.~\ref{f:stir_lz}) via eddies generated during the Kolmogorov cascade. The (subsonic) turbulent accretion flow is thus analogous to a gradually varying rotating flow near the accretor (Fig.~\ref{f:stir_T}).
As discussed in $\S\ref{s:adi}$, for a pressure-supported and slowly rotating flow, the geometric funnel in which the gas can accrete is roughly invariant, linked to a suppression $\sim\,$1/3. The central spiraling motion is enhanced by the baroclinic instability because of the atmosphere stratification (\citealt{Krumholz:2006}). For subsonic turbulence, local vorticity is more relevant than the gas bulk motion relative to the accretor.
For reference ${\rm Ma}$\,$\sim$\,0.35, the $\dot M_\bullet$ suppression related to the bulk motion (\citealt{Bondi:1944}) is just $\propto (1+M^2)^{-3/2}\simeq 0.84$.
A difference between the turbulent run and the purely rotating, adiabatic flow is
the increased $\dot M_\bullet$ variability.
The turbulent eddies randomly have low or high angular momentum, generating the peaks and valleys
observed in the accretion rate, which oscillate by a factor of $\sim\,$2.
The key role of the local eddy is remarked by the turbulent run with no rotation presented in G13 (Sec.~6),
showing similarly suppressed $\dot M_\bullet$.
As ${\rm Ta_t > 1}$ (Fig.~\ref{f:stir_mdot}; orange), the flow is driven by coherent rotation, with only minor turbulent perturbations, thereby reverting to the evolution described in $\S\ref{s:adi}$.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\subfigure{\includegraphics[scale=0.4]{dM_dlz_stir_M.pdf}}
\subfigure{\includegraphics[scale=0.4]{dM_dlz_stir_Mfour.pdf}}
\caption{Adiabatic accretion with subsonic turbulence (top: ${\rm Ma}$\,$\sim$\,0.35; bottom: 1/4 lower Mach number, i.e., ${\rm Ta_t}$\,$\sim$\,3) and $e_{\rm rot} = 0.3$: mass PDF per bin of specific angular momentum $l_z$, for the gas within $r<8$ kpc (cf.~Fig.~\ref{f:pure_lz}).
If ${\rm Ta_t < 1}$, turbulence widens the PDF, inducing both retrograde and prograde motions.
In the opposite regime, ${\rm Ta_t > 1}$, turbulence is too weak to induce retrograde motions: the underlying counter-clockwise rotation remains intact overall, with minor fluctuations superimposed.
}
\label{f:stir_lz}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\subfigure{\includegraphics[scale=0.28]{stir_pure_prof_ne.pdf}}
\subfigure{\includegraphics[scale=0.28]{stir_pure_prof_T.pdf}}
\end{center}
\caption{Adiabatic accretion with subsonic turbulence (${\rm Ma}$\,$\sim$\,0.35) and $e_{\rm rot}=0.3$: mass-weighted profiles of density and temperature (cf.~Fig.~\ref{f:pure_prof}). The profiles are cuspy,
as in the classic Bondi flow, albeit
becoming progressively shallower because of turbulent diffusion (dissipational heating is negligible, as indicated by the large-scale $T$ profile).
\label{f:stir_prof} }
\end{figure}
\subsection[]{Distribution of $l_z$ and radial profiles} \label{s:stir_prof}
\noindent
The importance of the threshold ${\rm Ta_t} \equiv v_{\rm rot}/\sigma_v \sim 1$ can be better appreciated in the distribution of angular momentum (Fig.~\ref{f:stir_lz}). If ${\rm Ta_t} < 1$ (top), stirring
can substantially reshape PDF($l_z$).
Turbulence can be approximated as a diffusion process (with diffusivity $\sim\,$$\sigma_v L$; \citealt{Gaspari:2013_coma}), spreading linear and thus\footnote{The radial displacement has uniformly random distribution.} angular momentum (an effective viscosity).
The initially peaked and solely positive $l_z$ distribution is progressively morphed into
a broader PDF including negative values, with variance $\propto \sigma_v$.
The PDF is skewed toward the right tail because of the initial rotation.
In the $\sigma_v \gg v_{\rm rot}$ regime, the PDF would be symmetric around zero.
The end product of real viscosity is homogeneous velocity (Dirac delta PDF), while the steady state of turbulence is always local perturbations ($\propto\,\sigma_v$). Turbulent diffusion not only acts on momentum, but also on $K$, $\rho$, $T$, as shown by the gradually shallower radial profiles (Fig.~\ref{f:stir_prof}), and by the power spectrum analysis presented in \citet{Gaspari:2014_coma2}. The fact that turbulence mimics a transport mechanism, while
inducing significant local fluctuations,
is a key element to develop chaotic cold accretion (\S\ref{s:heat}).
The broadening of the angular momentum distribution alone does not stimulate boosted accretion.
In contrast to the cold clouds experiencing major inelastic collisions, the hot diffuse halo is in global hydrostatic equilibrium
because of the pressure support, thereby the subsonic eddies do not mostly cancel angular momentum.
In the opposite regime ${\rm Ta_t} > 1$ (Fig.~\ref{f:stir_lz}, bottom), turbulence is too weak to induce retrograde motions: the underlying counter-clockwise $l_z$ distribution overall remains intact and the coherent rotation drives the dynamics.
The reduced effective diffusivity is also evident in the radial profiles (not shown), where the central density decreases only to $n_{\rm e}\simeq1.5$ cm$^{-3}$.
\section[]{Accretion with cooling and turbulence} \label{s:stir_cool}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\subfigure{\includegraphics[scale=0.45]{stir_cool_2kpc_T.pdf}}
\caption{Accretion with cooling, turbulence (${\rm Ma}$\,$\sim$\,0.35), and $e_{\rm rot} = 0.3$: mid-plane $T_{\rm m}$ cross-section through $z=0$ (final time). Without heating, the system experiences a massive CCA flow. Extended cold filaments and clouds condense out of the hot phase via TI, and through recurrent chaotic collisions are quickly accreted by the BH.
No steady thin disk can be formed. }
\label{f:stir_cool_T}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure
\center
\subfigure{\includegraphics[scale=0.31]{stir_cool_BHAR_msunyr_inst.pdf}}
\subfigure{\includegraphics[scale=0.31]{stir_cool_BHAR_Bondi.pdf}}
\caption{Accretion with cooling, turbulence (${\rm Ma}$\,$\sim$\,0.35), and $e_{\rm rot} = 0.3$ (green): evolution of the physical and normalized accretion rate (cf.~Fig.~\ref{f:cool_mdot}; the average of $\dot{M}_\bullet$ in the top panel has 0.1 Myr step).
The dashed line is the average cooling rate (1 Myr step).
The solid black line is the adiabatic rotating model (\S\ref{s:adi}).
Chaotic cold accretion drives the dynamics as long as ${\rm Ta < 1}$.
Recurrent collisions in the cold phase cancel angular momentum and boost the accretion rate up to two orders of magnitude with respect to the Bondi rate. The accretion rate is linearly tied to $\dot M_{\rm cool}$ again. }
\label{f:stir_cool_mdot}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\subfigure{\includegraphics[scale=0.4]{dM_dlz_stir_cool.pdf}}
\caption{Accretion with cooling, turbulence (${\rm Ma}$\,$\sim$\,0.35), and $e_{\rm rot} = 0.3$: mass PDF per bin of specific angular momentum $l_z$, for the cold phase (the hot phase has PDF analogous to Fig.~\ref{f:stir_lz}, top). At variance with the purely radiative run, the cold phase randomly condenses out of a broad $l_z$ distribution, including both prograde and retrograde motions. This permits frequent major collisions, canceling angular momentum. The mass of unaccreted cold gas tends to significantly rise with time due to the unheated cooling flow. }
\label{f:stir_cool_lz}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure
\begin{center}
\subfigure{\includegraphics[scale=0.28]{stir_cool_prof_ne.pdf}}
\subfigure{\includegraphics[scale=0.28]{stir_cool_prof_T.pdf}}
\subfigure{\includegraphics[scale=0.28]{stir_cool_prof_T_ew.pdf}}
\end{center}
\caption{Accretion with cooling, turbulence (${\rm Ma}$\,$\sim$\,0.35), and $e_{\rm rot} = 0.3$: mass-- and emission--weighted radial profiles of density and temperature (cf.~Fig.~\ref{f:cool_prof}). The profiles show the condensation of warm gas out of the hot phase via TI up to several kpc. The X-ray temperature is flat, with no cuspy core, which is a characteristic mark of cold accretion. }
\label{f:stir_cool_prof}
\end{figure}
\noindent
In the next model, we turn on radiative cooling, while the reference subsonic turbulence (${\rm Ma}$\,$\sim$\,0.35) stirs the hot atmosphere.
The development of a clumpy multiphase medium completely changes the behavior of accretion.
This simulation also warns how mild chaotic motions can profoundly modify the picture presented by analytic models (e.g., the classic thin disk).
\subsection[]{Dynamics} \label{s:stir_cool_dyn}
\noindent
In Fig.~\ref{f:stir_cool_T}, the temperature map reveals the absence of major coherent motions.
No source of heating is present, nevertheless the perturbations seeded by subsonic turbulence grow nonlinear via thermal instability (TI) and produce extended multiphase structures (see G13 and \citealt{McCourt:2012} for further discussions on the formed TI).
The dynamics of the gas is chaotic
because of high sensitivity of the long-term dynamics on local TI.
The recurrent chaotic collisions
between the condensed clouds, filaments, and a clumpy torus in the inner region
promote the cancellation of angular momentum (see also \citealt{Nayakshin:2007,Pizzolato:2010})
boosting the accretion rate.
On top of turbulent diffusion,
collisions promote further disruption of coherent motions and rotating structures.
No steady thin disk can be formed (compare the evolution with that in \S\ref{s:cool}), although at later times a volatile and clumpy cold torus emerges out of the residual gas with large $l_z$ due to incomplete cancellation (\S\ref{s:stir_cool_prof}).
The multiphase gas halo in galaxies should be thus treated as
a collisional, hydrodynamical system. The cold phase is not well described by ballistic orbits.
The collisions are frequent in the inner 1 kpc core (with Myr variability), as major filaments have lengths
comparable to this radius, initiating further interactions between cold elements.
\subsection[]{Accretion rate}\label{s:stir_cool_mdot}
\noindent
Chaotic cold accretion drives the dynamics, in a similar manner as found in G13 (as long as
${\rm Ta_t} < 1$; see next \S\ref{s:heat}).
The cold clouds condense out of the stirred hot phase,
thereby experiencing chaotic streamlines.
The rapid prograde versus retrograde collisions cancel angular momentum, and consequently boost the accretion rate up to two orders of magnitude with respect to the kpc-scale Bondi rate (Fig.~\ref{f:stir_cool_mdot}, bottom). Compared with the adiabatic run (either turbulent or rotating; solid black, top), the increase is almost a factor $10^{3}$.
At variance with the thin disk evolution (\S\ref{s:cool}), the accretion rate is linearly tied to $\dot M_{\rm cool}$ (dashed), albeit experiencing substantial chaotic variability up to $\sim\,$1 dex.
The cooling rate saturates slightly faster around $15\ \msun$ yr$^{-1}$ because of the turbulent mixing of entropy.
At $t>25$ Myr (top), the residual cold gas with high $l_z>0$ induces deeper $\dot M_\bullet$ valleys (via a clumpy torus).
This regime with no heating produces unrealistically high cooling rates and condensation.
The X-ray spectra indicate $\dot M_{\rm cool}$ lower by at least an order of magnitude (e.g., \citealt{Tamura:2003, Peterson:2006} for a review). Nevertheless, it is instructive to understand chaotic cold accretion embedded in a pure cooling flow.
Some systems may experience a delayed AGN feedback (in particular at high redshift), enabling a massive CCA for a transient time (e.g., Phoenix cluster; \citealt{McDonald:2012_Phoenix_HST}).
\subsection[]{Distribution of $l_z$ and radial profiles} \label{s:stir_cool_prof}
\noindent
At variance with the purely radiative run, the cold phase randomly condenses out of the $l_z$ distribution shown in Fig.~\ref{f:stir_lz} (top), i.e., the cold clouds and filaments can be generated with both prograde and retrograde motions.
Initially, the inner gas with lower $l_z$ cools faster, growing a modest PDF (dark blue line).
After 10 Myr, the wings of the broader PDF start to experience significant recurrent narrowing, as a result of violent collisions canceling angular momentum (occurring in a period of a few Myr).
However, the mass of unaccreted cold gas tends to substantially rise with time (leading to a PDF with larger width and normalization), progressively obfuscating the previous effect.
In the subsequent heated run (Fig.~\ref{f:heat_lz}), it will be easier to isolate the action of collisions, lacking the formation of a massive cooling flow.
An unbalance toward the right wing ($l_z >200$ kpc km s$^{-1}$) persists because of the initial halo rotation, implying that a prograde (though clumpy) torus-like structure is a recurrent phenomenon. As ${\rm Ta_t} \ll 1$, the role of rotation becomes negligible and the prograde bias disappears (G13). Conversely, as ${\rm Ta_t} > 3$, the cold phase can only be generated with positive $l_z$ (Fig.~\ref{f:stir_lz}, bottom) and the accretion follows that of the coherent thin disk (\S\ref{s:cool}).
In Fig.~\ref{f:stir_cool_prof}, the radial profiles are analogous to that found in G13, showing the massive condensation of warm or cold gas out of the hot phase via thermal instability, and the fluctuations imparted by turbulence.
After full condensation, the cold gas typically populates the region within 3 kpc.
Maximum density is slightly higher compared with G13 ($n_{\rm e}\sim10^4$ cm$^{-3}$), since the initial hydrostatic atmosphere has slightly shallower density gradient.
The core X-ray temperature is flat, a characteristic mark of cold accretion dominating over the hot mode.
\section[]{Accretion with heating, cooling, and turbulence: chaotic cold accretion (CCA)} \label{s:heat}
\noindent
In the last set of models, we focus on the typical state of the hot plasma in a massive galaxy, group, or cluster.
The cooling flow is now quenched via heating (\S\ref{s:init2})
by 10\,-\,20 fold, in agreement with {\it XMM-Newton} spectral data (\citealt{Tamura:2003, Peterson:2006}).
The source of heating is mainly attributed to AGN feedback, albeit supernovae, thermal conduction, and mergers
can possibly contribute.
\subsection[]{Accretion rate} \label{s:heat_acc}
\noindent
The major result is that, even in the presence of significant rotation ($v_{\rm rot}\approx100$ km s$^{-1}$), the accretion
rate is boosted up to $100\times$ the Bondi rate (Fig.~\ref{f:heat_mdot}, red), which is consistent with the $e_{\rm rot}=0$ model presented in G13 (Sec.~7).
The peaks in the accretion rate are comparable to the quenched cooling rate, $\dot M_{\rm cool}\sim1\ \msun\,{\rm yr}^{-1}$ (dashed).\footnote{Star formation is observed to be inefficient in massive elliptical galaxies, $\stacksymbols{<}{\sim}{2.5}{.2}\,$1 percent of the pure cooling rate (\citealt{McDonald:2014}).}
Adopting $\dot M_\bullet\sim\dot M_{\rm cool}$ is an effective subgrid accretion model for large-scale simulations and analytic calculations.
Initially, accretion is driven by the rotating hot flow.
After 10 Myr,
chaotic cold accretion drives the dynamics.
At variance with the runs in \S\ref{s:stir_cool}, the presence of heating prevents the formation of a catastrophic cooling flow: the average $\dot M_\bullet$ and $\dot M_{\rm cool}$ do not increase with time.
In the regions where $t_{\rm cool}/t_{\rm ff}<10$ (between $r\sim$\,100 pc and several kpc),
thermal instability grows nonlinearly (see also \citealt{Gaspari:2012a}), the cold gas condenses out of the hot phase, and the chaotic collisions promote cancellation of angular momentum (\S\ref{s:heat_dyn}).
Multiwavelength observations support the TI and CCA scenario,
detecting extended multiphase gas in the core of many massive galaxies which is cospatial
in X-ray, FUV, H$\alpha$, and molecular band (\citealt{McDonald:2010,McDonald:2011a,Werner:2013,Werner:2014}; \S\ref{s:comp}).
CCA dominates as long as the following criterium is met:
\begin{equation}
{\rm Ta_t} < 1.
\end{equation}
In Fig.~\ref{f:heat_mdot}, we show the models with 1/2 and 1/4 lower turbulence with respect to the reference ${\rm Ma}$\,$\sim$\,0.35, which correspond to ${\rm Ta_t}\sim1.5$ (magenta) and 3 (orange), respectively. As the rotational velocity exceeds the turbulent velocity dispersion, the accretion rate is progressively suppressed by a factor $\propto {\rm Ta_t}$.
The accretion flow shifts from turbulence-driven, with chaotic filaments and boosted $\dot M_\bullet$, to rotationally-driven,
displaying a coherent disk and reduced $\dot M_\bullet$. In the regime ${\rm Ta_t}\gg1$, $\dot M_\bullet$ saturates around $\sim\,$$0.1\ \msun$ yr$^{-1}$, as perturbations induced by turbulence are not influencing the evolution of the thin disk.
In a complementary run (not shown), we doubled
the rotational velocity ($\approx\,$200 km s$^{-1}$) while fixing the reference ${\rm Ma}$\,$\sim$\,0.35 (again ${\rm Ta_t}$$\,\sim\,$1.5).
The results are analogous to the previous models after comparing identical cooling rate
(a stronger flattening implies higher $\rho$ at large $r$, thus larger cooling rates).
Comparing to observations, accretion rates can be estimated from the jet or cavity power, which for common massive ellipticals spans $P_{\rm cav}\approx10^{42}$\,-\,$10^{44}$ erg\,s$^{-1}$ (\citealt{Allen:2006}).
From the quiescent to strong feedback state $\dot M_\bullet = P_{\rm cav}/(\varepsilon\,c^2)\approx 2\times10^{-2}$\,-\,$2\ \msun\,{\rm yr^{-1}}$, where $\varepsilon\sim10^{-3}$ is the typical mechanical efficiency for massive ellipticals (\citealt{Gaspari:2012b}).
The simulated models cover this range (Fig.~\ref{f:heat_mdot}), with CCA representing the strong impulsive feedback stage, while the disk-dominated phase is associated with the more quiescent galaxies. We notice that the accretion rates are sub-Eddington, $\dot M_\bullet/\dot M_{\rm Edd}\approx 3\times10^{-4}$\,-\,$3\times10^{-2}$ (where $\dot M_{\rm Edd} = 66\ \msun\,{\rm yr^{-1}}$), i.e., the common regime where AGN are observed to be radiatively inefficient and dominated by mechanical energy input (\citealt{Russell:2013}).
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\subfigure{\includegraphics[scale=0.31]{heat_BHAR_msunyr_Mall.pdf}}
\subfigure{\includegraphics[scale=0.31]{heat_BHAR_Bondi_Mall.pdf}}
\end{center}
\caption{Accretion with heating, cooling, $e_{\rm rot}=0.3$, and varying levels of turbulence: evolution of the accretion rate (the $\dot{M}_\bullet$ average in the top panel has 0.1 Myr step).
The Mach number varies from the reference ${\rm Ma}$\,$\sim$\,0.35 (red) to 1/2 (magenta) and 1/4 (orange) of this value,
i.e., ${\rm Ta_t}\simeq 0.7, 1.5, 3$, respectively. The dashed line is the average net cooling rate (1 Myr step).
As before, the solid black line is the adiabatic rotating model, and the runtime Bondi rate for the normalized plot is computed at $r\approx\,$1-2 kpc (\S\ref{s:adi}).
In the atmosphere with ${\rm Ta_t}<1$, chaotic cold accretion drives the dynamics, boosting the accretion rate up to $100\times$ the Bondi rate,
which is consistent with the nonrotating CCA evolution shown in G13.
As ${\rm Ta_t}>1$, the accretion flow shifts from turbulence-driven (linked to extended filaments and boosted accretion) to rotationally-driven (tied to a coherent disk and suppressed accretion). }
\label{f:heat_mdot}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\subfigure{\includegraphics[scale=0.46]{heat_e03_2kpc_T.pdf}}
\caption{Accretion with heating, cooling, turbulence (${\rm Ma}$\,$\sim$\,0.35), and $e_{\rm rot}=0.3$: temperature cross-section, with the velocity field overlaid.
Full circularization is not possible in a turbulent environment characterized by ${\rm Ta_t <1}$.
The recurrent chaotic collisions between the cold filaments, clouds, and the clumpy torus,
cancel the angular momentum of the cold gas, leading to the rapid peaks in the accretion rate, $\dot M_\bullet$\,$\sim$\,$\dot M_{\rm cool}$.}
\label{f:heat_T}
\end{figure}
\subsection[]{CCA dynamics and $l_z$ distribution} \label{s:heat_dyn}
\noindent
Chaotic cold accretion is driven by the following processes.
First, turbulence broadens the distribution of angular momentum related to the hot atmosphere, as
shown in Fig.~\ref{f:stir_lz} (top; see discussion in \S\ref{s:stir_prof}). The broadening is $\propto \sigma_v$ and induces both prograde and retrograde chaotic motions.
The broadening of the PDF($l_z$) alone does not imply boosted accretion, since the hot gas is supported by pressure.
The second step is the condensation of cold gas. The cooling gas retains the imprint of the hot phase, emerging
out of the broad $l_z$ distribution with both positive and negative values.
During infall\footnote{Nonlinear condensation is too fast and clouds are too massive to be directly affected by the driving, which is slowly injected at large scale.}, the clouds start to significantly collide, mainly in the inner 1 kpc (Fig.~\ref{f:heat_T}), inducing major angular momentum cancellation (see also \citealt{Pizzolato:2010}).
In Fig.~\ref{f:heat_lz}, we focus on the PDF($l_z$) evolution between 20 and 27 Myr, as three major $\dot M_\bullet$ bursts and collisions occur in rapid succession. Despite the continuous cold gas condensation,
a rapid narrowing of the $l_z$ distribution occurs, leading to the $\dot M_\bullet$ bursts seen in Fig.~\ref{f:heat_mdot}.
At other times (not shown), gas condensation can regenerate one or both tails.
Since the cooling rate and cold mass is quenched by more than an order of magnitude compared with the pure cooling flow (consistently with observations; \citealt{Tamura:2003}), collisional effects are not as overwhelmed by condensation through time as in the nonheated run (\S\ref{s:stir_cool}). The residual cold phase achieves statistical steady state after $\sim\,$$2 \,t_{\rm cool}$, while being shaped by the recurrent broadening and narrowing of the angular momentum distribution with Myr variability (a prograde bias is still present after 40 Myr).
Both turbulence and collisions characterize CCA. Without turbulence the angular momentum of the newborn cold phase would only have positive $l_z$ (cf.~Fig.~\ref{f:stir_lz}, bottom), leading to a coherent disk. Without collisions, the cold phase might not strongly boost accretion (no rapid $l_z$ cancellation). Both processes are tightly related to $\sigma_v$.
If ${\rm Ta_t}<1$, as in the reference run, turbulent diffusion
dominates over the advection because of coherent rotation, leading to substantial PDF broadening and head-on cloud collisions.
However, if ${\rm Ta_t}>1$, the broadening is too weak and collisions cannot cancel angular momentum.
The suppression in the accretion rate is relatively smooth, $\dot M_\bullet \propto {\rm Ta_t}^{-1}$ (Fig.~\ref{f:heat_mdot}), until the thin disk evolution dominates for ${\rm Ta_t} > 3$ (i.e., at least an order of magnitude in classic Taylor number; \S\ref{s:intro}).
\begin{figure}
\centering
\subfigure{\includegraphics[scale=0.4]{dM_dlz_heat.pdf}}
\caption{Accretion with heating, cooling, turbulence (${\rm Ma}$\,$\sim$\,0.35), and $e_{\rm rot}=0.3$: mass PDF per bin of specific angular momentum $l_z$, for the cold phase (the hot phase has PDF analogous to Fig.~\ref{f:stir_lz}, top). After three rapid $\dot M_\bullet$ bursts, the PDF narrows on average from 20 Myr (solid) to 27 Myr (dashed) due to major collisions canceling positive and negative $l_z$.
The action of collisions is periodically contrasted by fresh condensation, favoring a broader distribution. }
\label{f:heat_lz}
\end{figure}
The linear transition can be crudely understood in terms of mixing length approximation.
Accretion in a rotating atmosphere is ultimately limited by the diffusion time related to collisions (the PDF broadening, albeit directly tied to ${\rm Ta_t}$, is a necessary, but not sufficient, condition).
Using as
effective collisional viscosity\footnote{Notice that CCA diffusivity, based on collisions and $l$ cancellation, is different from the shear viscosity and associated steady inward or outward transport of $l_z$ postulated in Keplerian thin disks (\citealt{Shakura:1973}). In the latter model, the velocity is either prograde or retrograde only, and the cold rings experience friction due to internal micro-turbulence (e.g., driven by the magnetorotational instability; \citealt{Balbus:1998}).}
$\nu\sim \sigma_v\, \lambda$, with $\lambda$ the collisional mean free path, we can write the following scaling:
\begin{equation}\label{e:diff}
t_{\rm acc}\approx t_{\rm diff} \equiv\frac{r^2}{\nu} \sim \frac{v_{\rm rot}}{\sigma_ v}\; \frac{r}{\lambda}\; \,t_{\rm dyn}
\end{equation}
where we assumed the gas dynamical timescale is mainly associated with rotation.
The smaller the velocity dispersion, the longer the diffusion and hence accretion timescale.
The clouds and filaments must travel into the inner 1 kpc region to experience major collisions. Here,
the mean free path is typically comparable to the radius (yet smaller than the global system),
yielding the scaling $t_{\rm acc}\sim {\rm Ta_t}\: t_{\rm dyn}$, in agreement with our findings (Fig.~\ref{f:heat_mdot}).
In general, $\lambda$ varies depending on the size of the condensing clouds, which can be smaller than $r$. This slows the accretion time, creating the valleys in $\dot M_\bullet$.
While the accretion peaks are provided by major collisions, the average accretion rate is $\propto {\rm Ta_t}^{-1}$.
As ${\rm Ta_t} < 1$, turbulent diffusion overcomes rotation (Eq.~\ref{e:diff} is no longer accurate)
and the sinking of cold clouds, after condensation in a cooling time, occurs in a radial free-fall timescale, returning to the pure CCA evolution shown in G13.
We note that the ram pressure drag is here subdominant. The density contrast between the cold and hot phase is $\rho_{\rm c}/\rho_{\rm h}\sim10^3$. The cloud halting distance to lose all the kinetic energy can be estimated as
$d_{\rm halt}\sim(e_{\rm kin, c}/\dot{e}_{\rm kin, c})\,v_{\rm c}\sim(\rho_{\rm c}/\rho_{\rm h})\,r_{\rm c}$, using $e_{\rm kin,c}\sim \rho_{\rm c}\,v_{\rm c}^2\,r_{\rm c}^3$ and $\dot{e}_{\rm kin,c}\sim F_{\rm drag}\,v_{\rm c} \sim (\rho_{\rm h}\,v_{\rm c}^2\,r_{\rm c}^2)\,v_{\rm c}$. Therefore, even small clouds of 50 pc size would require distances larger than the box to lose most of the energy due to drag, while collisions occur in just a small fraction of the system size, mostly within $r<$\,1 kpc.
\begin{figure*}
\begin{center}
\subfigure{\includegraphics[scale=0.28]{heat_e03_prof_ne.pdf}}
\subfigure{\includegraphics[scale=0.28]{heat_e03_prof_T.pdf}}
\subfigure{\includegraphics[scale=0.28]{heat_e03_prof_ne_ew.pdf}}
\subfigure{\includegraphics[scale=0.28]{heat_e03_prof_T_ew.pdf}}
\end{center}
\caption{Accretion with heating, cooling, turbulence (${\rm Ma}$\,$\sim$\,0.35), and $e_{\rm rot}=0.3$: 3D mass- (top) and X-ray emission-weighted ($\propto$\,$\mathcal{L}$; bottom) radial profiles of density and temperature (cf.~Fig.~\ref{f:cool_prof}).
The profiles show the extended multiphase structure, which is largely concealed in the X-ray band.
The X-ray temperature profile is remarkably flat, in contrast to the hot-mode accretion,
which has a peaked temperature profile. This is a key observable, which can be thoroughly tested (\citealt{Wong:2014,Russell:2015}), to unveil the evolutionary stage in which the galaxy is residing.}
\label{f:heat_prof}
\end{figure*}
The reference $v_{\rm rot}\approx100$ km s$^{-1}$ is near the high end of the realistic range (as we want to clearly understand the impact of rotation).
For $e_{\rm rot}> 0.3$, the galaxy is substantially flattened and the gas $v_{\rm rot}$ would inconsistently exceed the stellar rotational velocity, which is commonly $\sim\,$100 km s$^{-1}$ (\citealt{Davies:1983}). Therefore, many massive elliptical galaxies should reside in the pure CCA regime (${\rm Ta_t}\ll1$), in particular after strong injection of turbulence, e.g., via AGN outbursts and merger events. On the other hand, a fraction of elliptical galaxies are observed to host central cold disks (\citealt{Young:2011,Alatalo:2013}), which is a by-product of incomplete angular momentum cancellation. This is associated with ${\rm Ta_t}\gta3$ as turbulence and heating start to decrease, in agreement with the observational findings presented by \citeauthor{Werner:2014} (2014; Table 1).
In the disk stage, AGN feedback can still be active (\citealt{Hamer:2014,McNamara:2014}), albeit being less episodic;
the accretion rates and feedback are dramatically suppressed only in the hot mode (\S\ref{s:stir}).
\subsection[]{Radial profiles} \label{s:heat_prof}
\noindent
The evolution of the $t_{\rm cool}/t_{\rm ff}$ (TI-ratio) profiles is analogous to those presented in G13 (their Fig.~15).
The threshold $t_{\rm cool}/t_{\rm ff}\lta10$ indicates where the nonlinear condensation of extended multiphase gas develops (\citealt{Gaspari:2012a, McCourt:2012, Sharma:2012}).
Within the Bondi radius and above $\sim$\,7 kpc thermal instability cannot grow nonlinearly, as buoyancy
dominates.
Most cold clouds and filaments fill the region 200 pc\,-\,1 kpc, where the TI-ratio has a minimum around 4 and the initial gas density is above 0.1 cm$^{-3}$, leading to more rapid condensation. The cloud funneling toward the BH allows more frequent interactions within such region. The dropout of cold gas results in a gradual increase of the average entropy and thus TI-ratio, as the plasma becomes more tenuous (in a later stage, feedback self-regulation prevents overheating; \citealt{Gaspari:2012a}).
\begin{figure*}
\begin{center}
\subfigure{\includegraphics[scale=0.43]{Halpha_filaments.pdf}}
\subfigure{\includegraphics[scale=0.43]{Halpha_disk.pdf}}
\subfigure{\includegraphics[scale=0.21]{Werner_NGC5044Ha.pdf}}
\hspace{+1.7cm}
\subfigure{\includegraphics[scale=0.21]{Werner_NGC6868Ha.pdf} \hspace{0.7cm}}
\end{center}
\caption{Top: Synthetic H$\alpha$ surface brightness image along an arbitrary line of sight during the two characteristic late stages: the filamentary phase (left; run with ${\rm Ta_t}\simeq0.7$) and the disk-dominated phase (right; ${\rm Ta_t}\simeq3$). The resolution mimics that of SOAR, $\sim\,$0.2 arcsec.
Bottom: Observed SOAR H$\alpha$+[NII] images from \citet{Werner:2014} showing the two analogous stages in two real massive elliptical galaxies: chaotic cold accretion (left; NGC 5044) and the rotating disk (right; NGC 6868).}
\label{f:Halpha}
\end{figure*}
For systems with ${\rm Ta_t}>1$, the gas is mainly supported by coherent rotation during the condensation process, implying that radial compression is less relevant for TI growth.
With no radially compressive term, it has been shown that the TI-ratio threshold is lower by an order of magnitude, $t_{\rm cool}/t_{\rm ff} \stacksymbols{<}{\sim}{2.5}{.2} 1$ (\citealt{McCourt:2012}). The free-fall time does not increase: the effective gravity is lower along $R$, but the cold gas tends to fall along the $z$ direction and settle on the equatorial plane; hence $t_{\rm ff}(z)=(2 z/g(z))^{1/2}$, which is identical to $t_{\rm ff}(r)$.
In other words, nonlinear TI and fragmented clouds are more difficult to form in a cooling gas shaped by the centrifugal force. This is confirmed by the ${\rm Ta_t}>1$ runs, having a rather stable $\dot M_\bullet$ evolution. Notice that $t_{\rm cool}/t_{\rm ff} > 1$ does not imply the cold phase will not form, but that the condensation is monolithic, leading to a disk structure instead of filaments (e.g., NGC 6868 and NGC 7049; \citealt{Werner:2014}).
The reduced fragmentation
also affects the ${\rm Ta_t}= 0.7$ run, favoring filaments instead of spherical clouds.
The major cold phase interactions can be thus more prolonged inducing broader $\dot M_\bullet$ peaks compared with G13 model.
The mass-weighted radial profiles (Fig.~\ref{f:heat_prof}, top panels) highlight
the extended multiphase structure and Myr variability of the accretion flow.
The extension of multiphase filaments up to a few kpc is consistent with ${\rm H}\alpha$ observations (Fig.~1 in \citealt{Werner:2014}; \S\ref{s:comp}).
Performing an X-ray observation (bottom) instead conceals them, allowing the hot component to emerge ($T>0.3$ keV).
As in G13, the X-ray emission-weighted temperature profile is flat, in contrast to the peaked profile
of the adiabatic flow (Fig.~\ref{f:stir_prof}).
This is a key observable and prediction, which can be tested, in particular, with future X-ray missions (e.g., {\it Athena}).
Recently, the Megasecond {\it Chandra} observation of NGC 3115 (\citealt{Wong:2014}) discovered a flat temperature core with multiphase structure within the Bondi radius. Their retrieved density profile within 200 pc has moderate slope $\propto r^{-1}$, which is consistent with our findings (Fig.~\ref{f:heat_prof}, bottom left).
\citet{Russell:2015} also discovered a flat X-ray temperature and $r^{-1}$ density profile
within the Bondi radius of M 87 with deep {\it Chandra} data.
Both observations remarkably corroborate the CCA predictions.
The mass-weighted density profiles show that an inner ($\sim\,$100 pc) clumpy torus is relatively common, though continuously formed and dismantled by the chaotic dynamics.
In fact, even in CCA a prograde bias is still present in the long term (\S\ref{s:stir_cool_prof}),
as turbulence generates vorticity locally but not globally.
The presence of an inner obscuring torus is supported by extensive AGN observations literature (\citealt{Bianchi:2012} for a review).
The central volatile structure derives from the accumulation of multiple filaments, which have not yet completely canceled angular momentum. On the other hand, its rising cross-section increases the collisional rate with the incoming clouds, promoting efficient angular momentum cancellation. The PDF($l_z$) of the cold gas within 100 pc is self-similar to Fig.~\ref{f:heat_lz}, continuously broadening and narrowing through time, albeit in a smaller range, $|l_z| < 40$ kpc km s$^{-1}$ (i.e., below circular angular momentum at 100 pc).
As ${\rm Ta_t} > 1$, collisions become less efficient (Eq.~\ref{e:diff}), and
the torus can stabilize in a more coherent and extended disk.
The cold phase temperature can fluctuate between $10^4$\,-\,$10^5\ {\rm K}$, implying that, in a heated and turbulent environment, the cooling gas does not have to necessarily collapse to the floor temperature, but it can remain relatively warm. Multiwavelength data similarly show cold filaments with a complex multitemperature transition layer (\citealt{McDonald:2009,McDonald:2010,McDonald:2011a}).
Subsonic turbulence in the hot phase becomes supersonic through the cold medium, thus increasing the efficiency of both turbulent mixing and dissipation, consequently reheating the filaments.
The observed filamentary warm gas frequently shows significant velocity dispersions ($\sim\,$100 km s$^{-1}$; e.g., \citealt{Canning:2014,Werner:2014}) corroborating the importance of turbulent motions.
\section{Comparison with H$\alpha$ observations} \label{s:comp}
As reviewed in \S\ref{s:intro}, massive elliptical galaxies have been observed to host a significant reservoir of cold gas
within the central few kpc. In the CCA mechanism, the extended multiphase gas is a natural outcome of the TI condensation.
A key observable of the condensed medium is H$\alpha$ emission, which is mostly associated with
gas at $10^4$ K.
We thus compute synthetic surface brightness maps of H$\alpha$ line from the last runs (\S\ref{s:heat})
and compare them with the latest observations (Fig.~\ref{f:Halpha}).
The H$\alpha$ emission (6564.6\,\AA; $n=3\rightarrow2$ hydrogen transition) is dominated by the recombination of ionized hydrogen H$^+$ (\citealt{Dong:2011,Draine:2011}). The recombination luminosity is
\begin{align}\label{e:Halpha}
dL_{\rm H\alpha} &= 4\pi\,j_{\rm H\alpha}\,dV \notag\\
&=4\pi\times 2.82 \times 10^{-26}\,T_4^{-0.942-0.031\,\ln T_4} \,n_{\rm e} n_{\rm H^+}\,dV,
\end{align}
where $T_4\equiv T/10^4\ K$.
The $10^4$ K gas is optically thick to radiation above 13.6\,eV, i.e., Lyman photons are quickly re-absorbed.
The recombination rate $j_{\rm H\alpha}$
includes such absorption (the so-called `case B' recombination; see \citealt{Draine:2011}). The ionization fraction $f\equiv n_{\rm H^+}/n_{\rm H}$ is typically low at $10^4$ K. In abundance equilibrium, the recombination and collisional ionization rates (see \citealt{Katz:1996})
determine $f$, such that $n_{\rm H^+}/n_{\rm H}=1+\alpha_{\rm R,\,H^+}/(\alpha_{\rm R,H^+}+\Gamma_{\rm C,H^0}$). At $T=10^4$ K the ionization fraction is $f\simeq10^{-3}$.
Photoionization driven by
OB and pAGB stars can increase this level. As adopted in reference literature studies (e.g., \citealt{Joung:2006}),
we use $f\sim10^{-2}$ (see also \citealt{Dale:2015}).
In a subsequent series of papers,
we will retrieve and study the ionization fraction in a more realistic way with
the inclusion of chemical reaction networks and stellar heating.
In Fig.~\ref{f:Halpha} (top), we present the synthetic H$\alpha$ maps at two characteristic moments, the filamentary and disk-dominated phase. The synthetic maps are created by summing the contribution from gas in each cell using Eq.~\ref{e:Halpha}; the latter equation naturally selects gas with $T\lta10^4$ K.
The resolution mimics that of SOAR, $\sim\,$0.2 arcsec.
In the bottom panels, we show for qualitative comparison the observed maps retrieved with the 4.1 m SOAR telescope (from \citealt{Werner:2014}).
In the top left image (${\rm Ta_t}\simeq0.7$ run), a complex network of cold filaments and clouds has condensed out of the hot halo, reaching $r\simeq3.3$ kpc. The system is in full chaotic cold accretion mode. Within 1 kpc, the frequent interactions between the filaments and clouds make the H$\alpha$ distribution approach spherical symmetry.
The observed H$\alpha$ emission (bottom left) shows similar filamentary and core morphology. The real emission appears more extended, albeit the synthetic maps are not contaminated by the stellar and [NII] contribution. At a distance $d_{\rm L}\simeq40.3$ Mpc, the total synthetic H$\alpha$ flux is $F_{\rm H\alpha}\simeq4.0\times10^{-13}\ {\rm erg\,s^{-1}\,cm^{-2}}$ ($L_{\rm H\alpha}\simeq7.8\times10^{40}$\,erg\,s$^{-1}$), which is comparable to the real NGC 5044 flux, $F_{\rm H\alpha+[NII]}\simeq7.6\times10^{-13}\ {\rm erg\,s^{-1}\,cm^{-2}}$ (\citealt{Werner:2014}).
It is worth noting that NGC 5044 H$\alpha$ luminosity marks the upper envelope of observed values; several elliptical galaxies have $\sim\,$1 dex lower luminosity.\footnote{Dust, which we do not model, can in part absorb H$\alpha$ emission.}
In the top right panel, the $\rm {Ta_t}\simeq3$ run displays a different behavior. The system is no longer in filamentary CCA mode; the rotating disk drives the dynamics. The disk is contained within 500 pc and is slightly perturbed by the relatively weak turbulence. The observed H$\alpha$ image of the massive elliptical NGC 6868 (bottom right) shows a very similar smooth pattern associated with a rotating structure (which has been confirmed through the [CII] velocity distribution; \citealt{Werner:2014}).
Remarkably, NGC 6868 does not show major signs of AGN feedback, as radio jets or outflows,
while NGC 5044 which resides in filamentary CCA mode is strongly perturbed by AGN activity (\citealt{Gastaldello:2009}).
Considering the disk size, this quiescent phase could last since $\stacksymbols{>}{\sim}{2.5}{.2}\,$50 Myr. The NGC 6868 cooling time is indeed relatively long, $t_{\rm cool}\approx78$\,Myr.
At a distance of 41.2 Mpc, the synthetic flux is $F_{\rm H\alpha}\simeq1.1\times10^{-13}\ {\rm erg\,s^{-1}\,cm^{-2}}$, which is consistent with the observed flux $F_{\rm H\alpha+[NII]}\simeq2.7\times10^{-13}\ {\rm erg\,s^{-1}\,cm^{-2}}$ (\citealt{Macchetto:1996}).
To conclude, despite the fact that it is not
our goal to match one-to-one the observed image of a single galaxy,
as this would require artificial fine-turning of run parameters and initial conditions,
the simulated models capture the essential features of real elliptical galaxies showing a dual morphology of filamentary and rotating multiphase nebulae within the core.
\section{Summary and conclusions} \label{s:disk}
\noindent
We carried out 3D high-resolution simulations to perform controlled astrophysical experiments of the accretion flow
on to a supermassive black hole, resolving the galactic 50 kpc scale down to the inner sub-pc scale.
We gradually increased the realistic complexity of the hydrodynamic flow, including
cooling, turbulence, and heating.
We focused on the role of rotation (reference $e_{\rm rot}=0.3$, i.e., $v_{\rm rot}\approx100$ km s$^{-1}$) in altering accretion rates, in comparison with the nonrotating models presented in \citealt{Gaspari:2013_cca} (G13). The main features of each accretion flow can be summarized as follows.\\
\renewcommand{\labelitemi}{$\bullet$}
\begin{itemize}
\item {\it Adiabatic rotating flow.}\\
The hot pressure-dominated flow forms a central rotational barrier ($\stacksymbols{<}{\sim}{2.5}{.2}\,$$r_{\rm B}$), with a thick toroidal geometry and mild variability. The gas can only accrete along a polar funnel with half-opening angle $\sim\,$$\pi/4$. Compared with the spherically symmetric model, the accretion rate is suppressed by a characteristic factor of $\sim\,$3.
The accretion rate is comparable to the reference $\dot M_{\rm Bondi}$ computed at $r$\,$\sim$\,1-\,2 kpc.
The stratification of the atmosphere slightly decreases the central density and accretion through time.
The characteristic mark of the hot flow is the cuspy (X-ray or mass-weighted) temperature profile.
The coherent prograde rotation preserves the initial positive angular momentum distribution.\\
\item {\it Radiative rotating flow.}\\
The radiatively cooling gas loses pressure support in a cooling time and circularizes on the equatorial plane, forming a cold thin disk. At variance with the classic cooling flow, the accretion rate is suppressed and decoupled from the cooling rate, $\dot M_\bullet \stacksymbols{<}{\sim}{2.5}{.2} 10^{-2}\, \dot M_{\rm cool}$. However, $\dot M_\bullet$ is still a decade higher compared with the adiabatic flow due to the halo condensation.
The cold phase progressively accumulates higher positive $l_z$, as the kpc-size disk grows through time via condensation.\\
\item {\it Adiabatic rotating flow stirred by turbulence.}\\
From the perspective of the accretion rate and $\rho$, $T$ radial profiles, the stirred hot flow is analogous to the unperturbed adiabatic evolution, with increased variability (factor of 2). The similar $\sim\,$1/3 suppression of $\dot M_\bullet$ is because subsonic turbulence generates local, though not global, vorticity
(which is further enhanced by the baroclinic instability in a stratified medium). As ${\rm Ta_t}\equiv v_{\rm rot}/\sigma_v<1$, the $l_z$ distribution is reshaped and substantially broadened via turbulent diffusion, generating both prograde and retrograde eddies. If ${\rm Ta_t}>1$, the initial PDF is only slightly modified: the flow is again driven and suppressed by coherent rotation ($l_z > 0$) and not by turbulent eddies. \\
\item {\it Chaotic cold accretion (cooling, heating, turbulence).}\\
As long as ${\rm Ta_t} < 1$, chaotic cold accretion (CCA) drives the dynamics, as found in G13.
Within several kpc, thermal instability can grow nonlinearly ($t_{\rm cool}/t_{\rm ff} < 10$), extended multi-temperature filaments condense out of the hot phase and rain toward the BH. The collisions ($r< 1$ kpc) between the cold clouds, filaments, and central clumpy torus enable to efficiently cancel angular momentum, boosting the accretion rate, with impulsive peaks up to the cooling rate or $100\times$ the Bondi rate.
Using $\dot M_\bullet\sim\dot M_{\rm cool}$ is thus a realistic (subgrid) model for large-scale simulations and analytic studies. Without heating, the CCA evolution is analogous, albeit the cold phase properties (cold mass, collisions, and PDF) are magnified by an order of magnitude.
The condensed cold phase retains the imprint of the stirred hot phase, emerging out of the broadened $l_z$ distribution.
The presence of both prograde and retrograde motions permits the cancellation of angular momentum.
After major collisions the PDF narrows ($\dot M_\bullet$ peaks), while condensation broadens it again.
Transient incomplete cancellation ($\dot M_\bullet$ valleys) creates a clumpy, highly variable torus, later favoring the interactions with incoming clouds.
In the regime ${\rm Ta_t} > 1$, turbulent diffusion becomes weaker than advection due to rotation, reducing the relative PDF broadening and the efficiency of collisions. The accretion rate thus decreases as ${\rm Ta_t}^{-1}$ until the cold disk drives the evolution again.
This is aggravated by the increased difficulty of TI and fragmented clouds to form under coherent rotation, as the thermal instability threshold is lowered because of the reduced influence of radial compression.
The synthetic H$\alpha$ maps trace the morphology of the condensed multiphase gas,
reproducing the main features of observations (e.g., SOAR and {\it Magellan}), such as line fluxes, kpc-scale filaments, or the central rotating disk.
\\
\end{itemize}
The present work, together with G13, emphasizes the central role of chaotic cold accretion in the evolution
of (supermassive) black holes, even in the presence of rotation. The high and variable accretion rates,
$\dot M_\bullet\sim\dot M_{\rm cool}$, can trigger the required level and self-regulation of the AGN feedback
to quench cooling flows, star formation and to shape the observed thermodynamic properties of massive galaxies, groups, and clusters (\citealt{Gaspari:2011a,Gaspari:2011b,Gaspari:2012a,Gaspari:2012b}; \S\ref{s:intro}).
The results obtained in recent years
corroborate the following cosmic accretion and feedback cycle shaping gaseous halos.
As gas cooling starts to overcome heating ($t_{\rm cool}/t_{\rm ff}<10$ or central entropy $K_0 \stacksymbols{<}{\sim}{2.5}{.2} 20$ keV cm$^2$), CCA is triggered\footnote{A nonzero level of subsonic turbulence is always present in real systems (\S\ref{s:init2}), e.g., because of galaxy motions, mergers, stellar evolution. The initial AGN outburst generates further turbulence.},
boosting the accretion rate ($\dot M_\bullet \gg \dot M_{\rm Bondi}$) and consequently the feedback injection via AGN outflows and/or jets (${\rm Ta_t}< 1$).
This phase can be observationally probed via the extended H$\alpha$ filaments
(e.g., NGC 5044; \citealt{McDonald:2010,McDonald:2011a,Werner:2013})
or inner flat temperature and $r^{-1}$ density profiles in X-ray,
as recently discovered in NGC 3115 (\citealt{Wong:2014}) and M 87 (\citealt{Russell:2015}).
As the core entropy rises and turbulence diminishes (${\rm Ta_t} > 1$), nonlinear TI weakens and the rotating disk is left as the sole cold structure
(e.g., NGC 6868 or NGC 7049 in \citealt{Werner:2014}; see also \citealt{Mathews:2003,Young:2011,Alatalo:2013}).
The transition is associated with a gradual decrease in the accretion rate $\propto {\rm Ta_t}^{-1}$
(feedback can still be active; e.g., NGC 4261).
Waiting longer times, as the disk is consumed (e.g., via accretion and star formation) and the halo has been overheated by feedback, the hot gas is the only resource available to poorly fuel the SMBH ($t_{\rm cool}/t_{\rm ff} \gg 10$). The main diagnostic of this hot-mode regime is the cuspy X-ray temperature profile, typically associated with more quiescent systems (e.g., NGC 4649, NGC 1332; \citealt{Humphrey:2008,Humphrey:2009}).
Transitioning from the fully cold mode to hot mode, the accretion rate experiences a strong suppression, from $100\times$ to a small fraction of the Bondi rate.
Feedback heating becomes negligible, entropy starts to decrease, and the gaseous halo is allowed to cool again, restarting a new cycle defined by CCA and boosted feedback to the rotating disk to the hot mode and suppressed feedback, and so on.
The simulated accretion rates cover the realistic range based on the cavity power observed in massive ellipticals (\citealt{Allen:2006}), $\dot M_\bullet = P_{\rm cav}/(\varepsilon\,c^2)\approx 2\times10^{-2}$\,-\,$2\ \msun\,{\rm yr^{-1}}$.
In the subsequent series of works, we will continue to investigate the role of additional physics
(see Sec.~9.1 in G13 for a discussion)
to further understand CCA and to better interpret new data.
For instance, a rapidly varying potential (e.g., mergers) could facilitate TI and chaotic collisions, thereby promoting
CCA via tidal torques (\S1). Although star formation is observed to be inefficient in elliptical galaxies and in turbulent
molecular clouds ($\stacksymbols{<}{\sim}{2.5}{.2}$\,1\% efficiency; \citealt{Federrath:2015}), it can partially reduce the fueling of the SMBH.
Stellar feedback, on the other hand, may reheat the cold gas, promoting additional turbulence and TI.
Forthcoming observations of cold gas, which combine several wavelengths, e.g., via {\it Herschel}, HST, SOAR, CARMA, SKA, and the newly expanding ALMA observatory, will be instrumental in probing chaotic cold accretion and the related predictions with high accuracy. Besides improving the sample size, the new data should be able to shed light on key astrophysical questions, such as the amount of cold gas `raining' on to the black hole, the kinematics of the cold phase (filaments, clouds, and rotating disk), and its tight coupling with AGN feedback.
\section*{Acknowledgments}
\noindent
The FLASH code was in part developed by the DOE NNSA-ASC OASCR Flash center at the University of Chicago.
M.G. is grateful for the financial support provided by the Max Planck Fellowship.
F.B. is in part supported by the Prin MIUR grant 2010LY5N2T.
HPC resources were provided by the NASA/Ames HEC Program (SMD-13-4373, SMD-13-4377, SMD-14-4819; {\it Pleiades}) and CLS center.
The post-processing analysis was in part performed with YT (\citealt{Turk:2011}).
We thank R.~Sunyaev, N.~Werner, M.~Anderson, R.~Khatri, P.~Girichidis, and A.~Gatto for helpful discussions.
We are grateful to N.~Werner, who allowed us to reproduce the H$\alpha$ SOAR images.
We thank the anonymous referee who helped to improve the manuscript.
\bibliographystyle{aa}
|
\section{Introduction}
\textbf{1.}\ Two groups are called isocategorical over a field $k$ if their respective categories of $k$-linear representations are monoidally equivalent. The goals of this paper are to classify isocategorical groups over arbitrary fields, extending a previous classification of Etingof-Gelaki \cite{isocategorical} and Davydov \cite{Davydov} for algebraically closed fields and to introduce a new variant of the Weil representation associated to simple Galois algebras and isocategorical groups. These Weil representations include as particular cases the unitary Weil representations associated to symplectic and quadratic spaces over a finite fields of characteristic two.
\textbf{2.}\ Let $G$ be an algebraic group over a field $k$. The category $\Rep_k(G)$ of finite dimensional $k$-linear representations is a symmetric tensor category over $k$. Symmetric tensor categories of this kind can be characterized using Tannaka duality theory, as those admitting a symmetric fiber functor, \cite{Saavedra}. Moreover, if $k$ is algebraically closed of characteristic $0$, the \textit{symmetric} tensor category $\Rep_k(G)$ determines the group $G$ up to isomorphism, see \cite[Theorem 3.2]{Deligne-Milne}. Despite this, there exist examples of non isomorphic isocategorical groups, for example, the affine symplectic group $\operatorname{ASp}(V):= V\rtimes \operatorname{Sp}(V)$ and the pseudo-symplectic group $\operatorname{APs}(V)$ ($V$ a symplectic space over the field of two elements ) are non-isomorphic isocategorical groups over $\mathbb{C}$, \cite{Davydov, isocategorical} (however, they are not isocategorical over $\mathbb{R}$, see Proposition \ref{Prop:No isocategorical sobre R}).
\textbf{3.}\ The Weil representation is a unitary projective representation of the symplectic group over a local field, \cite{pseudosymplectic}. When the local field is non-archimedean with residual field of characteristic two the Weil representation is a real projective representation of $\operatorname{Ps}(V)$ the pseudo-symplectic group, see \cite{Weil-fini-adv}. Isocategorical groups over arbitrary fields are closely related to Weil representations, for example, the affine orthogonal group and the pseudo-symplectic group of a quadratic space over a finite field of characteristic two are non-isomorphic isocategorical over $\mathbb{Q}$, see Proposition \ref{Prop:Pseudo simplect y affine orthogonal son isocat}.
As was pointed in \cite{Weil-fini-adv} and \cite{isocategorical} the unitary Weil representation of $\operatorname{APs}(V)$ is an extension of the Weil representation of $\operatorname{Ps}(V)$. However, the Weil representation of $\operatorname{APs}(V)$ is not real. Is natural to ask if there exists a \textit{real} Weil representation associated to a symplectic space over a finite field of characteristic two. We give a positive answer to this question and provide some examples of isocategorical groups over $\mathbb{Q}$ of a nature slightly different from the affine orthogonal and pseudo-symplectic group.
\textbf{4.}\ We would like to finish the introduction by pointing out an interesting relation between isocategorical groups and stringy orbifold theory. The Drinfel'd double $D(k[G])$ of a group algebra plays an important roll in stringy orbifold theory, for example (see \cite{KP} and \cite{MS}):
\begin{itemize}
\item The category of $G$-Frobenius algebras arising in global orbifold cohomology or $K$-theory is the category of Frobenius algebras
in the modular category of finite dimensional $D(k[G])$-modules.
\item The Grothendieck ring of the modular category of finite dimensional $D(k[G])$-modules can be realized geometrically as $K_{orb}^{k}([*/G])$ the stringy $K$-theory of the orbifold $[*/G]$.
\end{itemize}
The category of representation of the Drinfel'd double has a conceptual interpretation as the Drinfel'd center of the category Rep$_k(G)$ of $k$-linear representations of $G$. Thus, the Drinfel'd doubles of isocategorical groups are braided equivalents. Then as application of our main results we explicitly construct some family of example of pairs of non-isomorphic groups with the same category of $G$-Frobenius algebras and same stringy $K$-theories for every field $k$ of characteristic different to two.
\textbf{5.}\ The paper is organized as follows: In Section \ref{preliminare} we discuss the classification of Galois algebras of finite groups and their relation with isocategorical groups. In Section \ref{Seccion:Isocategorical groups over arbitrary fields} we give a classification of isocategorical groups over arbitrary fields and we study in detail isocategorical groups over formally real fields. The main results of this section are Theorem \ref{main result 2} and Corollary \ref{Corol Clasification over Q nad Z[1/2]}. In Section \ref{Section:Galois algebras and Weil representations} we introduce the Weil representation associated to a simple Galois algebra over a finite abelian group. We develope in detail the case of Weil representations associated to arbitrary symplectic and quadratic modules. In Section \ref{Section:Examples of non-isomorphic isocategorical groups and Weil representations} we present some concrete examples of non-isomorphic isocategorical groups over $\mathbb{Q}$ and an application to the Weil representation associated to a quadratic space over a finite field of characteristic two.
\section{Preliminaries}\label{preliminare}
Our main reference for the general theory of Hopf algebra is \cite{Mont}. We make free use of Sweedler's notation for comultiplcations and comodule structures, omitting the summation symbols: $\Delta(c)=c_1\otimes c_2$, $\rho(v)=v_0\otimes v_1$ for right comodules and $\lambda(v)=v_{-1}\otimes v_0$ for left comodules.
\subsection{Galois objects of Hopf algebras and Galois algebras of finite groups}\label{prels}
In this section we review some definition and results on Hopf Galois extensions
that we will need later. We refer the reader to \cite{galois-survey-schauenburg} and \cite{survey-susan} for a detailed exposition on the subject.
\begin{defin}
Let $k$ be a commutative base ring and $H$ a Hopf algebra over $k$. A \emph{right $H$-Galois object} is a right $H$-comodule algebra $(A,\rho)$ such that $A$ is a faithfully flat $k$-module, $A^{\co H}=k$ and the canonical map
$$\can: A\otimes A\to A\otimes H, \ \ x\otimes y\mapsto xy_{(0)}\otimes y_{(1)},$$ is bijective.
Left $H$-Galois objects are defined similarly.
\end{defin}
A morphism of $H$-Galois object is an $H$-colinear algebra map. It is known that a morphism of $H$-Galois objects is an isomorphism.
\begin{defin}
An $(L, H)$-Bigalois object is an $(L, H)$-bicomodule algebra $A$
which is simultaneously a left $L$-Galois object and right
$H$-Galois object.
\end{defin}
For any right $H$-Galois object $A$ there is an associated Hopf
algebra $L = L(A, H)$, called the \emph{left Galois} Hopf algebra,
such that $A$ is in a natural way an $(L, H)$-Bigalois object.
\begin{obs}\label{obs: obj cleft en dimension finita} An $H$-Galois object $A$ is called \emph{cleft} if there is an $H$-colinear convolution invertible map $H\to A$. In case that $A$ is cleft, the Hopf algebra $L(A, H)$ is obtained by a \emph{cocycle deformation} \cite[Theorem 3.9]{BiGal-Schau}, in particular for finite dimensional Hopf algebras over a field every Galois object is cleft \cite[Proposition 2]{cleft-finito}, so $\dim_k(L(A,H))=\dim_k (H)$. \end{obs}
If $G$ is a finite group, we will denote by $\mathcal{O}_k(G)$, the Hopf algebra of regular function of the constant group scheme over $k$, that is, $\mathcal{O}_k(G)$ is the free $k$-module with a basis $\{\delta_g\}_{g \in G}$, multiplication $m(\delta_g,\delta_h)=\delta_{g,h}\delta_g$ and comultiplication $\Delta(\delta_g)=\sum_{x,y \in G: xy=g}\delta_x\otimes \delta_y$, for all $g,h \in G$.
The category of $\mathcal{O}_k(G)$-comodule algebras is the same as the category of $k$-algebras endowed with an action of $G$ by $k$-algebra automorphisms. If $A$ is a $G$-algebra, $A^{\co \mathcal{O}_k(G)}=A^G$, the subalgebra of $G$-invariants.
For simplicity, a $\mathcal{O}_k(G)$-Galois object will be called just a $G$-Galois algebra over $k$ or just a $G$-Galois algebra if the base ring is clear. Analogously a $(G_1,G_2)$-Bigalois algebra is just a $(\mathcal{O}_k(G_2)-\mathcal{O}_k(G_1))$-Bigalois object.
\subsection{Isocategorical groups and Bigalois Algebras}
We will use freely the basic language of monoidal categories theory, for more reference see \cite{Bak-Kir} and \cite{Mac-Lane}.
If $H$ is a Hopf algebra we denote by $\M^H$ the $k$-linear monoidal category of all rigth $H$-comodules.
Given a finite group $G$, we will denote by Rep$_k(G)$, the monoidal category of all (left) $k[G]$-modules. Note that Rep$_k(G)=\M^{\mathcal{O}_k(G)}$ the tensor category of $k$-linear representations of $G$.
\begin{defin}[\cite{isocategorical}]
Let $G_1$ and $G_2$ be two finite groups. We say that $G_1$ and $G_2$ are isocategorical over a commutative ring $k$ if the monoidal categories $\Rep_k(G_1)$ and $\Rep_k(G_2)$ are equivalents as monoidal $k$-linear categories.
\end{defin}
If $A$ is a $G$-algebra over $k$, the group of $G$-equivariant algebra automorphisms we will denote by $$\Aut_G(A)=\{f\in \Aut_{\text{Alg}}(A)| f(g \cdot a)=g\cdot f(a), \ \text{for all \ } g \in G\}.$$
\begin{lem}\label{lema Aut_G}
If $k$ is a field and $A$ is a $G$-Galois algebra, then $A$ is a $(G-\Aut_{G}(A))$-Bigalois algebra if and only if $|\Aut_{G}(A)|=|G|$.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
If $A$ is a $G$-Galois algebra, there is a unique Hopf algebra (up to isomorphisms), such that $A$ is a $L$-$\mathcal{O}_k(G)$-Bigalois object, \cite[Theorem 3.5]{BiGal-Schau}. Remark \ref{obs: obj cleft en dimension finita} implies that $|G|=\dim_k(L)$.
By \cite[Corollary 3.1.4]{galois-survey-schauenburg}, $\Alg(L, k) \simeq \Aut_{G}(A)$, so $L\cong \mathcal{O}_k(\Aut_{G}(A))$ if and only if $|G|=|\Aut_{G}(A)|$.
\end{proof}
\begin{prop}\label{Prop equivalencias con isocat existencia bigalois}
Let $G_1$ and $G_2$ be two finite groups and $k$ be a commutative ring. The following are equivalents:
\begin{enumerate}
\item[(a)] $G_1$ and $G_2$ are isocategoric.
\item[(b)] There is a $(G_1,G_2)$-Bigalois algebra $A$ over $k$.
\item[(c)] If $k$ is a field, $(a)$ and $(b)$ are equivalent to: there is a $G_1$-Galois algebra $A$ such that $\Aut_{G1}(A)\cong G_2$ and $|G_1|=|G_2|$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
Equivalence $(a)$ and $(b)$ is \cite[Corolario 5.7]{BiGal-Schau} and the equivalence between $(b)$ and $(c)$ follows by Lemma \ref{lema Aut_G}.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Group cohomology}
In order to fix notations, we will recall the usual description of group cohomology associated to the normalized Bar resolution of $\mathbb{Z}$, see \cite{Eilenberg-MacLane} for more details. Let $N$ be a group and let $A$ be a $\mathbb{Z}[N]$-module written in multiplicative notation. Define $C^0(N,A)=A$, and for $n \geq 1$ $$C^n(N,A)=\{f:\underbrace{N\times\cdots \times N}_{n-times}\to A| f(x_1\ldots,x_n)=1, \text{ if } x_i=1_N \text{ for some }i \}.$$
Considere the following cochain complex
\begin{equation*}\label{complex}
0 \longrightarrow C^0 (N, A) \stackrel{\delta_0}{\longrightarrow }
C^1 (N, A) \stackrel{\delta_1}{\longrightarrow }C^2 (N, A) \cdots C^{n} (N, A)
\stackrel{\delta_n}{\longrightarrow } C^{n+1} (N, A) \cdots
\end{equation*} where
\begin{align*}
\delta_n(f)(x_1,x_2,\ldots,x_{n+1})&=x_1\cdot f(x_2,\ldots,x_{n+1})\\
&\times\prod_{i=1}^nf(x_1,\ldots,x_{i-1},x_ix_{i+1},x_{i+2},\ldots,x_{n+1})^{(-1)^{i}}\\
&\times f(x_1,\ldots,x_{n})^{(-1)^{n+1}}.
\end{align*}
Then, $Z^n(N,A):=\ker(\delta_n)$, $B^n(N,A):= \text{Im}(\delta_{n-1})$ and
$$H^n(N,A):=Z^n(N,A)/B^n(N,A) \ \ (n\geq 1),$$ is the group cohomology of $N$ with coefficients in $A$.
\subsubsection{Group cohomology associated to a group exact sequence}
Let $$1\to N\to S\to Q\to 1$$ be a group exact sequence. Let $A$ be a $Q$-module, consider $A$ as a $N$-module with the trivial action and $(C^{n} (N,A),\delta_n)$ as a cochain complex of $S$-modules, where $C^n(N,A)$ has $S$-module structure given by $$(^g f)(x_1,\ldots, x_n)= \ ^g f(\ g^{-1} x_1g,\ldots,\ g^{-1} x_ng),$$ for all $x_1,\ldots, x_n\in N, g \in S, f\in C^n(N,A)$. Since the maps $ \delta_n:C^{n} (N, A) \to C^{n+1} (N, A)$ are $S$-equivariant we have the double cochain complex $C^{p,q}_{S}(N,A):=C^q(S,C^{p+1}(N,A))$, $p,q\geq 0$, then we define the complex $$C_S^n(N,A):=\text{Tot}^{n-1}(C^{*,*}_{S}(N,A)), \ \ \text{for } n>1,$$ and the cohomology groups $$H^n_S(N,A):= H^n(C^{*}_{S}(N,A)), \ \ \ n\geq 0.$$
For future reference it will be useful to describe the equations that define a 2-cocycle and the coboundary of a 1-cochains:
\begin{itemize}
\item The 1-cochains are $C_S^1(N,A)=C^1(N,A)$ and the 2-cochains are $C_S^2(N,A)=C^2(N,A)\oplus C^1(S,C^1(N,A))$, so a 2-cochain is a pair of normalized functions $\sigma: N\times N\to A, \gamma: S\times N\to A$.
\item A 2-cocycle is a 2-cochain $(\sigma, \gamma)$ such that
\begin{align}
\sigma(x,y)\sigma (xy,z)&=\sigma(y,z)\sigma(x,yz),\label{C1}\\
^g\sigma(x,y)\gamma(g,xy)&=\sigma (^gx,^gy)\gamma(g,x)\gamma(g,y),\label{C2}\\
\gamma(gh,x)&=\ ^g \gamma(h,x)\gamma(g,^hx),\label{C3}
\end{align}
for all $x,y\in N, g,h\in S$.
\item The coboundary of a 1-cochain $\gamma:N\to A$ is given by
\begin{align*}
\partial (\gamma)(x,y)=\frac{\gamma(y)\gamma(x)}{\gamma(xy)},\\
\partial(\gamma)(g,x)= \frac{^g \gamma(x)}{\gamma(^g x)},
\end{align*}for all $g\in S, \ x,y\in N$.
\end{itemize}
\begin{prop}\label{Prop:chomologia normalizada}
Let $ Z^2_S(N,A)_{n}$ be the subgroup of all 2-cocycle $(\sigma,\gamma)$ such that $$\gamma(x,y)=\sigma(x,y)\sigma(xy,x^{-1})\sigma(x,x^{-1})^{-1}$$ for all $x, y\in N$. Then $B^2_S(N,A)\subset Z^2_S(N,A)_{n}$ and $$H^2_S(N,A)\cong Z^2_S(N,A)_{n}/B^2_S(N,A).$$
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
A straightforward calculation shows that $B_S(N,A)\subset Z^2_S(N,A)_n$.
Note that if $Q=1$, then $H^n_{N}(N,A)=H^n(N,A)$, a particular quasi-isomorphism $Z^2(N,A)\to Z^2_N(N,A)$ is given by $\sigma\mapsto (\sigma, \gamma)$, where $$\gamma(x,y)=\sigma(x,y)\sigma(xy,x^{-1})\sigma(x,x^{-1})^{-1},$$ for all $x, y\in N$.
Let $(\sigma, \gamma) \in Z^2_S(N,A)$
be an arbitrary 2-cocycle. Since $(\sigma,\gamma|_{N\times N})\in Z^2_N(N,A)$, there is $\gamma:N\to A$ such that $\partial(\gamma) (\sigma,\gamma)=(\sigma,\gamma_\sigma)\in Z^2_N(N,A)$. Then $\partial(\gamma) (\sigma,\gamma)\in Z^2_S(N,A)$ is a 2-cocycle in $Z^2_S(N,A)_n$ cohomologous to $(\sigma,\gamma)$.
\end{proof}
\subsubsection{The second cohomology group for abelian groups}
Let $V$ be a finite abelian group and let $k$ be a field such that $k^*$ is a divisible group. A bicharacter $\omega: V\times V\to k^*$ is called a skew-symmetric form if $\omega(x,x)=1$ for all $x\in V$. Let us denote by $\bigwedge^2 \widehat{V}$ the abelian group of all skew-symmetric forms over $k^*$.
\begin{prop}\label{Prop:exis de 2-cociclo para simplectco}
The group morphism
\begin{align*}
\operatorname{Alt}:Z^2(V,k^*) \to \bigwedge^2 \widehat{V}\\
\alpha \mapsto [(x,y)\mapsto \frac{\alpha(x,y)}{\alpha(y,x)}]
\end{align*}induces an isomorphism $H^2(V,k^*)\cong \bigwedge^2 \widehat{V}$.
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
See \cite[Proposition 2.6]{Tambara-Func}.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Galois algebras over arbitrary fields}
In this section we review the main result of \cite{Manuel}. In this section $k$ will denote a field.
Let $S$ be a subgroup of $G$ and $B$ be an $S$-algebra. The induced algebra is defined as the algebra of functions \[ \Ind_S^G(B)=\{r:G\to B|r(sg)=s\cdot
r(g) \quad \forall s\in S,g\in G\}, \] with $G$-action
$(g\cdot r)(x)=r(xg)$, for $r \in \Ind_S^G(B), g,x\in G$.
\begin{nota}\label{nota ind is a functor}
Induction is a covariant functor, where each homomor\-phism
of $S$-algebras $f:A\to B$ is sent to the homomorphism of $G$-algebras
$\Ind_S^G(f):\Ind_S^G(A)\to \Ind_S^G(B)$, $\Ind_S^G(f)(r)=f\circ r$.
\end{nota}
Let $S$ be a finite group, let $k$ be a field and let $\s\in Z^2(S, k^*)$ be a 2-cocycle.
For each $s\in S$, we will use the notation $u_s \in k_{\s}[S]$ to indicate the corresponding element in the
\emph{twisted group algebra} $k_{\s}[S]$. Thus $\{u_s\}_{s\in S}$ is a $k$-basis of
$k_{\s}[S]$, and in this basis $u_su_t = \s(s, t)u_{st}$ for all $s,t\in S$.
\begin{defin}
An element $s\in S$ is called $\s$-\emph{regular} if $\s(s, t) =
\s(t, s)$ for all $t \in C_S(s)$. The 2-cocycle $\s$ is called
\emph{non-degenerate} if and only if $1\in S$ is the only
$\s$-regular element.
\end{defin}
\begin{obs}
If $S$ is an abelian group a 2-cocycle $\s\in Z^2(S, k^*)$ is non-degenerate if and only if the skew-symmetric form $\operatorname{Alt}(\s)$ is a non-degenerate bicharacter.
\end{obs}
\begin{defin}Let $G$ be a finite group and $k$ be a field.
A \emph{Galois datum associated to $G$} is a collection
$(S,K,N,\s,\gamma)$ such that
\begin{enumerate}
[$i)$] \item $S$ is a subgroup of $G$ and $N$ is a normal subgroup of $S$,
\item $K\supseteq k$ is a Galois extension with Galois group $S/N$,
\item char$(k)\nmid |N|$,
\item $(\sigma,\gamma)\in Z^2_{S}(N,K^*)_n$ is
2-cocycle such that $\sigma \in Z^2(N,K^*)$ is non-degenerate.
\end{enumerate}
\end{defin}
Let $(S, K,N,\s,\gamma)$ be a Galois datum associated to $G$. We will denote
by $A(K_\sigma[N],\gamma)$ the twisted group algebra $K_\sigma [N]$ with
$S$-action defined by \begin{equation*}
g\cdot (\alpha u_x)=(g\cdot \alpha)(g\cdot
u_x)=\overline{g}(\alpha)\gamma(g,x)u_{\-^gx}, \end{equation*} for $g\in S$, $x\in
N$, and $\alpha\in K$.
We will denote by $\Ind_S^G(A(K_\sigma[N],\gamma))$ the induced $G$-algebra from
the $S$-algebra $A(K_\sigma [N],\gamma)$.
\begin{obs}
If $(S, K,N,\s,\gamma)$ is a Galois datum where $K=k$, then $S=N$ and $\gamma$ is determined by $\sigma$. Then a Galois datum with $K=k$ is really just a pair $(S,\sigma)$ where $S$ is a subgroup of $G$ and $\sigma\in Z^2(S,k^*)$ is a non-degenerate 2-cocycle.
\end{obs}
Now we can reformulate the main results of \cite{Manuel}.
\begin{teor}\label{main result} Let $G$ be a finite group and let $k$ be a
field.
\begin{enumerate}[i)]
\item Let $(S,K,N,\s,\gamma)$ be a Galois datum associated to $G$. Then
the $G$-algebra $\Ind_S^G(A(K_\sigma[N],\gamma))$ is a $G$-Galois
algebra over $k$.
\item Let $A$ be a $G$-Galois algebra over $k$. Then $A\simeq \Ind_S^G(A(K_\sigma[N],\gamma))$ for a Galois datum $(S,K,N,\s,\gamma)$.
\end{enumerate} \end{teor}
\qed
\section{Isocategorical groups over arbitrary fields}\label{Seccion:Isocategorical groups over arbitrary fields}
Considering Proposition \ref{Prop equivalencias con isocat
existencia bigalois} and Lemma \ref{lema Aut_G}, in order to
construct all groups isocategorical to a fixed group
$G$ is enough to describe the Galois data of $G$ such that
$|\Aut_G(A)|=|G|$, where $A$ is the associated $G$-Galois algebra.
\subsection{Equivariant automorphisms of Galois objects}
Let $G$ be a finite group, $S$ a subgroup of $G$ and
$(B,\cdot)$ an $S$-algebra. For each $g\in G$, we consider the
$g^{-1}Sg$-algebra $(B^{(g)},\cdot_g)$, where $B^{(g)}=B$ as algebras and
$g^{-1}Sg$-action given by $$h\cdot_g b=(g hg^{-1})\cdot b,$$ for all $h\in
g^{-1}Sg$ and $b\in B^{(g)}$.
Note that for all $g\in G$, the map
\begin{align}
\psi_g:\Ind_S^G(B)&\to \Ind_{g^{-1}Sg}^G(B^{(g)})\label{lema isomorfismo Ind_S^G(A) and Ind_g(-1)Sg^G(A^(g))}\\
f&\mapsto \psi_g(f)=[h\mapsto f(gh)].\notag \end{align} is a $G$-algebra isomorphism.
For a pair $(b,g)\in B\times G$, we define an element $\chi_{g}^b\in
\Ind_S^G(B)$ as the function
$$\chi_{g}^b(x)=\left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
0, & \hbox{if $x\notin Sg$} \\
s\cdot b, & \hbox{ if $x=sg$, where $s\in S$.}
\end{array}
\right.
$$
Note that $(b,g), (s',g')\in B\times G$ define the same element in
$\Ind_{S}^G{(B)}$ if and only if there is $s\in S$ such $g'=sg$ and
$b'=s\cdot b$.
The elements $\chi_g^1$ are central idempotents
that only depend of the coset $Sg$ and we will denote by
$\chi_{Sg}$. The action of $G$ on $\Ind_S^G(B)$ defines a transitive action of
$G$ on $\{\chi_{x}\}_{x\in S/G}$ by $h\cdot \chi_{Sg}=
\chi_{Sgh^{-1}}$. If $B$ is a simple algebra the central primitive
idempotents of $\Ind_S^G(B)$ are exactly $\{\chi_{x}\}_{x\in S/G}$.
Therefore, in this case each $G$-algebra automorphism of $\Ind_S^G(B)$
determines a unique automorphism of the $G$-set $\{\chi_{x}\}_{x\in
S/G}$, and a group homomorphism
\begin{align}
\pi: \Aut_G(\Ind_S^G(B))&\to N_G(S)/S \label{definicion de pi}\\
F&\mapsto Sg \notag
\end{align}
where $Sg$ is the unique coset such that $F(\chi_S)=\chi_{Sg}$.
The following proposition can be seen as a generalization of \cite[Theorem 5.5]{Davydov}.
\begin{prop}\label{Prop: exct sequence Aut_G}
Let $G$ be a finite group, $S$ a subgroup of $G$ and
$(B,\cdot)$ be a $S$-Galois algebra. Then, the sequence
\begin{equation}\label{primera sucesion exacta}
1\to \Aut_S(B) \to \Aut_G(\Ind_S^G(B))\to N_G(S)/S,
\end{equation}is exact. The map $\Aut_S(B) \to \Aut_G(\Ind_S^G(B))$ is the
induction and $\Aut_G(\Ind_S^G(B))\to N_G(S)/S$ is the group
morphism \eqref{definicion de pi}. Moreover,
the sequence \begin{equation*}
1\to \Aut_S(B) \to \Aut_G(\Ind_S^G(B))\to N_G(S)/S\to 1,
\end{equation*}is exact if and only if $B\cong B^{(g)}$ for all $g\in N_G(S)$.
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
First, we will see that induction is injective. Let
$T\in \Aut_S(B)$ such that $\Ind_S^G(T)=\id_{\Ind_S^G(B)}$. Then, for
all $r\in \Ind_S^G(B)$, $T\circ r=r$. In particular, for
$\chi_{e}^b$, we have $T\circ \chi_{S}^b(e) =\chi_{S}^b(e)$, so
$T(b)=b$ and this is true for all $b\in B$. Thus $T=\id_B$.
Now, let $F\in \Aut(\Ind_S^G(B))$ such that $\pi(F)=S$, that is, $F(\chi_{Sg})=\chi_{Sg}$ for all $g\in G$. Using the injective
map
\begin{align*}
B&\to \Ind_S^G(B)\\
b&\mapsto \chi_e^b,
\end{align*}we can and will identify $B$ with its image in $\Ind_S^G(B)$. Note that $f \in
B\subset \Ind_S^G(B)$ if and only if $\chi_{Sg}f=0$ for all $g\notin
S$. Thus, $F(\chi_e^b)\in B$, because
$\chi_{Sg}F(\chi_e^b)= F(\chi_{Sg})F(\chi_e^b)=
F(\chi_{Sg}\chi_e^b)=0$ if $g\notin S$. Therefore, $F$ defines an
automorphism $F|_B:B\to B$, by $F(\chi_e^b)=\chi_e^{F|_B(b)}$. We
will see that $F=\Ind_S^G(F|B)$. Let
\begin{align*}
\Ind_S^G(F|_B)(\chi_g^b)&= F|_B\circ \chi_g^b\\
&= F|_B(g^{-1}\cdot\chi_e^b)\\
&=g^{-1}F(\chi_e^b)\\
&=F(g^{-1}\chi_e^b)\\
&=F(\chi_g^b).
\end{align*}Since every $f\in \Ind_S^G(B)$ is a sum of elements of
the form $\chi_g^b$, it follows that $\Ind_S^G(F|_B)= F$.
Now we want to show that $\pi$ is surjective if and only if $B\cong
B^{(g)}$ for all $g\in G$. Suppose that $\pi$ is surjective. Then, for any $g\in N_G(S)$ there
exists $F_g\in \Aut_G(\Ind_S^G(B))$ such that $\pi(\chi_S)=\chi_{Sg}$.
Using \eqref{lema isomorfismo Ind_S^G(A) and Ind_g(-1)Sg^G(A^(g))},
we have $G$-algebras isomorphisms
$$\Ind_S^G(B)\stackrel{F_g}{\longrightarrow}\Ind_{S}^G(B)
\stackrel{\psi_g}{\longrightarrow}\Ind_{S}^G(B^{(g)}),$$ and the
restriction $(\psi_g \circ F_g)|_B:B\to B^{(g)}$ defines an $S$-algebra
isomorphism. Conversely, if $\gamma_g:
B^{(g)}\to B$ is an $S$-algebra isomorphism, then
$$\Ind_S^G(B)\stackrel{\psi_g}{\longrightarrow}\Ind_{S}^G(B^{(g)})
\stackrel{\Ind_S^G(\gamma_g)}{\longrightarrow}\Ind_{S}^G(B),$$ is an
algebra isomorphism such that
$\pi(\Ind_S^G(\gamma_g)\circ\psi_g)=Sg$.
\end{proof}
\begin{corol}\label{corol: condiciones igual orden}
Let $G$ be a finite group and $S\subset G$ be a subgroup. Let $B$ be a simple
$S$-Galois algebra and $A= \Ind_S^G(B)$. Then $|\Aut_G(A)|=|G|$ if
and only if
\begin{enumerate}
\item $|\Aut_S(B)|=|S|$,
\item $S$ is a normal subgroup of $G$,
\item for all $g\in G$, $B^{(g)}\cong B$ as $S$-algebras.
\end{enumerate}
\end{corol}
\begin{proof}
By Proposition \ref{Prop: exct sequence Aut_G} we have,
\begin{align*}
|\Aut_G(A)| &= |\Aut_S(B)||\text{Im}(\pi)|\\
&\leq |\Aut_S(B)||N_G(S)/S|\\
&\leq |S|\frac{|N_G(S)|}{|S|}\\
& = |N_G(S)|\leq |G|.
\end{align*}
Thus, if $|\Aut_G(A)|=|G|$, $S$ is a normal subgroup, $|$Aut$_S(B)|=|S|$ and Im$\pi=G/S$.
Therefore, by Proposition \ref{Prop: exct sequence Aut_G}, $B^{(g)}\cong B$ for all $g\in G$.
Conversely, the third condition implies that $|\Aut_G(A)|= |\Aut_S(B)||N_G(S)/S|$. Since $B$
is normal and $|\Aut_S(B)|= |S|$, we have $|G|=|\Aut_G(A)|$.
\end{proof}
\begin{defin}\label{defin:torsor data}
Let $G$ be a finite group. A Galois data $(S,K,N,\sigma,\gamma)$ will be called a \textit{ torsor data} if
\begin{enumerate}
\item $S$ is abelian
\item $S=N\oplus \Gal(K|k)$,
\item $k$ has a primitive root of unity of order equal to the exponent of $N$,
\item $\sigma$ takes values in $k^*$,
\item $\gamma: S\times N\to k^*$ is a pairing were $\gamma|_{\Gal(K|k)\times N}=1$ and $\gamma|_{N\times N}=\operatorname{Alt}(\sigma)$,
\item $N$ and $S$ are normal subgroups of $G$,
\item $[(\sigma,\gamma)]=[(\sigma^g,\gamma^g)]$ for all $g\in G/S$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{defin}
\begin{obs}
In the information of Galois datum we have the exact sequence of groups
\begin{equation}\label{ecuacion:suc exact}
1\to N \to S \to \Gal(K|k)\to 1.
\end{equation}
Thus, the meaning of condition $S=N\oplus \Gal(K|k)$ in a torsor datum is just the choice of a particular splitting of the sequence \eqref{ecuacion:suc exact}.
\end{obs}
\begin{lem}\label{Lema:descrip automorfismo simple Galois }
Let $B$ be a simple $S$-Galois algebra with Galois data
$(S,K,N,\sigma,\gamma)$. Then the group $\Aut_S(B)$ is
isomorphic to
\begin{align*}
\{( \eta,\omega)\in C^1(N, K^*)\times \mathcal{Z}(\Gal(K|k))&|
\ \partial(\eta)= \Big(\frac{\omega(\sigma)}{\sigma}, \frac{\omega(\gamma)}{\gamma}\Big),
\}
\end{align*}with product $(\eta,\omega)(\eta',\omega')= (
\eta({}^\omega\eta'),\omega\omega')$.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
See \cite[Proposition 5.6]{Manuel}.
\end{proof}
\begin{lem}\label{prop condiciones algebra simple}
Let $B$ be a simple $S$-Galois algebra with Galois data
$(S,K,N,\sigma,\gamma)$. Then $|\Aut_S(B)|=|S|$ if and only if the following conditions are satisfied
\begin{enumerate}
\item $N$ is abelian and $K$ contains a primitive root of unity of
order equal to the exponent of $N$.
\item $\Hom_{\Gal(K|k)}(N,K^*)=\Hom(N,K^*)$, where
\begin{align*}
\Hom_{\Gal(K|k)}(N,K^*)=:\{f:N \to K^*: f(n n')&=f(n)f(n'), \\
f(q nq^{-1}) &=q f(n), \ \forall n, n' \in N, q\in \Gal(K|k)\cong G/N\}
\end{align*}
\item $\Gal(K|k)$ is abelian and for all $\omega \in \Gal(K|k)$
$$[(\sigma,\eta)]= [(\omega(\sigma),\omega(\eta))],$$ as elements in $H^2_{\Gal(K|k)}(N,K^*)$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
The group homomorphism
\begin{align*}
\pi_2: \Aut_S(B) &\to \mathcal{Z}(\text{Gal}(k|K))\\
(\eta,\omega)&\mapsto \omega,
\end{align*}
induces the exact sequence $$1\to \Hom_{\Gal(K|k)}(N,K^*)\to \Aut_S(B)\overset{\pi_2}{\to} \mathcal{Z}(\text{Gal}(k|K)).$$
Therefore,
\begin{align*}
|\Aut_S(B)| &\leq |\Hom_{\Gal(K|k)}(N,K^*)| \ |\text{Im}(\pi_2)| \\
&\leq |\Hom(N,K^*)|\ |\mathcal{Z}(\text{Gal}(k|K))|\\
&\leq |N|\ |\text{Gal}(k|K)|\\
&= |N|\ |S/N|=|S|.
\end{align*}
Thus, $|\Aut_S(B)|=|S|$ if and only if $\text{Im}(\pi_2)=\mathcal{Z}(\text{Gal}(k|K))$, $\mathcal{Z}(\text{Gal}(k|K))=\text{Gal}(k|K) $, $\Hom_{\Gal(K|k)}(N,K^*)=\Hom(N,K^*)$ and $|N|=|\Hom(N,K^*)|$, and these conditions are precisaly $(1)$, $(2)$ and $(3)$.
\end{proof}
\begin{lem}\label{Lema1:main teor 2}
Let $B$ be a simple $S$-Galois algebra with Galois data
$(S,K,N,\sigma,\gamma)$. If $|\Aut_S(B)|=|S|$, then
\begin{itemize}
\item $k$ has a primitive root of unity of order equal to the exponent of $N$,
\item there is a canonical decomposition $S=N\oplus \Gal(K|k)$.
\end{itemize}
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
Let $\omega\in \Gal(K|k)$. Then, there is $\eta_\omega:N\to K^*$ such that $\omega(\sigma)=\delta(\eta_\omega)\sigma$. Therefore, $\operatorname{Alt}(\sigma)=\operatorname{Alt}(\omega(\sigma))=\omega(\operatorname{Alt}(\sigma))$ for all $\omega\in \Gal(K|k)$. Since $N$ has exponent $n$ and $\operatorname{Alt}(\sigma)$ is a non-degenerate bicharacter there are $x,y\in N$ such that $q=\operatorname{Alt}(\sigma)(x,y)$ is a primitive root of unity of order the exponent of $N$. Therefore, $\omega(q)=q$ for all $\omega\in \Gal(K|k)$, so $q\in k$.
Since $k$ has primitive root of unity $\Gal(K|k)$ acts trivially on $\Hom(N,K^*)=\Hom(N,k^*)$. Therefore, by Proposition \ref{prop condiciones algebra simple}, $S= \Aut_{\Aut_S(B)}(B) = N\oplus \Gal(K|k)$.
\end{proof}
\begin{lem}\label{Lema2:main teor 2}
Let $B$ be a simple $S$-Galois algebra with Galois data
$(S,K,N,\sigma,\gamma)$ where $S=N\oplus \Gal(K|k)$. The Galois data is equivalent to a data $(S,K,N,\sigma',\gamma')$, where $\gamma'|_{\Gal(K|k)\times N}=1$, $\sigma'\in Z^2(N,k^*)$ and $\gamma'|_{N\times N}=\operatorname{Alt}(\sigma')=\operatorname{Alt}(\sigma)$.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
Since $S$ is abelian the equation \eqref{C3} implies that for every $x\in N$, $\gamma(-,x):\Gal(K|k)\to K^*$ is a 1-cocycle. By Hilbert's Theorem 90 $H^1(\Gal(K|k),K^*)=0$, therefore there exists $\tau:N\to K^*$ such that $\gamma(g,x)=g(\tau(x))/\tau(x)$ for all $x \in N, g\in \Gal(K|k)$. Therefore, if $\sigma'=\sigma\delta(\tau)$ and $\gamma'=\gamma\partial(\tau)$, it follows that $(S,K,N,\sigma',\gamma')$ is a new Galois datum where $\gamma'|_{\Gal(K|k)\times N}=1$, thus $\sigma'\in Z^2(N,k^*)$ and $\gamma'|_{N\times N}=\operatorname{Alt}(\sigma')=\operatorname{Alt}(\sigma)$. By the equation \eqref{C2}, $g\sigma'(x,y)=\sigma'(x,y)$ for all $g\in \Gal(K|k)$, then $\sigma'(x,y)\in k^*$ for all $x,y\in N$.
\end{proof}
\begin{teor}\label{main result 2} Let $G$ be a finite group and let $k$ be a
field.
\begin{enumerate}[i)]
\item If $(S,K,N,\s,\gamma)$ is a torsor datum associated to $G$, then
$$|\Aut_G(\Ind_S^G(A(K_\sigma[N],\gamma)))|=|G|.$$
\item Let $A$ be a $G$-Galois algebra such that $|\Aut_G(A)|=|G|$. There exists a torsor datum $(S,K,N,\s,\gamma)$ such that $A\simeq \Ind_S^G(A(K_\sigma[N],\gamma))$.
\end{enumerate} \end{teor}
\begin{proof}
Let $A$ be a $G$-Galois algebra such that $|\Aut_G(A)|=|A|$. By Lemma \ref{Lema1:main teor 2} and Lemma \ref{Lema2:main teor 2} $A$ has a Galois datum $(S,K,N,\s,\gamma)$ which satisfies the first five conditions of Definition \ref{defin:torsor data}.
By Corollary \ref{corol: condiciones igual orden}, if $|\Aut_G(A)|=|G|$, then $S$ is a normal subgroup of $G$. We want to find conditions that imply $A(K_\sigma[N],\gamma)\cong A(K_\sigma[N],\gamma)^{(\sigma)}$ for all $\sigma\in G$.
The Galois datum of the simple $S$-algebra $A(K_\sigma[N],\gamma)^{(g)}$ is $$(g^{-1}Sg,g^{-1}Ng,\sigma^{(g)},\gamma^{(g)}),$$
where $$\sigma^{(g)}(x,y):=\sigma(gxg^{-1},gyg^{-1}),\ \ \gamma^{(g)}(h,x):=\gamma(ghg^{-1},gxg^{-1})$$ for all $h\in g^{-1}Sg, x,y \in g^{-1}Sg$.
By \cite[Proposition 5.6]{Manuel} $A(K_\sigma[N],\gamma)\cong A(K_\sigma[N],\gamma)^{(g)}$ for all $g\in G$ if and only $N$ is normal in $G$ and there is $\omega \in \Gal(K|k)$ such that $(\omega(\sigma),\omega(\eta))$ is cohomologous to $(\sigma^g,\eta^g)$. By condition (3) of Lemma \ref{prop condiciones algebra simple} $(\omega(\sigma),\omega(\eta))$ is cohomologous to $(\sigma,\eta)$, so $A(K_\sigma[N],\gamma)\cong A(K_\sigma[N],\gamma)^{(\sigma)}$ if and only if for all $g\in G$, $$[(\sigma,\eta)]=[(\sigma^g,\eta^g)],$$ as elements in $H^2_{\Gal(K|k)}(N,K^*)$, where $\sigma^g(x,y)=\sigma(gxg^{-1},gyg^{-1})$ and $\eta^g(s,x)=\eta(gsg^{-1},gxg^{-1})$, for all $x,y\in N, g\in G$. Therefore, the new Galois datum constructed using Lemma \ref{Lema2:main teor 2} is a torsor datum.
Conversely, if $(S,K,N,\s,\gamma)$ is a torsor datum, then the first five conditions of Definition \ref{defin:torsor data} and Lemma \ref{prop condiciones algebra simple} imply that $|\Aut_S(A(K_\sigma,\gamma))|=|S|$. The conditions (6) and (7) of Definition \ref{defin:torsor data} and Corollary \ref{corol: condiciones igual orden} imply that $|\Aut_G(\Ind_S^G(A(K_\sigma[N],\gamma)))|=|G|.$
\end{proof}
The next corollary is a generalization of \cite[Theorem 1.3]{isocategorical} and \cite[Corollary 6.2]{Davydov}.
\begin{corol}
Let $G_1$ and $G_2$ be finite groups and let $k$ be a field. Then, $G_1$ and $G_2$ are isocategorical over $k$ if and if there is a torsor datum of $G_1$ with $G_1$-Galois algebra associated $A$ such that $\Aut_{G_1}(A)\cong G_2$.
\end{corol}
\qed
\subsection{Isocategorical groups over formally real fields}
A field $k$ is called formally real if $-1$ is not a sum of squares. A formally real field with no formally real proper algebraic extensions is called a real closed field. Examples of real fields are $\mathbb{Q}$ and $\mathbb{R}$. The field of real numbers is a real closed.
Every formally real field $k$ has characteristic zero and the field extension $k\subset k(i)$ (where $i^2=-1$) is a Galois extension with $\Gal(k(i)|k)\cong \mathbb{Z}/2\mathbb{Z}$.
\begin{defin}\label{defin: real torsor data}
Let $G$ be a finite group and $k$ be a formally real field.
\begin{enumerate}
\item A real torsor datum for $G$ is a pair $(N,\sigma)$ where
\begin{itemize}
\item $N$ is a normal abelian elementary 2-subgroup of $G$.
\item $\sigma \in Z^2(N,\mu_2)$ is a non-degenerate 2-cocycle, where $\mu_2=\langle -1 \rangle$.
\item $[\sigma]=[\sigma^g]$ for all $g\in G/N$, as elements in $H^2(N,\mu_2)$.
\end{itemize}
\item A semi-real torsor datum for $G$ is a torsor datum $(S,k(i), N,\sigma,\gamma)$, where
\begin{itemize}
\item $N$ is an abelian 2-group
\item $\sigma \in Z^2(N,\mu_2)$, where $\mu_2=\langle -1 \rangle$.
\item $[(\sigma,\gamma)]=[(\sigma^g,\gamma^g)]$ for all $g\in G/S$, as elements in $H^2_S(N,\mu_4)$, where $\mu_4=\langle i \rangle$.
\end{itemize}
\end{enumerate}
\end{defin}
\begin{obs}
A real torsor datum $(N,\sigma)$ defines a torsor datum $(N,k,N,\sigma,\gamma_\sigma)$, where $\gamma_\sigma(x,y)=\sigma(x,y)\sigma(xy,x^{-1})\sigma(x,x^{-1})^{-1},$ for all $x, y\in V$.
\end{obs}
\begin{lem}\label{Lema:resultado3}
Let $N$ be an elementary abelian 2-group, $k$ a real closed field and let $S=N\oplus\Gal(k(i)|k)$. Every 2-cocycle in $Z^2_S(N,k(i)^*)$ is cohomologous to a 2-cocycle in $\sigma\in Z^2_S(N,\mu_2)$ and $\alpha, \beta \in Z^2_S(N,k(i)^*)$ are cohomologous as elements in $Z^2_S(N,k(i)^*)$ if and only if $\alpha, \beta$ are cohomologous as elements in $Z^2_S(N,\mu_4)$.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
Since $k$ is a real closed field, $k(i)$ is an algebraically closed field of characteristic zero. It is well known that for finite abelian groups every 2-cocycle with values in $k(i)^*$ is cohomologous to a bicharacter \cite[Proposition 2.6]{Tambara-Func}, so we can suppose that $\sigma$ is a bicharacter and since $N$ is an elementary 2-group $\sigma$ takes values in $\mu_2$. Then, the equation \eqref{C2} implies that $\gamma(g, -):N\to k(i)^*$ is a character for all $g \in S$. Again, since $N$ is an elementary abelian 2-group, $\gamma$ only takes values in $\mu_2$. Now, equation \eqref{C3} implies that $\gamma:S\times N\to \mu_2$ in fact is a pairing and therefore every 2-cocycle in $Z^2_S(N,k(i)^*)$ is cohomologous to a 2-cocycle in $Z^2_S(N,\mu_2)\subset Z^2_S(N,\mu_4)$. Let $(\sigma,\gamma)\in Z^2_S(N,\mu_2)\subset Z^2_S(N,\mu_4)$ and $\eta:N\to \mu_\infty$, such that $\partial(\eta)=(\sigma,\gamma)$. Let $g\in \Gal(K(i)|k)\subset S$ be the conjugation on $k(i)$. Then $\gamma(g,x)=\overline{\eta(x)}/\eta(x)$ for all $x\in N$. Since $\gamma(g,x)\in \mu_2$, then $\eta(x)\in \mu_4$ for all $x\in N$. Then, if $\alpha, \beta \in Z^2_S(N,\mu_2)\subset Z^2_S(N,\mu_4)$ and they are cohomologous as elements in $Z^2_S(N,k(i)^*)$ they are cohomologous as elements in $Z^2_S(N,\mu_4)$.
\end{proof}
\begin{teor}\label{main result 3} Let $G$ be a finite group and $k$ be a
formally real closed field. Let $A$ be a Galois algebra over $k$ such that $|\Aut_G(A)|=|G|$. Then, $A\simeq \Ind_S^G(A(k(i)_\sigma[N],\gamma))$ or $A\simeq \Ind_S^G(A(k_\sigma[N],\gamma))$ for a semi-real or real torsor datum, respectively.
\end{teor}
\begin{proof}
Since $k$ is a formally real field the unique primitive root of unity is $-1$. Let $A$ be a $G$-Galois algebra over $k$ such that $|\Aut_G(A)|=|G|$. By Theorem \ref{main result 2} there exists a torsor datum $(S,K,N,\s,\gamma)$, where $N$ is an abelian group of exponent $2$. Therefore $N$ is an elementary abelian group.
Since $H^2(N,k^*)\cong H^2(N,\mu_2)$ for any formally real closed field, if $K=k$ the torsor datum defines a real torsor. Now, if $K$ is a proper extension of $k$, then $K=k(i)$ and by Lemma \ref{Lema:resultado3} the torsor datum is equivalent to a semi-real torsor for $G$.
\end{proof}
\begin{corol}\label{Corol Clasification over Q nad Z[1/2]}
Let $G_1$ and $G_2$ be finite groups and $k$ be a formally real field. Then:
\begin{enumerate}
\item $G_1$ and $G_2$ are isocategorical over $k$ if and only if there is a real or semi-real torsor datum such that $\Aut_{G_1}(A)\cong G_2$, where $A$ is the associated Galois algebra to the datum.
\item $G_1$ and $G_2$ are isocategorical over $k$ if and if they are isocategorical over $\mathbb{Q}$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{corol}
\begin{proof}
Let $k'$ be a formally real closed extension of $k$. If $G_1$ and $G_2$ are isocategorical over $k$, then by Proposition \ref{Prop equivalencias con isocat existencia bigalois} there exists a $G_1$-Galois algebra $A$ such that $\Aut_{G_1}(A)\cong G_2$. The $G_1$-algebra $A'=A\otimes_k k'$ is also Galois and $\Aut_{G_1}(A')\cong G_2$. By Theorem \ref{main result 3} there exists a real or semi-real torsor datum such that $A' \simeq \Ind_S^{G_1}(A(k'(i)_\sigma[N],\gamma))$. By the definition of real of semi-real datum, we have that $A'$ has a $k$-form $D:=\Ind_S^{G_1}(A(k(i)_\sigma[N],\gamma))$ and by Lemma \ref{Lema:resultado3}, $\Aut_{G_1}(D)\cong \Aut_{G_1}(A')\cong G_2$. Therefore $G_1$ and $G_2$ are isocategorical over $k$. For the second part note that also $A'$ has a rational form $L:=\Ind_S^{G_1}(A(\mathbb{Q}(i)_\sigma[N],\gamma))$ and $\Aut_{G_1}(L)\cong \Aut_{G_1}(A')\cong G_2$.
\end{proof}
\section{Galois algebras and Weil representations}\label{Section:Galois algebras and Weil representations}
\subsection{ Categorical setting }
Let $\mathcal{G}$ be a small groupoid. We will denote by $\underline{\Aut(\mathcal{G})}$ the
monoidal groupoid where objects are autoequivalences of $\mathcal{G}$,
morphisms are natural isomorphism and the monoidal structure is given by the
composition of functors.
Given a group $X$, we will denote by $\underline{X}$ the discrete
monoidal category where objects are elements of $X$ and the monoidal structure is given by the product of $X$.
A normalized (right) \textit{action} of a group $X$ on a category $\mathcal{G}$ is a monoidal functor $\rho_*:\underline{X^{op}}\to \underline{\Aut(\mathcal{G})}$, where $X^{op}$ denoted the opposite group of $X$. More concretely, an action of $X$ on $\mathcal{G}$ consists of the following data:
\begin{itemize}
\item functors $(-)^{(x)}:\mathcal{G}\to \mathcal{G}, A\mapsto A^{(x)}$ for all $x\in X$,
\item natural isomorphisms $\gamma_{x,y}^A: A^{(xy)}\to A^{(x)(y)}$ for all $x,y\in X, A\in \mathcal{G}$,
\end{itemize} such that $(-)^{1}=\id_\mathcal{G}$, $\gamma_{x,1}^A=\gamma_{1,x}^A=\id_{A^{(x)}}$ for all $x\in X$ and the diagrams
\begin{equation}\label{2-cociclo G-accion}
\begin{diagram}
\node{ A^{(xyz)}}\arrow{s,l}{ \gamma_{x,yz}^{A}}\arrow{e,t}{\gamma_{xy,z}^A}\node{A^{(xy)(z)} }\arrow{s,r}{(\gamma_{x,y}^{A})^{(z)}}\\
\node{ A^{(x)(yz)}}\arrow{e,t}{\gamma_{y,z}^{A^{(x)}}}
\node{A^{(x)(y)(z)}}
\end{diagram}
\end{equation}commute for all $x,y,z\in G, A\in \mathcal{G}$.
There is two different groupoids associated to a
normalized action of a group $X$ on a groupoid $\mathcal{G}$: The groupoid
of equivariant objects $\mathcal{G}^X$ and the quotient groupoid $\mathcal{G}/\!\!/X$.
\subsubsection{The groupoid of $X$-equivariant objects}
The groupoid $\mathcal{G}^X$ of $X$-equivariant objects is defined as follows: an object in $\mathcal{G}^X$ is
a pair $(A,u)$, where $A\in \mathcal{G}$ is an object and $u_x: A^{(x)}\to
A$ is a family of morphisms such that $u_1=\id_A$ and the diagrams
\begin{equation}\label{diagrama u_g}
\begin{diagram}
\node{ A^{(xy)}}\arrow{s,l}{ \gamma_{x,y}}\arrow{e,t}{u_{xy}}\node{A }\\
\node{ A^{(x)(y)}}\arrow{e,t}{(u_x)^{(y)}}
\node{A^{(y)}}\arrow{n,r}{u_y}
\end{diagram}
\end{equation} commute for all $x,y\in X$. A morphism from $(A,u)$ to $(A',u')$ is
a morphism $f\in \Hom_\mathcal{G}(A,A')$ such that the diagrams
$$
\begin{diagram}
\node{ A^{(x)}}\arrow{s,l}{f^{(x)}}\arrow{e,t}{u_{x}}\node{A }\arrow{s,r}{f}\\
\node{ A'^{(x)}}\arrow{e,t}{u'_x} \node{A}
\end{diagram}
$$commute for all $x\in X$.
\subsubsection{The quotient groupoid of a $X$-action}
The groupoid $\mathcal{G}/\!\!/X$ has objects Obj$(\mathcal{G})$ and morphisms
$$\Hom_{\mathcal{G}/\!\!/X}(A,B)=\{(g,\alpha)| g\in X \text{ and } \alpha \in
\Hom_\mathcal{G}(A^{(g)},B)\}.$$ The composition of
$(g,\alpha_g)\in\Hom_{\mathcal{G}/\!\!/X}(A,B)$ and $(h,\alpha_h)\in
\Hom_{\mathcal{G}/\!\!/X}(B,C)$ is defined by $ (g,\alpha_g)\circ
(h,\alpha_h):=(gh,\alpha_g\odot \alpha_h)\in \Hom_{\mathcal{G}/\!\!/X}(A,C)$
where $\alpha_g\odot \alpha_h: A^{(gh)}\to C$ is defined by the
commutativity of the diagram
$$
\begin{diagram}
\node{ A^{(gh)}}\arrow{s,l}{ \gamma_{g,h}}\arrow{e,t}{\alpha_g\odot \alpha_h}\node{C }\\
\node{ A^{(g)(h)}}\arrow{e,t}{\alpha_g^{(h)}}
\node{B^{(h)}}\arrow{n,r}{\alpha_h}
\end{diagram}
$$ The identity of an object $A$ is given by $(1,\id_A)$ and the
associativity of the composition follows from the naturality of $\gamma$ and the commutativity of the diagrams \eqref{2-cociclo G-accion}:
\begin{align*}
\alpha_g \odot (\alpha_h\odot \alpha_k) &= \alpha_k\alpha_h^{(k)} \gamma_{h,k}^A\alpha_g^{(hk)}\gamma_{g,hk}^A\\
=&\alpha_k\alpha_h^{(k)}( \gamma_{h,k}^A\alpha_g^{(hk)})\gamma_{g,hk}^A\\
&= \alpha_k\alpha_h^{(k)}(\alpha_g^{(h)(k)}\gamma_{h,k}^{A^{(g)}})\gamma_{g,hk}^A\\
&= \alpha_k\alpha_h^{(k)}\alpha_g^{(h)(k)}(\gamma_{h,k}^{A^{(g)}}\gamma_{g,hk}^A)\\
&= \alpha_k\alpha_h^{(k)}\alpha_g^{(h)(k)}((\gamma_{g,h}^A)^{(k)}\gamma_{gh,k}^A)\\
&= \alpha_k (\alpha_h\alpha_g^{(h)}\gamma_{g,h}^A)^{(k)}\gamma_{gh,k}^A\\
&= \alpha_k (\alpha_g\odot \alpha_h)^{(k)}\gamma_{gh,k}^A\\
&= (\alpha_g\odot\alpha_h )\odot \alpha_k.
\end{align*}
The next proposition gives a complete description of the structure
of the groupoids $\mathcal{G}^X$ and $\mathcal{G}/\!\!/X$.
\begin{prop}\label{Prop estructura grupoide accion e invariante}
Let $X$ be a group acting on a groupoid $\mathcal{G}$. Then
\begin{itemize}
\item[(a)] The set of isomorphism classes of $\mathcal{G}/\!\!/X$ is the set
of orbits of the $X$-set of isomorphism classes of objects of
$\mathcal{G}$.
\item[(b)] For every $A\in \text{Obj}(\mathcal{G})$, the sequence
\begin{align}\label{sequence exact of quotient groupoid}
1\to \Aut_\mathcal{G}(A)\to \Aut_{\mathcal{G}/\!\!/X}(A)\to St([A])\to 1
\end{align} is exact. Where $\Aut_\mathcal{G}(A)\to \Aut_{\mathcal{G}/\!\!/X}(A), f\mapsto (1,f)$,
$\Aut_{\mathcal{G}/\!\!/X}(A)\to St([A]), (g,\alpha_g)\mapsto g$ and
$St([A])=\{g\in X| A^{(g)}\cong A\}$.
\item[(c)] Suppose that $St([A])=X$. There is a bijective
correspondence between splittings of the exact sequence
\eqref{sequence exact of quotient groupoid} and families of morphisms
$\{u_g:A^{(g)}\to A\}_{g\in X}$ such that $(A,u_g)\in \mathcal{G}^{X}$.
\item[(d)] If $(A,u_g)\in \mathcal{G}^{X}$, then $X$ acts by the right on
$\Aut_\mathcal{G}(A)$ by $$f\cdot g:=u_g(
f)^{(g)} u_g^{-1},$$for all $g\in X, f\in \Aut_\mathcal{G}(A)$. Moreover,
$\Aut_{\mathcal{G}^X}((A,u_g))=Aut_\mathcal{G}(A)^{X}$ and the isomorphism classes
of objects in $\mathcal{G}^X$ with underling object $A$ are in
correspondence with elements of the pointed set
$H^1(X,\Aut_\mathcal{G}(A))$.
\end{itemize}
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
The parts (a), (b) and (c) are intermediate from the definitions.
Let $(A,u_g)\in \mathcal{G}^X$. The group morphism $\hat{u} :X\to \Aut_{\mathcal{G}/\!\!/X}(A), g\mapsto (g,u_g)$ is a splitting of the exact sequence \eqref{sequence exact of quotient groupoid}. Therefore, the group $X$ acts (on the right) on $\Aut_\mathcal{G}(X)$ by $$f\cdot g:=u_{g^{-1}}\odot f\odot u_{g}$$for all $g\in G, f\in \Aut_\mathcal{G}(X)$. Using the diagrams \eqref{diagrama u_g}, we have $\id_A=u_gu_{g^{-1}}^{(g)}\gamma_{g^{-1},g}^A$. Hence
\begin{align*}
f\cdot g &:= u_{g^{-1}}\odot f\odot u_{g}\\
&= u_g f^{(g)}u_{g^{-1}}^{(g)}\gamma_{g^{-1},g}^A\\
&= u_gf^{(g)} u_g^{-1},
\end{align*}for all for all $g\in G, f\in \Aut_\mathcal{G}(A)$. Now is clear that $\Aut_{\mathcal{G}^X}((A,u_g))=Aut_\mathcal{G}(A)^{X}$.
The pointed set $H^1(X,\Aut_\mathcal{G}(A))$ is in bijective correspondence with the set of conjugacy classes of splittings of the exact sequence \eqref{sequence exact of quotient groupoid}. Therefore, by (c) and the first part of (d), $H^1(X,\Aut_\mathcal{G}(A))$ is in bijective correspondence with the set of isomorphism classes of objects in $\mathcal{G}^X$.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Actions on the groupoid of $N$-Galois algebras}
\subsubsection{Group extensions}
Let $X$ and $N$ be a groups. An $X$-crossed system over $N$ is a pair of maps
\begin{itemize}
\item $\cdot :X\times N\to N, (n,x)\mapsto \ ^xn$
\item $\theta:X\times X\to N$
\end{itemize}such that the set $N\times X$ with the product given by $$(n,x)(m,y):=(n(^xm)\theta(x,y),xy), \ \ \text{for all } (n,x), (m,y)\in N\times X$$ is a group with unit $(1,1)$. It is easy to see that a pair $(\cdot, \theta )$ is a $X$-crossed system if and only if
\begin{itemize}
\item $^x(nm)=\ (^xn)(^ym)$
\item $\theta(x,y)\ ^{xy}n=\ ^x(^yn)\theta(x,y)$
\item $\theta(x,y)\theta(xy,z)=\ ^x\theta(y,z)\theta(x,yz)$
\item $\theta(x,1)=\theta(1,x)=1$
\item $^1n=n$
\end{itemize}for all $x,y,z\in X, m,n\in N$.
We will denote by $ N\#_\theta X$ the group and will call it a crossed product of $X$ by $N$. Note that we have an exact sequence $$1\to N\to N\#_\theta X\to X\to 1,$$ where $N\to N\#_\theta X, n\mapsto (n,1)$ and $N\#_\theta X\to X, (n,x)\mapsto x$.
Let $N$ be a finite group and let $k$ be a field. It is well known that every morphism between Galois algebras over $k$ is an isomorphism. Therefore, the category $\mathcal{G}al(N,k)$ of $N$-Galois algebras over a $k$ is a groupoid.
Let $X$ be a finite group and let $(N,\cdot,\theta)$ be an $X$-crossed system. The crossed system defines an action of $X$ on $\mathcal{G}al(N,k)$ as follows. Let $A$ be a $N$-Galois algebra over $k$. Let $A^{(x)}=A$ as algebras with new $N$-action given by $n\cdot a:=\ ^{x}n\cdot a$, for all $x \in X, n\in N, a\in A$ and let
\begin{align*}
\gamma_{x,y}: A^{(xy)} &\to\ A^{(x)(y)} \\
a &\mapsto \theta(x,y)a
\end{align*}
for all $a\in A$. It is straightforward to see that the above formulas define a normalized right $X$-action on $\mathcal{G}al(N,k)$.
\begin{prop}\label{Prop:Isomorfismo Automorfismo Galois y auto grupoide equivariant} Let $X$ be a finite group, $(N,\cdot,\theta)$ be an $X$-crossed system. Let $A\in \mathcal{G}al(N,k)$. Then, there is an isomorphism of exact sequences
$$
\begin{diagram}
\node{1}\arrow{e,t}{}\node{ \Aut_N(A)}\arrow{s,l}{ \id}\arrow{e,t}{}\node{ \Aut_{N\#_\theta X}(\Ind_N^{N\#_\theta X}(A))} \arrow{s,l}{ \cong}\arrow{e,t}{}\node{X}\arrow{s,l}{ \id}\\
\node{1} \arrow{e,t}{} \node{ \Aut_{\mathcal{G}al(N,k)}(A)}\arrow{e,t}{}
\node{\Aut_{\mathcal{G}al(N,k)/\!\!/X}(A)}\arrow{e,t}{}\node {X}
\end{diagram}$$
where the first sequence is \eqref{primera sucesion exacta} and the second one is \eqref{sequence exact of quotient groupoid}.
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
Let $G:= N\#_\theta X$, the crossed product group. Let $A$ be a $N$-Galois algebra. For each $x\in X$ the map \begin{align*}
\psi_x:\Ind_N^G(A)&\to \Ind_{N}^G(A^{(x)})\\
f&\mapsto \psi_x(f)=[(n,z)\mapsto f(^xn \theta(x,z),xz))],
\end{align*} defines a $G$-algebra isomorphism. The map
\begin{align*}
F:\Aut_{\mathcal{G}al(N,k)/\!\!/X}(A) &\to \Aut_{N\#_\theta X}(\Ind_N^{N\#_\theta X}(A))\\
(\alpha_x,x) &\mapsto \Ind(\alpha_x)\circ\psi_x,
\end{align*}is a morphism of groups. In fact,
\begin{align*}
[F(\alpha_y,y)\circ F(\alpha_x,x)] (f)(n,z) &=[\Ind(\alpha_y)\psi_y \Ind(\alpha_x)\psi_x] (f) (n,z)\\
&=[\Ind(\alpha_y)\Ind(\alpha_x)\psi_x] (f) (^yn\theta(y,z),yz)\\
&=[\Ind(\alpha_y)\Ind(\alpha_x)] (f) (^x(^yn))^x\theta(y,z)\theta(x,yz),xyz)\\
&=[\Ind(\alpha_y)\Ind(\alpha_x)] (f)( ^x(^yn)^x\theta(y,z)\theta(x,yz),xyz)\\
&=[\Ind(\alpha_y)\Ind(\alpha_x)] (f)( ^x(^yn)\theta(x,y)\theta(xy,z),xyz)\\
&=[\Ind(\alpha_y)\Ind(\alpha_x)] (f)( \theta(x,y)(^{xy}n)\theta(xy,z),xyz)\\
&=[\Ind(\alpha_y)\Ind(\alpha_x)\Ind(\gamma_{x,y})] (f)( ^{xy}n\theta(xy,z),xyz)\\
&=[\Ind(\alpha_y)\Ind(\alpha_x)\Ind(\gamma_{x,y})\psi_{xy}] (f)( n,z)\\
&=[\Ind(\alpha_y\alpha_x)\Ind(\gamma_{x,y})\psi_{xy}] (f)( n,z)\\
&=[\Ind(\alpha_y\alpha_x\gamma_{x,y})\psi_{xy}] (f)( n,z)\\
&= F(\alpha_x\odot \alpha_y,xy)(f)(n,z)
\end{align*}for all $(n,z)\in N\#_\theta X$.
It follows from the proof of Proposition \ref{Prop: exct sequence Aut_G} that $F$ is injective. We claim that $F$ is surjective. Let $W\in \Aut_{N\#_\theta X}(\Ind_N^{N\#_\theta X}(A))$. There is a unique $x\in X$ such that $W(\chi_1^x)=\chi_1^1$, so $W\psi_x^{-1}(\chi_1^y)=\chi_1^y$ for all $y\in X$. If $\alpha_x=(W\psi_x^{-1})|_A$, then $W\psi_x^{-1}=\Ind(\alpha_x)$, thus $W=F(\alpha_x,x)$.
\end{proof}
\subsection{The Finite Weil representation associated to a simple Galois algebra}
Let $S$ be a finite abelian group and $A$ be an $S$-Galois algebra. Then, $\Aut_S(A)$ is an abelian group. Let $$\operatorname{St}(A)= \{g\in \Aut(S)| A^{(g)}\cong A \text{ as $S$-algebras}\}.$$
\begin{prop-def}\label{weil action}
Let $S$ be a finite abelian group and $A$ be an $S$-Galois algebra. If we choose an isomorphism of $S$-algebras $\alpha_g:A^{(g)}\to A$ for each $g\in \operatorname{St}(A)$, then
\begin{align*}
g\cdot f &:= \alpha_g^{-1} f \alpha_{g},\\
\theta(x,y) &:= \alpha_x^{-1}\alpha_y^{-1}\alpha_{xy} \in \Aut_S(A).
\end{align*}define a crossed system of $\operatorname{St}(A)$ over $\Aut_S(A)$. The crossed product $\Aut_S(A)\#_\theta \operatorname{St}(A)$ acts on $A$ by algebra automorphisms as
\begin{equation}\label{ecuacion de la accion de Weil}
(\psi,x)\cdot a=\psi(\alpha_{x}^{-1}(a)).
\end{equation}This action will be called the \textit{Weil action}. If the cohomology class $$\theta \in Z^2(\operatorname{St}(A),\Aut_S(S))$$ is zero, $\operatorname{St}(A)$ acts on $A$ and this action will be also called the \textit{Weil action}.
\end{prop-def}
\begin{proof}
Straightforward.
\end{proof}
If $A$ is a simple algebra, once a simple $A$-module $M$ is fixed, there is a canonical isomorphism $A\cong M_n(D)$, where $D=\End_A(M)$. Using the Skolem-Noether theorem, the Weil action defines and is defined by a unique (up to isomorphism) projective representation $\rho :\Aut_S(A)\#_\theta \operatorname{St}(A)\to \operatorname{PGL}(M):= \operatorname{GL}_k(M)/k^*$ by the equation $$\alpha_g(f)(v)=\rho_gf\rho_g^{-1}(v)$$ for all $f\in M_n(D), v\in M$.
\begin{ejem}\label{cannoical weil}
Let $V$ be an abelian group of odd order and $\omega \in \operatorname{Hom}(\wedge^2 V,k^*)$ a non-degenerate skew-symmetric bicharacter. Let $A=k_\omega[V]$ be the twisted group algebra. Then $A$ is a $V$-Galois algebra, \begin{equation}\label{definicion de grupo simplectico}
\operatorname{Sp}(V,\omega)=\{g\in \Aut(V)| \omega(x,y)=\omega(g(x),g(y))\}= \operatorname{St}(A)
\end{equation} and $\Aut_V(A)=\widehat{V}$. The group $\operatorname{Sp}(V,\omega)$ acts on $A$ by $\alpha_g:A\to A, u_x\mapsto u_{g(x)}$. Fixing a Lagrangian decomposition of $V=U\oplus W$, $A$ acts on $M:=\text{Span} (\{t_b| b\in U\})$ by $u_{x\oplus y}\cdot t_b=\omega(y,b)t_{x+b}$ and the associated representation corresponds to the usual Weil representation.
\end{ejem}
\begin{obs}
The Weil action defined in Example \ref{cannoical weil} can be seen as the \textit{canonical Weil representation} because it is defined only in terms of the pair $(V,\omega)$.
\end{obs}
\subsection{The Weil representation of a Symplectic module}
Let $V$ be an abelian group. A skew-symmetric form on $V$ is a bicharacter $\omega: V\times V\to \mathbb{C}^*$ such that $\omega(v,v)=1$ for all $v\in V$. We will denote by $\bigwedge^2 \widehat{V}$ the abelian group of all skew-symmetric forms on $V$.
A symplectic module is a pair $(V,\omega)$, where $V$ is a finite abelian group and $\omega$ is a non-degenerate skew-symmetric form. We define $\operatorname{Sp}(V,\omega)$ the symplectic group of $(V,\omega)$ by \eqref{definicion de grupo simplectico}
\begin{ejem}\label{Ejem:smplectico lineal a simplecto modulo}
Let $\mathbb{F}_{p^n}$ be the finite field with $p^n$ elements. Let $V$ be an $\mathbb{F}_{p^n}$-vector space and $\langle-,-\rangle:V\times V\to \mathbb{F}_{p^n}$ a symplectic $\mathbb{F}_{p^n}$-bilinear form. Using the trace map $\operatorname{Tr}: \mathbb{F}_{p^n}\to \mathbb{F}_{p}, x\mapsto x+x^p+\cdots x^{p-1}$ we define the skew-symmetric form
\begin{align*}
\omega: V\times V&\to \mathbb{C}^*\\
(v,w)&\mapsto e^{\frac{ 2\pi i\operatorname{Tr}(\langle v,w\rangle)}{p} }.
\end{align*}
\begin{prop}\label{Prop:ejem simplec lineal simplec module}
The pair $(V,\omega)$ is a symplectic module and the linear symplectic group $\operatorname{Sp}_k(V)$ is a subgroup of $\operatorname{Sp}(V,\omega)$.
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
It is clear that $\omega \in \bigwedge^2 \widehat{V}$, so we only will see that $\omega$ is non-degenerate. Suppose that $\omega(v,w)= 1$ for all $w\in V$, so $\operatorname{Tr}(\langle v,w\rangle)=0$ for all $y\in V$. Therefore, $\operatorname{Tr}(c\langle v,w\rangle)=\operatorname{Tr}(\langle v,cw\rangle)=0$ for all $c\in \mathbb{F}_{p^n}$. Since the bilinear form $\mathbb{F}_{p^n}\times \mathbb{F}_{p^n}\to \mathbb{F}_{p}, (a,b)\mapsto \operatorname{Tr}(ab)$ is non-degenerate, then $\langle v,w\rangle=0$ for all $w\in V$. Finally, since $\langle-,-\rangle$ is non-degenerate $v=0$, so $\omega$ is a non-degenerate.
\end{proof}
\end{ejem}
Let $(V,\omega)$ be a symplectic module. By Proposition \ref{Prop:exis de 2-cociclo para simplectco} there exists $\alpha\in Z^2(V,\mathbb{C}^*)$ such that $\omega =\operatorname{Alt}(\alpha)$ and $$\operatorname{Sp}(V,\omega)=\{g\in \Aut(V)| \exists \eta \in C^1(V,\mathbb{C}^*): \frac{\alpha^g}{\alpha}=\delta(\eta) \}.$$
The tuple $(V,k,V,\alpha,\eta_\alpha)$ is a torsor datum. Hence, $A=\mathbb{C}_{\alpha}[V]$ is a simple $V$-Galois algebra and by Lemma \ref{Lema:descrip automorfismo simple Galois } $$\Aut_V(A)= \widehat{V}.$$
Let us fix for every $g\in \operatorname{Sp}(V,\omega)$ a cochain $\eta_g\in C^1(V,\mathbb{C}^*)$ such that $\frac{\alpha^g}{\alpha}=\delta(\eta_g)$. The map $\alpha_g: A\to A^{(g)}, u_x\mapsto \eta_g(x)u_{g(x)}$ is an isomorphism of $V$-algebras. Thus, by Proposition \ref{weil action} there is an associated crossed product group $$\operatorname{ASp}(V,\omega):=\widehat{V}\#_{\theta} \operatorname{Sp}(V,\omega).$$ Following \cite{isocategorical} we call $\operatorname{ASp}(V,\omega)$ the \emph{affine pseudo-symplectic group}.
The Weil representation of the affine pseudo-symplectic group $\operatorname{ASp}(V,\omega)$ is the projective representation associated to the Weil action of $\operatorname{ASp}(V,\omega)$ on the simple algebra $A=\mathbb{C}_{\alpha}[V]$, see Proposition \ref{weil action}.
\subsection{The Weil representation associated to a quadratic module }
\begin{defin}
An abelian group $V$ isomorphic to $(\mathbb{Z}/n\mathbb{Z})^r$ will be called a homogeneous module. The number $r$ is called the rank and $n$ the exponent of $V$.
\end{defin}
We will denote by $\mu_n$ the group of all root of unity of order $n$ in $\mathbb{C}$.
A quadratic form on a homogeneous module $V$ of exponent $n$ is a map $q:V\to \mu_n$ such that $q(x)=q(x^{-1})$ and the map
\begin{align*}
\omega_q:V\times V &\to \mathbb{C}^*\\
(x,y)&\mapsto \frac{q(xy)}{q(x)q(y)}
\end{align*}
is a bicharacter. The group of all quadratic forms on a homogeneous module $V$ will be denoted by $\operatorname{Quad}(V)$.
\begin{defin}
A quadratic module is a pair $(V,q)$, where $V$ is a finite homogeneous module and $q$ is a quadratic form on $V$ such that the associated skew-symmetric form $\omega_q$ is non-degenerate.
\end{defin}
Given a quadratic module $(V,q)$ the orthogonal group of $(V,q)$ is defined as $$O(V,q)=\{g \in \Aut(V) | q(x)=q(g(x)), \ \forall x\in V\}.$$
\begin{ejem}\label{Ejemplo: modulo cuadratico de spacop cuadratico}
Let $k$ be field and $V$ a finite dimensional $k$-vector space. Recall that a (usual) quadratic form is a function $q:V\to k$ such that $q(ax+by)=a^2q(x)+abB(x,y)+ b^2q(y)$ for all $a,b \in k, x, y\in V$, where $B$ is a $k$-bilinear form on $V$. The form $q$ is called nondefective if the bilinear form $B$ is non-degenerate. Note that if $k$ has characteristic different from 2, the quadratic form is totally determined by $B$. A quadratic (linear) space is a pair $(V,q)$ where $V$ is a linear space and $q$ is a quadratic form whose associated bilinear form is non-degenerate. Given a linear quadratic module $(V,q)$ the linear orthogonal group of $(V,q)$ is defined as $$O_k(V,q)=\{g \in \operatorname{GL}_k(V) | q(x)=q(g(x)), \ \forall x\in V\}.$$
Let $V$ be an $\mathbb{F}_{p^n}$-vector space and $q:V\to \mathbb{F}_{p^n}$ a quadratic form. Le us define the quadratic form
\begin{align*}
\widehat{q}: V&\to \mu_p\\
v&\mapsto e^{\frac{2\pi i\Tr(q(v))}{p}}.
\end{align*}
\begin{prop}
If $q$ is nondefective then the pair $(V,\widehat{q})$ is a quadratic module of exponent $p$ and the linear orthogonal group $O_{\mathbb{F}_{p^n}}(V,q)$ is a subgroup of $O(V,\widehat{q})$.
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
For all $v\in V$, $$\widehat{q}(-v)=e^{\frac{2\pi i\Tr(q(-v))}{p}}= e^{\frac{2\pi i(-1)^2\Tr(q(v))}{p}}=e^{\frac{2\pi i\Tr(q(v))}{p}}=\widehat{q}(v).$$
Let $B$ be the $\mathbb{F}_{p^n}$-bilinear form associated to $q$. Then $$\omega_{\widehat{q}}(x,y)= \frac{\widehat{q}(x+y)}{\widehat{q}(x)\widehat{q}(y)}= e^{\frac{2\pi i\Tr(B(x,y)) }{p} }$$ for all $x,y\in V$. Thus, $\omega_{\widehat{q}}$ is a skew-symmetric form. It follows from Proposition \ref{Prop:ejem simplec lineal simplec module} that $\omega_{\widehat{q}}$ is non-degenerate.
\end{proof}
\end{ejem}
For a homogeneous module $V$ we denote by $\operatorname{Bil}(V)$ the abelian group of all bicharacter with values in $\mathbb{C}^*$.
The map $\operatorname{Tr}:\operatorname{Bil}(V)\to \operatorname{Quad}(V), \Tr(b)(x)=b(x,x)$ defines a morphism of groups with kernel $\bigwedge^2 \widehat{V}$.
\begin{lem}\label{Lemma1:cohomologia ortogonales}
Let $V$ be a finite homogeneous module. The sequence $$0\to \bigwedge^2 \widehat{V} \to \operatorname{Bil}(V) \to \operatorname{Quad}(V)\to 1$$ is exact.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
It is clear that we only need to show that the trace map $$\Tr: \operatorname{Bil}(V) \to \operatorname{Quad}(V)$$ is surjective. If $V=\langle g \rangle$ has rank one (that is, $V$ is a cyclic group of order $n$) and $q\in \operatorname{Quad}(V)$, then $b:V\times V\to \mu_n$, $b(g^i,g^j)= q(g)^{ij}$ is a bilinear map with $\Tr(b)=q$. Let $V=A\oplus C$ where $C$ has rank one, $q\in \operatorname{Quad} (V)$ and suppose that for $q|_A$ and $q|_C$ we have $b_A \in \operatorname{Bil}(V)$, $b_C\in \operatorname{Bil}(C)$ with $\Tr(b_A)=q|_A$, $\Tr(b_C)=q|_C$. Then
\begin{align*}
b:V\times V &\to \mu_n,\\
a\oplus c, a'\oplus c' &\mapsto b_A(a,a')b_C(c,c')\omega_q(a,c')
\end{align*}
is a bichartacter with $\Tr(b)=q$.
\end{proof}
Let $V$ be a finite homogeneous module of exponent $n$. We define $$C_0^1(V,\mu_n)=\{\eta\in C^1(V,\mu_n)| \delta(\eta) \text{ is bicharacter and } \eta(x^2)=\eta(x)^2, \forall x\in V\},$$ and the morphism
\begin{align*}
\delta:C_0^1(V,\mu_n)&\to \bigwedge^2 \widehat{V}\\
\eta&\mapsto \delta(\eta).
\end{align*}
\begin{lem}\label{Lemma2:cohomologia ortogonales}
The sequence $$0\to \widehat{V} \to C_0^1(V,\mu_n) \to \bigwedge^2 \widehat{V}\to 1$$ is exact.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
Let $b\in \bigwedge^2 \widehat{V}$. Then, $1=b(xy,xy)=b(x,y)b(y,x)$, which implies that $b(x,y)=b(y,x)^{-1}$ for all $x,y \in V$.
If $V$ is cyclic $\bigwedge^2 \widehat{V}=0$, and $\widehat{V} = C_0^1(V,\mu_n)$. Let $V=A\oplus C$, where $C$ has rank one. Suppose that there exists $\eta_A\in C_0^1(A,\mu_n)$ such that $\delta(\eta_A)=b|_{A\times A}$. Let $\widehat{\eta_A} \in C_0^1(V,\mu_n),$ by $ \widehat{\eta_A}(a\oplus c)=\eta_A(a)$. Then $b':=b\delta(\widehat{\eta_A})^{-1}\in \bigwedge^2 \widehat{V}$ and $b'|_{A\times A}=1$. If we define $s\in C^1(V,\mu_n)$ by $s(a\oplus c)=b(a,c)^{-1}$. A simple calculation shows that $\delta(s)=b'$. Therefore, $s\in C_0^1(V,\mu_n)$. Finally, for $\gamma:= \widehat{\eta_A}s \in C_0^1(V,\mu_n)$ we have $\delta(\gamma)=\delta(s)\delta(\widehat{\eta_A})=b$.
\end{proof}
\begin{corol}\label{Corol:existencia 2-cociclo quadratic}
Let $(V,q)$ be a quadratic module and $b\in \operatorname{Bil}(V)$ that satisfies $\Tr(b)=q$. Then
$$O(V,q)=\{g\in \Aut(V)|\exists \eta \in C_0^1(V,\mu_n) : b^{g}/b=\delta(\eta)\}.$$
\end{corol}
\begin{proof}
It is clear that $$\{g\in \Aut(V)|\exists \eta \in C_0^1(V,\mu_n) : b^{g}/b=\delta(\eta)\}\subseteq O(V,q).$$ Let $b\in \operatorname{Bil}(V)$ be such that $\Tr(b)=q$ and $g\in O(V,q)$. By Lemma \ref{Lemma1:cohomologia ortogonales} $b^{g}/b\in \bigwedge^2 \widehat{V}$ and by Lemma \ref{Lemma2:cohomologia ortogonales} there exists $\eta\in C_0^1(V,\mu_n)$ such that $\delta(\eta)=b^{g}/b$. Therefore, $$O(V,q)=\{g\in \Aut(V)|\exists \eta \in C_0^1(V,\mu_n) : b^{g}/b=\delta(\eta)\}.$$
\end{proof}
Let $(V,q)$ be a quadratic module. We define the Weil representation of $O(V,q)$ analogously to the case of a symplectic module. By Corollary \ref{Corol:existencia 2-cociclo quadratic} there is $b\in \operatorname{Bil}(V)$ such that $q(x)=b(x,x)$ for all $x\in V$. Let $A=\mathbb{C}_{b}[V]$ and fix for every $g\in O(V,q)$ a map $\eta_g\in C_0^1(V,\mu_n(k))$ such that $b^{g}/b=\delta(\eta_g)$. Then the map
\begin{align*}
\alpha_g: A&\to A^{(g)}\\
u_x&\mapsto \eta_gu_{g(x)},
\end{align*}
is an isomorphism of $V$-algebra. The crossed product group associated by Proposition \ref{weil action} which we denote as $$\operatorname{Ps}(V,q):=\widehat{V}\#_\theta O(V,q),$$ and call the pseudo-symplectic group, see \cite{pseudosymplectic} and \cite{pseudodos}.
The Weil representation of $\operatorname{Ps}(V,q)$ is the projective representation associated to the Weil action of $\operatorname{Ps}(V,q)$ on the simple algebra $A=\mathbb{C}_{b}[V]$.
\begin{obs}
\begin{itemize}
\item If $(V,q)$ is a quadratic module with $V$ homogeneous of exponent $n$, then the Weil representation of $\operatorname{Ps}(V,q)$ is defined over $\mathbb{Z}[e^{\frac{2\pi i}{n}}]$.
\item The pseudo-symplectic group $\operatorname{Ps}(V,q)$ is a proper subgroup of the Affine pseudo-symplectic $\operatorname{APs}(V,\omega_q)$ and the Weil representation of $ \operatorname{APs}(V,\omega_q)$ is an extension of the Weil representation of $\operatorname{Ps}(V,q)$.
\end{itemize}
\end{obs}
\section{Examples of non-isomorphic isocategorical groups and Weil representations}\label{Section:Examples of non-isomorphic isocategorical groups and Weil representations}
The goal of this section is to construct some concrete examples of
non-isomorphic isocategorical groups.
\begin{lem}
Let $S$ be a finite abelian group and $(S,K,N,\sigma,\gamma)$ a torsor datum over $S$ with associated simple $S$-Galois algebra $B:=A(K_\sigma[N],\gamma)$. Then
$$\Aut_S(B)\cong \widehat{N}\oplus \Gal(K|k)$$and
$$\operatorname{St}(B)\cong \operatorname{St}([\sigma,\gamma]):=\{g\in \Aut_N(S): [(\sigma,\gamma)]=[(\sigma^g,\gamma^g)]\in H^2_{\Gal(K|k)}(N,K^*) \},$$where $\Aut_N(S)=\{g\in \Aut(S)\mid g|_N\in \Aut(N)\}$.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
The isomorphism $\Aut_S(B)\cong \widehat{N}\oplus \Gal(K|k)$ follows from Lemma \ref{Lema:descrip automorfismo simple Galois }. The isomorphism $\operatorname{St}(B)\cong \operatorname{St}([\sigma,\gamma])$ follows from the proof of Theorem \ref{main result 2}.
\end{proof}
\begin{teor}\label{Teor:Main4}
Let $S$ be a finite abelian group and $(S,K,N,\sigma,\gamma)$ a torsor datum over $S$, with associated simple $S$-Galois algebra $B:=A(K_\sigma[N],\gamma)$. Then the semidirect product group $$(\widehat{N}\oplus \Gal(K|k))\rtimes \operatorname{St}([\sigma,\gamma]) $$ and the crossed product group $$(\widehat{N}\oplus \Gal(K|k))\#_\theta \operatorname{St}([\sigma,\gamma])$$ (See Proposition-Definition \ref{weil action}) are isocategorical over $k$.
\end{teor}
\begin{proof}
Follows from Theorem \ref{main result 2} and Proposition \ref{Prop:Isomorfismo Automorfismo Galois y auto grupoide equivariant}.
\end{proof}
Let $(V,q)$ be a linear quadratic space over a finite field of characteristic $p$. Let $(V,\widehat{q})$ be the the quadratic module associated by Example \ref{Ejemplo: modulo cuadratico de spacop cuadratico}. The \textit{linear} pseudo-symplectic group is defined as $$\operatorname{Ps}_k(V,q):=\widehat{V}\#_{\theta}O_k(V,q)\subset \widehat{V}\#_{\theta}O(V,\widehat{q})= \operatorname{Ps}(V,\widehat{q})$$ and the Weil representation of $\operatorname{Ps}_k(V,q)$ is by definition the restriction of the Weil representation of $\operatorname{Ps}(V,\widehat{q})$.
If $(V, \langle -,-\rangle)$ is a symplectic space over a finite field $k$, by Example \ref{Ejem:smplectico lineal a simplecto modulo} there is an associated symplectic module $(V,\omega)$ and $\operatorname{Sp}_k(V)\subset \operatorname{Sp}(V,\omega)$, where $\operatorname{Sp}_k(V)$ is the the \textit{linear} symplectic group.
The \textit{linear} affine pseudo-symplectic group is defined as $$\operatorname{APs}_k(V):=\widehat{V}\#_{\theta}\operatorname{Sp}_k(V)\subseteq \operatorname{APs}(V,\omega)$$ and its Weil representation is the restriction of the Weil representation of $\operatorname{APs}(V,\omega)$.
We will denote by $\Omega_k(V,q)$ the subgroup of index 2 in $O_k(V,q)$, for which Dickson invariant is zero, see \cite{Grove} for details and the basic properties of $\Omega_k(V,q)$.
Next proposition is a generalization of \cite[Theorem 1]{Grupo-Extra-special} to arbitrary finite fields of characteristic two.
\begin{prop}\label{Proposition:generalizacion Teorema Extra especial}
Let $k$ be a finite field of characteristic two and $(V,q)$ a quadratic space over $k$, where $\dim_k(V)=2n$ and $n\geq 4$. Then the exact sequences
$$0\to \widehat{V}\to \operatorname{APs}_k(V)\to \operatorname{Sp}_k(V,\omega_q)\to 1,$$ $$0\to \widehat{V}\to \operatorname{Ps}_k(V,q)\to O_k(V,q)\to 1,$$
$$0\to \widehat{V}\to \widehat{V}\#_{\theta}\Omega_k(V,q)\to \Omega_k(V,q)\to 1,$$
are nonsplit.
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
The proof consists in apply \cite[Theorem 0]{Grupo-Extra-special} to our exact sequences. We need to show that there exists a subgroup $W=\{x,y,z,0\}\subset \widehat{V}$ such that $x$ and $y$ are singular (that is, $q(x)=q(y)=0$), $z=x+y$ is non-singular (that is, $q(z)\neq 0$) and there exists a subgroup $G\subset \Omega_k(V,q)\subset O_k(V,q)\subset \operatorname{Sp}_k(V,\omega_q)$ satisfying
\begin{enumerate}
\item $G$ fixes $z$,
\item $G$ has an involution $t$, with $t(x)=y$,
\item $G$ has no subgroup of index 2.
\end{enumerate}
Let $(x,y)\subset V$ an hyperbolyc pair, that is, $q(x)=q(y)=0$ and $B_q(x,y)=1$. Thus, $z=x+y$ is nonsingular. Let $G=\operatorname{Stab}_z(\Omega_k(V,q))$ and $V=\langle z \rangle_k\oplus H$. Then, the canonical map $G\to O_k(H,q)$ is an isomorphism and since $\dim_k(H)$ is odd, $O_k(H,q)\cong \operatorname{Sp}(2n-2)$ (see \cite[Proposition 4.1.7]{APA}). Therefore, we can find an involution $t\in G$ such that $t(x)=y$. Since $n\geq 4$, $\operatorname{Sp}(2n-2)$ is simple. Thus, $G$ has no subgroups of index 2.
\end{proof}
\begin{prop}\label{Prop:No isocategorical sobre R}
Let $(V,q)$ be a quadratic spaces over a finite field of characteristic two with $\dim_{k}(V)=2n$ and $n\geq 4$. The affine symplectic group $\operatorname{ASp}_k(V)$ and the affine pseudo-symplectic group $\operatorname{APs}_k(V,\omega_q)$ are isocategorical over $\mathbb{C}$ but not over $\mathbb{R}$.
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
If we view the skew-symmetric form $\omega_q$ as an element in $Z^2(V,\mathbb{C}^*)$, then $\operatorname{St}([\sigma])=\operatorname{Sp}(V,\omega_q)$. Therefore, by Theorem \ref{Teor:Main4} the groups $\operatorname{ASp}_k(V)$ and $\operatorname{APs}_k(V,\omega_q)$ are isocategorical over the field of complex numbers.
Let $S\lhd \operatorname{ASp}(V)$ be an abelian normal subgroup. Since $\operatorname{Sp}(V)$ is a non-abelian simple group and $V\lhd SV\lhd \operatorname{ASp}(V)$, it follows that $S/S\cap V \cong SV/V\lhd\operatorname{Sp}(V)$, thus $S\subset V$. Since $S\lhd \operatorname{ASp}(V)$, it follows that $S=V$. Thus the unique normal abelian subgroup of $\operatorname{ASp}(V)$ is $V$. Hence, do not exist a semi-real torsor datum over $\operatorname{ASp}(V)$. Let $(V,\mu)$, where $\mu \in H^2(V,\mu_2)$ is a non-degenerate cohomology class. By Lemma \ref{Lemma1:cohomologia ortogonales} and Lemma \ref{Lemma2:cohomologia ortogonales}, $\operatorname{St}([\mu])=O_k(V,q)$ and the orthogonal group is a proper subgroup of the symplectic group. Therefore, the pair $(V,\mu)$ is not a real torsor. If follows that $\operatorname{ASp}(V)$ does not have real or semireal torsor datum, hence by Theorem \ref{main result 3} every group isocategorical to $\operatorname{ASp}(V)$ group is isomorphic to $\operatorname{ASp}(V)$.
\end{proof}
\begin{prop}\label{Prop:Pseudo simplect y affine orthogonal son isocat}
Let $(V,q)$ be a quadratic linear space over a finite field of characteristic two. The following pairs of groups are concrete examples of non-isomorphic groups isocategorical over $\mathbb{Q}$.
\begin{enumerate}
\item $\widehat{V}\rtimes O_k(V,q)$ and $\operatorname{Ps}(V,q)$, where $\dim_{k}(V)=2n$, $n\geq 4$,
\item $\widehat{V}\rtimes \Omega_k(V,q)$ and $\widehat{V}\#_\theta\Omega_k(V,q)$, where $\dim_{k}(V)=2n$, $n\geq 4$,
\item $\mathbb{F}_2^6\rtimes P_2$ and $\mathbb{F}_2^6\#_\theta P_2$, where $P_2 $ is a Sylow 2-subgroup of $O(\mathbb{F}_2^6,q)$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
By Theorem \ref{Teor:Main4} we only need to check that the pairs of group are non-isomorphic. By Proposition \ref{Proposition:generalizacion Teorema Extra especial}, the groups in $(2)$ and $(3)$ are non-isomorphic.
Now, we need to see that the groups $\mathbb{F}_2^6\rtimes P_2$ and $\mathbb{F}_2^6\#_\theta P_2$ are non-isomorphic. This can be done easily using the function \textsf{IsIsomorphicPGroup(G,R)}, included in the \textsf{GAP}~package \textsf{ANUPQ}, \cite{GAP4}.
\end{proof}
\begin{obs}
For the construction of $\mathbb{F}_2^6\rtimes P_2$ and $\mathbb{F}_2^6\#_\theta P_2$ in \textsf{GAP}\ is useful to know that the exact sequence $$1\to \widehat{V}\to \operatorname{Ps}_{\mathbb{F}_2}(V,q)\to O_{\mathbb{F}_2}(V,q_c)\to 1,$$ is isomorphic to the exact sequence $$1\to \text{Inn}(E)\to \Aut(E)\to \text{Out}(E)\to 1,$$where $E$ is an extra-special 2-group and $ \text{Inn}(E), \text{Out}(E)$ are the groups of inner and outer automorphisms of $E$ respectively, see \cite{Grupo-Extra-special}.
\end{obs}
\subsection{Semi-real torsors data and real Weil representations associated to finite symplectic modules}
The aim of this section is to describe a systematic way of constructing torsor data with $\Gal(K|k)$ non trivial.
Let $N$ be a finite abelian group, $k$ be a field with a primitive root of unity of order the exponent of $N$, $\sigma \in Z^2(N,k^*)$ a non degenerate 2-cocycle and let $k\subset K$ be an abelian Galois field extension.
For the abelian group $S:=N \oplus \Gal(K|k)$ we define the torsor datum $(S,K,N,\gamma_\sigma)$, where $\gamma_\sigma:S\times N\to k^*$ is the pairing defined by $\gamma|_{\Gal(K|k)\times N}=1$ and $\gamma_\sigma|_{N\times N}=\operatorname{Alt}(\sigma)$.
Let us define $$X=\{g\in \Aut(N)| [\sigma]=[\sigma^g] \text{ as elements in } H^2(N,K^*) \}$$
and $$Y=\{g\in \Aut_N(S)| [(\sigma,\gamma_\sigma)]^g=[(\sigma,\gamma_\sigma)] \text{ as elements in } H^2_S(N,K^*)\},$$ where $\Aut_N(S)=\{g\in \Aut(S) | g|_N\in \Aut(N)\}$.
\begin{teor}\label{Teor:Ultimo}
The restriction map $$r:Y\to X, g\mapsto g|_N$$ defines an exact sequence of groups $$1\to \Aut(\Gal(K|k))\to Y\to X\to 1.$$
\end{teor}
\begin{proof}
Let us first prove that the kernel of $r:Y\to X, g\mapsto g|_N$ is isomorphic to $ \Aut(\Gal(K|k))$. Let $g\in Y$ and $\eta_g:N\to K^*$ such that $(\sigma^g,\gamma_\sigma^g)=\partial(\eta_g)(\sigma,\gamma_\sigma)$. If $g|_N=\id_N$, thus $\eta_g:N\to K^*$ is a character and $\eta_g(x)\in k^*$ for all $x\in N$. Therefore, $ \gamma(g(a),x)=\gamma(a,x)$ for all $a \in \Gal(K|k), x\in N$. Thus, $\gamma(g(a)a^{-1},x)=1$ for all $a \in \Gal(K|k), x\in N$. Therefore, $g(a)a^{-1}\in \Gal(K|k)$, that is, $g(a)\in \Gal(K|k)$ for all $a\in \Gal(K|k)$.
Now we want to show that $r$ is surjective. Let $g\in Y$ and $\eta_g:N\to K^*$ such that $\sigma^g/\sigma=\delta(\eta_g).$ For each $a \in \Gal(K|k)$, the map $\eta_g/a(\eta_g)$ is a character that does not depend on the choice of $\eta_g$. Then, there exists a unique $n(g,a)\in N$ such that $\eta_g/a(\eta_g)=\operatorname{Alt}(\alpha)(n(g,a),g(x))$ for all $x\in N$.
Since
\begin{align*}
\operatorname{Alt}(\sigma)(n(g,a)n(g,b),g(x)) &= (\eta_g/a(\eta_g))\eta_g/b(\eta_g)\\
&=(\eta_g/a(\eta_g))a\eta_g/ab(\eta_g)\\
&=\eta_g/ab\eta_g\\
&= \operatorname{Alt}(\sigma)(n(g,ab),g(x))
\end{align*}it follows that $n(g,ab)=n(g,a)n(g,b)$, where we have used that $\eta/b\eta(x)\in k^*$ for all $x\in N, b\in A$. Define $g'\in \Aut_N(N\oplus A)$ by $g'(x\oplus a)= g(x)n(g,a)\oplus a$. Then
\begin{align*}
\frac{\gamma^{g'}}{\gamma}(x\oplus a,y) &= \frac{\gamma(g'(x\oplus a),g(y))}{\gamma(x\oplus a,y)}\\
&= \frac{\gamma(g(x)n(g,a)\oplus a,g(y)))}{\gamma(x,y)\gamma(a,y)}\\
&= \frac{\gamma(g(x),g(y)) \gamma (n(g,a),g(y))\gamma(a,g(y))}{\gamma(x,y)\gamma(a,y)}\\
&=\gamma (n(g,a),g(y))=\frac{\eta_g}{a\eta_g}(y),
\end{align*}
so $g'\in Y$ and $r(g')=g$.
\end{proof}
\begin{obs}
\begin{itemize}
\item The group $Y$ only depends on $[\sigma] \in H^2(N,K^*)$.
\item If $\Gal(K|k)=\mathbb{Z}/2Z$, then $X\cong Y$.
\end{itemize}
\end{obs}
Let $(V,\omega)$ be a symplectic module of exponent two, for example, the symplectic module associated to a symplectic linear space over finite field of characteristic two, see Example \ref{Ejemplo: modulo cuadratico de spacop cuadratico}. Since $\omega \in Z^2(V,\mathbb{R}^*)\subset Z^2(V,\mathbb{C}^*)$, it follows from by Theorem \ref{Teor:Ultimo} that the tuple $$(\widehat{V}\oplus \Gal(\mathbb{C}|\mathbb{R}), \mathbb{C},\omega,\gamma_\omega)$$ is a semi-real torsor datum over the group $$(\widehat{V}\oplus \Gal(\mathbb{C}|\mathbb{R})) \rtimes \operatorname{Sp}(V,\omega).$$ The crossed product group $$(\widehat{V}\oplus \Gal(\mathbb{C}|\mathbb{R})) \#_\theta \operatorname{Sp}(V,\omega)$$ (See Proposition-Definition \ref{weil action}) contains the pseudo-symplectic groups and it is isocategorical over $\mathbb{Q}$ to $(\widehat{V}\oplus \Gal(\mathbb{C}|\mathbb{R})) \rtimes \operatorname{Sp}(V,\omega).$
The group $(\widehat{V}\oplus \Gal(\mathbb{C}|\mathbb{R})) \#_\theta \operatorname{Sp}(V,\omega)$ acts by algebra automorphisms on the rational simple algebra $\mathbb{Q}_{\omega}[V]$. Once a simple module of $\mathbb{Q}_{\omega}[V]$ is fixed, we have a \textit{rational} projective representation of $(\widehat{V}\oplus \Gal(\mathbb{C}|\mathbb{R})) \#_\theta\operatorname{Sp}(V,\omega)$ that extends the rational Weil representations of the pseudo-symplectic groups $\operatorname{Ps}(V,q)$.
\bigbreak
\textbf{Acknowledgment.} The author would like to thank the Mathematics Departments at MIT where part of this work was carried out. The author is grateful to Paul Bressler and Pavel Etingof for useful discussions. This research was partially supported by the FAPA funds from Vicerrector\'{i}a de Investigaciones de la Universidad
de los Andes.
\def$'${$'$}
|
\section{Introduction} \label{sec1}
A number of observations suggested that phenomena in most active
regions in the universe are related to black holes.
Some of most active objects in the universe, for example, active galactic
nuclei (AGNs), micro-quasars (black hole binaries), and gamma-ray
bursts (GRBs), emit relativistic jets \citep{biretta99,pearson87,mirabel94,tingay95,kulkarni99}.
It is believed that these relativistic jets are caused by the drastic phenomena
around the black holes at the centers of these objects.
The possible energy sources of the drastic phenomena are
gravitational energy of the matter falling toward the black hole
and rotational energy of the black hole itself.
Recently, numerical simulations of general relativistic MHD (GRMHD) have
suggested that the relativistic jet is launched from the vicinity
of the black hole, i.e. inside of the ergosphere \citep{koide04,koide06}, and
some long-term simulations showed that the energy
is seemed to be supplied from the rotational energy of the black hole
\citep{mckinney06,mckinney12}.
In these GRMHD simulations,
the black hole rotational energy seems to be extracted through
the magnetic field flux tubes due to
the so called Blandford-Znajek mechanism \citep{blandford77}.
It was proposed as the mechanism in the force-free condition,
by which the rotational energy of the
black hole is extracted directly through the horizon along
the magnetic flux tubes. However, in principle, causality
prohibits the outward transportation of
any material, energy, and information across the horizon.
Thus, as pointed out by \citet{punsly89,punsly90a,punsly90b},
the Blandford-Znajek mechanism seems to be contradictory to the causality.
On the other hand, in the Penrose process, the black hole spin energy is extracted
causally due to the negative energy-at-infinity (or just called ``energy") of
a particle caused by fission \citep{penrose69}.
\citet{takahashi90} and \citet{hirotani92} found
the axisymmetric steady-state solution of ideal MHD plasma inflow
with the negative energy toward the rotating black hole.
When the negative energy of the inflowing plasma in the ergosphere
is swallowed by the black hole, the black hole rotation energy decreases,
that is, the black hole energy is extracted, just like the Penrose process.
The difference between the ideal MHD mechanism and the Penrose process
is that the negative energy is produced by the magnetic
tension force in the ideal MHD inflow, while in the Penrose process it
is caused by the fission of a particle. This MHD energy extraction mechanism
is called ``MHD Penrose process" (see Table \ref{clasmech}).
The MHD Penrose process was mimicked and confirmed
by the GRMHD simulations of initially uniform, very strongly
magnetized plasma around a rapidly rotating black hole, which showed that
the negative energy of plasma is produced quickly in the ergosphere
\citep{koide02,koide03}. However, because of the short time duration of the simulation,
the numerical solution is far from a stationary state.
\citet{komissarov05} performed a long term GRMHD
simulations with the similar
initial situation of Koide (2003), and confirmed the MHD Penrose process
in the early stage. Furthermore, he found that the MHD Penrose process is
a transient phenomenon and alternately the outward electromagnetic energy flux
through the horizon stationarily appears almost everywhere with the exception
of a very thin equatorial belt. He remarked that the pure electromagnetic
mechanism with ideal MHD condition continues to operate to extract
the rotational energy of the black hole.
Strictly speaking, this electromagnetic mechanism should be distinguished
from the original Blandford-Znajek mechanism because the original mechanism
is derived with the force-free condition, while the electromagnetic
energy extraction mechanism was shown with the ideal MHD simulations.
In this paper, we call the mechanism shown by the simulations ``MHD
Blandford-Znajek mechanism" while the original mechanism is called
``force-free Blandford-Znajek mechanism".
Considering the numerical results,
\citet{komissarov09} discussed the electromagnetic extraction mechanism
of the black hole energy, including the force-free Blandford-Znajek mechanism,
MHD Penrose mechanism, and superradiance in the wide view.
However, unfortunately, the convincing explanation with respect to the causality
of these mechanisms, which should also yield the conditions of the mechanisms,
is not given except for the MHD Penrose process \citep{komissarov09}.
\citet{koide03} pointed out that the force-free Blandford-Znajek mechanism uses the
{\it negative electromagnetic energy-at-infinity} to extract
the spin energy of the black hole.
This point of view was discussed extensively by \citet{krolik05} and \citet{lasota14}
for ideal MHD and force-free Blandford-Znajek mechanisms, respectively.
However, it is often difficult to build physical intuition on the
MHD/force-free Blandford-Znajek mechanisms with causality.
Here, we present an intuitive formula for the electromagnetic mechanism of
the energy extraction from the rotating black hole to aid in building the
physical intuition on the mechanisms.
The formula is also applicable to other electromagnetic mechanisms like the
MHD Penrose process \citep{takahashi90,hirotani92,koide02,koide03}
and super-radiance \citep{press72,teukolsky74,lightman75}.
In section \ref{sec2}, we review the energy and angular momentum transport
of electromagnetic field around the black holes briefly but sufficiently.
In section \ref{sec3},
we explain the electromagnetic mechanisms of the black hole energy extraction,
that is, the force-free Blandford-Znajek mechanism, MHD Blandford-Znajek mechanism,
and superradiance within causality.
We summarize our explanation about the energy extraction mechanisms
from the black hole including the both Blandford-Znajek mechanisms
in section \ref{sec4}.
\section{Electromagnetic energy and angular momentum transport
near rotating black hole \label{sec2}}
We review the electromagnetic energy and angular momentum transport
in the space-time $(x^0, x^1, x^2, x^3)$
around a spinning black hole based on so called ``3+1 formalism". The scale
of a small element in the space-time around the rotating black hole is given by
\begin{equation}
ds^2 = g_{\mu \nu} dx^\mu dx^\nu
=-h_0^2 dt^2 +\sum _{i=1}^3 \left [h_i^2(dx^i)^2 - 2h_i^2 \omega _i dt dx ^i
\right] .
\end{equation}
Here, we have $g_{ij}=0 (i \neq j)$, $g_{00}=-h_0^2$, $g_{ii}=h_i^2$,
$g_{i0}=g_{0i}=- h_i^2 \omega_i$, where Greek indices $(\mu, \nu)$ run from 0 to 3
and Roman indices $(i,j)$ run from 1 to 3.
Through this paper, we use the natural unit system, where the light speed, electric permittivity,
and magnetic permeability in vacuum are unity: $c=1$, $\epsilon_0=1$, and $\mu_0=1$.
When we define the lapse function $\alpha$ and shift vector $\beta ^i$ by
\begin{equation}
\alpha = \root \of {h_0^2+\sum _{i=1}^3
\left ( h_i \omega _i \right ) ^2} ,
\verb! !
\beta ^{i} = \frac{h_i \omega _i}{\alpha } ,
\label{diff_alpbet}
\end{equation}
the line element $ds$ is written as
\begin{equation}
ds^2=-\alpha ^2 dt^2+\sum _{i=1}^3 (h_i dx^i - \alpha \beta^i dt)^2 .
\label{eqlinelement}
\end{equation}
The determinant of the matrix with elements $g_{\mu \nu}$
is given by
$\root \of {- \| g \|} = \alpha h_1 h_2 h_3$, and
the contravariant metric is written explicitly as
\( \displaystyle
g^{00}=- \frac{1}{\alpha ^2} ,
g^{i0}=g^{0i}=- \frac{\beta^i}{\alpha h_i},
\) and \( \displaystyle
g^{ij} = \frac{1}{h_i h_j} ( \delta ^{ij}
-\beta ^i \beta ^j ),
\)
where $\delta ^{ij}$ is the Kronecker $\delta$ symbol.
The relativistic Maxwell equations are
\begin{eqnarray}
{\nabla _\mu} ^\ast F^{\mu \nu} = 0 ,
\label{eqfa}
\\
\nabla _\mu F^{\mu \nu}
=- J^\nu ,
\label{eqam}
\end{eqnarray}
where $\nabla _\nu$ is the covariant derivative, $F_{\mu \nu}$ is the electromagnetic
field-strength tensor, and $^\ast F^{\mu \nu}$ is the dual tensor of $F_{\mu \nu}$,
$\displaystyle ^\ast F^{\mu \nu}
\equiv \frac{1}{2} \epsilon^{\mu \nu \lambda \sigma} F_{\lambda \sigma}$
($\epsilon^{\mu \nu \lambda \sigma}$ is the Levi-Civita anti-symmetric tensor,
which is a tensor density of weight -1), and
$J^\nu = (\rho _{\rm e}, J^1, J^2, J^3)$ is the electric 4-current density
($\rho _{\rm e}$ is the electric charge density)\citep{jackson79}.
The electric field $E_i$ and the magnetic field $B^i$
are given by $E_i = F_{i0}$ $(i=1,2,3)$ and $B^1=F_{23}$,
$B^2=F_{31}$, $B^3=F_{12}$ or $\displaystyle B^i = \frac{1}{2} \epsilon^{0ijk} F_{jk}
= {^\ast} F^{0i}$,
respectively.
Using the 4-vector potential
$A_\mu$, we have $F_{\mu \nu} = \nabla_\mu A_\nu - \nabla_\nu A_\mu
= \partial_\mu A_\nu - \partial_\nu A_\mu$ because of the symmetry of
Christoffel symbols, $\Gamma_{\mu \nu}^\lambda = \Gamma_{\nu \mu}^\lambda$.
The electromagnetic energy-momentum tensor $T_{\rm EM}^{\mu \nu}$
is given by
\begin{equation}
T_{\rm EM}^{\mu \nu} = {F^\mu}_\sigma F^{\nu \sigma} -
\frac{1}{4}g^{\mu \nu} F^{\lambda \kappa} F_{\lambda \kappa} .
\end{equation}
The total energy-momentum tensor $T^{\mu \nu}$ is
\begin{equation}
T^{\mu \nu} = p g^{\mu \nu} + {\mathfrak h} U^\mu U^\nu
+ T_{\rm EM}^{\mu \nu},
\end{equation}
where $p$, $\mathfrak h$, and $U^\mu$ are the proper pressure, the proper enthalpy density,
and the 4-velocity of the plasma, respectively.
The energy momentum conservation law is given by
\begin{equation}
\nabla_\mu T^{\mu \nu} = 0.
\label{eqenmo}
\end{equation}
The force-free condition is
\begin{equation}
J^\mu F_{\mu \nu} = 0 ,
\end{equation}
and the general relativistic Ohm's law is
\begin{equation}
F_{\mu \nu} U^\nu = \eta \left [ J_\mu + (U^\nu J_\nu) U_\mu \right ],
\label{ohmlaw}
\end{equation}
where $\eta$ is the resistivity of the plasma.
The ideal MHD condition is given by setting $\eta=0$, $F_{\mu \nu} U^\nu = 0$.
Here, we introduce a local coordinate frame, so called
``fiducial observer (FIDO) frame'', $(\hat{x}^0, \hat{x}^1, \hat{x}^2, \hat{x}^3)$.
Using the local coordinates of the frame $\hat{x}^\mu$, the line element becomes
\[
ds^2 = \eta_{\mu \nu} d \hat{x}^\mu d \hat{x}^\nu
= - d \hat{t}^2 + \sum_{i=1}^3 (d \hat{x}^i)^2,
\]
where $\eta_{\mu \nu}$ is the metric of Minkowski space-time.
Comparing this metric with Eq. (\ref{eqlinelement}), we get
\begin{equation}
d \hat{t} = \alpha dt, \verb! !
d \hat{x}^i = h_i dx^i - \alpha \beta^i dt ,
\end{equation}
and we have partial derivative relations,
\begin{equation}
\frac{\partial}{\partial \hat{t}} = \frac{\partial t}{\partial \hat{t}}
\frac{\partial}{\partial t}
+ \sum_i \frac{\partial x^i}{\partial \hat{t}} \frac{\partial}{\partial x^i}
= \frac{1}{\alpha} \frac{\partial}{\partial t}
+ \sum_i \frac{\beta^i}{h_i} \frac{\partial}{\partial x^i}, \verb! !
\frac{\partial}{\partial \hat{x}^i} =
\frac{1}{h_i} \frac{\partial}{\partial x^i} .
\end{equation}
Then, a contravariant vector $\hat{a}^\mu$ in the FIDO frame of an arbitrary
contravariant vector $a^\mu$ in the global coordinates $x^\mu$ is written as,
\begin{equation}
\hat{a}^0 = \alpha a^0, \verb! !
\hat{a}^i = h_i a^i - \alpha \beta^i a^0
\end{equation}
and the covariant vector $\hat{a}_\mu$ is
\begin{equation}
\hat{a}_0 =
\frac{1}{\alpha} a_0 + \sum_i \frac{\beta^i}{h_i} a_i, \verb! !
\hat{a}_i = \frac{1}{h_i} a_i .
\label{covarianttransform}
\end{equation}
We use the quantities observed by the FIDO frame because they can be treated
intuitively and yield formulae more easily.
This is because the relations between the variables in the FIDO
frame are the same as these in the special theory of relativity and
similar to the Newtonian relation.
Using the quantities of electromagnetic field in the FIDO frame,
Maxwell equations are written by the following 3+1 formalism,
\begin{equation}
\frac{\partial \hat{B}^i}{\partial t} = - \sum _{j,k} \frac{h_i}{h_1 h_2 h_3}
\epsilon ^{ijk} \frac{\partial}{\partial x^j}
\left [ \alpha h_k (\hat{E}_k - \sum _{l,m} \epsilon ^{klm} \beta ^l \hat{B}^m)
\right ],
\label{cmfa}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\alpha \left ( \hat{J}^i + \hat{\rho} _{\rm e} \beta ^i \right )
+ \frac{\partial \hat{E}_i}{\partial t} =
\sum _{j,k} \frac{h_i}{h_1 h_2 h_3} \epsilon ^{ijk}
\frac{\partial}{\partial x^j} \left [
\alpha h_k \left ( \hat{B}^k + \sum _{l,m} \epsilon ^{klm}
\beta ^l \hat{E}_m \right ) \right ] ,
\label{cmam}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\sum _{i} \frac{1}{h_1 h_2 h_3} \frac{\partial}{\partial x^i}
\left ( \frac{h_1 h_2 h_3}{h_i} \hat{B}^i
\right ) = 0 ,
\label{divb0}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\rho _{\rm e} = \sum _{i} \frac{1}{h_1 h_2 h_3}
\frac{\partial}{\partial x^i} \left (
\frac{h_1 h_2 h_3}{h_i} \hat{E}_i
\right ) ,
\label{dive}
\end{equation}
where $\epsilon^{ijk}=\epsilon^{0ijk}$.
For the convenience, we introduce the derivatives of arbitrary a three-vector field
$\hat{\VEC{a}}$ and an arbitrary scalar field
$\hat{\phi}$ measured by the FIDO frame as
\begin{equation}
\nabla \cdot \hat{\VEC{a}} = \sum _i \frac{1}{h_1 h_2 h_3}
\frac{\partial}{\partial x^i} \left (
\frac{h_1 h_2 h_3}{h_i} \hat{a}^i
\right ) ,
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
(\nabla \hat{\phi})_i =
\frac{1}{h_i} \frac{\partial \hat{\phi}}{\partial x^i} ,
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
(\nabla \times \hat{\VEC{a}})_i = \sum _{j,k} \frac{h_i}{h_1 h_2 h_3}
\epsilon ^{ijk} \frac{\partial}{\partial x^j} (h_k \hat{a}^k) .
\end{equation}
We express Maxwell equations in vector forms as,
\begin{equation}
\frac{\partial \hat{\bf B}}{\partial t} = -
\nabla \times [\alpha ( \hat{\bf E}-
\VEC{\beta} \times \hat{\bf B} ) ] ,
\label{vecfa}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\alpha \left ( \hat{\bf J} + \hat{\rho}_{\rm e} \VEC{\beta} \right )
+ \frac{\partial \hat{\bf E}}{\partial t}
= \nabla \times [\alpha (\hat{\bf B} +
\VEC{\beta} \times \hat{\bf E}) ] ,
\label{vecam}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\nabla \cdot \hat{\bf B} = 0 ,
\label{vecnm}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\hat{\rho}_{\rm e} = \nabla \cdot \hat{\bf E} ,
\label{vecec}
\end{equation}
where $\VEC{\beta} = (\beta _1, \beta _2, \beta _3)$,
$\hat{\VEC{E}}=(\hat{E}_1, \hat{E}_2, \hat{E}_3)$,
$\hat{\VEC{B}}=(\hat{B}^1, \hat{B}^2, \hat{B}^3)$, and
$\hat{\VEC{J}}=(\hat{J}^1, \hat{J}^2, \hat{J}^3)$.\\
The 3+1 form of the force-free condition is
\begin{equation}
\hat{\VEC{J}} \cdot \hat{\VEC{E}} = 0 , \verb! !
\hat{\rho}_{\rm e} \hat{\VEC{E}} +
\hat{\VEC{J}} \times \hat{\VEC{B}} = \VEC{0} ,
\end{equation}
and Ohm's law is written by
\begin{equation}
\hat{\bf E} + \hat{\bf v} \times \hat{\bf B} = \frac{1}{\hat{\gamma}} \eta
\left [ \hat{\VEC{J}} - \rho'_{\rm e} \hat{\gamma} \hat{\VEC{v}} \right ] ,
\label{vecimhd}
\end{equation}
where $\hat{\gamma} = \hat{U}^0$ is the Lorentz factor,
$\hat{\VEC{v}} = (\hat{U}^1/\hat{\gamma}, \hat{U}^2/\hat{\gamma}, \hat{U}^3/\hat{\gamma})$
is the 3-velocity, and $\rho'_{\rm e} = - J^\nu U_\nu$ is the electric charge density
observed by the plasma-rest frame (the proper electric charge density).
The conservation equation of the electric charge is derived by
Eqs. (\ref{vecam}) and (\ref{vecec}) as
\begin{equation}
\frac{\partial \hat{\rho}_{\rm e}}{\partial t} +
\nabla \cdot \left [ \alpha \left ( \hat{\bf J}
+ \hat{\rho_{\rm e}} \VEC{\beta} \right ) \right ] = 0.
\label{vecformchrgcon}
\end{equation}
We present the equations of energy and
angular momentum conservation around a spinning black hole.
When $\xi^\mu$ is a Killing vector, we have an
conservation law associated with Eq. (\ref{eqenmo})
\begin{equation}
\frac{1}{\root \of {-\|g\|}} \frac{\partial}{\partial x^\mu}
({\root \of {-\|g\|}} T^{\mu \nu} \xi _\nu)=0 .
\end{equation}
Because of $\|g\| = -(\alpha h_1 h_2 h_3)^2$, this equation yields
\begin{equation}
\frac{\partial}{\partial t} (\alpha T^{0 \nu} \xi _\nu)
= - \frac{1}{h_1 h_2 h_3} \sum _i \frac{\partial}{\partial x^i}
(\alpha h_1 h_2 h_3 T^{i \nu} \xi _\nu) .
\end{equation}
Using the Killing vector $\chi ^\nu =(-1, 0, 0, 0)$, we have the conservation law of energy
\begin{equation}
\frac{\partial e^\infty}{\partial t}
= - \hat{\nabla} \cdot {\bf S} ,
\label{coen}
\end{equation}
where $e^\infty \equiv \alpha T^{0 \nu} \chi _\nu$ is called
{\it energy-at-infinity} (or just ``energy'') density and ${S^i} \equiv
\alpha h_i T^{i \nu} \chi _\nu$ is the $i$-th component of energy flux density.
Here, we also express these quantities in the FIDO frame as
\begin{equation}
e^\infty = \alpha ( \epsilon + \rho \hat{\gamma}) + \sum _i \alpha \beta^i \hat{Q}^i ,
\label{apeai}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
S^i = \alpha \left [ \alpha \hat{Q}^i + e^\infty \beta^i +
\sum _j \alpha \beta ^j \hat{T}^{ij} \right ] ,
\end{equation}
where $\epsilon + \rho \hat{\gamma} = \hat{T}^{00}$,
$\hat{\gamma} = \hat{U}^0$, and $\hat{Q}^i = \hat{T}^{0i}$.
We separate these quantities into the hydrodynamic and electromagnetic components:
\begin{equation}
e^\infty = e^\infty _{\rm hyd} + e^\infty _{\rm EM} ,
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
S^i = S^i _{\rm hyd} + S^i _{\rm EM} ,
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
e^\infty _{\rm hyd} = \alpha ( {\mathfrak h} \gamma ^2 - p)
+ \sum _i \alpha \beta^i {\mathfrak h} \gamma ^2 \hat{v}^i ,
\label{eaikin}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
e^\infty _{\rm EM} = \alpha \left ( \frac{(\hat{B})^2}{2} +
\frac{\hat{(E)^2}}{2} \right ) + \sum _i \alpha \beta^i
(\hat{\bf E} \times \hat{\bf B})_i ,
\label{eaiem}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
S^i _{\rm hyd} = \alpha ^2 {\mathfrak h} \gamma ^2
\left ( 1 + \sum _j \beta ^j \hat{v}^j \right )
(\hat{v}^i + \beta ^i) ,
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
S^i _{\rm EM} = \alpha ^2 \left [ (\hat{\bf E} - \VEC{\beta} \times
\hat{\bf B} ) \times \left ( \hat{\bf B} +
\VEC{\beta} \times \hat{\bf E} \right ) \right ]^i ,
\end{equation}
where the subscripts `hyd' and `EM' indicate hydrodynamic and
electromagnetic components, respectively, and
$(\hat{E})^2 = (\hat{E}_1)^2+(\hat{E}_2)^2+(\hat{E}_3)^2$, $(\hat{B})^2 = (\hat{B}^1)^2+(\hat{B}^2)^2+(\hat{B}^3)^2$.
Here, ${\bf S}_{\rm EM}=(S_{\rm EM}^1,S_{\rm EM}^2,S_{\rm EM}^3)$
can be regarded as the Poynting vector.
The general relativistic Maxwell equations
(\ref{vecfa})-(\ref{vecec}) yield
\begin{equation}
\frac{\partial e^\infty _{\rm EM}}{\partial t}
= - \hat{\nabla} \cdot {\bf S}_{\rm EM} -
\alpha (\hat{\bf v} + \VEC{\beta}) \cdot {\bf f}_{\rm L} ,
\label{tren}
\end{equation}
where ${\bf f}_{\rm L} = \hat{\rho} _{\rm e} \hat{\bf E}
+ \hat{\bf J} \times \hat{\bf B}$ is the Lorentz force density.
If $\eta ^\mu = (0, 0, 0, 1)$ is the Killing vector for the azimuthal direction, we have the
equation of angular momentum conservation
\begin{equation}
\frac{\partial l}{\partial t} = - \hat{\nabla} \cdot
{\bf M} ,
\label{coam}
\end{equation}
where $l \equiv \alpha T^{0 \nu} \eta _\nu$
and $M^i \equiv \alpha h_i T^{i \nu} \eta _\nu$
are the total angular momentum density and the angular momentum
flux density, respectively.
Using the quantities measured in the FIDO frame,
we have
\begin{equation}
l = h_3 \hat{Q}^3 ,
\label{apam}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
M^i = \alpha h_3 (\hat{T}^{i3}+ \beta ^i \hat{Q}^3).
\end{equation}
These variables also can be divided into
the hydrodynamic and electromagnetic components, denoted by the
subscripts `hyd' and `EM', as follows:
\begin{equation}
l=l_{\rm hyd} + l_{\rm EM} ,
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
M^i=M^i_{\rm hyd} + M^i_{\rm EM} ,
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
l_{\rm hyd} = h_3 {\mathfrak h} \gamma ^2 \hat{v}^3 ,
\label{amkin}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
l_{\rm EM} = h_3 (\hat{\bf E} \times \hat{\bf B})_3 ,
\label{amem}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
M^i_{\rm hyd} = \alpha h_3 \left [ p \delta ^{i3} +
{\mathfrak h} \gamma ^2 \hat{v}^i \hat{v}^3 +
c \beta ^i {\mathfrak h} \gamma ^2 \hat{v}^3
\right ] ,
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
M^i_{\rm EM} =
\alpha h_3 \left [ \left ( \frac{(\hat{B})^2}{2} + \frac{(\hat{E})^2}{2} \right ) \delta ^{i3}
- \hat{B}^i \hat{B}^3 - \hat{E}_i \hat{E}_3
+ \beta ^i (\hat{\bf E} \times \hat{\bf B})_3
\right ] .
\end{equation}
In this case, from Eqs. (\ref{apeai}) and (\ref{apam}), we have a relation
of the energy and the angular momentum,
\begin{equation}
e^\infty = \alpha (\epsilon + \rho \hat{\gamma}) + \omega^3 l
= \alpha \left [ \epsilon + \rho \hat{\gamma} + \frac{\beta^3}{h_3} l \right ],
\label{releaianm}
\end{equation}
when $\omega_1 = \omega_2=0$.
Furthermore, Eqs (\ref{eaikin}), (\ref{eaiem}), (\ref{amkin}), (\ref{amem}) yield
\begin{equation}
e^\infty _{\rm hyd} = \alpha ( {\mathfrak h} \gamma ^2 - p) + \omega^3 l_{\rm hyd},
\label{eaikinang}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
e^\infty _{\rm EM} = \alpha \left ( \frac{(\hat{B})^2}{2} +
\frac{\hat{(E)^2}}{2} \right ) + \omega^3 l_{\rm EM}.
\label{eaiemang}
\end{equation}
The general relativistic Maxwell equations
(\ref{vecfa})-(\ref{vecec}) read
\begin{equation}
\frac{\partial l _{\rm EM}}{\partial t}
= - \hat{\nabla} \cdot {\bf M}_{\rm EM} -h_3 f_{\rm L}^3 .
\label{tram}
\end{equation}
From now on, we consider the electromagnetic energy transport when we have the
relation between the electric field and magnetic field as
\begin{equation}
\hat{\VEC{E}} = - \hat{\VEC{v}}_{\rm F} \times \hat{\VEC{B}}.
\label{eandb}
\end{equation}
Here, $\hat{\VEC{v}}_{\rm F}$ is a certain vector field and does not always
mean the real velocity, while in the ideal MHD case, it is identified by the plasma
velocity $\hat{\VEC{v}}$.
It is noted that the drift velocity due to the electric field $\VEC{E}$,
$\displaystyle \hat{\VEC{v}}_{E} = \frac{\hat{\VEC{E}} \times \hat{\VEC{B}}}{\hat{B}^2}$
can be used as one of vector of $\hat{\VEC{v}}_{\rm F}$.
Intuitively, $\hat{\VEC{v}}_{\rm F}$ is regarded as the velocity of the magnetic
field lines,
while this intuition is not rigorous because we can not identify the magnetic field lines
at the different times. However, we have not so serious contradiction
with the interpretation and we often recognize $\hat{\VEC{v}}_{\rm F}$ as the velocity
of the field line implicitly.
Using Eq. (\ref{eandb}), we have
\begin{eqnarray}
e_{\rm EM}^\infty = \alpha \left ( \frac{(\hat{B})^2}{2} + \frac{(\hat{E})^2}{2} \right ) +
\alpha \hat{\VEC{\beta}} \cdot \left ( \hat{\VEC{E}} \times \hat{\VEC{B}} \right ) =
\alpha \left [
\frac{1}{2} (1 + \hat{v}_{\rm F \perp}^2) + \VEC{\beta} \cdot \hat{\VEC{v}}_{\rm F \perp}
\right ] (\hat{B})^2,
\label{eeminf}
\end{eqnarray}
where $\hat{\VEC{v}}_{\rm F \perp}$ is the component of $\hat{\VEC{v}}_{\rm F}$
perpendicular to the magnetic field $\hat{\VEC{B}}$,
$\hat{\VEC{v}}_{\rm F} = \hat{\VEC{v}}_{\rm F \parallel} + \hat{\VEC{v}}_{\rm F \perp}$,
$\hat{\VEC{v}}_{\rm F \parallel} \parallel \hat{\VEC{B}}$,
$\hat{\VEC{v}}_{\rm F \perp} \perp \hat{\VEC{B}}$.
Here, we used the relations, $(\hat{E})^2 = (\hat{B})^2 \hat{v}_{\rm F \perp}^2$,
$\hat{\VEC{E}} \times \hat{\VEC{B}} = (\hat{B})^2 \hat{\VEC{v}}_{\rm F \perp}$.
With respect to the energy transport flux density, we have
\begin{equation}
\VEC{S}_{\rm EM} = \alpha^2 \left [ \left \{ \frac{1}{2} (1 + \hat{v}_{\rm F \perp}^2)
+ \VEC{\beta} \cdot \hat{\VEC{v}}_{\rm F \perp} \right \}
(\hat{B})^2 (\hat{\VEC{v}}_{\rm F \perp} + \VEC{\beta})
+ (1 - v_{\rm F \perp}^2) \left \{ \frac{(\hat{B})^2}{2} (\hat{\VEC{v}}_{\rm F \perp}
+ \VEC{\beta})
- (\VEC{\beta} \cdot \hat{\VEC{B}}) \hat{\VEC{B}} \right \} \right ] .
\label{semeq}
\end{equation}
Using Eqs. (\ref{eeminf}) and (\ref{semeq}), we obtain
\begin{equation}
\VEC{S}_{\rm EM} = \alpha e_{\rm EM}^\infty (\hat{\VEC{v}}_{\rm F \perp} + \VEC{\beta})
+ \alpha^2 (1 - \hat{v}_{\rm F \perp}^2)
\left \{ \frac{\hat{B}^2}{2} (\hat{\VEC{v}}_{\rm F \perp} + \VEC{\beta})
- (\VEC{\beta} \cdot \hat{\VEC{B}}) \hat{\VEC{B}}
\right \} .
\label{frm4sem}
\end{equation}
With respect to the angular momentum of the electromagnetic field,
assuming Eq. (\ref{eandb}), we have
\begin{eqnarray}
& l_{\rm EM} = h_3 (\hat{B})^2 \hat{v}_{\rm F \perp}^3,
\label{angmome2andb} \\
& M_{\rm EM}^i = \alpha h_3 \left [ \frac{1}{2} (1 + \hat{v}_{\rm F \perp}^2)
(\hat{B})^2 \delta^{i3} + \beta^i (\hat{B})^2 \hat{v}_{\rm F \perp}^3
-\hat{B}^i \hat{B}^3 -\hat{E}^i \hat{E}^3 \right ] .
\end{eqnarray}
In this case, we also have
\begin{equation}
e_{\rm EM}^\infty = \alpha
\frac{(\hat{B})^2}{2} (1 + \hat{v}_{\rm F \perp}^2) + \omega^3 l_{\rm EM}.
\label{eeminfang}
\end{equation}
\section{Causal energy extraction from black holes with several kinds of electromagnetic fields
\label{sec3}}
\subsection{Force-free electromagnetic field case: Blandford-Znajek mechanism
\label{ffefbz}}
In this subsection, we consider the energy transport near the horizon in the
force-free limit case, which is assumed in the original work of Blandford-Znajek mechanism
\citep{blandford77}.
Here, we use the Kerr metric for space-time $(x^0, x^1, x^2, x^3)=(t, r, \theta, \phi)$
with $\omega^\phi \ge 0$ in this section.
The condition of force-free, $J^\mu F_{\mu \nu} = 0$, reads
\begin{eqnarray}
\hat{\VEC{J}} \cdot \hat{\VEC{E}} &=& 0, \label{ffcone}\\
\hat{\rho}_{\rm e} \hat{\VEC{E}} + \hat{\VEC{J}} \times \hat{\VEC{B}}
&=& \VEC{0}. \label{ffconj}
\end{eqnarray}
This means no energy and momentum transforms between the electromagnetic field
and plasma. In such a case, we can write the electromagnetic field by Eq.
(\ref{eandb}).
This is because when $\hat{\rho}_{\rm e} \neq 0$, we have
$\displaystyle \hat{\VEC{E}} = - \frac{\hat{\VEC{J}}}{\hat{\rho}_{\rm e}} \times \hat{\VEC{B}}$,
and confirm Eq. (\ref{eandb}) with
$\displaystyle \hat{\VEC{v}}_{\rm F} = \frac{\hat{\VEC{J}}}{\hat{\rho}_{\rm e}}$.
When $\hat{\rho}_{\rm e} = 0$, we have $\hat{\VEC{J}} \times \hat{\VEC{B}} = \VEC{0}$,
that is $\hat{\VEC{J}} \parallel \hat{\VEC{B}}$. Furthermore, because of Eq. (\ref{ffcone}),
we have $\hat{\VEC{J}} \perp \hat{\VEC{E}}$, and then $\hat{\VEC{E}} \perp \hat{\VEC{B}}$.
We confirm Eq. (\ref{eandb}) with $\displaystyle \hat{\VEC{v}}_{\rm F} = \frac{1}{\hat{B}^2}
\hat{\VEC{E}} \times \hat{\VEC{B}}$.
In the steady-state and axisymmetry case,
Eqs. (\ref{cmfa}), (\ref{divb0}), (\ref{ffcone}), and (\ref{ffconj}) yield
\begin{equation}
\hat{\VEC{v}}_{\rm F} = \frac{h_\phi}{\alpha} (\Omega _{\rm F}- \omega_{\phi}) \VEC{e}_\phi
= \frac{R}{\alpha} (\Omega _{\rm F}- \omega_{\phi}) \VEC{e}_\phi ,
\label{vhf2hz}
\end{equation}
where $\Omega_{\rm F}$ is a constant along the magnetic flux surface,
$R \equiv h_\phi = h_3$ corresponds to the distance from the $z$ axis,
$\VEC{e}_\phi$ is
the unit vector for azimuthal direction \citep{blandford77}.
Because the triangle of $\hat{\VEC{v}}_{\rm F \perp}$ and $\hat{\VEC{v}}_{\rm F}$
and the triangle of $\hat{\VEC{B}}_{\rm P}$ and $\hat{\VEC{B}}$ are similar
(Fig. \ref{bzvfperp})，we found the following relation,
\begin{equation}
\frac{\hat{v}_{\rm F \perp}}{\hat{v}_{\rm F}}= \frac{\hat{B}_{\rm P}}{\hat{B}}.
\end{equation}
Here, we define $\hat{\VEC{B}}_{\rm P}$ and $\hat{\VEC{B}}_\phi$ as the
poloidal and azimuthal components of magnetic field $\hat{\VEC{B}}$, respectively.
Then, we have
\begin{equation}
\hat{v}_{\rm F \perp} = \frac{\hat{v}_{\rm F}}{\sqrt{1 + (\hat{B}^\phi/\hat{B}_{\rm P})^2}}.
\end{equation}
The Znajek boundary condition at the horizon \cite{znajek77} is expressed as
\begin{equation}
\frac{\hat{B}^\phi}{\hat{B}_{\rm P}} = \hat{v}_{\rm F}^\phi .
\label{znajekcond}
\end{equation}
Then, very near the horizon, we also have
\begin{equation}
\hat{v}_{\rm F \perp} \approx \frac{\hat{v}_{\rm F}}{\sqrt{1 + \hat{v}_{\rm F}^2}} ,
\end{equation}
where ``$\approx$" means asymptotic equivalence.
In the limit toward the horizon ($r \rightarrow r_{\rm H}$, $r_{\rm H}$ is
the radius of the black hole), we have
$\hat{v}_{\rm F} \rightarrow \infty$ when $\Omega_{\rm F} \neq \Omega_{\rm H}$, and
then we found $\hat{v}_{\rm F \perp} \rightarrow 1$.
Here, we write the value of $\omega^\phi$ at the horizon by $\Omega_{\rm H}$.
Eventually, using Eq. (\ref{frm4sem}) we obtain very near the horizon,
\begin{equation}
\VEC{S}_{\rm EM} = \alpha e_{\rm EM}^\infty (\hat{\VEC{v}}_{\rm F\perp} + \hat{\VEC{\beta}}) .
\end{equation}
The directions of $\hat{\VEC{v}}_{\rm F}$ of the cases of
$\Omega_{\rm F} < \Omega_{\rm H}$ and $\Omega_{\rm F} > \Omega_{\rm H}$
are opposite because of Eq. (\ref{vhf2hz}), and the slope of the magnetic field lines
in the two cases are also opposite (Fig. \ref{bh_horizon}).
Then, the direction of $\hat{\VEC{v}}_{\rm F \perp}$ is always directed
toward the black hole inner region when $\Omega_{\rm F} \neq \Omega_{\rm H}$.
Then, when $e_{\rm EM}^\infty < 0$, the electromagnetic energy flux is directed outward
and the energy of the black hole is extracted through the horizon.
Next, we determine the condition of the negative energy $e_{\rm EM}^\infty < 0$
at the horizon.
When $\Omega_{\rm F} \neq \Omega_{\rm H}$,
$\VEC{v}_{\rm F \perp}$ is directed toward the black hole horizon
in both cases of $\Omega_{\rm F} < \Omega_{\rm H}$ and $\Omega_{\rm F} > \Omega_{\rm H}$.
Because the triangle of $\hat{\VEC{v}}_{\rm F \perp}$, $\hat{\VEC{v}}_{\rm F}$
and the triangle of $\hat{\VEC{B}}_{\rm P}$, $\hat{\VEC{B}}$ are similar
(Fig. \ref{bzvfperp}),
we found $\displaystyle \frac{\hat{v}_{\rm F \perp}^\phi}{\hat{v}_{\rm F \perp}}
=\frac{\hat{B}_{\rm P}}{\hat{B}}$, and then we obtain
\begin{equation}
\hat{v}_{\rm F \perp}^\phi = \left ( \frac{\hat{B}_{\rm P}}{\hat{B}} \right )^2 \hat{v}_{\rm F}
= \frac{\hat{v}_{\rm F}}{1 + \hat{v}_{\rm F}^2} .
\end{equation}
Finally, using the second equation of Eq. (\ref{diff_alpbet}) and Eq. (\ref{vhf2hz}) we get
\begin{equation}
e_{\rm EM}^\infty = \left [ \frac{1}{2}
\left ( 1 + \frac{\hat{v}_{\rm F}^2}{1 + \hat{v}_{\rm F}^2} \right )
+ \frac{\hat{\beta}^\phi \hat{v}_{\rm F}^\phi}{1 + \hat{v}_{\rm F}^2} \right ] \alpha \hat{B}^2 \\
= \frac{1}{2} \frac{\alpha^2
+ 2 R^2 \Omega_{\rm F} (\Omega_{\rm F} - \hat{\omega}_\phi)}{\alpha^2 + R^2 (\Omega_{\rm F}
- \hat{\omega}_\phi)^2} \alpha \hat{B}^2.
\end{equation}
At the horizon, ($\alpha \longrightarrow 0$，
$\omega_\phi \longrightarrow \Omega_{\rm H}$),
Eqs. (\ref{vhf2hz}) and (\ref{znajekcond}) yield
$\displaystyle \hat{B} = \sqrt{(\hat{B}^\phi)^2+(\hat{B}_{\rm P})^2}
\approx |\hat{B}^\phi| = \left | \frac{R}{\alpha} (\Omega_{\rm F} - \Omega_{\rm H}) \right |
\hat{B}_{\rm PH}$ because $| \hat{B}^\phi | \gg \hat{B}_{\rm P}$,
where $\hat{B}_{\rm PH}$ is the value of $\hat{B}_{\rm P}$ at the horizon.
Eventually, at the horizon, we found
\begin{eqnarray}
& \displaystyle e_{\rm EM}^\infty \approx \frac{R_{\rm H}^2}{\alpha}
\Omega_{\rm F} (\Omega_{\rm F} - \Omega_{\rm H}) (\hat{B}_{\rm PH})^2,
\label{form2eemi} \\
& \VEC{S}_{\rm EM} = R_{\rm H}^2 \Omega_{\rm F} (\Omega_{\rm F} - \Omega_{\rm H})
(\hat{B}_{\rm PH})^2 (\hat{\VEC{v}}_{\rm F \perp} + \VEC{\beta}),
\label{form2sem}
\end{eqnarray}
where $R_{\rm H}$ is the value of $R = h_\phi$ at the horizon.
It is noted that the radial component of the electromagnetic energy flux is
identical to the simple equation given by \citet{mckinney04} (Eq. (34) in the paper),
if we set the force-free condition at the horizon, $\hat{\VEC{v}}_{\rm F}^\perp
= \VEC{e}_r$.
Then, when $0 < \Omega_{\rm F} < \Omega_{\rm H}$, the negative energy of the
electromagnetic field is realized ($e_{\rm EM}^\infty < 0$) and
the rotation energy of the black hole is extracted.
This is exactly the same condition of the Blandford-Znajek mechanism. This suggests
even in the Blandford-Znajek mechanism, to extract the black hole rotational energy,
the negative energy of the electromagnetic field is utilized as a mediator.
In conclusion, putting the negative electromagnetic energy into the black hole,
the black hole rotational energy is extracted causally in the Blandford-Znajek mechanism.
Sometimes the energy extraction of the rotating black hole is intuitively explained
by the torque of magnetic field at the horizon. This intuitive explanation is not
appropriate with respect causality. Because at the horizon no torque affects
the matter and field outside of the horizon from these inside of the horizon.
Eqs. (\ref{form2eemi}) and (\ref{form2sem}) suggest that the falling-down
of the negative (electromagnetic) energy into the black hole could
decrease the black hole energy to extract the black hole energy.
\subsection{Ideal MHD case: MHD Blandford-Znajek mechanism/ MHD Penrose process
\label{mhdbz}}
We consider the ideal MHD case in the space-time around the spinning black hole.
We assume the situation is stationary and axisymmetric as the same as
the force-free case in the previous section.
In such a case, the magnetic flux surfaces are stationary and axisymmetric
and are expressed as constant azimuthal component of vector potential, $A_\phi$.
We introduce the new coordinate system $(t, s, \Psi, \phi)$, where
$t$ is the time of Kerr space-time, $\phi$ is
the azimuthal coordinate, $\Psi=A_\phi$, and
the coordinate $s$ is set outwardly along the intersection line of a magnetic surface
and the meridian plane ($\phi$= const.)(Fig. \ref{idealmhdcase}).
Here, we set the coordinates $s$ so that it is perpendicular to the coordinate
$\Psi$. The $s$ coordinate at the horizon is $s_{\rm H}$.
Essentially, this coordinate system corresponds to the Boyer-Linquist
coordinate $(t, r, \theta, \phi)$
where $t=t$, $s=s(r,\theta)$, $\Psi=\Psi(r, \theta)$, and $\phi=\phi$.
Then, the length of a line element in the space-time of the rotating black hole
is given by
\[
ds^2 = -h_t^2 dt^2 + h_s^2 ds^2 + h_\Psi^2 d\Psi^2 + h_\phi^2 d\phi^2
- 2 h_\phi^2 \omega_\phi dt d\phi.
\]
We assume the ideal MHD condition, $U^\mu F_{\mu \nu}=0$, which yields
\begin{equation}
\hat{\VEC{E}} + \hat{\VEC{v}} \times \hat{\VEC{B}} = \VEC{0}.
\label{idealmhdcond}
\end{equation}
Using the coordinates $(s, \Psi, \phi)$, Eqs. (\ref{cmfa})--(\ref{dive}),
(\ref{coen}), (\ref{coam}), and (\ref{idealmhdcond}) yield
the following conservation variables along the magnetic surface:
\begin{eqnarray}
\dot{M}(\Psi) & =& h_\phi h_\Psi \rho \alpha \hat{U}^s
= \frac{\alpha \rho \hat{U}^s}{\hat{B}^s}, \label{constmd} \\
B^s(\Psi) & =& h_\Psi h_\phi \hat{B}^s =1, \label{constbs} \\
\Omega_{\rm F} (\Psi) & =& \frac{\alpha}{h_\phi} \left [
\hat{v}^\phi + \beta^\phi - \frac{\hat{B}^\phi}{\hat{B}^s} \hat{v}^s \right ] ,
\label{constwf}\\
L(\Psi) & =& h_\phi \left [ \frac{\mathfrak h}{\rho} \hat{U}^\phi
- \frac{\alpha}{\dot{M}} \hat{B}^\phi
\right ] , \label{constl} \\
H(\Psi) & =& \frac{\mathfrak h}{\rho}
[\alpha \hat{\gamma} - h_\phi (\Omega_{\rm F} - \omega_{\phi} ) ]
= \frac{\mathfrak h}{\rho} \alpha (\hat{\gamma} - \hat{v}^\phi_{\rm F} \hat{U}^\phi).
\label{consth}
\end{eqnarray}
It is noted that quantities with hats are variables observed by the FIDO frame.
It is also noted that the distribution of $\Psi$ is determined by the transverse
equation called the ``Grad-Shafranov equation"\citep{beskin00}.
Recently, numerical simulations of GRMHD provide the more complete feature of the
mechanism like the distribution of Poynting flux over the event horizon,
the relative importance of negative energy-at-infinity fluid and electromagnetic field,
the energy flux from the black hole to the disk through the magnetic field lines, etc.
\citep{mckinney12,hawley06}.
It is noted that the numerical, time-dependent simulations showed that
magneto-rotational instability (MRI) always causes fluctuations and no steady state
of plasma and magnetic field is found.
At the black hole horizon, the lapse function $\alpha$ becomes 0, $h_s$ becomes infinite,
while $\displaystyle \omega^\phi = \frac{\alpha \beta^\phi}{h_\phi} \longrightarrow \Omega_{\rm H}$,
$h_\Psi \longrightarrow h_{\Psi \rm H}$, $h_\phi \longrightarrow R_{\rm H}$
are finite except on the $z$ axis.
Hereafter, we discuss the quantities along a certain fixed magnetic flux surface $\Psi=\Psi$.
Because the horizon is not a real singular surface, and the density $\rho$ and
pressure $p$ are measured by the plasma rest frame, $\rho$ and $p$ should be
finite at the horizon. Then, from Eqs. (\ref{constmd}) and (\ref{constbs}),
$\alpha \hat{U}^s$ and $\hat{B}^s$ must be finite at the horizon, where we write $\hat{B}^s$ at
the horizon by $\hat{B}_{\rm H}^s$.
At the horizon, the plasma falls vertically to the horizon at the light velocity
\footnote{This is also derived as follows. Extremely near the horizon,
$\alpha \hat{B}^\phi$ is finite, because $\hat{v}^s$ is finite.
Then, from Eq. (\ref{constl}), $\hat{U}^\phi$ is finite.
At the horizon, because $\alpha \hat{U}^s$ is finite and $\alpha \longrightarrow 0$,
$\hat{U}^s$ and $\hat{\gamma}= \sqrt{1 + (\hat{U}^s)^2+(\hat{U}^\phi)^2}$ are infinite.
Then, $\displaystyle \hat{v}^\phi = \frac{\hat{U}^\phi}{\hat{\gamma}}$
becomes zero at the horizon and $\tilde{\gamma} = |\hat{U}^s|$.
Finally, at the horizon, $\displaystyle \hat{v}^s = \frac{\hat{U}^s}{\hat{\gamma}} = -1$.},
$\hat{v}^\phi = \hat{v}^\Psi = 0$, $\hat{v}^s=-1$, and second equation of Eq. (\ref{diff_alpbet})
and Eq. (\ref{constwf}) yield
\begin{equation}
\frac{\alpha \hat{B}^\phi}{\hat{B}^s} \approx R_{\rm H}(\Omega_{\rm F} - \Omega_{\rm H}) .
\label{bnd2hz}
\end{equation}
Using Eqs. (\ref{idealmhdcond}) and (\ref{constwf}), we have
\begin{equation}
\hat{\VEC{E}} = - \hat{\VEC{v}} \times \hat{\VEC{B}}
= \hat{B}^s \left ( - \hat{v}^\phi + \hat{v}^s \frac{\hat{B}^\phi}{\hat{B}^s} \right )
\VEC{e}_\phi \times \VEC{e}_s
= - \frac{R}{\alpha} (\Omega_{\rm F} - \omega_\phi) \VEC{e}_\phi \times
(\hat{B}^s \VEC{e}_s) = - \hat{\VEC{v}}_{\rm F} \times \hat{\VEC{B}} ,
\end{equation}
where we put $\displaystyle \hat{\VEC{v}}_{\rm F} = \frac{R}{\alpha}
(\Omega_{\rm F} - \omega^\phi) \VEC{e}_\phi$ and
$\VEC{e}_\phi$, $\VEC{e}_s$ are the unit base vectors along the $\phi$ and $s$
coordinates, respectively.
Very near the horizon, we have
\begin{equation}
\hat{\VEC{v}}_{\rm F} \approx \frac{R_{\rm H}}{\alpha}
(\Omega_{\rm F} - \Omega_{\rm H}) \VEC{e}_\phi.
\label{eqvf}
\end{equation}
Eqs. (\ref{bnd2hz}) and (\ref{eqvf}) present the geometrical disposition of vectors
$\hat{\VEC{B}}$ and $\hat{\VEC{v}}_{\rm F}$, as shown in Fig. \ref{bh_horizon}.
When $\Omega_{\rm F} \neq \Omega_{\rm H}$,
we found that
the vector of $\VEC{v}_{\rm F}$ is always directed toward the black hole inner region.
Intuitively, at the horizon of the rotating black hole,
the plasma falls into the black hole radially with the speed of light
($\hat{v}^s = -1$, $\hat{v}^\phi = 0$ at $s = s_{\rm H}$).
When the azimuthal component of magnetic field is finite outside of the horizon
and stationary, the magnetic field lines are twisted extremely strongly
near the horizon in appearance because of Eq. (\ref{constwf}) where $\alpha \hat{B}_\phi$
is uniform along the magnetic surface and $\alpha$ vanishes at the horizon.
This is due to difference in the lapse of time near the black hole and
is apparent feature in the Kerr metric.
In such case, the perpendicular
component of the velocity to the magnetic field is identical to the plasma
velocity and then we have
\begin{equation}
\hat{v}_{\rm F}^\perp = \hat{v}^\perp = 1
\label{eqvfperp}
\end{equation}
at the horizon
\footnote{This equation is also derived as follows.
Using similarity of the triangle of $\hat{\VEC{\VEC{v}}}_{\rm F \perp}$ and
$\hat{\VEC{v}}_{\rm F}$ and the triangle of $\hat{\VEC{B}}_{\rm P}=\hat{\VEC{B}}^s$
and $\hat{\VEC{B}}$ (Fig. \ref{bzvfperp}), we found
$\displaystyle \frac{\hat{v}_{\rm F \perp}}{\hat{v}_{\rm F}}= \frac{\hat{B}_{\rm P}}{\hat{B}}
= \frac{\hat{B}^{s}}{\hat{B}}$,
where $\displaystyle \hat{B} = \sqrt{(\hat{B}^s)^2+ (\hat{B}^\phi)^2}$ and
$\hat{B}_{\rm P} = \hat{B}^s$.
Very near the horizon, because $\hat{B}^\phi$ is much larger than $\hat{B}^s$,
we have $\displaystyle \frac{\hat{B}^{s}}{\hat{B}} \approx \frac{\hat{B}^s}{|\hat{B}^\phi|}$
and then
$\displaystyle \frac{\hat{v}_{\rm F \perp}}{\hat{v}_{\rm F}} \approx
\frac{\hat{B}^s}{|\hat{B}^\phi|}$.
Using Eqs. (\ref{bnd2hz}) and (\ref{eqvf}), at the horizon we confirm
$\displaystyle \hat{v}_{\rm F \perp} = \frac{\hat{B}^s}{|\hat{B}^\phi|} \hat{v}_{\rm F} =1$.}.
Then, the electromagnetic energy flux density at the horizon is given by
\begin{equation}
\VEC{S}_{\rm EM} =\alpha e_{\rm EM}^\infty (\hat{\VEC{v}}_{\rm F \perp} + \hat{\VEC{\beta}}) ,
\end{equation}
from Eq. (\ref{frm4sem}).
When $e_{\rm EM}^\infty$ becomes negative at the horizon, the electromagnetic
energy is transported outwardly through the horizon when $\Omega_{\rm F} \neq \Omega_{\rm H}$,
because $\hat{\VEC{v}}_{\rm F \perp}$ is always directed inwardly toward the black hole inner
region (see Fig. \ref{bh_horizon}).
Here, because $\hat{\VEC{v}}_{\rm F \perp}$ vanishes if $\Omega_{\rm F} = \Omega_{\rm H}$,
no electromagnetic output is expected, then we consider only the case of
$\Omega_{\rm F} \neq \Omega_{\rm H}$ case.
As shown in Eq. (\ref{eeminf}), the electromagnetic energy-at-infinity density is given by
\begin{equation}
e_{\rm EM}^\infty = \alpha \left [ \frac{1}{2} (1 + \hat{v}_{\rm F \perp}^2)
+ \beta^\phi \hat{v}_{\rm F \perp}^\phi \right ] (\hat{B})^2 .
\end{equation}
With Fig. \ref{bzvfperp}, we found
$\displaystyle
\frac{\hat{v}_{\rm F \perp}^\phi}{\hat{v}_{\rm F \perp}}
= \frac{\hat{v}_{\rm F \perp}}{\hat{v}_{\rm F}^\phi}$ ,
and then we have $\displaystyle
\hat{v}_{\rm F \perp}^\phi = \frac{(\hat{v}_{\rm F \perp})^2}{\hat{v}_{\rm F}^\phi}$.
At the horizon, using Eqs. (\ref{eqvf}) and (\ref{eqvfperp}),
we have
\begin{equation}
\hat{v}_{\rm F \perp}^\phi \approx \frac{\alpha}{R_{\rm H} (\Omega_{\rm F} - \Omega_{\rm H})}.
\end{equation}
Using Eq. (\ref{bnd2hz}), we also have
$\displaystyle \hat{B} \approx |\hat{B}^\phi| \approx
\left | \frac{R_{\rm H}}{\alpha} (\Omega_{\rm F} - \Omega_{\rm H}) \right | | \hat{B_{\rm H}}^s |$
at the horizon because of $| \hat{B}^\phi | \gg | \hat{B}^s |$.
Eventually, we obtain
\begin{eqnarray}
&\displaystyle e_{\rm EM}^\infty \approx \frac{R_{\rm H}^2}{\alpha} \Omega_{\rm F}
(\Omega_{\rm F} - \Omega_{\rm H}) (\hat{B}_{\rm H}^s)^2,
\label{eemhzmhd} \\
& \VEC{S}_{\rm EM} = R_{\rm H}^2 \Omega_{\rm F} (\Omega_{\rm F} - \Omega_{\rm H})
(\hat{B}_{\rm H}^s)^2 (\hat{\VEC{v}}_{\rm F \perp} + \VEC{\beta})
\label{semhzmhd}.
\end{eqnarray}
This clearly shows that when $0 < \Omega_{\rm F} < \Omega_{\rm H}$, $e_{\rm EM}^\infty$ becomes
negative and the electromagnetic energy flux directs outward through the horizon.
It is surprising that not only the condition of the electromagnetic energy extraction
from the black hole
but also the expression of energy density and the energy flux density at the horizon are
the same as those of the Blandford-Znajek mechanism (force-free case).
In the above two cases of electromagnetic extraction of the black hole rotational
energy, the negative electromagnetic energy-at-infinity is required
as a mediator to extract the black hole
rotational energy through the horizon causally. As shown in Eq. (\ref{eeminfang}), we have
$e_{\rm EM}^\infty = \alpha u_{\rm EM} + \omega^\phi l_{\rm EM}$,
where $\displaystyle u_{\rm EM} = \frac{(\hat{E})^2}{2}
+ \frac{(\hat{B})^2}{2}$ is the electromagnetic energy density in the FIDO frame.
To realize the negative electromagnetic energy,
the angular momentum of
the electromagnetic field $l_{\rm EM}$ should become less than $- \alpha u_{\rm EM}/\omega^\phi$.
Locally the angular momentum should be conserved because of
Eq. (\ref{coam}) and then
redistribution of the angular momentum is required.
In the Penrose process, fission of a particle is utilized for redistribution of
the angular momentum and production of a particle with negative energy-at-infinity.
Equation (\ref{tram}) indicates that dynamically only the magnetic force (the magnetic tension
in the axisymmetric case) and the Lorentz force
can redistribute the electromagnetic angular momentum.
In the ideal MHD case, magnetic tension plays an important role to redistribute
the electromagnetic angular momentum and realize the negative electromagnetic
energy. This mechanism of energy extraction with negative
electromagnetic energy is often confused with the (original) Blandford-Znajek
mechanism, where the force-free condition is used, as we did in section \ref{sec1}.
However, strictly speaking, they should be distinguished.
From now on, in this paper, we call the ideal MHD process
with the negative electromagnetic energy ``MHD Blandford-Znajek mechanism".
In the MHD Blandford-Znajek mechanism, we have to take the hydrodynamic energy
flux of the plasma flow into account to discuss the net energy flux from/into
the black hole.
In fact, in the ideal MHD case, the black hole rotational energy can be also extracted
with the negative {\it hydrodynamic} energy of the plasma. The hydrodynamic energy
flux density is
\[
\VEC{S}_{\rm hyd} = \alpha (e_{\rm hyd}^\infty + \alpha p) (\hat{\VEC{v}}
+ \hat{\VEC{\beta}}) .
\]
Then, near the horizon if the plasma with $\alpha e_{\rm hyd}^\infty < 0$ falls into the black hole,
the energy is transported outwardly through the horizon because $\alpha \longrightarrow 0$
at the horizon.
If $\VEC{S}_{\rm EM}$ is directed outward, $\alpha e_{\rm hyd}^\infty$ must be smaller
than zero to extract the black hole rotational energy.
This extraction mechanism of black hole rotational energy is called ``MHD Penrose process''
\citep{takahashi90,hirotani92,koide02,koide03}.
The hydrodynamic energy is given by $e_{\rm hyd}^\infty = \alpha ({\mathfrak h} \gamma
-p) + \VEC{\omega} \cdot \VEC{l}_{\rm hyd}$ where $\VEC{\omega} = (\omega_1, \omega_2, \omega_3)$
and $l_{\rm hyd} = {\mathfrak h} \gamma^2 h_3 \hat{v}^3$ is the hydrodynamic angular
momentum density. To realized the negative hydrodynamic energy,
$\displaystyle l_{\rm hyd}^3 < - \frac{\alpha ({\mathfrak h} \gamma^2 -p)}{\omega^3}$.
The angular momentum is conserved and the redistribution of hydrodynamic angular
momentum is also required. The redistribution of hydrodynamic
angular momentum is caused by the Lorentz force shown in Eq. (\ref{tram}).
To distinguish the MHD Blandford-Znajek mechanism and MHD Penrose process,
we should observe the electromagnetic and hydrodynamic energy-at-infinity density
($e_{\rm EM}^\infty$ and $e_{\rm hyd}^\infty$).
If the electromagnetic energy plays a main role to extract the black hole
energy, we recognize the process as the MHD Blandford-Znajek mechanism.
On the other hand, the hydrodynamic or plasma energy has an important role
for the extraction, it is recognized as the MHD Penrose process.
In the real cases, both of them are possible, while some long-term simulations
indicate that MHD Penrose process
is transient and the MHD Blandford-Znajek mechanism is dominant in the
later phase of the simulations \citep{komissarov05,mckinney06}.
The electromagnetic extraction mechanisms of black hole rotational energy
picked up in this paper are restricted to those
in the steady-state, axisymmetric cases.
Recently, the long term GRMHD simulations showed 3-D dynamics of plasma
interacting with the magnetic field around the rotating black hole
\citep{mckinney12}. Strictly speaking, the results of this paper
are not applicable to the time-dependent, axiasymmetric numerical
results. The generalization of the results of this paper for such
time-dependent, axiasymmetric numerical results is required.
\subsection{Electromagnetic wave case: Superradiance \label{superradiance}}
We mention the electromagnetic wave energy transport through the horizon briefly.
We use the Kerr metric for the space-time $(x^0, x^1, x^2, x^3)=(t, r, \theta, \phi)$
around the spinning black hole, where we set $\omega^\phi \ge 0$.
We consider the stationary solution of the electromagnetic wave in the vacuum,
where each component of the electromagnetic field is proportional to
$f(r,\theta) e^{-i \omega t + i m \phi}$ ($f$ is a function of $r$ and $\theta$).
We use the short wavelength limit of the electromagnetic wave,
$\displaystyle | \VEC{k} | \gg \left | \frac{1}{h_i}
\frac{\partial}{\partial x^i} g_{\mu \nu}\right|$
($i=1,2,3$, $\mu, \nu= 0,1,2,3$), where $\VEC{k}$ is the wavenumber of the
electromagnetic wave in a local region, which is fixed at the global coordinates.
In a vacuum ($\hat{\VEC{J}}=\VEC{0}$，$\hat{\rho}_{\rm e}=0$),
Eqs. (\ref{vecfa})---(\ref{vecec})
in the FIDO frame yield
\begin{equation}
\hat{\VEC{E}} = - \frac{\hat{\VEC{k}}}{\hat{\omega}} \times \hat{\VEC{B}} ,\verb! !
\hat{\VEC{B}} = \frac{\hat{\VEC{k}}}{\hat{\omega}} \times \hat{\VEC{E}} ,
\end{equation}
where $\hat{\VEC{k}}$ and $\hat{\omega}$ are the wave number and
angular frequency of the electromagnetic wave in the FIDO frame.
These equations read the dispersion relation, $\hat{\omega} = \pm \hat{k}$ and
the relation $\hat{\VEC{k}} \perp \hat{\VEC{B}}$.
In this case, we identify
\begin{equation}
\hat{\VEC{v}}_{\rm F \perp} = - \frac{\hat{\VEC{k}}}{\hat{\omega}} .
\label{vfperpideal}
\end{equation}
Because of $\hat{v}_{\rm F \perp} = | \hat{\VEC{k}}/\hat{\omega} | = 1$,
using Eq. (\ref{frm4sem}), we have
\begin{equation}
\VEC{S}_{\rm EM} = \alpha e_{\rm EM}^\infty (\hat{\VEC{n}} + \hat{\VEC{\beta}}).
\end{equation}
When electromagnetic wave passes through the horizon and enters into the black hole,
if $\alpha e_{\rm EM}^\infty$ is negative, the rotational energy of the black hole
decreases.
In this case, Eqs. (\ref{angmome2andb}), (\ref{eeminfang}), and (\ref{vfperpideal}) read
\begin{equation}
e_{\rm EM}^\infty = \alpha (\hat{B})^2 + \omega^3 l_{\rm EM}
= \alpha \left ( 1 + \omega^3 h_3 \frac{\hat{k}^\phi}{\alpha \hat{\omega}} \right ) (\hat{B})^2 .
\end{equation}
Very near the horizon, we have $\displaystyle e_{\rm EM}^\infty \approx \omega^3 R
\frac{\hat{k}^\phi}{\hat{\omega}} ( \hat{B})^2$.
Because the 4-wavenumber $k_\mu = (- \omega, k_1, k_2, k_3)$ is the covariant vector,
using Eq. (\ref{covarianttransform}), we have
\begin{equation}
- \hat{\omega} = \frac{1}{\alpha} (- \omega) + \frac{\beta^3}{h_3} k_3
= - \frac{1}{\alpha} (\omega - \omega_3 k_3), \verb! !
\hat{k}_3 = \frac{1}{h_3} k_3 = \frac{m}{h_3}.
\end{equation}
Then, the energy density of the electromagnetic wave very near the horizon is
approximately given by
\begin{equation}
e_{\rm EM}^\infty \approx \Omega_{\rm H} \alpha \frac{m}{\omega - m \Omega_{\rm H}} (\hat{B})^2.
\end{equation}
When $\omega < m \Omega_{\rm H}$, the negative energy at the horizon appears and the
rotational energy of the black hole is extracted.
This extraction mechanism corresponds to the ``superradiance".
To produce the negative energy of the electromagnetic wave, the redistribution
of the angular momentum is required. To understand the redistribution process, we have to
consider the structure of the solution of the electromagnetic wave in the ergosphere.
\section{Discussion \label{sec4}}
In this paper, we showed simple formulae (Eqs. (\ref{frm4sem}) and (\ref{eeminfang}))
to aid in building
physical intuition on the causal extraction mechanism of the black hole energy
by the electromagnetic fields with the negative electromagnetic energy
produced in the ergosphere.
In three cases of force-free, ideal MHD conditions and electromagnetic wave in vacuum,
at the horizon we found that $\hat{v}_{\rm F \perp}=1$ and then we have
$\VEC{S}_{\rm EM} = \alpha e_{\rm EM}^\infty (\hat{\VEC{v}}_{\rm F \perp}+\VEC{\beta})$.
To extract the black hole rotational energy causally, we have to put the
negative electromagnetic energy down into the black hole through the horizon.
To produce the negative electromagnetic energy,
because of the angular momentum conservation (\ref{eeminfang}),
we should redistribute the angular momentum of the electromagnetic field,
where we require the negative electromagnetic angular momentum density,
\begin{equation}
l_{\rm EM} < - \frac{\alpha (\hat{B})^2}{\omega^\phi}
= - \frac{R (\hat{B})^2}{\beta^\phi} < 0,
\end{equation}
at the horizon (see Eq. (\ref{eeminfang})).
To realize the negative angular momentum azimuthal component,
the angular momentum should be redistributed because the total
angular momentum is conserved.
The redistribution of the angular momentum of the electromagnetic field
is caused by the electromagnetic torque \citep{koide03,gammie04,hawley06,krolik05}.
This point of view is originated on the Penrose process \citep{penrose69},
which uses negative mechanical energy of a particle.
In fact, equations of the energies of matter and electromagnetic field
have similar forms as shown in Eqs. (\ref{eaikinang}) and (\ref{eaiemang}).
With the viewpoint, in general, we classify the known mechanisms
of energy extraction from the black hole as shown in Table \ref{clasmech}.
The Penrose process is well known and is shortly mentioned in section \ref{sec1}.
The Blandford-Znajek mechanism, MHD Blandford-Znajek mechanism,
and the MHD Penrose process were explained in the previous sections.
We showed that in all electromagnetic mechanisms of the energy extraction
from the spinning black hole, the negative electromagnetic energy is utilized
as a mediator for the causal energy extraction through the horizon.
We confirmed that the condition of the energy extraction is given by
the realization condition of the negative energy at the horizon.
The magnetic Penrose process was not discussed in this paper.
In the magnetic Penrose process, a particle interacts with the electromagnetic field
and falls to the negative energy orbit. The negative energy of the particle is used to
extract the black hole rotational energy.
This is just the Penrose process with the electromagnetic interaction instead of fission.
The superradiance was mentioned in subsection \ref{superradiance}.
We found the electromagnetic wave
with negative energy is used to extract the black hole rotational energy.
We also add the energy extraction mechanism with the magnetic reconnection
in the ergosphere in Table \ref{clasmech} \citep{koide09}.
We discuss the coincidence of the formulae of the energy density and
the energy flux density
of the electromagnetic field at the horizon for the force-free and MHD
Blandford-Znajek mechanisms as shown by Eqs. (\ref{form2eemi}), (\ref{form2sem}),
and (\ref{eemhzmhd}), (\ref{semhzmhd}) in sections \ref{ffefbz} and \ref{mhdbz},
although the conditions of the two mechanisms are different.
On a posteriori reasoning, we have the coincident expressions of the electric
field $\hat{\VEC{E}} = - \hat{\VEC{v}}_{\rm F} \times \hat{\VEC{B}}$,
$\displaystyle \hat{\VEC{v}}_{\rm F}=\frac{R_{\rm H}}{\alpha} (\Omega_{\rm F}
- \Omega_{\rm H}) \VEC{e}_\phi$ in the assumption of stationary, axisymmetric
conditions for the both cases. Furthermore, we have the coincident
boundary condition at the horizon $\hat{v}_{\rm F \perp} \longrightarrow 1$ and
$\displaystyle \hat{B} = \hat{B}_{\rm P} \frac{\hat{v}_{\rm F}}{\hat{v}_{\rm F \perp}}$
for the both cases. These leading equations for the both cases are the same
and then we have the coincident formulae for the both mechanisms.
Here, we remark on the overlap of the ideal MHD and force-free conditions.
The conditions of ideal MHD (Eq. (\ref{idealmhdcond})) and force-free
(Eq. (\ref{ffconj})) can both be satisfied if
$\hat{\VEC{J}} = \rho_e \hat{\VEC{v}} + \hat{\VEC{J}}_\parallel$
and $\rho_{\rm e} \neq 0$,
where $\hat{\VEC{J}}_\parallel$ is a vector parallel to the magnetic field
$\hat{\VEC{B}}$. The vector $\hat{\VEC{J}}_\parallel$ corresponds to the net current
density along the magnetic field lines at the plasma rest-frame.
Alternatively, in ideal MHD simulations, the ``force-free" condition is
often defined by $\hat{B}^2/(2 \rho h) \gg 1$ even if
$\hat{\VEC{J}} - \rho_e \hat{\VEC{v}}$ is not
parallel to $\hat{\VEC{B}}$.
In the astrophysical situation like AGNs, which mechanism is mostly expected to extract
the black hole rotational energy and activate the region near the black hole?
We think the MHD Blandford-Znajek mechanism is most promising process rather than
the original Blandford-Znajek mechanism. Because the plasma near the black hole
is expected to be relativistically hot, the plasma beta $\beta_{\rm p} = 2p/B^2$
never vanishes. Of course, the original Blandford-Znajek mechanism is applicable
as an approximation with respect to the very strong magnetic field case.
Such very low plasma beta is expected at the higher-latitude of the
black hole magnetosphere and the fast component of a relativsitc jet.
\begin{deluxetable}{lllll}
\tabletypesize{\scriptsize}
\rotate
\tablecaption{Classification of various mechanisms of energy extraction from black hole.
\label{clasmech}}
\tablewidth{0pt}
\tablehead{
\colhead{mechanism} & \colhead{form of negative energy}
& \colhead{\parbox[c]{0.3\textwidth}{\begin{flushleft} torque for redistribution of angular momentum
\end{flushleft}}}
& \colhead{output energy} & \colhead{references}
}
\startdata
Penrose process & mechanical energy of particle & force of particle fission
& mechanical energy of particle & \citet{penrose69} \\
\parbox[c]{0.25\textwidth}{\begin{flushleft} magnetic Penrose process \end{flushleft}}
& \parbox[c]{0.25\textwidth}{\begin{flushleft} mechanical energy of electrically charged particles
\end{flushleft}} &
\parbox[c]{0.25\textwidth}{\begin{flushleft} electromagnetic force \end{flushleft}}
& \parbox[c]{0.25\textwidth}{\begin{flushleft} mechanical energy of electrically charged particles
\end{flushleft}}
& \citet{wagh89} \\
\parbox[c]{0.25\textwidth}{\begin{flushleft} force-free Blandford-Znajek mechanism
\end{flushleft}} & electromagnetic energy &
\parbox[c]{0.25\textwidth}{\begin{flushleft} electromagnetic tension force (force-free)
\end{flushleft}}
& electromagnetic energy & \citet{blandford77} \\
\parbox[c]{0.25\textwidth}{\begin{flushleft} MHD Blandford-Znajek mechanism
\end{flushleft}} & electromagnetic energy &
\parbox[c]{0.25\textwidth}{\begin{flushleft} electromagnetic tension force (MHD) \end{flushleft}}
& \parbox[c]{0.25\textwidth}{\begin{flushleft} electromagnetic energy and kinetic energy
(Alfven wave) \end{flushleft}}
& \parbox[c]{0.25\textwidth}{\begin{flushleft} \citet{takahashi90,koide03,komissarov05}
\end{flushleft}} \\
MHD Penrose process & mechanical energy of plasma &
\parbox[c]{0.25\textwidth}{\begin{flushleft} Lorentz force (magnetic tension, MHD)\end{flushleft}}
&\parbox[c]{0.25\textwidth}{\begin{flushleft} electromagnetic energy and kinetic energy (Alfven wave)
\end{flushleft}} &
\parbox[c]{0.25\textwidth}{\begin{flushleft} \citet{takahashi90,hirotani92,koide02,koide03}
\end{flushleft}} \\
\parbox[c]{0.25\textwidth}{\begin{flushleft} energy extraction with magnetic reconnection
\end{flushleft}} &
mechanical energy of plasmoid &
\parbox[c]{0.25\textwidth}{\begin{flushleft} magnetic tension due to magnetic reconnection
\end{flushleft}}
& mechanical energy of plasmoid & \citet{koide09} \\
superradiance &
\parbox[c]{0.25\textwidth}{\begin{flushleft} electromagnetic energy of electromagnetic wave
\end{flushleft}} & \parbox[c]{0.25\textwidth}{\begin{center}
``half-mirror" effect due to quantum tunneling \end{center}}
& \parbox[c]{0.25\textwidth}{\begin{flushleft} electromagnetic energy of electromagnetic wave
\end{flushleft}}
&\parbox[c]{0.25\textwidth}{\begin{flushleft} \citet{press72,teukolsky74,lightman75}
\end{flushleft}} \\
\enddata
\end{deluxetable}
\acknowledgments
We are grateful to Mika Koide for her helpful comments on this paper.
|
\section{Introduction}
\label{sec:introduction}
Finding pathways towards global minima on the energy landscape of complex materials is a
major challenge in many fields\cite{Wales2003}. In the last decades, we have assisted to
the multiplications of new approaches for accelerating the exploration of the energy
landscape space while still attempting to follow physical-relevant pathways (see, for
example, Refs.~\onlinecite{Barkema1996,wales1997global,voter1997hyperdynamics,Goedecker2004,
beland2011}).
Because the complexity of energy landscapes increases at least exponentially with system
size\cite{Wales:1999fk, rossi2009searching}, much efforts have gone into identifying
local features that could be used to bias the search towards global low-energy
structures. Such knowledge would allow one to generate physically relevant and efficient
moves much more quickly, reducing the size of the effective landscape and increasing the
probability of constructing pathways leading to global energy minima.
Among the various propositions, a number of groups have suggested that the
Bell-Evans-Polanyi (BEP) principle \cite{Evans1935,Bell1936,Marcus1968}, developed in
physical chemistry, could also apply to more complex systems
\cite{Wales:1999fk,Goedecker2004,Roy2008,Kushima2009}. The BEP principle states that the
lowest-energy barriers surrounding a local minimum lead to deeper low-energy states;
following systematically the lowest-energy barrier out of a local minimum should
therefore rapidly lead to deep minima. It is closely connected to the methods that follow
the lowest vibrational normal mode(s) to establish folding pathways and find native
states of proteins and other molecules\cite{Bahar2005}. While the BEP principle has been
used mostly for molecules\cite{Jensen1999}, its application to bulk matter is relatively
new\cite{Goedecker2004}. Recent results, however, raise questions about its
efficiency, even in a relatively simple bulk system\cite{brommer2012comment,koziatek2013}, in apparent contradiction with a detailed analysis proposed by Goedecker and collaborators\cite{Roy2008}.
In this article, we review this contradiction, assessing the efficiency gains and
insights provided by the BEP principle by comparing its application with kinetic
Monte-Carlo (KMC), an algorithm known to provide the correct kinetics\cite{Bortz1975}. This comparison allows us to better understand how these methods work but, more importantly, what the nature of the energy landscape of complex bulk systems is.
Irrespective of the sampling method, handling low-energy non-diffusive events, that would
otherwise trap the system in local energy minima, is essential. This is why the
application of most of these energy landscape exploration methods includes generally an
additional step for handling flickers, i.e.\ non-diffusive states separated by low-energy
barriers that increase the energy landscape complexity without contributing to the system
evolution, and frequently visited sates. A number of approaches have been proposed for
handling these states, including the exact treatment of their
kinetics\cite{Novotny1995,Athenes1997, puchala2010energy,
beland2011,Fichthorn:2013:164104,Cao2014} and Tabu-like methods, approaches that block
already visited states or transition, facilitating the overall phase-space
sampling\cite{Glover:1997,Chubynsky:2006aa,El-Mellouhi2008}. As it turns out, the choice
of a method for handling flickers can have major influence on the overall efficiency of a
sampling algorithm.
Here, we combine the BEP-based and the KMC strategies with both exact
flicker-handling and Tabu-like methods in order to separate the role of each of these
algorithms. To do so, we use the kinetic
Activation-Relaxation Technique (k-ART), an off-lattice KMC method with on-the-fly
catalog building, that handles both disordered systems and long-ranges deformations
directly\cite{El-Mellouhi2008,beland2011}.
In the following section we describe the implementation of the various methods. We then
present results from tests run on two systems: vacancy aggregation in iron and
relaxation of an ion-implanted box of crystalline silicon. The signification of these
results is presented in the discussion section. When handling flicker states correctly,
we find that crossing high-energy barriers is essential to open new low-energy pathways,
by moving into unvisited energy basins that can lead to new low-energy structures. On the
other hand, while Tabu does not preserve the correct kinetics, it significantly raises
the efficiency of BEP, but does not significantly accelerate the configurational space
sampling as compared with standard KMC with flicker-handling.
\section{Methodology}
\label{sec:methodology}
The comparison presented in this paper is done between two algorithms, kinetic Monte Carlo and the BEP principle. For each of these methods, we apply two different approaches for handling low-energy barriers. All these are run using the kinetic Activation-Relaxation Technique (k-ART) package as a base. In this section, we first describe the k-ART package and then each algorithm separately.
\begin{figure}[t]
\includegraphics[height=2.5in]{fig1.eps}
\caption{The Bell-Evans principle: if all local-energy basins are similar in size, then selecting the lowest-energy barrier from an initial minimum (A) will lead to the lowest-energy minimun in (B) and an overall faster energy relaxation.}
\label{fig:fig1}
\end{figure}
\subsection{The kinetic Activation-Relaxation Technique}
\label{sub:the_kinetic_activation_relaxation_technique}
The kinetic Activation-Relaxation Technique (k-ART) is a kinetic Monte Carlo algorithm
(KMC)\cite{Bortz1975} that lifts many of the technical restrictions preventing its
application to complex materials\cite{El-Mellouhi2008,beland2011}. Traditionally, KMC
uses a fixed, preconstructed event catalog to compute the rate of escape from a local
minimum and brings forward the simulation clock according to a Poisson
distribution.\cite{Bortz1975,fichthorn1991theoretical}. This choice limits the atomic
motion to discrete states, which are generally crystalline positions, preventing its
application to disordered or defective materials, alloys and, in many cases,
semiconductors, and leaving aside much of long-range elastic effects on energy barriers
and kinetics.
While k-ART is described in details in Refs.~\onlinecite{beland2011, Joly2012,Mousseau2012}, it is useful to provide here a short description of the algorithm. Updating the system in k-ART can be described as a four-step process:
\begin{enumerate}
\item After a move, all atoms are inspected for changes in local environment. A spherical region around each atom, with a radius typically set to between 5 and 7~\AA, is defined. A bonding graph is constructed between atoms within this region, by connecting nearby atoms within a preset cut-off, generally fixed between the first and second-neighbor. Using NAUTY\cite{McKay1981}, a topological analysis library, we identify the unique automorphic group associated with this bonding graph, irrespective of the various symmetry operations. This allows us to construct a discrete and reusable catalog even for totally disordered systems.
\item For each new topology encountered, excluding the crystalline ones that would only lead to improbable events on the simulation timescale, we launch a series of event searches using the latest version of ART nouveau\cite{Malek2000, Machado-Charry2011}. For the two systems studied here, we launch 50 random event searches for each new topology and restrict our search to events with an energy barrier less or equal to 5~eV, generating on average between 3 and 5 events per topology and therefore per atom in a non-perfectly crystalline environment. To ensure a complete catalog, new searches are also regularly launched on the most common topologies.
\item Once the catalog is updated to include events associated with the new topologies, all events corresponding to the current configuration are placed in a binary tree in preparation for the KMC step. All barriers corresponding to at least 99.99\% of the rate, computed with constant prefactor, are then reconstructed and fully relaxed to account for geometrical rearrangements due to short- and long-range elastic deformations. The final individual and global rates are therefore associated with the exact conformation.
\item Finally, the standard KMC algorithm is applied to select an event to execute it and
advance the clock according to a Poisson distribution. Once the event is executed, we return to (1) for the next step.
\end{enumerate}
Using topological classification coupled with unbiased open search for transition states,
k-ART handles events without regard to the presence or not of a crystalline substructure,
constructing the event-catalog as the system evolves and fully taking care of all elastic
effects. Parallelizing event searches over tens to hundreds of processors \cite{joly2012,beland2011}, K-ART has been applied with success to highly defective crystals\cite{brommer2012comment,
beland2013replenish,beland2013long,brommer2014}, alloys and even amorphous materials\cite{joly2013contribution},
generating atomistic trajectories on time scale of 1~s or more and providing insight in
the long-time dynamics of these systems.
\subsection{Implementing the Bell-Evans-Polanyi Principle}
\label{sub:implementing_the_bell_evans_polanyi_principle}
The Bell-Evans-Polanyi (BEP) principle is based on the observation that the local curvature on the energy landscape is almost constant for given systems\cite{Roy2008}. Taken to its extreme (see Fig.~\ref{fig:fig1}), BEP implies that the barrier height out of a local minimum is a direct indicator of the depth of the following energy minimum. To relax a system, it is therefore sufficient to always select the lowest available energy-barrier.
Implementing the Bell-Evans-Polanyi principle is straightforward within k-ART. We follow
steps (1) to (3) according to the description above. The only difference is that after all
barriers have been relaxed, the lowest-energy barrier is systematically selected within the limits of the flicker handling method as discussed in the next subsection. Although time has no physical meaning with the BEP approach, we still use the KMC rate to assign a clock to the BEP evolution for comparison with k-ART results.
\subsection{Handling flickers}
\label{sub:handling_the_flickers}
The efficiency of event-based simulations is limited by the presence of flickers,
non-diffusive states of similar energy separated by a low-energy barrier with respect to
those leading to structural evolution. When the KMC or BEP strategy, as defined above, is
applied to any system with more than a few barriers, simulations become
trapped rapidly within flickers that seize all computational efforts without structural
evolution. Many efforts have gone into handling flickers since KMC was first introduced
to material sciences, 25 years ago\cite{Bortz1975}. Here we consider two approaches:
the basin auto-constructing Mean-Rate Method (bac-MRM)\cite{beland2011}, that we have
adapted from Puchala \emph{et al.}'s Mean-Rate Method\cite{puchala2010energy} and a
simple barrier-based Tabu\cite{Glover:1997,Chubynsky:2006aa,El-Mellouhi2008}.
The bac-MRM, discussed in details in Ref.~\onlinecite{beland2011}, handles flickers by merging the associated states within a single basin,
solving the internal dynamics analytically, projecting the solution onto the various exit
pathways, and correcting their respective rate. Since the bac-MRM is statistically exact
and since by definition the in-basin states have very close energy, it is possible to
adjust the basin barrier cut-off as the simulation evolves to prevent it from being trapped.
When the focus is on sampling configurations rather than follow the right kinetics, it is
possible to limit or even forbid the visit of already known states. In barrier-based
Tabu, when a barrier is selected, we compare the trajectory, i.e.\ the displacement from
the initial to saddle to final state, with the last $N$ moves (see
Ref.~\onlinecite{Chubynsky:2006aa} for more details). If the displacement is not in the database, the
event is generated, otherwise, the configuration is left in the initial or final state
according to their respective Boltzmann weight. The transition can be completely
forbidden of the rest of the simulation or blocked for a number $n$ of steps, hence the
name \emph{Tabu}. Here we select $n=50$.
While recent k-ART simulations with the KMC algorithm used the bac-MRM, which
offers a statistically correct kinetics\cite{beland2011}, the BEP implementation of
Goedecker's basin-hoping minimization algorithm\cite{Goedecker2004} is closer in spirit
to the Tabu approach than to bac-MRM. Indeed, in basin-hopping, while states are never
blocked, the energy landscape exploration is controlled by adaptable energy pulses. The
energy of these pulses is raised systematically as the same basins are visiting multiple
times so that, as for Tabu and contrary to bac-MRM, there is no formal upper limit to the
energy barrier that can be crossed when the system is trapped in a local basin.
\subsection{Systems studied}
\label{sub:systems_studied}
We compare the KMC and BEP methods and the impact of flicker handling on two
different systems: (1) the aggregation of 50 vacancies inside a 2000-atom box of bcc iron
described with the Ackland potential \cite{ackland2004development} and (2) the
relaxation of a 27000-atom box of c-Si disordered through the implantation of a
single 3-keV Si ion and described with Stillinger-Weber potential\cite{stillinger1985computer}. Both systems are run at
300 K and at constant volume corresponding to crystalline density.
For the Iron system, we start with a 2000-atom bcc Fe cubic box and remove 50 atoms at random. Both BEP and KMC
simulations are launched after a simple local energy minimisation. For the Ackland
potential, the vacancy diffusion barrier is found to be 0.64 eV with
MD\cite{ackland2004development} and ART nouveau. At 300 K, aggregation from
random vacancies into 9 to 10 vacancy clusters was found to take on the order of 1~ms in
two three independent off-lattice KMC simulations\cite{brommer2012comment,xu2013cascade,chill2014molecular}.
The initial configuration of ion-implanted Si is described in detail in
Ref.~\onlinecite{beland2013replenish}. A 3-keV ion is first implanted in a 100~000-atom
Stillinger-Weber box\cite{stillinger1985computer} with two surfaces along the
z-direction and periodic boundary condition (PBC) along the $x$ and $y$ directions and is
then relaxed for 10~ns using NVT molecular dynamics at 300~K. A block of 27~000 atoms
surrounding the disordered region is then extracted and placed into a cubic cell with PBC
along the three axes. The kinetics of relaxation with k-ART and bac-MRM was found to be
in excellent agreement with nanocalorimetric measurements\cite{beland2013replenish, beland2013long}.
\section{Results}
\label{sec:results}
\subsection{Basin Mean Rate Method}
\label{sub:basin}
\subsubsection{ Vacancies in bcc iron}
We first compare the k-ART and BEP relaxation methods coupled with the bac-MRM using the Fe system. Fig.~\ref{fig:fig3} shows the initial state for a 2000-atom bcc-iron box
containing 50 vacancies colored as function of cluster size. We run three independent simulations for BEP and two for KMC. Each run is about 1300 k-ART steps not counting flickering steps that are handled with the bac-MRM. Fig.~\ref{fig:fig4} reports the evolution of the total energy as a function of time (as a function of step in inset).
\begin{figure}[t]
\includegraphics[height=2.2in]{fig3.eps}
\caption{ The initial state for a 2000-atom bcc-iron box containing 50 vacancies colored as function of cluster size. Mono-vacancies are colored in green, cluster containing two vacancies are colored in grey and tri vacancies are colored in dark.}
\label{fig:fig3}
\end{figure}
The five simulations, using either k-ART or BEP, follow a similar trajectory for the
first 100 steps or so. At that point, all BEP simulations are trapped at an energy about
7~eV below the initial configuration for the rest of the simulations (more than 1000
steps further for each run), unable to find pathways to more relaxed states while the
KMC simulations evolve the system for the whole run, finishing
between 25 and 28 eV below the BEP runs. Projecting these runs on a time axis, we see
that the two methods follow the same path until about \unit{10}{\micro}s, at which point
the clock for BEP runs slows down noticeably compared to KMC: after 1300 steps, BEP runs
reach about \unit{100}{\micro}s compared with 1 to 10 ms for KMC.
\begin{figure}[t]
\includegraphics[height=2.5in]{fig4.eps}
\caption{ The total energy evolution as function of logarithmic of simulated time for three BEP and two KMC runs in the 50-vacancy Fe system.. Inset: Total energy evolution as function of simulation step for three BEP and two KMC runs.}
\label{fig:fig4}
\end{figure}
This difference in effective time is not caused by the handling of flickers, since both k-ART and BEP use, here, the bac-MRM. Indeed, these BEP simulation results are consistent with Fan \emph{et al.}\cite{Fan:2011ab} recent work using the Autonomous Basin Climbing (ABC) method, a BEP-like approach\cite{Kushima2009}. Using the same 50-vacancies Fe system, ABC simulations produced an energy drop of 13~eV during a simulation lasting 20~000~s, while k-ART reaches the same energy level in the first 500~\textmu s of simulation and continues to relax well-below ABC's level. Fig.~\ref{fig:fig5} (red line) compares the performance of k-ART with KMC with that of Autonomous Basin Climbing (ABC) for this system.
\begin{figure}[t]
\includegraphics[height=2.5in]{fig5.pdf}
\caption{Comparison of k-ART vs. ABC relaxation of an 2000-atom iron system with 50 vacancies initially distributed at random. Red line: total energy evolution as function of logarithmic of simulated time; green line: evolution of cluster size; blue line: evolution of the fraction of mono-vacancies. The horizontal dashed black line corresponds to the energy level reached after 20~000 s with ABC.}
\label{fig:fig5}
\end{figure}
To understand the difference between these two methods, we look at the time evolution of the average vacancy cluster and the mono-vacancy fraction for one BEP and KMC simulation (Fig.~\ref{fig:fig6}). These correspond respectively to the green and blue lines in Fig.~\ref{fig:fig4}. As for the energy, structural evolution for the two simulation types follows a similar path for the first 10 \textmu s, which corresponds to the clustering of about 38~\% of the initial value of the vacancies into small clusters (averaged cluster size equals two). At that stage, the structural evolution of the BEP run comes almost to a stop while the aggregation continues with KMC simulation with clusters reaching an average size of 13 as the proportion of mono-vacancies falls to less than 12.5~\% of the initial value. This supports the relation between BEP and Fan \emph{et al.} simulation observed for the total energy (blue line in Fig.~\ref{fig:fig5}), where the mono-vacancy fraction decreased to only 52~\% of the initial value (averaged size 6) after 20~000~s. The structural difference between the final BEP and KMC states is clearly seen in the snapshots taken during the evolution of both simulation types (Fig.~\ref{fig:fig7}). Even at 10 \textmu s, we note a difference in the number of isolated vacancies between the two types of runs.
\begin{figure}[t]
\includegraphics[height=2.8in]{fig6.pdf}
\caption{Comparison of k-ART vs.\ BEP with structural evolution for the 50-vacancy FE system. Top: Evolution of the average cluster size as function of logarithmic of
simulated time. Bottom: Evolution of the fraction of mono-vacancies. Blue line: KMC; green line: BEP.}
\label{fig:fig6}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[t]
\includegraphics[height=2.8in]{fig7.pdf}
\caption{Selected snapshots of the atomic configuration for a KMC run (top) at 1~\textmu s, 10~\textmu s and 10~ms and a BEP run at 1~\textmu s and 10~\textmu s. Only vacancies are shown. Colors are associated with cluster size. Mono-vacancies are coloured in green, cluster containing two vacancies are colored in grey and tri vacancies are colored in dark.}
\label{fig:fig7}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[t]
\includegraphics[height=2.5in]{fig8.pdf}
\caption{Distribution of the executed energy barriers as function of the logarithmic simulated time for both BEP (green triangle) and KMC (blue squares) simulations of the Fe 50-vacancy system. The dashed black line provides a rough estimate of the energy threshold for the events with barrier height in the top 10~\% of the executed events in a given time interval.}
\label{fig:fig8}
\end{figure}
To further understand the kinetic evolution of these two simulations sets and their relation to the structure of the energy landscape, we analyze
the evolution of the energy barrier height for all \emph{executed} events.
Fig.~\ref{fig:fig8} shows all the energy barriers for executed events as function of
logarithmic time of KMC and BEP simulations. For KMC simulations, we note that the
maximum barrier height increases logarithmically with time, but that, in any time frame, the energy barrier distribution remains almost continuous. For BEP simulations
we note instead, that by 10 ns, the maximum barrier height visited -- around 0.4~eV -- has
been reached and that, after this point, the same distribution of barrier is selected
until the simulations stopped, around 10 \textmu s, after 1300 steps. KMC manages therefore
to access, even at times as short as 10~ns, activated barriers that are slightly
higher, 0.5~eV, than those crossed with BEP, but sufficient to unlock configurations by giving access to new relaxation pathways.
Why would crossing high barriers be so important? Fig.~\ref{fig:fig9} plots the energy released by the system, or the asymmetry energy, for executed events associated with the 10~\% higher energy barriers calculated in a moving window. In this plot, negative asymmetry energy means that the system has moved into a state of lower energy while positive values are associated with higher energy final states. We see that 93~\% of these events lead to states with a higher final energy in KMC simulation versus 53~\% events in BEP simulation. In BEP, crossing these high energy barriers leads, almost half the time, to lower energy states and, as often, to higher energy states while, for KMC runs, the bias is clearly towards higher energy states.
Before discussing the significance of this observation, we first need to check whether these results are seen in other systems.
\begin{figure}[t]
\includegraphics[height=2.5in]{fig9.pdf}
\caption{Asymmetric energy, i.e.\ energy difference between the final and initial energy states, for events within the top highest 10~\% energy barrier as function of logarithmic simulated time in the Fe 50-vacancy system. (93~\% of these events lead in high energy state in KMC simulations vs 53~\% events in BEP simulations)}
\label{fig:fig9}
\end{figure}
\subsubsection{ Ion-bombarded crystalline silicon}
We consider now a disordered system with
an equal number of vacancies and interstitials: ion-implanted crystalline silicon. This
model system has been studied extensively, both experimentally and theoretically, over the
years\cite{caturla1996ion,karmouch2007damage,pothier2011flowing, beland2013replenish}. Here, we follow the relaxation of a 27000-atom box of Stillinger-Weber
\cite{stillinger1985computer} c-Si disordered through the implantation
of a single 3-keV Si. After 1~ns of MD, the implantation
yields 152 defects (interstitials and vacancies) distributed into about 30 clusters
ranging in size from 1 to 30 with most of them counting between 4 and 7 defects. This configuration serves as the starting point for all simulations in this section. A
snapshot of this initial configuration is presented in Fig.~\ref{fig:fig10}.
\begin{figure}[t]
\includegraphics[height=2.5in]{fig10.pdf}
\caption{The initial state for a 27000-atom box of c-Si after the implantation of a single 3~keV Si atom and relaxation, through MD, over 1~ns. Interstitials are colored in beige and vacancies in blue.}
\label{fig:fig10}
\end{figure}
Fig.~\ref{fig:fig11} presents the energy evolution of 3 BEP and 3 KMC simulations over time and, in inset, as a function of k-ART steps. All simulations are run for about 4000 k-ART steps with an overall similar behavior for BEP and KMC runs to what had been observed for vacancy aggregation in Fe: both BEP and KMC sets follow each other closely for the first \textmu s, corresponding to about 1200 k-ART steps. After this point, the BEP remains trapped onto a constant energy surface while the KMC runs release another 25~eV and access a time scale of up to 10 ms.
\begin{figure}[t]
\includegraphics[height=2.5in]{fig11.pdf}
\caption{The total energy evolution as function of the logarithm of simulated time for 3 KMC and 3 BEP runs on a 27~000-atom cell of ion-implanted Si. The k-ART runs are launched after a first 1~ns molecular dynamics following a 3~keV single Si implantation. Inset: Total energy evolution as function of simulation step for the same runs.}
\label{fig:fig11}
\end{figure}
The difference in relaxation pathway between BEP and KMC simulations is analyzed using
the defect evolution. In the first 100 ns, for both systems, we observe only cluster reconfigurations and single defect migration. Thus, the number of defects remains constant (152).
Afterwards, annihilation events dominate during \unit{1}{\micro}s and the number of defects passes from 152 to 88 where
BEP simulations is locked, vibrating and reconfiguring the defects while k-ART with KMC
simulations continue to generate annihilation events by effectively moving distant
defects, allowing a further reduction in their number to 64.
Analysis of the energy barrier height evolution for all \emph{executed} events for the
three BEP and three KMC simulation shows the same characteristic as observed previously
in the Fe system (Fig.~\ref{fig:fig13}). Fig.~\ref{fig:fig14} gives the energy released
by the system for the top 10\% highest executed energy barriers crossed calculated over a
moving time window. 89~\% of these events lead to higher final energy states in KMC simulations vs
43~\% events for BEP simulations confirming, here also, the importance of allowing the crossing of barriers that are not the lowest in order to open up new pathways leading, in the end, to lower energy states\cite{beland2013replenish}.
\begin{figure}[t]
\includegraphics[height=2.5in]{fig13.pdf}
\caption{Distribution of the selected energy barriers as function of the logarithmic simulated time for both BEP (green triangle) and KMC (blue squares) ion implanted Si simulations of a 27~000-atom cell of ion-implanted Si. The black line provides a rough estimate of energy threshold for the events with barrier height in the top 10~\% of the selected events in a given time interval.}
\label{fig:fig13}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[t]
\includegraphics[height=2.5in]{fig14.pdf}
\caption{Asymmetry energy, i.e.\ energy difference between the final and initial energy states, for events within the top highest 10~\% energy barrier as function of logarithmic simulated time for all BEP and KMC runs on the 27~000-atom implanted Si cell. Blue symbols: KMC runs; green symbols: BEP. (The 89~\% events lead in high energy state in KMC simulation vs 43~\% events in BEP simulation.)}
\label{fig:fig14}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[t]
\includegraphics[height=2.5in]{fig15.pdf}
\caption{The total energy evolution for a system of 50 vacancies in Fe as function of logarithmic of simulated time for 2 runs of BEP with Tabu and 1 run with bac-MRM, and 2 runs of KMC with Tabu and 1 run with bac-MRM. Inset: Total energy their evolution as function on simulation step.}
\label{fig:fig15}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[t]
\includegraphics[height=2.5in]{fig17.pdf}
\caption{Asymmetric energy, i.e.\ energy difference between the final and initial energy states, for events within the top highest 10~\% energy barrier as function of logarithmic simulated time for the Tabu-based KMC and BEP simulations of the 50-vacancy Fe system.}
\label{fig:fig17}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Tabu}
\label{sub:tabu}
\begin{figure}[t]
\includegraphics[height=2.5in]{fig18.pdf}
\caption{ The total energy evolution as function of the logarithmic simulated time for 2 runs of BEP with Tabu and 1 run with bac-MRM, and 2 runs of KMC with Tabu and 1 run with bac-MRM (Blue ligne in Fig.~\ref{fig:fig11}) in a 27~000-atom cell of ion-implanted Si. Inset: Total energy their evolution as function on simulation step.}
\label{fig:fig18}
\end{figure}
We now look at the effect of Tabu, an approach that can be applied to handle flickers in kinetic simulations but also to orient relaxation when searching for global minimum. We compare Tabu with bac-MRM using both BEP and KMC sampling techniques. Fig.~\ref{fig:fig15} shows the evolution of the total energy for a 2000-atom Fe box with 50 vacancies as a function of simulation time (inset, as a function of k-ART steps). Focusing on energy as a function of time, we note that all simulations follow a relatively similar relaxation pathway over 10 ms, with the exception of BEP-bac-MRM (light blue) that remains trapped at -7750~eV (as was previously seen).
As a function of k-ART step (see inset), however, KMC-bac-MRM still provides the fastest overall relaxation, reaching -7770 eV after 2250 steps, almost 80 \% faster than Tabu-KMC or BEP. Nevertheless, in the long run, Tabu, irrespective of the sampling method, manages to reach KMC-bac-MRM's relaxation level and even, in one simulation, achieve a better energy gain.
Fig.~\ref{fig:fig17} gives the energy released for all \emph{selected} events for one
Tabu-BEP and one Tabu-KMC simulation for the top 10\% highest executed energy barriers
crossed calculated over a moving time window. Analysis of the energy barrier height
evolution for these simulations shows that Tabu-based simulations display a similar rate
of visiting higher final energy states as previously observed for KMC-bar-MRM: 84~\% of
Tabu-KMC events and 93~\% Tabu-BEP events lead to higher energy states. This explains why
Tabu approaches can be, on average, as efficient as KMC-bac-MRM for finding low-energy
states. By blocking already visited directions, Tabu effectively forces the system to
sample the more asymmetric states that lead to overall lower-energy configurations. This might explain also why, since minima-hopping uses a Tabu-like approach, by systematically increased the exit energy, the method remains efficient even though it is based on the BEP principle\cite{Goedecker2004,Roy2008}.
For large scale complex system Tabu become less efficient(Fig.~\ref{fig:fig18}). The
total energy evolution as function of logarithmic of simulated time of a 27000-atom box
of c-Si disordered through the implantation of a single 3-keV Si ion for two runs of BEP
with Tabu and one run with bac-MRM, and two runs of KMC with Tabu and one run with
bac-MRM (inset: total energy their evolution as function on simulation step). We see the
two simulations using Tabu with BEP held at high energy state and Tabu with KMC
simulation descending following the same pathway as with bac-MRM with KMC , due, in part,
to the 50-step memory used here .
In spite of these similarities, it is important to remember that bac-MRM is statistically exact, contrary to Tabu, and that it preserves the correct dynamics of the system. For example, analysis of energy evolution for the four Tabu simulations shows sudden staircase-like decrease for the energy (Fig.~\ref{fig:fig18}), a behavior that is not observed with the bac-MRM simulations.
\section{Discussion}
\label{sec:discussion}
In the previous section, we have presented four sets of simulations, each performed on
two systems: a 2000-atom Fe cell with 50 vacancies and a 30~000-atom Si cell disordered
by a 3-keV implanted atom. The results allow us to better understand the applicability of the BEP principle to bulk systems, the importance of the flicker-handling methods as well as more about the structure of the energy landscapes.
As discussed in the introduction, the BEP principle was formulated many decades ago and it has helped to understand various kinetic phenomena in chemistry. In its simplest form, it states that around a given local energy minimum, the lowest energy-barrier will lead to the lowest energy state among those directly connected to the initial minimum. In a recent paper, Roy and collaborators showed that a relaxed version of BEP is applicable to bulk systems: crossing a small barriers has more chances to lead to a deep minimum that crossing a high-energy barrier.\cite{Roy2008}
This observation is correct, but incomplete. Extensive characterization of the energy
landscape of amorphous silicon (a-Si), for example, has shown that in fact for any event
the forward and reverse barrier height, i.e.\ the barrier height computed from the
initial and the final minima, respectively, are totally uncorrelated,\cite{Kallel2010}.
This general observation that also holds, at least, in ion-bombarded
Si\cite{beland2013long}. Since the depth of the final well, as measured from the initial
state, is the difference between the reverse and the forward barrier height, this absence
of correlation means that, on average, lower forward energy barriers do lead to deeper
minima, which explains some of the success of the application of the principle to
materials\cite{goedecker2005global, kazachenko2009improved}. Fundamentally, however, the
structure of the landscape does not correspond to the original BEP principle, which
states that there is a direct correlation between the barrier height and the depth of the
final minimum.
Since the BEP principle is correct locally, on average, even though for the wrong
reasons, is strictly following the lowest available energy barrier, in respect of the BEP
principle, an efficient global minimization approach?
Results presented in the previous section show that it is not. Indeed, for two very different systems, a comparison of the BEP principle with an off-lattice kinetic Monte-Carlo, an algorithm that provides the correct atomistic kinetics, show that simulations following the BEP principle rapidly become trapped in relatively high-energy configurations while KMC simulations, that select events with a Boltzmann weight on the activation barriers, allowing them to sample beyond the lowest-energy barrier, manage to visit much deeper energy basins for the same computational effort.
To relax efficiently, both the Fe vacancy and the ion-implanted Si systems require therefore to cross barriers that do not correspond to the lowest ones available in order to land into higher energy states, in contradiction with the locally-derived BEP model. As was shown recently in ion-implanted c-Si and a-S, accessing these high-energy states is essential to open new low-energy pathways, by moving into unvisited energy basins that can lead to low-energy structures\cite{beland2013replenish, joly2013contribution}. This so-called \emph{replenish and relax} mechanism explains why, when treating correctly the local flickering dynamics, BEP approaches cannot be as efficient as standard KMC methods. Clearly, systematically selected lower energy barriers are not sufficient to exit local energy basins.
Why then do BEP-based relaxation methods, such as minima-hopping work? The crucial step is in the way the code handles local-energy traps. In the second set of simulations presented above, we compare the efficiency of two algorithms designed specifically to take care of the flickering states, these non-diffusive states separated by low-energy barriers with respect to those necessary to reach new energy basins.
Here, we looked at the basin auto-constructing Mean-Rate Method, an algorithm that statistically solves the inner-basin kinetics, based on a pre-defined maximum barrier height for defining flickers, and a Tabu-like approach, that blocks already-visited transition, forcing the system to jump over higher and higher barriers until it finds a new energy basin. When coupled to KMC, both methods show a similar efficiency in finding low-energy structures, with slight advantage for the correct kinetics on the more complex ion-implanted Si system.
When applied to BEP runs, Tabu manages to prevent the trajectories to get trapped, allowing the simulations to reach energy level similar to those obtained with the KMC method, in a similar number of steps. This is done, essentially, by violating the BEP principle, and systematically blocking the lowest energy barrier, allowing the system to cross over higher energy ones.
These results confirm that efficient energy minimization in a bulk system cannot be based on the BEP principle. This failure is due, in part, to the fact that this principle is not exact: it is the absence of correlation between the forward and backward energy barriers that explains why lower-energy barriers tend to lead to deeper energy minima, not a specific correlation between these two quantities. More important, however, is the need to go over higher-energy states in order to reach new deep-energy minima. This can only be done either by using a physically-based kinetic algorithm such as simple MD or KMC or by systematically limiting the available phase space to non-visited regions, in effect forcing the system to move over these high-energy barriers.
\section{Conclusion}
\label{sec:conclusion}
In this paper, we use kinetic ART, an efficient on-the-fly off-lattice kinetic Monte Carlo algorithm that incorporates exactly all elastic effects to compare both the Bell-Evans-Polanyi (BEP) principle with KMC and a Tabu-like approach to handling small flickering-states with a statistically exact one.
Testing these methods on two systems --- a 2000-atom cell of EAM bcc iron with 50 vacancies and a 27~000-atom ion-bombarded crystalline silicon cell --- we find that pure BEP simulations, even when handling low-energy flickering states, become trapped rapidly in relatively high-energy configurations while KMC runs manage to find ever lower energy states (on the simulation time scale). This is explained by the \emph{replenish and relax} model\cite{beland2013replenish} which shows that to move into a new and deeper energy basin, it is necessary, first, to move into higher energy states that are not allowed by the BEP approach but that come out naturally from a kinetically-based sampling method such as KMC. It is possible to overcome BEP's limits by adding a Tabu criterion on the visited transition states. Even a relatively short memory kernel, with 50 states, is sufficient to bring the efficiency of the BEP method on par with KMC, even though the correct kinetics is lost.
This comparison of various algorithms used for sampling energy landscape allows us to better understand the crucial \emph{replenish and relax} steps, necessary to escape local energy minima in complex system, confirming recent results\cite{beland2013long} and helping to understand the strength of kinetically-based methods for relaxing these structures.
\begin{acknowledgments}
This work has been supported by the Canada Research Chairs program
and by grants from the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research
Council of Canada (NSERC) and the \textit{Fonds Qu\'eb\'ecois de la
Recherche sur la Nature et les Technologies} (FQRNT). We are
grateful to \textit{Calcul Qu\'ebec} (CQ) for generous allocations of computer
resources. Gawonou Kokou N'Tsouaglo acknowledges financial support from
Islamic Development bank (IDB)
\end{acknowledgments}
|
\section{Introduction}
\begin{figure*}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{siv_spectrum}
\caption{
Typical photoluminescence spectra from a single $\mathrm{SiV}^-$ site at room
and cryogenic temperatures.
%
The strong ZPL at 737\,nm contains 70\% (65\%) of the emission at room (cryogenic) temperature.
%
The sideband shows a number of features, including a prominent narrow line at about 766 nm which is 64\,meV from the ZPL.
}
\label{fig:spectra}
\end{figure*}
Colour centres in diamond provide attractive architectures for quantum information science and quantum metrology.
They can be detected at the single-site level \cite{gruber_scanning_1997,wang2006single}, and therefore are candidates for single photon generation \cite{kurtsiefer_stable_2000, rogers2013multiple}, quantum information processing \cite{knill_scheme_2001, wrachtrup2006processing, childress2006fault-tolerant}, nano-scale sensing \cite{maletinsky_robust_2012,ermakova2013detection} and bio-marking \cite{fu_characterization_2007, vlasovmolecular-sized2013}.
The negative silicon-vacancy ($\mathrm{SiV}^-$) centre in diamond has shown potential as an exceptional source for single photon applications \cite{vlasov2009nanodiamond, neu2011single}, and recently multiple $\mathrm{SiV}^-$ centres have been demonstrated to produce indistinguishable photons intrinsically \cite{rogers2013multiple, sipahigil_indistinguishable_2014}.
It has a strong zero phonon line (ZPL) which contains about 70 \% of the total fluorescence, and a typical photoluminescence spectrum is shown in Figure \ref{fig:spectra}.
Recent steps towards optical access of the $\mathrm{SiV}^-$ spin have raised the exiting possibility of a usable qubit system being identified in this colour centre \cite{muller2014optical}.
Studies of the related nitrogen vacancy (NV$^-$) centre in diamond have demonstrated that optical control of electronic spin can provide access to nuclear spins of ${}^{13}$C atoms in the lattice \cite{childress_coherent_2006} and ${}^{15}$N atoms forming the defect site \cite{jacques_dynamic_2009}.
Nuclear spins have superior coherence properties and are ideal for quantum information processing applications \cite{dutt_quantum_2007}.
The most abundant isotope of silicon (${}^{28}$Si) has no nuclear spin, but ${}^{29}$Si is known to have a spin $I=1/2$.
Here we show it is possible to spectrally determine the silicon isotope present in a single $\mathrm{SiV}^-$ centre, providing an important technique to find nuclear spins.
Progress towards these exciting spin applications also depends on a substantial understanding of the $\mathrm{SiV}^-$ centre.
Despite a number of recent advancements \cite{gali2013abinitio, neu2013low-temperature, hepp2014electronic, rogers2014electronic}, many fundamental aspects of the $\mathrm{SiV}^-$ centre have not been explained.
One of the details that assists theoretical modeling is the vibrational behaviour \cite{alkauskas2014first-principles}.
Although the $\mathrm{SiV}^-$ sideband is weak, recent polarisation results have suggested interesting physics is displayed in the phonon peaks \cite{rogers2014electronic}.
In this work we examine the sideband for each of the three stable silicon isotopes, and unambiguously confirm that a sharp vibrational peak at 64\,meV is a local mode involving axial oscillation of the silicon atom.
This result resolves contention about the nature of this sideband feature.
The neutral charge state SiV$^{0}$ was established by magnetic resonance measurements to have a split-vacancy structure giving $\mathrm{D}_\mathrm{3d}$ symmetry \cite{edmonds_electron_2008}, however magnetic resonance has not been observed for $\mathrm{SiV}^-$.
The same $\mathrm{D}_\mathrm{3d}$ symmetry was proposed for $\mathrm{SiV}^-$ from {\em ab inito} calculations \cite{goss_twelve-line_1996}, and this model is widely accepted \cite{hepp2014electronic,rogers2014electronic}.
The axial oscillation we report here is consistent with this structure, further justifying its broad acceptance.
In addition, the existence of such a local mode suggests a plausible cause of the ZPL isotopic shift.
\section{Experimental design}
Clark et al. \cite{clark1995silicon} reported twelve lines in the ZPL structure for a $\mathrm{SiV}^-$ ensemble at low temperature.
This was interpreted as a four-line pattern repeated three times corresponding to the three stable isotopes of silicon.
This isotopic shift suggests that it is possible to identify which silicon isotope is present in an individual $\mathrm{SiV}^-$ centre.
However, many of the early single-site measurements of $\mathrm{SiV}^-$ were performed in nanodiamonds and showed large site-to-site variation in the $\mathrm{SiV}^-$ spectrum \cite{neu2013low-temperature}.
This variation makes it difficult to be sure that spectral shifts of single sites are due to the silicon isotope.
Recently, much more uniform spectral lines were reported for single $\mathrm{SiV}^-$ sites in high-purity bulk diamond \cite{rogers2013multiple}.
That same diamond sample is used here.
The $\mathrm{SiV}^-$ centres were incorporated into a microwave-plasma chemical vapour deposition (CVD) layer during growth.
The single crystal CVD layer was grown on the \{001\} surface of a low-strain high-pressure high-temperature (HPHT) diamond substrate.
Silicon was introduced into the plasma as it etched 6H-SiC placed on the sample mount, and this process assured a natural abundance of silicon isotopes.
The silicon incorporated during diamond growth produced $\mathrm{SiV}^-$ sites at a density of about 1.5 sites per \SI{}{\cubic \micro \metre} at the measurement depth of 2--\SI{3}{\micro \metre}.
This density is low enough to resolve single sites in the confocal microscope, but still is high enough to make it convenient to examine a large number of $\mathrm{SiV}^-$ sites.
The diamond sample was mounted on the cold finger of a continuous-flow helium cryostat, and cooled to about 8\,K.
The MPCVD layer was imaged using a home-built confocal microscope, which had a scan range of 200$\times$\SI{200}{\micro \metre}.
The objective had NA=0.95 and a magnification of 100x.
Excitation was provided by 532\,nm CW laser with about 1\,mW of power at the objective.
Fluorescence from $\mathrm{SiV}^-$ was measured using avalanche photo diodes (APD).
Low resolution spectra covering the entire sideband were measured using a spectrometer with a 150-grooves-per-mm grating.
The ZPL was measured with a 1200-grooves-per-mm grating which gave a 16\,GHz resolution capable of resolving the four fine-structure lines separated by 50\,GHz and 200\,GHz.
\section{Isotopic shift of spectral features}\label{test}
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=1\textwidth]{individual_sites}
\caption{
Individual $\mathrm{SiV}^-$ ZPLs form clusters matching the natural abundance of the silicon isotopes.
%
(a) Example spectrum of a typical $\mathrm{SiV}^-$ fine structure recorded with the spectrometer.
(b) Histograms showing the distribution of position for each fine-structure line.
For each line there is strong bunching into three distinct clusters.
The gap between clusters (about 80\,GHz) is much larger than the width of each cluster (about 12\,GHz) and there were no instances of lines located in between clusters.
%
The right-hand vertical axis applies to the centre and right clusters.
%
(c) The number of sites in each cluster corresponds to the natural abundance ratios of the three stable silicon isotopes.
The occurrence is listed in numbers of measured sites and the abundance in percentage.
}
\label{fig:individual_sites}
\end{figure}
Photoluminescence (PL) spectra were recorded for 817 individual $\mathrm{SiV}^-$ centres at a resolution capable of resolving the ZPL fine structure.
The positions of all four fine-structure lines were extracted from fits to the high-resolution spectra, and binned in intervals of 0.5\,GHz.
The results are shown in Figure \ref{fig:individual_sites}(b), and it is obvious that all four lines show the $\mathrm{SiV}^-$ sites naturally clustered into three distinct groups spectrally separated by about 80\,GHz.
The vast majority of these sites were contained in the shortest wavelength cluster, which was found to have an inhomogeneous distribution of about 8\,GHz full-width at half maximum (FWHM).
This is much narrower than the 80\,GHz separation between the clusters, and so the clustering must arise from a physical effect and cannot be due to noise.
The two clusters displaced to longer wavelength occurred less frequently.
The total number of sites in each of these three clusters corresponds closely to the natural abundance of silicon isotopes as illustrated in Figure \ref{fig:individual_sites}(c).
It is concluded that the displacement between clusters must arise from changing the silicon isotope present in the $\mathrm{SiV}^-$ centre.
This is the first observation of $\mathrm{SiV}^-$ isotopic shift at the single-site level, and indicates that the silicon isotope present in an individual $\mathrm{SiV}^-$ site can be unambiguously identified.
The ``digital shift'' between distinct $\mathrm{SiV}^-$ sites is a elegant confirmation of the isotopic explanation presented for the 12-line structure seen in ensembles \cite{clark1995silicon}.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{isotopic_shift_2}
\caption{
Two features in the $\mathrm{SiV}^-$ photolumiescence band shift depending on silicon isotope.
(a) The ZPL shifts to longer wavelength as the silicon atom increases in mass. The shifts are 87\,GHz and 166\,GHz for $^{29}$Si and $^{30}$Si, respectively.
%
(b) The sharp phonon peak at \SI{64}{\meV} also shifts with the silicon isotope. This feature moves to shorter wavelengths as the silicon mass increases, but the actual energy of the phonon mode is given by the separation between this peak and the ZPL. Therefore the phonon energy decreases for $^{29}$Si and $^{30}$Si. The fine structure of the ZPL was recorded with 1200 grooves/mm, and the sideband with 150 grooves/mm.
%
The calculated phonon energies for this feature are $63.76 \pm 0.06$\,meV for ${}^{28}$Si and $62.74 \pm 0.06$\,meV for ${}^{29}$Si and $61.55 \pm 0.06$\,meV for ${}^{30}$Si.
%
The intensities of the ZPL and the sideband spectra cannot be compared since the acquisition was done with different gratings.
}
\label{fig:local_mode}
\end{figure}
The average ZPL spectrum for each silicon isotope is shown in Figure \ref{fig:local_mode}(a).
The fine structure splittings for each isotope are identical, but the ${}^{29}$Si and ${}^{30}$Si
ZPLs are shifted to longer wavelength by 87\,GHz and 166\,GHz respectively.
These isotopic shifts of the ZPL for $^{29}$Si and $^{30}$Si are in close correspondence with the values previously observed in ensemble measurements \cite{clark1995silicon}.
With this ability to identify the silicon isotope we examine the entire phonon sideband.
The only other feature in the PL spectrum that exhibited measurable isotopic shift was the 64\,meV phonon peak.
The results of the 64\,meV peak for different isotopes are shown in Figure \ref{fig:local_mode}(b).
This feature moves to shorter wavelength meaning that the phonon energy, which is determined by the separation from the ZPL, is decreasing with heavier isotopes.
\section{Identification of local vibrational mode}
It is possible to calculate the precise energy of this phonon peak for each of the silicon isotopes by determining its distance from the corresponding ZPL.
The phonon energies give the ratios
\begin{equation}
\frac{E_{28}}{E_{29}}=1.0163\pm0.0014 \quad \approx \quad 1.0177 = \sqrt{\frac{m_{29}}{m_{28}} }
\label{64mevRatio29}
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
\frac{E_{28}}{E_{30}}=1.0359\pm0.0011 \quad \approx \quad 1.0357 = \sqrt{\frac{m_{30}}{m_{28}} }
\label{64mevRatio30}
\end{equation}
These ratios are in close agreement with a simple harmonic oscillator model where the phonon frequency $\omega$ is given by
\begin{equation}
\omega=\sqrt{\frac{k}{m}}
\label{omega}
\end{equation}
for spring constant $k$ and an oscillating mass $m$ corresponding to the silicon atom.
The validity of this simple model indicates this spectral feature arises from a local oscillation of the silicon atom, with weak coupling to the carbon nuclei of the diamond lattice.
Therefore it must be a purely local vibrational mode of the $\mathrm{SiV}^-$ centre.
This informs an ongoing discussion about this feature in the $\mathrm{SiV}^- $ sideband, and resolves some contention.
Early in the analysis of the $\mathrm{SiV}^-$ sideband it was suggested that the peak at 43 meV is due to a local vibrational mode, and that the other features arise from the lattice \cite{feng1993characteristics}.
In contrast, Gorokhovsky \cite{gorokhovsky_photoluminescence_1995} showed that 64\,meV was close to a phonon energy in silicon and concluded that this $\mathrm{SiV}^-$ feature was a local mode.
They also suggested the feature at 128\,meV could be a second harmonic of this vibration.
More recently it has been proposed that either the 42\,meV or the 64\,meV features could arise from a local mode, depending on the symmetry of the defect \cite{zaitsev_vibronic_2000}.
We have shown conclusively that the 64\,meV sideband feature is due to a local vibrational mode.
Our spectral measurements did not show any isotopic variation in the 42\,meV feature, although it is significantly broader and so small shifts in position would be difficult to detect.
Additionally, broad peaks do not generally arise from local modes, and therefore we conclude the 42\,meV feature to be non localized.
We also observed no isotopic variation in the 128\,meV feature, and conclude that it is not a harmonic of the local mode.
Numerous extra electronic transitions have been proposed to account for the photon autocorrelation statistics of SiV, which exhibit bunching shoulders typical of storage in metastable states \cite{neu2012photophysics}.
An additional electronic transition has been reported at 822.7\,nm \cite{neu_electronic_2012}, although this spectral feature was not observed in our measurements here.
Since we have shown that the 64\,meV feature is due to a local vibrational mode, it cannot be due to an electronic transition associated with metastable states.
We conclude that the 64\,meV sideband peak does not give insight to the storage mechanism.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=5cm]{D3d.pdf}
\caption{
The $\mathrm{D}_\mathrm{3d}$ symmetry of $\mathrm{SiV}^-$ with the oscillating silicon atom.
%
Carbon (C) atoms are marked in grey, while silicon (Si) is symbolised in cyan.
%
The position of the vacancies (V) is marked by opaque spheres.
%
This symmetry supports a localised oscillation of the silicon atom along the $\langle 111 \rangle$ axis.
}
\label{fig:D3d}
\end{figure}
It is widely accepted that $\mathrm{SiV}^-$ has $\mathrm{D}_\mathrm{3d}$ symmetry \cite{goss_twelve-line_1996, rogers2014electronic, hepp2014electronic}, which consists of the silicon atom in the middle of a split vacancy as shown in Figure \ref{fig:D3d}.
It is worthwhile considering the implications of a local silicon vibration within this geometry.
The 64\,meV peak is polarized similarly to the ZPL and has most of its strength coming from the axial dipole moment \cite{rogers2014electronic}.
This suggests that the silicon atom oscillates along the $\langle 111 \rangle$ symmetry axis.
Since the silicon atom lies between two vacant lattice sites it is weakly bound along this axis.
Such a geometry is likely to support an oscillation of the silicon atom that does not couple strongly to the carbon lattice.
In this work we have identified the silicon isotope present in each $\mathrm{SiV}^-$ centre from the ZPL position.
This technique is possible when the inhomogeneous distribution is smaller than the $\approx 80$\,GHz isotopic shift.
However, in samples with less uniform $\mathrm{SiV}^-$ sites (such as typically result from Si implantation) it may be possible to use the energy of this local vibrational mode to identify the silicon isotope.
\section{Origin of ZPL isotopic shift}
Although the isotopic shift of the $\mathrm{SiV}^-$ ZPL has been known since the early ensemble measurements of Clark and Kanda \cite{clark1995silicon}, a mechanism for this shift has never been proposed.
Our observation of a local vibrational mode provides a plausible explanation, following the direction of Iakoubovskii and Davies \cite{iakoubovskii_vibronic_2004} for the 1.4 eV optical center and Lawson et al. with the H2 center \cite{lawson1992h2}.
The key idea is to consider that a local vibrational mode couples to the electronic states of the center.
Hence, the ZPL energy is composed of a purely electronic component and a vibrational component.
This additional energy depends on the curvature of the vibrational potential, which in turn depends on the symmetry properties of the electronic states and therefore differs between ground and excited states.
For an isotopic shift of the ZPL, this curvature must differ between the ground and excited states.
We have observed a local mode for $\mathrm{SiV}^-$ which could interact with the ZPL in this manner.
The ZPL energy $h\nu$ in this model can be expressed as a function temperature of the form
\begin{equation}
h \nu(T)= h\nu_\text{el}+\sum_i^N \left( n_i + \frac{1}{2} \right) \hbar \left( \omega^\prime_i-\omega_i \right)
\label{eq:Lawson}
\end{equation}
following Lawson et al.\cite{lawson1992h2}.
Here $h\nu_\text{el}$ is the purely electronic transition energy.
The term in the sum is the energy difference between the excited ($\omega^\prime$) and ground ($\omega$) states of the $i^\mathrm{th}$ phonon mode (which could be a local vibration) at the same occupation level $n$.
Transitions of this kind between levels of matching phonon occupation contribute to the ZPL since phonons are not involved \cite{iakoubovskii_vibronic_2004}.
This energy is summed over all $N$ phonon modes that couple to electronic states.
The temperature dependence appears only in the vibrational states.
At zero temperature only the $n=0$ levels will be occupied, while at higher temperatures energy levels with increasing $n$ occur providing a broadening of the ZPL \cite{iakoubovskii_vibronic_2004}.
We do not know which global modes are involved in the sum, but do know that one of the vibrational modes is entirely local.
Because this vibration behaves exactly as a harmonic oscillator, and therefore does not involve the carbon atoms of the diamond lattice, it is possible to separate local modes out from the sum.
The sum over all phonons can hence be separated into independent sums over the local vibrational modes of the silicon atom and over the phonons of the carbon lattice.
So equation (\ref{eq:Lawson}) becomes
\begin{equation}
h \nu(T)= h\nu_\text{el}+\sideset{}{_\mathrm{Si}}\sum^{M}_i \left( n_i + \frac{1}{2} \right) \hbar \left( \omega^\prime_i-\omega_i \right)+\sideset{}{_\mathrm{C}}\sum^{N-M}_i \left( n_i + \frac{1}{2} \right) \hbar \left( \omega^\prime_i-\omega_i \right).
\label{blalal}
\end{equation}
The Si subscripted sum covers the $M$ local silicon modes, while the
subscript C sums over the $N-M$ carbon phonons.
To see if this model is valid to explain the shift of the ZPL, the energy
ratios between the isotopes are now compared.
As we have established in the previous section, changing the silicon mass only affects the energy of the local phonons which change as $\omega\propto 1/\sqrt{m}$.
Therefore the only changing term is the sum over the local silicon phonons, and so this term gives the differences $\Delta E_{28,29}$ and $\Delta E_{28,30}$.
The frequencies ($\omega_{i}$ and $\omega^\prime_{i}$) of the $^{29}$Si and $^{30}$Si can be expressed in relation to
${}^{28}$Si via the fraction of the square roots of the masses.
This allows the energy difference to be expressed as:
\begin{equation}
\Delta E_{28,29}=\hbar \left(1-\sqrt{m_{28}/m_{29}}\right)\cdot\left(\sideset{}{_{{}^{28}\mathrm{Si}}}\sum^{M}_{i} \left( n_i + \frac{1}{2} \right) \hbar \left( \omega^\prime_i-\omega_i \right)\right)
\end{equation}
and similarly for $\Delta E_{28,30}$.
The ratio between these energy differences is then
\begin{equation}
\frac{\Delta E_{28,29}}{\Delta E_{28,30}}=\frac{1-\sqrt{m_{28}/m_{29}}}{1-\sqrt{m_{28}/m_{30}}} \approx 0.5135
\end{equation}
Since we have measured the ZPL energy shift for all three silicon isotopes this model can be compared to our experiments.
The calculated ratio is in close agreement with the empirically determined value of $0.52\pm0.07$.
The correspondence between theory and experiment suggests there is validity to this model and that the shift of the ZPL with different isotopes arises from the presence of local modes.
Without knowing the difference in curvature of the harmonic potentials between the ground and excited states, the model is unable to predict the direction of the ZPL shift.
We have experimentally found that the ZPL moves to lower energy as the silicon mass increases, and this observation may assist theoretical efforts to describe the phonon harmonic potentials.
\section{Conclusion}
We have demonstrated the ability to unambiguously identify the silicon isotope contained in a single $\mathrm{SiV}^-$ centre from the PL spectra.
This ability is of interest because it allows easy identification of centres containing ${}^{29}$Si.
Only these centres provide the possibility of accessing silicon nuclear spin, which is a feature of interest for quantum information applications.
Nuclear spins in diamond are weakly coupled to their environment and generally have long coherence times which are necessary for quantum information storage.
We identify the 64\,meV phonon sideband feature to be a local vibrational mode of the silicon atom.
This resolves some contention about local modes in the literature \cite{gorokhovsky_photoluminescence_1995,feng1993characteristics,zaitsev_vibronic_2000} and gives insight into the vibrational properties of $\mathrm{SiV}^-$.
The presence of a local mode suggests a plausible explanation for the ZPL isotopic shift in a similar manner to that proposed for other colour centres in diamond including the 1.4\,eV and H2 centres.
Although the $\mathrm{D}_\mathrm{3d}$ symmetry of $\mathrm{SiV}^-$ is widely accepted, it has not been directly observed.
The local vibrational mode we have described here is entirely consistent with $\mathrm{D}_\mathrm{3d}$ symmetry and this result provides further indirect evidence supporting this split-vacancy defect geometry.
\section*{Acknowledgements}
The authors acknowledge funding from EU (DIAMANT, SIQS, DIADEMS), ERC,
German Science Foundation - DFG (SFB TR21, FOR1482, FOR1493), JST, JSPS KAKENHI (No. 26246001), DARPA, Sino-German Center, VW Stiftung.
\nocite{*}
\section*{References}
\bibliographystyle{unsrt}
|
\section{\@startsection {section}{1}{\zeta@}%
{-3.5ex \@plus -1ex \@minus -.2ex
{2.3ex \@plus.2ex}%
{\normalfont\large\bfseries}}
\renewcommand\subsection{\@startsection{subsection}{2}{\zeta@}%
{-3.25ex\@plus -1ex \@minus -.2ex}%
{1.5ex \@plus .2ex}%
{\normalfont\bfseries}}
\parskip 6 pt
\marginparwidth 0pt
\oddsidemargin 0pt
\evensidemargin 0pt
\marginparsep 0pt
\topmargin -0.25in
\textwidth 6.5in
\textheight 9.0 in
\newcommand{\begin{equation}}{\begin{equation}}
\newcommand{\end{equation}}{\end{equation}}
\newcommand{\begin{eqnarray}}{\begin{eqnarray}}
\newcommand{\end{eqnarray}}{\end{eqnarray}}
\newcommand{\begin{subequations}}{\begin{subequations}}
\newcommand{\end{subequations}}{\end{subequations}}
\newcommand{\begin{itemize}}{\begin{itemize}}
\newcommand{\end{itemize}}{\end{itemize}}
\newcommand{\ho}[1]{$\, ^{#1}$}
\newcommand{\hoch}[1]{$\, ^{#1}$}
\newcommand{\rightarrow}{\rightarrow}
\newcommand{\longrightarrow}{\longrightarrow}
\newcommand{\Leftrightarrow}{\Leftrightarrow}
\newcommand{\tilde \beta^\prime}{\tilde \beta^\prime}
\newcommand{{\rm tr} }{{\rm tr} }
\newcommand{{\rm Tr} }{{\rm Tr} }
\newcommand{\begin{eqnarray}}{\begin{eqnarray}}
\newcommand{\end{eqnarray}}{\end{eqnarray}}
\newcommand{\nonumber \\}{\nonumber \\}
\newcommand{\partial}{\partial}
\newcommand{\textrm{d}}{\textrm{d}}
\newcommand{\textrm{e}}{\textrm{e}}
\newcommand{T^{\prime \, 0}_\textrm{H}}{T^{\prime \, 0}_\textrm{H}}
\newcommand{\Omega^{\prime \, 0}_i}{\Omega^{\prime \, 0}_i}
\newcommand{\nonumber}{\nonumber}
\def\fft#1#2{{#1 \over #2}}
\newcommand{\textcolor{red}}{\textcolor{red}}
\newcommand{\fixme}[1]{\textbf{FIXME: }$\langle$\textit{#1}$\rangle$}
\newcommand{\note}[1]{\textbf{NOTE: }$\langle$\textit{#1}$\rangle$}
\newtheorem{theorem}{Theorem}[section]
\newtheorem{lemma}[theorem]{Lemma}
\newtheorem{proposition}[theorem]{Proposition}
\newtheorem{corollary}[theorem]{Corollary}
\def\medmuskip = 1mu plus 1mu minus 1mu{\medmuskip = 1mu plus 1mu minus 1mu}
\def\medmuskip = 4mu plus 2mu minus 4mu{\medmuskip = 4mu plus 2mu minus 4mu}
\def\hat{a}{\hat{a}}
\def\hat{b}{\hat{b}}
\def\tilde{\chi}{\tilde{\chi}}
\newcommand{\ads}[1]{AdS$_{#1}$}
\newcommand{\cft}[1]{CFT$_{#1}$}
\newcommand{\sph}[1]{S$^{#1}$}
\newcommand{AdS$_{5}\times$ S$^5$ }{AdS$_{5}\times$ S$^5$ }
\defS$^2\times$S$^1$ {S$^2\times$S$^1$ }
\def\Label#1{\label{#1}%
\smash{\hbox to0pt{\raise1ex\hbox{\tiny[#1]}\hss}}}
\def\let\Label=\label{\let\Label=\label}
\def\let\bbibitem=\bibitem{\let\bbibitem=\bibitem}
\newcommand{\!\cdot\!}{\!\cdot\!}
\newcommand{\eta}{\eta}
\newcommand{\varphi}{\varphi}
\newcommand\F{{}_3F_2}
\newcommand{\scriptscriptstyle}{\scriptscriptstyle}
\newcommand{{\it e.g.,}\ }{{\it e.g.,}\ }
\newcommand{{\it i.e.,}\ }{{\it i.e.,}\ }
\newcommand{\labell}[1]{\label{#1}}
\newcommand{\labels}[1]{\label{#1}
\newcommand{\reef}[1]{(\ref{#1})}
\newcommand\prt{\partial}
\newcommand\veps{\varepsilon}
\newcommand\vtheta{\vartheta}
\newcommand\m{{\overline m}}
\newcommand\X{\bs X}
\newcommand{\partial}{\partial}
\begin{document}
\baselineskip 18pt%
\begin{titlepage}
\vspace*{1mm}%
\hfill%
\hfill
\vbox{
\halign{#\hfil \cr
arXiv:yymm.nnnn\cr
IPM/P-2014/nnn \cr
}
}
\begin{center}
{\Large{\textbf{More on Five Dimensional EVH Black Rings}}}
\vspace*{8mm}
{ Ahmad Ghodsi\footnote{<EMAIL>}$^{,a}$, Hanif Golchin\footnote{<EMAIL>}$^{,a}$ and M.M. Sheikh-Jabbari\footnote{<EMAIL>}$^{,b}$}\\
\vspace*{0.4cm}
{$^a$ \it Department of Physics, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, \\
P.O. Box 1436, Mashhad, Iran}\\
{$^b$ \it School of Physics, Institute for Research in Fundamental Sciences (IPM),\\
P.O.Box 19395-5531, Tehran, Iran}
\vspace*{1.0cm}
\end{center}
\begin{abstract}
In this paper we continue our analysis of arXiv:1308.1478[hep-th] and study in detail the parameter space of three families of doubly spinning black ring solutions: balanced black ring, unbalanced ring and dipole-charged balanced black rings. In all these three families the Extremal Vanishing Horizon (EVH) ring appears in the vanishing limit of the dimensionful parameter of the solution which measures the ring size. We study the near horizon limit of the EVH black rings and for all three cases we find a (pinching orbifold) AdS$_3$ throat with the AdS$_3$ radius $\ell^2=8 G_5 M/(3\pi)$ where $M$ is the ring mass and $G_5$ is the 5d Newton constant. We also discuss the near horizon limit of near-EVH black rings and show that the AdS$_3$ factor is replaced with a generic BTZ black hole. We use these results to extend the EVH/CFT correspondence for black rings, a 2d CFT dual to near-EVH black rings.
\end{abstract}
\end{titlepage}
\addtocontents{toc}{\protect\setcounter{tocdepth}{2}}
\tableofcontents
\section{Introduction}
Five dimensional asymptotic flat vacuum Einstein gravity solutions are in the form of Myers-Perry black holes \cite{MP} or black rings \cite{Emparan:2001wn,Pomeransky:2006bd, Emparan:2008eg}. These solutions form a three parameter family, specified by mass and two angular momenta. In different regions of the parameter space of these solutions we can have black hole solutions with $S^3$ horizon topology \cite{MP}, or black ring solutions with $S^2\times S^1$ horizon topology \cite{Emparan:2001wn,Pomeransky:2006bd, Emparan:2008eg}. There is a region in this parameter space where black holes and rings can both exit \cite{Elvang-Emparan-2003}. In this overlapping region where the hole and the ring have the same mass and angular momenta, the black hole solution has a larger entropy than the ring and so it is expected to be a more stable configuration.
Black rings can be balanced or unbalanced. In the balanced case constructed and discussed in \cite{Emparan:2001wn,Pomeransky:2006bd}, expanding around north and south poles of topologically $S^2$ part of the horizon we get a 2d flat space without any deficit angle or conical singularity. In a different viewpoint, in the balanced case the centrifugal force from the angular momentum along the ring is tuned to precisely balance off the tension and self-gravitation of the ring \cite{Elvang-Emparan-2003, Emparan-Obers-2007, ur}.
However, in the unbalanced case \cite{Elvang-Emparan-2003} (\emph{cf.} discussions in section \ref{sec-3}), if we adjust the expansion around the north pole of the topologically $S^2$ part of the horizon to be a flat $R^2$, the expansion around the south pole will show a deficit (or excess) angle and we have a conical disk \cite{A-R-T-papers}. For the unbalanced rings the mass gets an additional contribution from the pressure (tension) of the conical (defect) disk \cite{Elvang-Emparan-2003, ur, A-R-T-papers}. Due to the contribution of this tension the first law of thermodynamics and the Gibbs free energy for unbalanced rings has an extra term which vanishes in the balanced case \cite{{A-R-T-papers},Chen:2011jb}.
The parameter space of unbalanced rings is hence four dimensional, mass, two spins and the unbalance parameter. The balanced rings solutions correspond to a three dimensional subspace on this parameter space.
The 5d Einstein-Maxwell-dilaton theory also admits charged black ring solutions. There are in particular black rings with conserved dipole charges, while having vanishing electric or magnetic charge \cite{dipole, Yazadjiev, Chen:2012kd}. The dipole charges can be defined as Noether-Wald conserved charge \cite{Sudarsky-Wald} and appear in the first law of black hole thermodynamics for the black rings \cite{Horowitz-Copsey}. The (balanced) dipole-charged black rings form a four parameter family of solutions, describing the mass, two spins and the dipole charge.
In the family of balanced, unbalanced and (neutral but) dipole charged black rings we have geometries with vanishing surface gravity and degenerate horizon, the extremal rings. Within the family of extremal rings, there exist a ``singular'' region where the horizon area (and hence the Bekenstein-Hawking entropy) vanishes. These Extremal Vanishing Horizon (EVH) rings are what we will focus on in this work. One of the motivations to study the EVH rings is that, as discussed in our previous work on the topic \cite{Ghodsi:2013soa}, the EVH points are generically in the part of the parameter space of the ring solutions where the hole and ring solutions can coexist \cite{Elvang-Emparan-2003} and the hole-ring transition can be studied.
Despite of being singular, the EVH black hole/rings, have their own interesting features which makes their analysis worthwhile. Many different examples of EVH black holes in various dimensions and various asymptotics and theories have been studies, see \cite{SheikhJabbaria:2011gc,EVH-examples,deBoer:2011zt} for an incomplete list. To be more precise, EVH black holes/rings are defined as black objects with $A_H, T_H\to 0$ limit while $T_H/A_H$ is kept fixed, where $A_H$ is the horizon area and $T_H$ is the Hawking temperature \cite{SheikhJabbaria:2011gc}. Moreover, the vanishing of horizon area should come from vanishing of a one-cycle on the horizon \cite{Johnstone:2013ioa}. In all these various examples it has been observed that the near horizon limit of EVH black holes leads to an AdS$_3$ throat. This AdS$_3$ factor is, however, a pinching orbifold of AdS$_3$ \cite{deBoer:2010ac}. Moreover, one may consider ``excitations'' of these EVH black holes to near-EVH black holes. As one may expect, in the near horizon limit of the near-EVH black holes the (pinching) AdS$_3$ is then excited to (pinching) BTZ. This nice feature prompts the idea that one may be able to study the low energy excitations of EVH black holes focusing on their near horizon geometry and their excitations. This was actually what was proposed as EVH/CFT correspondence \cite{SheikhJabbaria:2011gc}, that low energy excitations around an EVH black hole is described by a 2d CFT dual to the AdS$_3$ factor appearing in its near horizon geometry.\footnote{Although the near horizon geometry, like the original EVH solution, has curvature singularity, this singularity is of the ``good type'' in the terminology of \cite{Gubser}. That is, if we reduce the gravity theory on the ansatz given by the near horizon EVH geometry (to obtain an AdS$_3$ gravity), the reduced theory does not involve any singularity. In other words, the low energy excitations appearing in near-EVH black holes do not probe the singularity, they are completely captured in the excitations of the AdS$_3$ throat.}
There are also EVH black rings, falling precisely into the definition of EVH black holes given above \cite{Ghodsi:2013soa}. As is expected and we will show explicitly in this work, for EVH rings the vanishing of horizon area should come from vanishing of a circle on the topologically $S^2$ part of the geometry and the ring size remains finite. We will show that, like EVH black holes, we get a (pinching) AdS$_3$ in the near horizon limit of the EVH black rings.
As we will see this AdS$_3$ throat consists of the radial $r$ and time direction $t$ of the original ring and the vanishing circle on the topologically $S^2$ part of the geometry, the ring circle is transverse to the AdS$_3$ throat. Moreover, in the near-EVH black rings this AdS$_3$ factor is excited to a BTZ black hole.
In this work we will give a full account of balanced and unbalanced doubly spinning rings and doubly spinning dipole charge rings and where in their parameter space they become EVH. As we will show for both balanced and unbalanced cases the near-EVH excitations appear as generic BTZ black hole excitation on the AdS$_3$ throat. We discuss how the unbalancing factor and the dipole charge appear in the near horizon geometry and its excitation. We discuss the EVH/CFT correspondence as the dual 2d CFT describing low energy excitations of the EVH rings. Among other things, we also discuss how the EVH Myers-Perry black hole and an EVH ring of similar mass and spin can be distinguished from this dual CFT viewpoint.
The organization of the paper is as follows. In section \ref{sec-2}, we revisit and extend the EVH Pomeransky-Sen'kov black ring solution
analyzed in \cite{Ghodsi:2013soa} and study the most general region in the parameter space which the EVH ring solutions exist.
In section \ref{sec-3}, we investigate the parameter space of the unbalanced double rotating black ring \cite{Elvang-Emparan-2003,A-R-T-papers,Chen:2011jb}
and specify the region corresponding to EVH unbalanced rings. We also discuss the near horizon geometry of these EVH rings. The parameter space of the double
rotating dipole black ring solution \cite{Chen:2012kd}, its EVH regions and the corresponding near horizon geometry is studied in section \ref{sec-4}.
We find that in the EVH limit the dipole charge is irrelevant. We discuss the EVH/CFT correspondence for the mentioned EVH rings in section \ref{sec-5}.
Last section is devoted to concluding remarks.
\section{Balanced EVH Pomeransky-Sen'kov black ring}\label{sec-2}
Neutral double rotating black ring \cite{Pomeransky:2006bd} (DRBR) is an asymptotically flat vacuum solution of Einstein gravity with the horizon topology $S^1\times S^2$. In \cite{Ghodsi:2013soa} we studied the parameter space of this solution, focusing on the Extremal Vanishing Horizon (EVH) limit. This is a limit where the Hawking temperature $T_H$ and the horizon area $A_H$ of the solution vanishes:
\begin{equation} \label{evhc}
A_H \to 0\,, \qquad T_H \to 0\,, \qquad \frac{T_H}{A_H}\to finite\,.
\end{equation}
We showed that condition (\ref{evhc}) can be satisfied in the parameter space of DRBR and discussed a specific EVH point in this parameter space. In this section we study the most general EVH region in the parameter space of DRBR, extending and generalizing discussions in \cite{Ghodsi:2013soa}.
Let us start with reviewing the solution. The DRBR line element is given by
\begin{eqnarray} \label{DRBRmetr}
ds^2&=& -\frac{H(y,x)}{H(x, y)}\big(d t+\Omega(x, y)\big)^2-\frac{F(x, y)}{H(y,x)}d\psi^2-2\frac{J(x, y)}{H(y,x)} d \phi\, d\psi
\nonumber \\ &+&\frac{F( y,x)}{H( y,x)}d \phi^2+\frac{2 k^2 H(x, y)}{(x- y)^2(1-\nu)^2}\big(\frac{dx^2}{G(x)}-\frac{d y^2}{G(y)}\big)\,,
\end{eqnarray}
where $-1\leq x\leq1$ and $-\infty <y<-1$ and $\phi, \psi\in[0, 2\pi]$. The functions $F, G, H, J$ and $\Omega$ are defined as follows
\begin{equation}\label{FGHJOm}
\begin{split}
F(x, y) &= \frac{2 k^2}{(x - y)^2 (1 - \nu)^2} \Big( G(x) (1 - y^2)\big(((1 - \nu)^2 - \lambda ^2)
(1 + \nu ) + y \lambda (1 \!- \!\lambda ^2 + 2 \nu - 3 \nu ^2)\big) \\
&+ G( y) (2 \lambda ^2 + x \lambda ((1 - \nu )^2 + \lambda ^2)+ x^2\big((1 - \nu )^2 - \lambda ^2\big) (1 + \nu) \\
&+ x^3\lambda(1 - \lambda^2 - 3\nu^2 + 2\nu^3) - x^4 (1 - \nu ) \nu (\lambda ^2 + \nu ^2 - 1))\Big) \,,\\
G(x)&=(1-x^2)(1+\lambda x+\nu x^2)\,, \\
H(x, y) &= 1+\lambda ^2-\nu^2+2\lambda\nu (1-x^2) y+2x\lambda(1- y^2\nu^2)+ x^2 y^2 \nu(1-\lambda^2-\nu^2)\,,\\
J(x, y)&=\frac{2 k^2 (1-x^2) (1- y^2) \lambda {\nu^\frac12}}{(x- y) (1-\nu)^2} \big(1+\lambda ^2 -\nu ^2 + 2 (x+ y) \lambda \nu-x y \nu (1-\lambda ^2-\nu^2)\big)\,,\\
\Omega(x, y)&=-\frac{2 k \lambda \big((1+\nu )^2-\lambda ^2\big)^\frac12}{H( y,x)} \big(\frac{1+ y}{1-\lambda +\nu}(1+\lambda -\nu +\nu (1-\lambda-\nu) y x^2+2\nu x(1- y))d\psi \\
&+\nu^\frac12 y(1-x^2)d\phi \big)\,.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
In above solution $k$ has dimension of length and is related to the radius of the ring circle which is parameterized by $\psi$.\footnote{We use the notation that coordinates $\phi$ and $\psi$ are interchanged compared to the original paper \cite{Pomeransky:2006bd}. This is the notation used in papers by Emparan et al. The metric also has written with the mostly plus signature.}
On the other hand $\nu$ and $\lambda$ are two dimensionless parameters related to the rotations of the black ring around the $\phi$ and $\psi$ directions with
\begin{equation} \label{ranges1}
0\leq\nu<1\,, \qquad 2\sqrt{\nu}\leq\lambda<1+\nu\,, \qquad k>0\,.
\end{equation}
$\nu$ controls the rotation around the $\phi$ direction, which parameterizes the circle on the topologically $S^2$ part of the horizon; in the $\nu=0$ we recover the single rotating black ring of Emparan and Reall \cite{Emparan:2001wn}. The parabola $\nu=\lambda^2/4$ is where the black ring becomes extremal. The parameter space for solution (\ref{DRBRmetr}) is depicted in Fig(\ref{fig1}.b).
In \cite{Ghodsi:2013soa} we discussed that around the cusp at $\nu=1, \lambda=2$\, (the ``collapsing region'' \cite{Elvang:2007hs}) Hawking temperature and Beckenstein-Hawking entropy of this solution which are given by
\begin{equation} \label{entem}
T_{H}=\frac{(y_h^{-1} - y_h) (1-\nu) \sqrt{\lambda^2 - 4 \nu}}{8\pi\, k\, \lambda (1+\nu +\lambda)} \,, \qquad\quad
S_{BH}=\frac{8 \pi^2 k^3 \, \lambda (1+\nu+\lambda)}{G_5(1-\nu)^2(y_h^{-1}-y_h)} \,,
\end{equation}
satisfy the EVH condition provided that we scale $k$ appropriately. In the above
\begin{equation}\label{yh-DRBR}
y_{h}=\frac{-\lambda + \sqrt{\lambda^2-4\nu}}{2\nu}\,,
\end{equation}
is the outer horizon (larger root of $G(y)$) of the DRBR.
One may then readily check that the other physical quantities, the mass, angular momenta and angular velocities
\footnote{For general values of the parameters we have the Smarr relation $M=\frac32\,(T_H S_{BH} + J_\phi \Omega_\phi + \Omega_\psi J_\psi)$\,.}
\begin{eqnarray} \label{MJOm}
M&=&\frac {3\,\pi \,{k}^{2}\lambda}{G_5(1+\nu-\lambda)}\,, \qquad J_{\psi}=\frac {2\,\pi{k}^{3}\lambda \sqrt{ \left( 1+\nu \right) ^{2}-{\lambda}^{2}} \left( {\nu}^{2}+ \left( \lambda-6 \right) \nu+\lambda+1 \right) }{G_5 \left( 1-\nu \right) ^{2} \left( 1+\nu-\lambda \right) ^{2}}\,,\nonumber\\
\qquad J_{\phi}&=&\frac {4\,\pi \,\lambda \sqrt{\nu}\,{k}^{3} \sqrt{ \left(1+\nu \right) ^{2}-{\lambda}^{2}}}{G_5 \left( 1-\nu \right) ^{2} \left(1+\nu-\lambda \right) }\,, \qquad \qquad\qquad \quad \Omega_{\psi}=\frac{1}{2 k} \sqrt{\frac{1+\nu-\lambda}{1+\nu+\lambda}} \,,\nonumber\\
&& \qquad\quad \Omega_{\phi}=\frac{\lambda (1+\nu)-(1-\nu)\sqrt{\lambda^2 - 4\nu}}
{4 k\, \lambda \sqrt{\nu}} \sqrt{\frac{1+\nu-\lambda}{1+\nu+\lambda}}\,,
\end{eqnarray}
remain finite at the $\nu=1,\ \lambda=2$ EVH point with the prescribed $k$ scaling \cite{Ghodsi:2013soa}. In this EVH point, $J_\phi$ vanishes while all the other thermodynamic quantities remain finite, and $3M=2\Omega_\psi J_\psi$.
In the collapsing point $\lambda=2,\ \nu=1$\, there is the coordinate transformations which transforms DRBR to a generic (non-extremal) Myers-Perry (MP) black hole \cite{Elvang:2007hs}
\begin{equation} \label{trans1}
x=-1+\frac{16 \sqrt{a} k^3 \cos^2\theta}{(a+b)^{3/2}(r^2-a\,b)}\,, \quad \qquad y=-1-\frac{16 \sqrt{a} k^3 \sin^2\theta}{(a+b)^{3/2}( r^2-a\,b)}\,,
\end{equation}
where $a$ and $b$ are the rotation parameters of the MP black hole and are given by $a=\sqrt{2\tilde M} \sigma$ and $b=\sqrt{2\tilde M}(1-\sigma)$. In addition $\sigma$ and $\tilde M$ are defined by
\begin{equation} \label{sM}
\sigma=\frac{1+\nu-\lambda}{(1-\nu)^2}\,,\qquad \qquad \tilde M=\frac{8k^2}{1+\nu-\lambda}\,.
\end{equation}
We note that (\ref{trans1}) demonstrates two features of an EVH near horizon solution: For the cusp at $\lambda=2,\,\nu=1$, horizon is located at $y_h\sim-1$\, and recalling that we need to take $k\to 0$ to keep the mass finite, (\ref{trans1}) is essentially a near horizon expansion. Second, we should obtain a vanishing horizon solution due to {\it one} shrinking cycle on the horizon. To see this let us study behavior of the metric on the horizon in the $\lambda=2,\,\nu=1\,$ limit. The EVH condition \eqref{evhc} is satisfied if one scales the parameters as
$$\nu=1-\hat \nu \epsilon\,,\qquad \lambda=1+\nu-\hat \lambda \epsilon^4,\qquad k=\hat k \epsilon^2\,.$$ Without inserting $x\sim y\sim -1$ as in (\ref{trans1}), the metric components on the horizon (constant $t$ and $y=y_h$), are
\begin{equation} \label{HMcomp}
g_{xx}=\frac{-8\,\hat k^2}{\hat \nu(x-1)(x+1)^3}\epsilon^3\,,\qquad g_{\phi\phi}=\frac{8(1-x)\hat k^2}{(x+1)\hat \nu}\,\epsilon^3\,, \qquad g_{\psi\psi}=\frac{16\,\hat k^2}{\hat \lambda}\,.
\end{equation}
It is obvious that there are {\it two} vanishing components in the horizon metric unless $x\sim -1+\epsilon$. In other words, (\ref{trans1}) insures two necessary properties of an EVH near horizon solution.
\subsection{The EVH and near-EVH near horizon limit}
As pointed out in \cite{Ghodsi:2013soa}, one may formally check that for a generic point on the $\lambda=1+\nu$ line (and not just the $\nu=1$ on it), both $T_H,A_H\to 0$ and $T_H/A_H=finite$ conditions still hold. However, as depicted in Fig(\ref{fig1}.b) this line (shown as a dashed line) is not in the DRBR parameter space and the solution becomes singular on this line. Despite of this fact, given the ``EVH-type'' behavior of temperature and entropy, one can show that when we approach this dashed line from the left we indeed get an EVH ring for generic values of $\nu$. This is what we will establish here. To this end,
we consider $\lambda=1+\nu-\hat \lambda \epsilon^a$ expansion with $\hat\lambda>0$. The parameter $a$ controls how fast we are approaching the $\lambda=1+\nu$ line. As we show momentarily $a\geq 4$ corresponds to sitting at the EVH point while with $a=2$ we find a near-EVH ring.
In order to find the near horizon of the EVH DRBR, we define the parameters of the solution as follows
\begin{equation} \label{parsca}
\lambda=1+\nu-\hat \lambda \epsilon^4\,, \qquad \quad k=\hat k \epsilon^2\,,
\end{equation}
together with transformations (\ref{trans1}), accompanied by inserting the following scalings in the coordinates
\begin{equation} \label{csca1}
r =\hat r \epsilon\,, \qquad t=\frac{\hat t}{\epsilon}\,, \qquad \psi=\hat \psi+\Omega_{\psi}\,t\,,\qquad \phi=\frac{\hat \phi}{\epsilon}\,.
\end{equation}
Using (\ref{parsca}) the mass and spins of the solution behave as $M\sim M_0+\delta M \epsilon^4\,,\, J_{\phi}\sim \delta J_{\phi}\epsilon^4$ and $J_{\psi}\sim J_{\psi_0} +\delta J_{\psi}\epsilon^4\,$. The near horizon metric can be obtained by taking the limit $\epsilon\to 0$
\begin{eqnarray} \label{nhDRevh}
ds^2=\cos^2\theta \bigg[-\frac{\hat r^2}{\ell^2}\,d\hat t^2+\frac{\ell^2}{\hat r^2}\,d\hat r^2+\hat r^2 d\hat \phi^2\bigg]+\ell^2\left(\cos^2\theta\, d\theta^2+\tan^2\theta d\hat \psi^2\right),
\end{eqnarray}
where $\ell^2=\frac{8\hat k^2(1+\nu)}{\hat \lambda}$ is the AdS$_3$ radius which is related to the physical mass of the solution as $M_0=\frac{3\pi}{8}\ell^2$\,. In fact (\ref{nhDRevh}) is in the form of pinched AdS$_3$ due to the infinitesimal period of $\hat \phi\in [0, 2\pi\epsilon]$. We also note that \eqref{nhDRevh} is exactly the same geometry one find in the near horizon of EVH 5d Myers-Perry black hole \cite{Ghodsi:2013soa}. This is of course not a coincidence, as there are uniqueness theorems for 5d Einstein vacuum solutions with local $SO(2,2)$ invariance \cite{SO22-uniqueness}.
In order to find the near-EVH near horizon geometry, we should adjust how fast we approach the $\lambda=1+\nu$ line. We choose
\begin{equation} \label{parscane}
\lambda=1+\nu-\hat \lambda \epsilon^2\,, \qquad \quad k=\hat k \epsilon\,,
\end{equation}
where $\epsilon$ is the parameter defined in the near horizon scaling of the radial coordinate $r$, $r=\hat r \epsilon$.
We see that mass and $J_{\phi}$ appear in the form
$M= M_0+\delta M \epsilon^2\,, J_{\phi}\sim \delta J_{\phi}\epsilon^2$ and $J_{\psi}\sim J_{\psi_0} +\delta J_{\psi}\epsilon^2$, and
\begin{equation} \label{shifts}
J_{\phi}\sim \epsilon^2\,, \qquad M-\frac{M_0}{J_{\psi_0}}J_{\psi}\sim \epsilon^2\,.
\end{equation}
These charge scalings are compatible with the general expectation for EVH black holes \cite{Johnstone:2013ioa}.
The value of leading terms for $M, J_{\phi}$ and $J_{\psi}$ in the near-EVH limit are given by $(G_5=1)$
\begin{equation} M_0=\frac{3\pi\hat k^2(1+\nu)}{\hat \lambda}\,,\quad \delta J_{\phi}=\frac{4\pi\hat k^3\sqrt{2\nu}(1+\nu)^{3/2}}{\sqrt{\hat \lambda} (\nu-1)^2}\,,\quad J_{\psi_0}=\frac{4\pi\hat k^3\sqrt{2}(1+\nu)^{3/2}}{\hat \lambda^{3/2}}\,.
\end{equation}
After discussing the scaling of parameters we now consider the near horizon scaling of coordinates. It is sufficient to use (\ref{parscane}) and (\ref{trans1}) together with the following rescalings
\begin{equation} \label{csca2}
r =\sqrt{2\hat r-2\hat k^2\cos 2\theta}\,\, \epsilon\,, \qquad t=\frac{\hat t}{\epsilon}\,, \qquad \psi=\hat \psi+\Omega_{\psi}\,t\,,\qquad \phi=\frac{\hat \phi}{\epsilon},\qquad \epsilon \to 0\,.
\end{equation}
The near horizon metric after a redefinition $\hat r=\frac{\rho^2(1-\nu)+2\hat k^2(\nu+7)}{2(1-\nu)}$ can be written as
\begin{equation}\label{nhDRnevh2}\begin{split}
ds^2=&\cos^2\!\theta \Big[-{f(\rho)} d\hat t^2+\frac{d\rho^2}{f(\rho)}+\rho^2 \big(d\hat\phi-\frac{8\hat k^2(1+\nu)\sqrt{\nu}}{\rho^2\ell(\nu-1)^2}d\hat t\big)^2\Big]+\ell^2\big(\cos^2\theta d\theta^2+\tan^2\theta d\hat \psi^2\big),\\
f(\rho)=&\frac{1}{\ell^2\rho^2}\big(\rho^2-\frac{4\hat k^2(\nu+1)^2}{(1-\nu)^2}\big)\big(\rho^2-\frac{16\hat k^2\nu}{(1-\nu)^2}\big)\,,\qquad
\ell^2= \frac{8\hat k^2(1+\nu)}{\hat \lambda}\,.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
As we expected the AdS$_3$ throat of the geometry \eqref{nhDRevh} is now replaced by a generic (pinching) BTZ part which is a common feature for the near-EVH near horizon solutions. One may show that the mass and angular momentum of the BTZ is exactly equal to the near-EVH angular momentum and charges given in \eqref{shifts}. To see this we need to reduce the 5d gravity over the $\theta\hat\psi$ part of \eqref{nhDRevh} to obtain the Newton constant of the 3d AdS$_3$ gravity: $G_3=\frac{1}{\pi \ell^2}$ (see (\ref{grel})). Then, we use the standard formulas for the BTZ mass and spin
\begin{equation} \label{mjbtz}
M_{BTZ}=\frac{\rho_+^2+\rho_-^2}{8\ell^2 G_3}=\frac{\pi \hat k^2(\nu^2+6\nu+1)}{2(\nu-1)^2}\,,\,\qquad J_{BTZ}=\frac{\rho_+ \rho_-}{4\ell G_3}=\frac{4\pi \hat k^3\sqrt{2\nu}(1+\nu)^{3/2} }{\sqrt{\hat \lambda}(\nu-1)^2}=\delta J_{\phi}\,.
\end{equation}
There seems to be an $\epsilon^2$ factor difference between $M_{BTZ},\ J_{BTZ}$ and the expression in \eqref{shifts} which may be understood as follows \cite{Johnstone:2013ioa}: One power of $\epsilon$ comes from the fact that we have scaled $t$ and $\phi$ by $\epsilon$, \emph{cf}. \eqref{csca2}. The other factor comes from the pinching. (Recall that BTZ mass and spin are obtained as integrals over the $\hat\phi$ direction which is ranging over $[0,2\pi\epsilon]$.)
\paragraph{The $\lambda=2, \nu=1$ limit.} It is quite natural to search for EVH black holes/rings among extremal ones. This was what we did in \cite{Ghodsi:2013soa} where we focused on the point C in Fig.(\ref{fig1}.b), (Note that the $\lambda=1+\nu$ line is not within the parameter space of ring solutions, let alone the extremal rings). One may then wonder if the $\lambda=2,\ \nu=1$ point, which is also the end point of $\lambda=1+\nu$ line, can be obtained as a limit of the general case discussed earlier.
As we discussed in \cite{Ghodsi:2013soa}, a well-defined solution around $\lambda=2\,, \nu=1$ can be found by scaling the parameters as
\begin{equation} \label{evh12}
\nu=1-\hat \nu \epsilon\,,\qquad \lambda=1+\nu-\hat\lambda \epsilon^{2(1+\alpha)}\,,\qquad k=\hat k \epsilon^{1+\alpha}\,.
\end{equation}
With this scaling, the entropy and temperature behave as $S\sim \epsilon^{\alpha}$, $T\sim \epsilon^{2+\alpha}$, $J_{\phi}\sim \epsilon^{2\alpha}$ and the other charges remain finite. In other words we find that $T/S \sim \epsilon^2$ and moreover to get the EVH solution one should take $\alpha>0$.
The near horizon metric for the EVH ring can be easily obtained by inserting (\ref{evh12})\,, (\ref{trans1}) and (\ref{csca1}) with $(\alpha>1)$ and taking the limit $\epsilon \to 0$. The result will be a metric like (\ref{nhDRevh}) solution with the AdS$_3$ radius $\ell^2=\frac{16\hat k^2}{\hat \lambda}$.
To find the near horizon of the near-EVH solution, it is enough to repeat all the steps similar to EVH case but with $\alpha=1$. In this case taking the limit $\epsilon \to 0$ yields the following metric
\begin{equation}\begin{split}
ds^2=&\cos^2\theta \Big[-f(\hat r) d\hat t^2+\frac{d\hat r^2}{f(\hat r)}+\hat r^2\big( d\hat \phi-\frac{16\hat k^2}{\ell\,\hat r^2 \hat \nu^2}d\hat t \big)^2 \Big]+\ell^2\big(\cos^2\!\theta\, d\theta^2+\tan^2\!\theta d\hat \psi^2\big)\,,\\
f(\hat r)=& \frac{1}{\ell^2\hat r^2}\big(\hat r^2-\frac{16\hat k^2}{\hat \nu}\big)^2\,,\qquad \ell^2=\frac{16\hat k^2}{\hat \lambda}\,,
\end{split}\end{equation}
which is a pinched extremal BTZ solution with radius $\ell^2=\frac{16\hat k^2}{\hat \lambda}$\,. The BTZ mass and spin also can be found easily as
\begin{equation} \label{mjextbtz}
M_{BTZ}=\frac{r_+^2+r_-^2}{8\ell^2 G_3}=4\pi \hat k^2\,,\,\quad \qquad J_{BTZ}=\frac{r_+ r_-}{4\ell G_3}=4\pi \hat k^2 \ell\,.
\end{equation}
The above expressions can be obtained as the $\nu\to 1$ limit of \eqref{mjbtz}. In other words, the near horizon of \emph{extremal} near-EVH ring leads to an extremal BTZ, while for a generic near-EVH ring around the $\lambda=1+\nu$ line we get a generic BTZ.
\section{Unbalanced Pomeransky-Sen'kov black ring}\label{sec-3}
As discussed there are unbalanced ring solutions with conical singularity in the space-time \cite{{Emparan-Obers-2007},ur, Chen:2011jb}.
This is an asymptotically flat solution which contains the balanced Pomeransky-Sen'kov black ring as a special limit, where a ``balancing condition'' is satisfied. A compact form of this metric is \cite{Chen:2011jb}
\begin{eqnarray} \label{UBR}
ds^2&=&-\frac{H(y,x)}{H(x,y)}\,\bigg(d t-\omega_\psi\,d\psi-\omega_\phi\,d\phi\bigg)^2-\frac{F(x,y)}{H(y,x)}\,d\psi^2-2\,\frac{J(x,y)}{H(y,x)}\,d\psi\,d\phi\nonumber\\ &+&\frac{F(y,x)}{H(y,x)}\,d\phi^2+\frac{2k^2(1-\mu)^2(1-\sigma)H(x,y)}{(1-\xi)(1-\mu\sigma)\Phi\Psi(x-y)^2}\bigg(\frac{d x^2}{G(x)}-\frac{d y^2}{G(y)}\bigg)\,,\nonumber\\
\omega_\psi&=&\frac{k(\mu+\sigma)}{H(y,x)}\,\sqrt{\frac{2\xi(\xi-\mu)(1+\xi)(1-\xi\mu)\Phi\Xi}{(1-\xi)(1-\mu\sigma)\Psi}}\,(1+y)\nonumber\\ &\times&\left\{\Phi ( 1+\sigma{x}^{2}y ) +\sigma(1-\mu)\left[1+\xi x -xy(x+\xi)\right]\right\},\nonumber\\
\omega_\phi&=&\frac{k(\mu+\sigma)}{H(y,x)}\,\sqrt{\frac{2\sigma\xi(1-\xi^2)\Phi\Psi\Xi}{1-\mu\sigma}}\,(1-x^2)y\,,\nonumber\\
\Phi\!&=&\!1-\!\xi\mu-\!\xi\sigma\!+\!\mu\sigma\,,\quad
\Psi\!=\!\mu-\!\xi\sigma+\!\mu\sigma-\! \xi\mu^2\,,\quad
\Xi\!=\!\mu+\!\xi\sigma-\mu\sigma-\!\xi\mu^2\,.
\end{eqnarray}
The functions $G$, $H$, $J$ and $F$ in the metric are given by
\begin{eqnarray}
G(x)\!&=&\!(1-x^2)(1+\mu x)(1+\sigma x)\,, \nonumber\\ &&\cr
H(x,y)\!&=&\!\Phi\Psi+\sigma(\xi-\mu)(1+\xi)\Phi
+\sigma\Psi\Xi{x}^{2}{y}^{2}+\sigma ( \mu+\sigma )(\xi-\mu )(1- \xi\mu)( 1-\xi\mu{x}^{2}{y}^{2} ) \nonumber\\
&+&\! \xi ( \mu+\sigma) ( 1-\xi\mu-\sigma (\xi-\mu)xy)((1-\xi\mu) x+ \sigma(\xi-\mu)y)\,,\nonumber\\ &&\cr
J(x,y)\!&=&\!\frac{2k^2(\mu+\sigma)\,\sqrt{\sigma(\xi-\mu)(1-\xi\mu)}(1-x^2)(1-y^2)}{(1-\mu\sigma)\Phi(x-y)}\,\Big\{
\Phi\Psi+\sigma(\xi-\mu)(1+\xi)\Phi \nonumber\\
&-&\! \sigma\Psi\Xi xy+\sigma
( \mu+\sigma )( \xi-\mu ) ( 1-\xi\mu ) ( 1+\xi x+\xi y+\xi\mu xy)\Big\}\,,\nonumber\\ &&\cr
F(x,y)\!&=&\!\frac{2k^2}{\mu\sigma(1-\mu\sigma)\Phi(x-y)^2}\,\bigg\{G(x)(y^2-1)\,\Big\{\mu(1-\xi^2)[\Psi+\sigma(\xi-\mu)(1+\sigma)]^2\cr
&-&\! (\mu+\sigma)(1-\xi\mu)(1+\sigma y)\big[\Psi\Xi-\xi\mu(\xi-\mu)[\Psi+\sigma(\xi-\mu)(1+\sigma)]\big]\Big\}\nonumber\\
&+&\!\sigma G(y)\Big\{(\xi-\mu)(1-\xi\mu)\big[
\xi(\mu+\sigma)^2(1-\xi\mu)+[\Psi+\sigma(\xi-\mu)(1+\sigma)]\nonumber\\
&\times&\! (\mu+\sigma-\mu\sigma x)x\big]+[\Psi\Xi+\xi\mu\Phi(\Phi-1)(\Phi-\Psi+\Xi)
][1+(\mu+\sigma)x]x^2\nonumber\\
&+&\! \mu\sigma\Phi[\Psi\Xi-\xi\mu(\mu+\sigma)(\xi-\mu)(1-\xi\mu)]x^4
\Big\}\bigg\}\,.
\end{eqnarray}
$x$ and $y$ coordinates are in the ranges $-1\leq x\leq 1$ and $-\infty<y< -1$ where infinity located at $x=y=-1$ and the azimuthal angles lie in the range $0\leq \phi,\psi \leq 2\pi$. Because of the unbalanced characteristic of the solution there are four independent parameters $\sigma, \mu, \xi, k$ instead of the three $\nu, \lambda, k$ in the Pomeransky-Sen'kov (balanced) metric. The first three parameters are dimensionless while $k$ has dimension of length and determines the scale of the solution. The unbalanced ring parameter space is subject to
\begin{equation} \label{ur ranges}
0\leq\sigma \leq \mu \leq \xi<1\,,\qquad k>0\,.
\end{equation}
The metric (\ref{UBR}) has two horizons (roots of $G(y)$). The outer one is located at $y=-\frac{1}{\mu}$ and the inner is at $y=-\frac{1}{\sigma}$\,.
The entropy, temperature, angular velocities, mass and spins of this solution are given by \cite{Chen:2011jb}
\begin{eqnarray} \label{tur}
S\!&=&\!\frac{4\pi^2k^3(\mu+\sigma)(1-\mu)\Xi}{(1-\xi)(1+\mu)(1-\mu\sigma)^{3/2}}\,\left(\frac{2\xi(1+\xi)(1-\sigma)}{\Phi\Psi}\right)^{\!\frac12},\nonumber\\ T\!&=&\!\frac{(\mu-\sigma)(1-\xi)(1+\mu)}{8\pi k(\mu+\sigma)(1-\mu)\Xi}\,\left(\frac{2(1-\mu\sigma)\Phi\Psi}{\xi(1+\xi)(1-\sigma)}\right)^{\!\frac12},\nonumber\\
\Omega_\psi\!\!&=&\!\!\frac{1}{k(1\!-\!\mu)}\left(\frac{(\xi\!-\!\mu)(1\!-\!\xi)(1\!-\!\xi\mu)(1\!-\!\mu\sigma)\Psi}{2\xi(1+\xi)\Phi\Xi}\right)^{\!\!\frac 12},\quad \Omega_\phi\!=\!\frac{1+\mu}{k(\mu\!+\!\sigma)}\left(\frac{\sigma(1\!-\!\xi)(1\!-\!\mu\sigma)\Psi}{2\xi(1+\xi)\Phi\Xi}\right)^{\!\!\frac 12},\nonumber\\
M\!&=&\!\frac{3\pi k^2\xi(\mu+\sigma)(1-\mu)\Phi}{2(1-\xi)(1-\mu\sigma)\Psi}\,, \qquad
J_\phi=\frac{2\pi k^3(\mu+\sigma)(1-\mu)}{(1-\mu\sigma)^{3/2}}\,\left(\frac{2\sigma\xi(1+\xi)\Xi}{(1-\xi)\Phi\Psi}\right)^{\!\frac12}, \nonumber\\
J_\psi\!&=&\!\frac{\pi k^3(\mu\!+\!\sigma)(1\!-\!\mu)[2\sigma(1\!-\!\xi)(1\!-\!\mu)+(1\!-\!\sigma)\Phi]}{(1-\xi)^{3/2}(1-\mu\sigma)^{3/2}\Psi^{3/2}}\left(\frac{2\xi(\xi\!-\!\mu)(1\!+\!\xi)(1\!-\!\xi\mu)\Xi}{\Phi}\right)^{\!\frac 12}\,,
\end{eqnarray}
which satisfy the Smarr relation $TS-\Omega_{\phi} J_{\phi}-\Omega_{\psi} J_{\psi}-\frac23\,M=0$\,.
To determine existence of a deficit angle in $\phi$ coordinate on the horizon one may expand the $\phi\phi$ component of the horizon metric around $x=x_0$ where they vanish. The $x\!-\!\phi$ part of the metric takes the form
\begin{equation} \label{defi1}
ds_H^2= A \frac{dx^2}{x-x_0}+B(x-x_0)d\phi^2\,,
\end{equation}
where $x_0=\pm 1$. Using the transformation $x-x_0=\alpha r^2$, it is possible to rewrite this part as
\begin{equation}\label{defi2}
ds_H^2=4\alpha A(dr^2+\kappa_E^2 r^2 d\phi^2)\,, \qquad \kappa_E^2=\frac{B}{4A}\,,
\end{equation}
which exhibits a deficit or excess angle due to the periodicity $2\pi /\kappa_E$. For the metric (\ref{UBR}) at $x=1$ (the north pole of $S^2$ at the horizon)
we find
\begin{equation} \label{kappa}
\kappa_E=\frac{1+\mu}{1-\mu}\,\sqrt{\frac{(1-\xi)(1+\sigma)\Psi}{(1+\xi)(1-\sigma)\Xi}}\,,
\end{equation}
while for $x=-1$ (the south pole of $S^2$ at the horizon) we find $\kappa_E=1$. This means that the unbalanced ring has a ``distorted $S^2$'' in its horizon which is a topologically $S^2$ geometry consisting of a conic space in its north pole joined to a round hemisphere at the south pole (a pear-shape geometry).
The conical singularity at the horizon of the unbalanced ring is removed if we put $\kappa_E=1$. This leads to a balancing condition between parameters as
\begin{equation} \label{balance}
\xi=\frac{2\mu}{1+\mu^2}\,.
\end{equation}
We note that value of $\psi \psi$ component on the horizon is also different at $x=\pm1$, but being a topologically $S^1$ direction, this means that the radius of the ring varies on the horizon of unbalanced ring (ring is not geometrically a circle).
\subsection{The parameter space}
As it has been studied in \cite{Chen:2011jb}, the unbalanced ring in different limits contains different solutions such as the balanced Pomeransky-Senkov's black ring, the Emparan-Reall single rotating black ring \cite{Emparan:2001wn}, Figueras single rotating black ring \cite{Figueras:2005zp}, boosted Kerr string and the Myers-Perry black hole. In the following we will discuss the parameter space from a different point of view. Remembering the condition (\ref{ur ranges}), the parameter space is looking like a triangular pyramid, depicted in Fig(\ref{fig1}.a). Because of ranges in (\ref{ur ranges}), the $\xi=1$ face does not belong to the parameter space. We now concentrate on some special regions:
\begin{figure}[ht]
\begin{picture}(0,0)(0,0)
\put(100,-275){\footnotesize Fig (1.a)}
\put(345,-275){\footnotesize Fig (1.b)}
\end{picture}
\center
\includegraphics[height=165mm,angle=90]{ur-br.eps}
\vspace{-14mm}
\caption{{\small Fig(1.a) The parameter space of the unbalanced black ring is located inside the (ABCO) pyramid. The $\xi=1$ face (the ABC triangle) does not belong to the parameter space. There are different known solutions which can be viewed as different limits of the unbalanced ring. The Pomeransky-Sen'kov (balanced) black rings are located on the blue curved plane surrounded by the pyramid; the $\sigma=0$ or the (OAB) face represents the (unbalanced) Emparan-Reall single rotating black rings; the $\xi=\mu$ or the (OBC) face recovers the Figueras black ring. On the (OB) line both $J_{\phi}$ and $J_{\psi}$ vanishes and it is depicted by a dashed line. The extremal unbalanced rings lie on the $\mu=\sigma$ (OAC) face . In this case on the $\xi=1$ plane the solution becomes massless. The boosted Kerr strings are located around the origin (O), and the Myers-Perry black holes are around the $\xi=\mu=1$\, (BC) edge.
Fig(1.b) The parameter space of Pomeransky-Sen'kov (balanced) black ring. Points O, B and C in this figure are corresponding to the same points in Fig(1.a).
}\label{fig1}}
\end{figure}
\paragraph{$\bullet$ {\bf The balanced solution.}} By imposing the balance condition (\ref{balance}), solution (\ref{UBR}) reduces to the Pomeransky-Sen'kov black ring with three parameters $(\lambda, \nu, k)$. To see this explicitly, one should use the relation between parameters of the balanced and unbalanced solutions as
\begin{equation} \label{conv}
\lambda=\mu+\sigma\,, \qquad \nu= \mu\sigma\,,\qquad k=k\,.
\end{equation}
We have shown the location of balanced solutions, computing from the balanced condition (\ref{balance}), with a blue curved plane in Fig(\ref{fig1}.a).
\paragraph{$\bullet$ {\bf The extremal face $\mu=\sigma$.}} Inserting $\mu=\sigma$ unifies the roots of $G(y)$ in (\ref{UBR}) and the temperature in (\ref{tur}) vanishes so this condition corresponds to the extremal unbalanced rings (OAC triangle in Fig (\ref{fig1}.a)).
\paragraph{$\bullet$ {\bf The $\sigma, \mu, \xi \to 0$ corner.}} Upon the following transformations \cite{Chen:2011jb}
\begin{eqnarray}
\sigma&=&\frac{m\!-\!\sqrt{m^2\!-\!a^2}}{\sqrt{2}k}\,, \quad \mu=\frac{m\!+\!\sqrt{m^2\!-\!a^2}}{\sqrt{2}k}\,, \quad \xi=\frac{m\!+\!\sqrt{m^2\!-\!a^2}}{\sqrt{2}k}\cosh\!\sigma\,,\nonumber \\ x&=&\cos\theta\,,\qquad \qquad y=-\frac{\sqrt{2}k}{r}\,,\qquad \qquad \psi=-\frac{z}{\sqrt{2}k}\,,
\end{eqnarray}
while taking the $k\to \infty$ limit keeping the new variables fixed, (\ref{UBR}) transforms to the boosted Kerr string.
The $k\to \infty$ limit takes $\sigma, \mu, \xi$ to zero. Therefore, the boosted Kerr string solution is obtained from the unbalanced ring around the origin O.
\paragraph{$\bullet$ {\bf The $\sigma=0$ face.}} Inserting $\sigma=0$ (OAB face), the solution (\ref{UBR}) recovers the known Emparan-Reall single spin black ring \cite{Emparan:2001wn}.
\paragraph{$\bullet$ {\bf The $\mu=\xi$ face.}} By considering $\mu=\xi$ the solution goes to the Figueras black ring \cite{Figueras:2005zp} which has only one rotation in the $\phi$ direction (the coordinate normal to the circle $S^1$ of the ring).
\paragraph{$\bullet$ {\bf The $\xi=\mu=1$ edge.}} Although the $\xi=1$ face does not belong to the parameter space, the solution shows interesting properties in the limit $\xi, \mu \to 1$. By inserting
\begin{equation} \label{ximu}
\xi=1-c(1-\mu)\,,
\end{equation}
where $0<c \leq 1$ and the following coordinate transformations
\begin{equation} \label{MPtrans}
x=-1\!+\!{\frac {8{k}^{2} \cos^2\theta \left( 1-\mu \right) }{2{r}^{2}\!+a^{2}\!+b^{2}\!-m-4{k}^{2} \cos 2\theta}}\,, \quad
y=-1\!-\!{\frac {8{k}^{2} \sin^2\theta \left( 1-\mu \right) }{2{r}^{2}\!+a^{2}\!+b^{2}\!-m-4{k}^{2} \cos 2\theta}}\,,
\end{equation}
and taking the $\mu\to 1$ limit, the solution (\ref{UBR}) goes over to the MP black hole. Here the mass and rotation parameters are given by
\begin{equation} \label{mpc}
m\!=\!{\frac {4{k}^{2} \left( 1\!+\!\sigma \right) }{ c\left(1- \sigma \right)}}, \quad
a\!=\!{\frac { 2k\sqrt{(1\!-\!c^2)(1\!-\!\sigma)(1\!+\!\sigma\!+\!c\!-\!c\sigma)} }{\sqrt {c}\left( 1-\sigma+c+c\sigma \right) }},\quad
b\!=\!{\frac {4k\sqrt {c\sigma(1\!+\!\sigma\!+\!c\!-\!c\sigma)}}{\sqrt {1\!-\!\sigma}\left( 1\!-\!\sigma\!+\!c\!+\!c\sigma \right)}}\,.
\end{equation}
Note that in the special case $c=1$, the rotation parameter $a$ is vanishing and solution reduces to the single rotating MP solution.
\subsection{The EVH limit}
In this section we investigate whether the EVH condition (\ref{evhc}) can be satisfied in the parameter space of the unbalanced ring. We find that near the (ABC) triangle in the upper plane $\xi=1$\,, the unbalanced ring solution becomes EVH. In fact by approaching the $\xi=1$ plane as
\begin{equation} \label{xiup}
\xi=1-\hat \xi \epsilon^a\,, \qquad k=\hat k \epsilon^{\frac{a}{2}}\,,
\end{equation}
(scaling of $k$ is needed to keep the mass finite) leads to the following expressions for the charges of the solution
\begin{eqnarray} \label{atup}
T&=&\frac{(1+\mu) \hat \xi \sqrt{(1-\mu\,\sigma)
(\mu-\sigma) ^{3}}}{8\pi(-1+\mu) (\mu+\sigma) ^{2}\hat k}\,{\epsilon}^{\frac a2}\,, \qquad
A_H = \frac {32{\pi }^{2}{\hat k}^{3} (\mu+\sigma)^{2}(-1+\mu )}{\sqrt{(\mu-\sigma)( 1-\mu\,\sigma)^{3}} \left( 1+\mu \right)\hat \xi }
\,{\epsilon}^{\frac a2}\,,\nonumber\\
M&=&\frac{3\pi \hat k^2(\mu+\sigma)(1-\mu)(1-\sigma)}{2\hat \xi(1-\mu \sigma)(\mu-\sigma)}+\mathcal{O}(\epsilon^a)\,,\qquad J_{\phi}=\frac{4\pi \hat k^3 (\mu+\sigma) \sqrt{\sigma(1-\mu)(\mu^2-\sigma^2)}}{(\mu-\sigma)\sqrt{\hat \xi (1-\sigma)(1-\mu \sigma)^3}}\epsilon^a\,,\nonumber\\
&&\qquad \qquad J_{\psi}=\frac{2\pi \hat k^3(1-\mu)^2(1-\sigma)^{3/2}(\mu+\sigma)^{3/2}}{\sqrt{\hat \xi^3(1-\mu)(\mu-\sigma)^3(1-\mu \sigma)^3}}+\mathcal{O}(\epsilon^a)\,,
\end{eqnarray}
$\Omega_{\phi}\,, \Omega_{\psi}$ also remain finite. If we denote the leading term in the expansion of charge $Q$ by $Q_0$ then we find the following relation
\begin{equation} \label{btzsig}
M- \frac{M_0}{J_{\psi_0}}\,J_{\psi} \sim \epsilon^a\,.
\end{equation}
As we will show this quantity can be related to the mass of the BTZ solution which appears in the deviation from the EVH point.
In the $\xi\to 1$ limit, to obtain the near horizon metric, one should take $\epsilon\to 0$ limit while inserting (\ref{xiup}) and (\ref{csca1}) together with the following coordinate transformations\footnote{These transformations obtained by inserting $c=0$ in (\ref{MPtrans}) and (\ref{mpc}).}
\begin{equation} \label{trans2}
x=-1\!+\!{\frac{8{k}^{2}\cos^2\theta (1-\mu)}{2{r}^{2}-4{k}^{2}\cos 2\theta}}, \qquad \quad
y=-1\!-\!{\frac{8{k}^{2}\sin^2\theta (1-\mu)}{2{r}^{2}-4{k}^{2}\cos 2\theta}}\,,
\end{equation}
in the metric.
By choosing $a>2$ in (\ref{xiup}), we will approach to the EVH regime. Taking the limit $\epsilon \to 0$ the near horizon of the EVH unbalanced ring can be found as
\begin{equation}
ds^2=\ell^2 \cos^2\theta\big(-\hat r^2 d\hat t^2+\frac{d\hat r^2}{\hat r^2}\big)+\frac{1-\sigma}{1-\mu \sigma}\,\hat r^2\cos^2\theta d\hat \phi^2+\ell^2\big(\cos^2\theta d\theta^2+\tan^2\theta d\hat \psi^2\big)\,,\nonumber
\end{equation}
where $\ell^2=\frac{4\hat k^2(1-\sigma)(1-\mu)(\mu+\sigma)}{\hat \lambda(\mu-\sigma)(1-\mu \sigma)}$ and it can be related to the physical mass of the solution (\ref{atup}) as $M=\frac{3\pi \ell^2}{8}$. We can rewrite the near horizon metric by scaling $\hat t=\frac{\tilde t}{\ell^2}$ and $\hat \phi=\sqrt{\frac{1-\mu\sigma }{1-\sigma}}\tilde \phi$ into the usual pinching AdS$_3$ form
\begin{equation} \label{abcnh}
ds^2=\cos^2\theta\Big[-\frac{\hat r^2}{\ell^2} d\tilde t^2+\ell^2 \frac{d\hat r^2}{\hat r^2}+\hat r^2 d\tilde \phi^2\Big]+\ell^2\big(\cos^2\theta d\theta^2+\tan^2\theta d\hat \psi^2\big)\,.
\end{equation}
The unbalanced characteristic of the original solution appears (only) through the range of pinched coordinate $\tilde \phi\in \Big[0,2\pi \sqrt{\frac{1-\mu\sigma }{1-\sigma}}\epsilon\Big]$. Note that the AdS$_3$ radius and the value of pinching are different for each point on the (ABC) triangle. When we are close to the (BC) line ($\mu=1$), which is the balanced limit, the range of the pinching coordinate reduces to $[0, 2\pi \epsilon]$, where the AdS$_3$ radius also matches with the balanced case as we will see in the next subsection.
\subsubsection{EVH solutions on the BC line}
The BC line ($\xi \sim \mu \sim 1$) is the intersection of the balanced curved plane with the EVH solutions on ABC triangle, so one expects to find the balanced EVH solutions on it. In this subsection we study these solutions and their near horizons in the EVH and near EVH regimes. We will show the equivalence of the BC line in Fig.(\ref{fig1}.a) with the BC line in Fig.(\ref{fig1}.b).
In this limit to find a well-defined EVH solutions with finite charges, one should define the parameters as
\begin{equation} \label{bcpar}
\xi=1-\hat \xi \epsilon^{2a}\,, \qquad \mu=1-\hat \mu \epsilon^a\,, \qquad k=\hat k \epsilon^{\frac a2}\,,
\end{equation}
which leads to the following results for charges of the solution
\begin{eqnarray} \label{bccharg}
T&=&\frac{\hat \xi (1-\sigma)^2}{4\pi \hat k \hat \mu (1+\sigma)^2}\,\epsilon^{\frac a2}, \qquad A=\frac{16\pi^2 \hat \mu \hat k^3(1\!+\!\nu)^2}{\hat \xi (1-\sigma)^2}\,\epsilon^{\frac a2},\qquad M=\frac{3\pi \hat \mu \hat k^2(1+\sigma)}{2\hat \xi (1-\sigma)}+\mathcal{O}(\epsilon^a)\,,\nonumber\\
J_{\phi}&=& \frac{4\pi \hat k^3 \sqrt{\hat \mu \sigma(1+\sigma)^3}}{\sqrt{\hat \xi (1-\sigma)^5}}\,\epsilon^a\,, \qquad \qquad J_{\psi}=\frac{2\pi \hat k^3 \hat \mu^{\frac 32}(1+\sigma)^{\frac 32}}{(1-\sigma)^{\frac 32} \hat \xi^{\frac 32}}+\mathcal{O}(\epsilon^a)\,.
\end{eqnarray}
Again we find the same behavior as (\ref{btzsig}) between the leading terms in the expansion of charges around the EVH point.
As in the previous sections, in order to find the near horizon we should insert (\ref{bcpar}), (\ref{csca1}) and (\ref{trans2}) into metric and take $\epsilon \to 0$ limit.
By considering $a>2$ we approach to the EVH regime and the near horizon metric takes the following form
\begin{equation} \label{bcevhnh}
ds^2=\ell^2 \cos^2\theta\Big[-\hat r^2 d\hat t^2+\frac{d\hat r^2}{\hat r^2}+\frac{\hat r^2}{\ell^2} d\hat \phi^2\Big]+\ell^2\big(\cos^2\theta d\theta^2+\tan^2\theta d\hat \psi^2\big)\,,
\end{equation}
where the AdS$_3$ radius is $\ell^2=\frac{8M}{3\pi}=\frac{4\hat k^2 \hat \mu(1+\sigma)}{\hat \xi (1-\sigma)}$ and the period of $\hat \phi$ is reduced to $2\pi \epsilon$, so (\ref{bcevhnh}) is a balanced solution. After another rescaling $\tilde t=\ell^2 \hat t$ one can find a pinching AdS$_3$ geometry as
\begin{equation} \label{bcnh}
ds^2=\cos^2\theta\Big[-\frac{\hat r^2}{\ell^2} d\tilde t^2+\ell^2 \frac{d\hat r^2}{\hat r^2}+\hat r^2 d\hat \phi^2\Big]+\ell^2\big(\cos^2\theta d\theta^2+\tan^2\theta d\hat \psi^2\big)\,.
\end{equation}
If we consider $a=2$ we will then approach to the near-EVH regime. Note also that (\ref{btzsig}) will be proportional to $\epsilon^2$ which is a signature of a BTZ solution. In this case, upon the redefinition $\hat r=\frac{\sqrt{\rho^2(\sigma-1)^2-2\hat k(\sigma^2+6\sigma+1)}}{1-\sigma}$, the near horizon metric takes to the following form
\begin{equation}\label{bcnevhnh}\begin{split}
ds^2=&\cos^2\theta \Big[-\!{f(\rho)}d\hat t^2+\frac{d\rho^2}{f(\rho)}+\rho^2 \big(d\hat\phi^2+\frac{8\hat k^2\sqrt{\sigma}(1+\sigma)}{\rho^2\ell\,(\sigma-1)^2}d\hat t\big)^2\Big]\!+\!\ell^2\big(\cos^2\theta d\theta^2+\tan^2\theta d\hat \psi^2\big)\,,\\
f(\rho)=& \frac{1}{\ell^2\rho^2}\Big(\rho^2-\frac{4\hat k^2(\sigma+1)^2}{(\sigma-1)^2}\Big)\Big(\rho^2-\frac{16\hat k^2\sigma}{(\sigma-1)^2}\Big)\,,\qquad \ell^2=\frac{4\hat k^2 \hat \mu(1+\sigma)}{\hat \xi(1-\sigma)}\,,
\end{split}\end{equation}
which is a (pinching) BTZ with the mass and spin
\begin{equation} \label{mjubtz}
M_{BTZ}=\frac{\pi \hat k^2 (\sigma^2+6\sigma+1)}{2(1-\sigma)^2}\,, \qquad
J_{BTZ}=\frac{4\pi \hat k^3 \sqrt{\hat \mu \sigma(1+\sigma)^3}}{\sqrt{\hat \xi (1-\sigma)^5}}=J_{\phi_0}\,.
\end{equation}
We can see the agreement of these charges with the mass and spin (\ref{mjbtz}) on the BC line in the parameter space of the balanced ring in Fig.(\ref{fig1}.b).
Using (\ref{conv}) and (\ref{bcpar}) the balanced condition takes the form of $\hat \xi=\hat \mu^2/2$. It can be easily checked that the BTZ masses are exactly equal and the BTZ spins are equal when $\hat \lambda=\hat \mu(1-\nu)$.
We can verify this relation in a geometrical approach: Using the relations (\ref{bcpar}) or (\ref{parscane}) we approach to the BC line from different directions but $\hat \lambda=\hat \mu(1-\nu)$, unifies both directions into one.
\subsubsection{The extremal line AC}
As mentioned, the extremal unbalanced ring is located on the $\mu=\sigma$ plane in the parameter space. On the other hand the AC line is the intersection of the extremal plane with the EVH face $\xi=1$, so we can study the EVH solutions in this limit.
To find a well-defined solution one should scale the parameters as follows
\begin{equation} \label{acpar}
\mu=\sigma+ \hat \mu \epsilon^a\,, \qquad \xi=1-\hat \xi \epsilon^{\frac a2}\,, \qquad k=\hat k \epsilon^{\frac a2}\,.
\end{equation}
Again the near horizon limit can be found by inserting (\ref{acpar}) and (\ref{csca1}) together with (\ref{trans2}) and taking the $\epsilon \to 0$ limit. For EVH solutions ($a>2$), the near horizon metric can be found by an additional rescaling $\tilde t=\frac{\hat t}{\sqrt{1+\sigma}}$ as
\begin{equation} \label{acevhnh}
ds^2=\cos^2\theta\Big[-\frac{\hat r^2}{\ell^2} d\tilde t^2+\ell^2 \frac{d\hat r^2}{\hat r^2}+\hat r^2 d\tilde \phi^2\Big]+\ell^2\big(\cos^2\theta d\theta^2+\tan^2\theta d\hat \psi^2\big)\,,
\end{equation}
with $\ell^2=\frac{8\hat k^2(\sigma-1)^2}{\hat \xi^2 (\sigma+1)^2}$\,. Due to the range of pinched coordinate $\tilde \phi \in \left[0, \frac{2\pi}{\sqrt{1+\sigma}}\,\epsilon\right]$, the above metric is describing an unbalanced pinched AdS$_3$ geometry.
\section{Double rotating dipole ring}\label{sec-4}
A generalization of the double rotating black ring \cite{Pomeransky:2006bd} containing dipole charges was introduced in \cite{Chen:2012kd} (see also \cite{dipole, Yazadjiev}). This is a solution of Einstein-Maxwell-dilaton theory
\begin{equation}
I =\frac{1}{16\pi G_5} \int d^5 x \sqrt{-g}\,\big[R-\frac 12\, \partial_\mu\varphi\partial^\mu\varphi-\frac 14\, e^{-\alpha\varphi}F_{\mu\nu}F^{\mu\nu}\big]\,.
\end{equation}
For particular values of parameter $\alpha$, $\alpha^2=4/N-4/3,\ N=1,2,3$ the above action may be embedded in string theory compactification \cite{dipole}. For the $N=1, \alpha=\sqrt{8/3}$ case the dipole ring solution is \cite{Chen:2012kd}
\begin{eqnarray} \label{drdr}
ds^2_5&=&-\left[\frac{H(y,x)^3}{K(x,y)^2H(x,y)}\right]^{1/3}\left(d t+\omega_1\,d\psi+\omega_2\,d\phi\right)^2+\frac{2R^2}{(x-y)^2}\left[K(x,y)H(x,y)^2\right]^{1/3}\nonumber \\
&\times&\bigg\{\frac{F(x,y)\left(d\psi+\omega_3\,d\phi\right)^2}{H(x,y)H(y,x)}-\frac{G(x)G(y)\,d\phi^2}{F(x,y)}+\frac{1}{\Phi\Psi}\bigg[\frac{d x^2}{G(x)}-\frac{d y^2}{G(y)}\bigg]\bigg\}\,.
\end{eqnarray}
Coordinates lie in the ranges $0\leq \phi, \psi\leq 2\pi\,, \, -1\leq x \leq 1$ and $-\infty <y < -1$\,; also functions of the metric are as followings
\begin{equation} \label{funcs}
\begin{split}
G(x)&=(1-x^2)(1+cx)\,,\\
K(x,y)&=-a^2(1+b)\big[bx^2(1+cy)^2+(c+x)^2\big]+\big[b(1+cy)-1-cx\big]^2+bc^2(1-xy)^2, \\
H(x,y)&=-a^2(1+b)\left[b(1+cx)(1+cy)xy+(c+x)(c+y)\right]-a(1+b)(x-y)\big[c^2-1 \\
&+b(1+cx)(1+cy)\big]+\left[b(1+cy)-1-cx\right]\left[b(1+cx)-1-cy\right]+bc^2(1-xy)^2, \\
F(x,y)&=\frac{1-y^2}{\Phi\Psi}\,\Big(bcG(x)\Big\{c(y^2-1)\left[a^2(1+b)-b+1\right]^2-4a^2y(1-b^2)(1+cy)\Big\} \\
&-(1+cy)\Big\{a^2(1+b)^2\left[a^2(c+x+bx+bcx^2)^2-(c+x-bx-bcx^2)^2\right] \\
&-(1-b)^2(1+cx)^2\left[a^2(1+b)^2-(1-b)^2\right]\Big\}\Big)\,, \\
J_{\pm}(x,y)&=a^2(1+b)\left[bx(1+cx)(1+cy)+(1+c)(c+x)\right]-bc^2(1-x)(1-xy) \\
&\pm a\left\{(1-x)\left[b(1+cx)+c-1\right]\left[b(1+cy)+c+1\right]-2bc(1-y)(1+cx)\right\} \\
&-\left[b(1+cx)-c-1\right]\left[b(1+cy)-cx-1\right]\,,\\
L(x,y)&=a^2(1+b)\big[bx(1+cy)^2+(1+c)(c+x)\big]-a(1-x)\big[b^2(1+cy)^2+c^2-1\big]\\
&-\big[b(1+cy)-c-1\big]\big[b(1+cy)-cx-1\big]-bc^2(1-y)(1-xy)\,,
\end{split}
\end{equation}
together with
\begin{equation}\begin{split}
\omega_1&=\sqrt{\frac{2a(a+c)}{\Phi\Psi}}\,\frac{R(1+b)(1+y)J_{+}(x,y)}{H(y,x)}\,,\\
\omega_2&=\sqrt{\frac{2ab(a+c)(1-a^2)}{\Phi\Psi}}\,\frac{R c(1+b)(1-x^2)\big[(1+cy)(a+ab+by)-c-y\big]}{H(y,x)}\,,\\
\omega_3&=\frac{\sqrt{b(1-a^2)}}{\Phi\Psi}\,\frac{ac(1+b)(x-y)(1-x^2)(1-y^2)}{F(x,y)}\\
&\times\left[b(1+cx)(1+cy)(1-b-a^2-a^2b)-(1-c^2)(1-b+a^2+a^2b)\right]\,,
\end{split}
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
\Phi=1+a-b+ab, \qquad \Psi=1-a-b-ab.
\end{equation}
This solution has four independent parameters $a, b, c$ and $R$. The parameter $a$ controls the dipole charge, $b$ introduces the rotation on the $S^2$, size of the black ring is characterizes by $c$ and $R$ represents the scale of the solution. These parameters are satisfying the following constraints
\begin{equation} \label{pranges}
0\leq c\leq a<1\,,\qquad 0\leq b< \frac{1-a}{1+a}\,,\qquad R>0\,.
\end{equation}
The gauge field $A$ and dilaton field $\varphi$ are given by
\begin{equation}\label{dilg}
A=A_t dt+A_{\phi} d\phi+A_{\psi} d\psi\,, \qquad e^{-\varphi}=\left(\frac{K(x,y)}{H(x,y)}\right)^{\sqrt{2/3}}\,,
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}\label{gfs}
\begin{split}
A_{t}=&-\sqrt{b(a^2-c^2)(1-a^2)}\ \frac{c(1+b)(1-xy)(x-y)}{K(x,y)}\,,\\
A_{\phi}=&-\sqrt{\frac{2a(a-c)}{\Phi\Psi}}\ \frac{R(1+b)(1+x)L(x,y)}{K(x,y)}\,,\\
A_{\psi}=&-\sqrt{\frac{2ab(a\!-\!c)(1\!-\!a^2)}{\Phi\Psi}}\,\frac{R c(1\!+\!b)(1\!+\!y)}{K(x,y)}\big(x(1\!-\!y)(1\!+\!c)\Phi+(1\!-\!x)^2(a+ab+bcy+c)\big)\,.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
The metric (\ref{drdr}) is an asymptotically flat solution with infinity located at $x=-1, \, y=-1$ \cite{Chen:2012kd}. The ADM mass and angular momenta of the solution are given by
\begin{equation}\label{mj}
\begin{split}
M&=\frac{\pi R^2(1+b)[(a+c)\Phi+a(1-b+c+bc)]}{\Phi\Psi}\,,\\
J_\psi&=\frac{2\pi R^3(1+b)[(1+c)\Phi+2bc(1-a)]}{\Psi^{3/2}}\,\sqrt{\frac{a(a+c)}{2\Phi}}\,,\\
J_\phi&=\frac{2\pi R^3c(1+b)}{\Psi^{3/2}}\,\sqrt{\frac{2ab(a+c)(1-a^2)}{\Phi}}\,.
\end{split}\end{equation}
The entropy, temperature, horizon angular velocities, magnetic dipole charge and potential are given by
\begin{eqnarray} \label{termdrd}
S&=&4\pi^2R^3 c(1+b)\sqrt{\frac{2a(a+c)(1-a^2)}{\Phi\Psi^3}}\,,\qquad \quad \,\,\,T=\frac{1}{8\pi (1+b)R}\,\sqrt{\frac{2\Phi\Psi^3}{a(a+c)(1-a^2)}}\,,\nonumber\\
\Omega_\phi&=&\frac{1\!-\!b\!+\!a^2\!+a^2b}{R\,(1+b)}\,\sqrt{\frac{b\Psi}{2a(a\!+\!c)(1\!-\!a^2)\Phi}}\,, \quad \quad \,\,\, \Omega_\psi=\frac{1}{R}\,\sqrt{\frac{a\Psi}{2(a+c)\Phi}}\,,\nonumber\\
Q&=&\frac{(1+b)R\sqrt{2a(a-c)}}{\sqrt{\Psi\Phi}}\,, \qquad \qquad \qquad\,\,\, \qquad \Phi_m=\frac{\pi R \sqrt{2(a-c)\Psi} }{2\sqrt{a\Phi}}\,,
\end{eqnarray}
which satisfy the Smarr formula $\frac 23 M=TS+\Omega_{\phi} J_{\phi}+\Omega_{\psi} J_{\psi}+\frac{1}{3} Q \Phi_m$ and the first law of thermodynamics
with the dipole charge and its potential also included \cite{Chen:2012kd}.
\subsection{Parameter space and extremal limit}
Under the conditions in (\ref{pranges}), the parameter space of the solutions, is a ``pyramid like'' space (OMNP) as depicted in Fig.(\ref{fig2}). Note that the blue face (MNP) does not belong to the parameter space but we can study its neighborhood. All double rotating dipole rings lie inside this pyramid. Also the neutral double rotating black rings, single rotating dipole rings and MP black holes can be studied as different limits of this solution.
\begin{figure}[tt]
\vspace{-20mm}
\center
\includegraphics[height=150mm,angle=0]{2sd.eps}
\vspace{-34mm}
\caption{{\small The parameter space of the dipole rings. All double rotating dipole rings are inside the deformed pyramid (OMNP). Single rotating dipole rings are located on the OMN face. The ONP face is the location of the neutral double rotating rings. This face is equivalent to the blue plane OBC in Fig.(\ref{fig1}.a). The extremal double rotating MP black holes lie near the MNP plane. The EVH condition is satisfied for black rings/holes on the MN edge. This edge is equal to the BC edge in Fig.(\ref{fig1}.a}).
\label{fig2}}
\end{figure}
\paragraph{$\bullet$ {\bf The ONP face.}}
As (\ref{gfs}) shows, by inserting $a=c$ one eliminates the dipole charge so the ONP face represents the neutral double rotating black rings \cite{Pomeransky:2006bd}.
\paragraph{$\bullet$ {\bf The OMN face.}}
The parameter $b$ tunes the rotation on $S^2$. By choosing $b=0$, two parameters $\omega_2$ and $\omega_3$ \eqref{funcs} become zero and this turns off rotation in the $\phi$ direction. In other words, the single rotating dipole rings \cite{dipole} are located at $b=0$ plane.
\paragraph{$\bullet$ {\bf The MNP plane.}} At this surface $\Psi=0$ or by $b=\frac{1-a}{1+a}$. As one can see from \eqref{mj}, in order to keep the mass and spins finite one is forced to take $R$ to zero. This is hence a collapsing ring limit where the ring collapses into a black hole. This is somehow similar to the BC line in Fig.(\ref{fig1}.b). Finite mass can be guaranteed if we take $R\to 0$ limit introducing a new parameter $\eta$ defined through
\begin{equation} \label{collaps}
b=\frac{1-a-\eta R^2}{1+a}\,.
\end{equation}
Defining the following parameters
\begin{equation} \label{d2rmp}
m=\frac{4(a+c)}{\eta(1+a)}\,,\qquad a_1=\frac{\sqrt{2}(a^2c+2a+c)}{\sqrt{\eta(1+a)(a+c)}}\,,\qquad a_2=\frac{\sqrt{2}c(1-a^2)}{\sqrt{\eta(1+a)(a+c)}}\,,
\end{equation}
and performing the following coordinate transformations \cite{Chen:2012kd}
\begin{equation} \label{d2rct}
x=-1+\frac{4R^2(1-c)\cos^2\theta}{r^2-a_1a_2}\,,\qquad y=-1-\frac{4R^2(1-c)\sin^2\theta}{r^2-a_1a_2}\,,
\end{equation}
one can explicitly find the 5D MP black hole rotating in both $\phi$ and $\psi$ directions
\begin{eqnarray} \label{MPbh}
ds^2&=& -\frac {\Delta}{{\rho}^{2}} \left[ {dt}-a_1 \sin^2 \theta d\phi -a_2 \cos^2 \theta d\psi \right] ^{2}+\rho^2 \big({\frac {{dr}^{2}}{\Delta}}+d\theta^2\big) \nonumber\\
&+& \frac {\sin^2 \theta}{{\rho}^{2}} \big[ a_1{dt}- \left( {r}^{2}+{a_1}^{2}
\right) d\phi \bigr] ^{2} +{\frac { \cos^2 \theta}{{\rho}^{2}} \left[ a_2{dt}- \left( {r}^{2}+
{a_2}^{2} \right) d\psi \right] ^{2}}\nonumber \\
&+&{\frac {1}{{r}^{2}{\rho}^{2}} \left[ a_1a_2\,{dt}-a_2 \left( {r}^{2}+{a_1}^{2} \right) \sin^2 \theta d\phi -a_1 \left( {r}^{2}+{a_2}^{2} \right) \cos^2 \theta d\psi \right] ^{2}}\,,
\end{eqnarray}
where $\Delta=\frac{1}{r^2}(r^2 + a_1^2)(r^2 + a_2^2) - 2m$\,, and $\rho^2 = r^2 + a_1^2\cos^2\theta + a_2^2\sin^2\theta\,.$
As we will see below, in the collapsing limit the temperature of the black ring tends to zero and it becomes extremal. The resulting MP black hole, too, will have a vanishing temperature, as one can readily check from \eqref{d2rmp}, the parameters $a_1$ and $a_2$ of the MP black hole satisfy extremality condition $m=\frac12(a_1+a_2)^2$.
\paragraph{$\bullet$ {\bf The extremal corner P.}}
In addition to the collapsing limit $R\to 0$\,, there is another way to get an extremal solution. If we settle in the region $a,c \to 0$ and $b \to 1$ in the parameter space, then the temperature will vanish and the geometry of (\ref{drdr}) becomes extremal.
\subsection{The EVH limit}
As in the other black ring solutions studied here and in \cite{Ghodsi:2013soa}, the EVH condition is satisfied in the collapsing limit. Using (\ref{collaps}), defining $R = \hat R\,\epsilon^{\delta}, \, a=1-\epsilon^{\gamma}$
and taking the limit $\epsilon \to 0$, the temperature and entropy in (\ref{mj}) of the solution behave as $T\sim \hat R^2 \epsilon^{2\delta-\gamma/2}$ and $S\sim \epsilon^{\gamma/2}$.
In fact the double rotating dipole ring becomes EVH if $0<\gamma<4\delta\,$ but for simplicity we will consider $\gamma=\delta$
\begin{equation} \label{drdrevh}
b=\frac{1-a-\eta R^2}{1+a}\,, \qquad R = \hat R\,\epsilon^\delta\,, \qquad a=1-\epsilon^{\delta}\,.
\end{equation}
In the EVH point the entropy, temperature and charges of the solution are as follows
\begin{eqnarray}
S&=&\frac{4\pi^2 c \sqrt{2 \hat a(1+c)}}{\eta^{\frac 32}}\,\epsilon^{\frac{\delta}{2} }\,, \qquad T=\frac{\sqrt{2\eta^{3}}\,\hat R^2}{4\sqrt{\hat a(1+c)}}\,\epsilon^{\frac{3\delta}{2}}\,, \qquad M=\frac{3\pi (1+c)}{2\eta}+\mathcal{O}(\epsilon^{\delta})\,,\nonumber\\
J_{\phi}&=&\frac{2\pi c \hat a \sqrt{1+c}}{\eta^{3/2}}\,\epsilon^{\delta}\,, \qquad J_{\psi}=\frac{2\pi (1+c)^{3/2}}{\eta^{3/2}}+\mathcal{O}(\epsilon^\delta)\,,
\end{eqnarray}
and angular velocities also remain non-vanishing. Note that in the collapsing limit, even without sending $a\to 1$\,, the black ring solution will be extremal. In fact for the MP solution, the parameters in (\ref{d2rmp}) satisfy the extremality condition $m=\frac12(a_1+a_2)^2$ and when we send $a\to 1$ the MP black hole becomes single rotating, and hence EVH MP black hole \cite{Ghodsi:2013soa}.
Another interesting fact is that in the EVH limit, the gauge field components (\ref{gfs}) vanish and the resulting solution becomes uncharged
\begin{eqnarray}
A_t&=&\frac{8\hat a c \sqrt{1-c^2}\,\hat R^2(1-2\cos^2\!\theta)}{4r^2(1+c)\cos^2\!\theta+r^4 \eta}\,\epsilon^6, \qquad A_{\phi}=\frac{4\hat a c \sqrt{1-c}\,\hat R^2\cos^2\!\theta}{r^2 \sqrt{\eta}}\,\epsilon^6\,, \nonumber\\
A_{\psi}&=&-\frac{4c\hat a \sqrt{1-c}\,\hat R^2\sin^2\!\theta\big[r^2\eta+4(1+c) \sin^2\theta \big]}{r^2 \sqrt{\eta}\,\big[r^2\eta+4(1+c) \cos^2\theta\big]}\,\epsilon^6\,.
\end{eqnarray}
This has a simple physical explanation: The EVH condition occurs when $(x,y)$ coordinates are computed around the $(-1,-1)$ point, which corresponds to the asymptotic region of the ring.
On the other hand the dipole ring is a distribution of the magnetic monopoles \cite{dipole} and
the electromagnetic fields of the dipole ring outside the horizon is produced by a circular array of magnetic monopoles
such that, despite of having a local distribution of charge, the total magnetic charge is zero.
Therefore, the dipole ring can not be distinguished from a neutral ring from the asymptotic infinity and electromagnetic fields are vanishing in the EVH limit.
In order to discuss the near horizon of EVH solutions, one should insert (\ref{drdrevh}) and (\ref{csca1}) together with (\ref{d2rct}) in the original solution (\ref{drdr}) and take the $\epsilon \to 0$ limit.
Considering $\delta>2$, one can settle in the EVH regime. In this case by an extra rescaling $\tilde t=\ell^2 \hat t$, the near horizon metric takes the following form
\begin{equation} \label{colevh}
ds^2=\cos^2\theta\Big[-\frac{\hat r^2}{\ell^2} d\tilde t^2+\ell^2 \frac{d\hat r^2}{\hat r^2}+\hat r^2 d\hat \phi^2\Big]+\ell^2\big(\cos^2\theta d\theta^2+\tan^2\theta d\hat \psi^2\big)\,,
\end{equation}
which is the familiar pinched AdS$_3$ with radius $\ell^2=\frac{8M}{3\pi}=\frac{4(1+c)}{\eta}$.
The near-EVH solution is obtained for $\delta=2$. In this case we find that the near horizon of the near-EVH ring takes the form of \emph{extremal} pinching BTZ solution
\begin{equation}\begin{split}
ds^2=&\cos^2\theta\ \Big[- f(\hat r) d\hat t^2+\frac{d\hat r^2}{f(\hat r)}+\hat r^2\big(d\hat \phi-\frac{4\eta\, \hat a c}{\ell r^2}\, d\hat t \big)^2\Big]+ \ell^2\big(\cos^2\theta d\theta^2+\tan^2\theta d\hat \psi^2\big)\,,\\
f(\hat r)=& \frac{\big(\hat r^2-\frac{4\hat a c}{\eta} \big)^2}{\ell^2 \hat r^2}\,,\qquad \ell^2=\frac{4(1+c)}{\eta}\,.
\end{split}\end{equation}
\section{The EVH/CFT and black rings}\label{sec-5}
As we discussed in the near horizon geometry of EVH black rings we find a (pinching) AdS$_3$ throat which turns into a BTZ for near-EVH solutions.
One may then use this AdS$_3$ to extend the EVH/CFT proposal \cite{SheikhJabbaria:2011gc} for these rings too. The dual 2d CFT proposed here would hence govern the low energy excitations or perturbations around the original EVH black ring.
Below we briefly discuss this dual CFT for different EVH rings we discussed in previous sections.
\subsection{The unbalanced ring}
As we saw in the previous sections for unbalanced ring the EVH conditions are satisfied at $\xi=1$. Besides the EVH point, the unbalanced ring becomes extremal
at $\sigma=\mu$, where as we will discuss there is also a Kerr/CFT type chiral 2d CFT \cite{Guica:2008mu,{Chen:2012yd}} to these geometries.
\subsubsection{The EVH solution near $\xi=1$, (ABC triangle)}
In the previous sections we showed the explicit form of the near horizon metrics in the EVH limits (\ref{abcnh}). Since this metric contains an AdS$_3$ part we can find the Brown-Hennueax \cite{BH} central charge $c_{B.H.}=\frac{3 \ell}{2G_3}$ of the 2d CFT associated with this AdS$_3$ factor. To find the 3d Newton constant $G_3$ in terms of the $G_5$ we use the reduction ansatz
\begin{eqnarray}
ds^2= \cos^2 \theta \, \underbrace{g_{\alpha \beta} dx^{\alpha} dx^{\beta}}_{AdS_3}+\ell^2 \big(\cos^2\theta d \theta^2+\tan^2 \theta d \psi^2 \big)\,,
\end{eqnarray}
where by considering $G_5=1$ the result is
\begin{equation} \label{grel}
G_3=\frac{1}{\pi \ell^2}\,.
\end{equation}
One should note that due to the pinching the above Brown-Henneaux central charge is for the 2d CFT on a pinching orbifold cylinder, which can be equivalent to a 2d CFT at central charge $c_{B.H.}\epsilon$ on a cylinder (without pinching) \cite{deBoer:2010ac}.
\paragraph{The region inside the ABC triangle.}
The Brown-Hennueax central charge in this case can be read from the near horizon metric (\ref{abcnh})
\begin{equation}
c_{B.H.}=\frac{3\ell}{2G_3}=\frac{3\pi \ell^3}{2}=12\pi \hat k^3 \left[\frac{(1-\sigma)(1-\mu)(\mu+\sigma)}{\hat \lambda(\mu-\sigma)(1-\mu \sigma)}\right]^{\frac 32}\,.
\end{equation}
\paragraph{The BC line ($\mu =\xi= 1$ edge).}
We can find the Brown-Hennueax central charge for this case from (\ref{bcnh}) as
\begin{equation} \label{ccbc}
c_{B.H.}=\frac{3\ell}{2G_3}=\frac{3\pi \ell^3}{2}=12\pi \hat k^3 \left[\frac{\hat \mu(1+\sigma)}{\hat \xi (1-\sigma)}\right]^{\frac 32}\,.
\end{equation}
On the other hand on $\xi=1$ plane the value of $c$ in (\ref{ximu}) vanishes and hence the rotation parameter $b$ in (\ref{mpc}) is also vanishing. To keep the mass $m$ and rotation parameter $a$ finite, we need to rescale $k$ and $c$ in (\ref{mpc}) as $k=\hat k \,\epsilon, c=\hat c \,\epsilon^2$ and the geometry becomes that of a single rotating extremal MP black hole with $2m=a^2=\frac{4\hat k^2(1+\sigma)}{1-\sigma}$. It was discussed in \cite{Ghodsi:2013soa} that the central charge for this EVH MP black hole is given by $c_{CFT}=\frac{3\pi}{2}\,a^3=12\pi \hat k^3\left[\frac{1+\sigma}{\hat c(1-\sigma)}\right]^{3/2}$. Recalling (\ref{ximu}) and the definitions of $\xi$ and $\mu$ in (\ref{bcpar}), this central charge as expected matches with the value in (\ref{ccbc}).
\paragraph{The AC line $\sigma=\mu\,; \,\xi= 1$.}
Noting (\ref{acevhnh}) and that $\ell^2=\frac{8\hat k^2(\sigma-1)^2}{\hat \xi^2 (\sigma+1)^2}$, it is possible to read the central charge as
\begin{equation}
c_{B.H.}=24\sqrt{2}\,\pi\, \hat k^3\frac{(\sigma-1)^3}{\hat \xi^3 (\sigma+1)^3}\,.
\end{equation}
\subsubsection{The extremal plane $\sigma=\mu$}
For completeness, here we briefly discuss the extremal, but non-EVH, (unbalanced) ring and its chiral dual 2d CFT via Kerr/CFT \cite{Guica:2008mu,Chen:2012yd}. To this end, we need to read the near horizon metric of the extremal ring:
\begin{equation}
ds^2=\alpha(x) \big(-y^2 dt^2+\frac{dy^2}{y^2}\big)+\beta(x)dx^2 +\gamma\, d\psi^2+\delta(x)(d\phi+\rho \, d\psi+f^{\phi} y dt)\,,
\end{equation}
where $f^{\phi}=1$ and the other functions and parameters are given by
\begin{eqnarray}
\alpha (x) &=&-{\frac {2{\mu}^{2} ( \mu-1 ) ^{2}{k}^{2} ( 1+\xi ) ( {x}^{2}+2 \xi x+1
) }{ ( 1-2 \xi \mu+{\mu}^{2} ) ( 1+\mu x ) ^{2} ( \xi-1 ) ( 1+\mu ) ^{2}}}\,,\nonumber \\
\beta(x)&=&-\frac {2{k}^{2} ( \mu-1 ) ^{3}{\mu}^{2} ( 1+\xi ) ( {x}^{2}+2 \xi x+1
) }{ ( 1-2 \xi \mu+{\mu}^{2} ) ( 1+\mu x ) ^{4} ( 1+\mu ) ( \xi-1 ) (
x-1 ) ( x+1 ) } \,,\nonumber \\
\delta(x)&=&-\frac {8{k}^{2}{\mu}^{2} ( -1+{\xi}^{2} ) ( {x}^{2}-1 ) }{ ( -1+{\mu}^{2} ) ( {x}^{2}+2 \xi x+1 ) ( 1-2 \xi \mu+{\mu}^{2} ) } \,,\nonumber \\
\gamma&=&-\frac {2{k}^{2}\lambda\, \left( 1+\lambda \right) \left( \mu-1
\right) ^{2} \left( 1-2\,\lambda\,\mu+{\mu}^{2} \right) }{ \left(
\lambda-1 \right) ^{3} \left( 1+\mu \right) ^{2}\mu} \,,\nonumber \\
\rho&=&-\frac { \sqrt{ \left( 1-\lambda\,\mu \right) \left( \lambda-
\mu \right) } \left( 1+{\mu}^{2}+ \left( -4\,\lambda+2 \right) \mu
\right) \left( \mu-1 \right) }{ 2\left( 1+\mu \right) {\mu}^{3/2}
\left( \lambda-1 \right) ^{2}} \,.
\end{eqnarray}
According to \cite{Chow:2008dp} one can read the central charge of the dual CFT of the near horizon of the extremal geometry
\begin{equation} \label{ccur}
c_{\phi}=\frac{3}{2\pi}f^{\phi}\!\int dx d\phi d\psi \sqrt{\beta(x) \gamma \delta(x)}=\frac {48\pi \,{\mu}^{3/2}{k}^{3} \sqrt{1-{\xi}^{2}} \left(
1-\mu \right) \sqrt{2\,\xi} \left( 1+\xi \right) }{ \left( 1+
\mu \right) ^{3} \left( \xi-1 \right) ^{2} \sqrt{1-2\,\xi\,
\mu+{\mu}^{2}}}\,.
\end{equation}
The Frolov-Thorne temperature is equal to $T_{\phi}^{FT}=\frac{1}{2\pi}$, hence the microscopic Cardy entropy can be computed as
\begin{equation}
S_{micro}=\frac{\pi^2}{3}c_{\phi} T_{\phi}^{FT}= \frac {8\pi^2 \,{\mu}^{3/2}{k}^{3} \sqrt{1-{\xi}^{2}} \left(
1-\mu \right) \sqrt{2\,\xi} \left( 1+\xi \right) }{ \left( 1+
\mu \right) ^{3} \left( \xi-1 \right) ^{2} \sqrt{1-2\,\xi\,
\mu+{\mu}^{2}}}\,,
\end{equation}
which this is equal to the macroscopic entropy when the value of the entropy in equation (\ref{tur}) evaluated at the extremal limit $\mu=\sigma$.
The central charge (\ref{ccur}) vanishes when we approach to $\xi=1$ plane (AC line) as (\ref{xiup}).
In fact this is an expected result due to the fact that on $\xi=1$ the entropy vanishes while $T_{\phi}^{FT}$ has a constant value.
By inserting the balance condition (\ref{balance}) and $\mu=\lambda/2$, which is the relation between parameters of unbalanced and balanced rings in the
extremal limit, one exactly recovers the central charge and entropy (\ref{entem}) of the Pomeransky-Sen'kov black ring \cite{Ghodsi:2013soa,Chen:2012yd}.
\subsection{The double rotating dipole ring}
As in the previous case, we discuss the 2d CFT dual to the EVH cases and then analyze the extremal, but non-EVH case.
\subsubsection{The EVH dipole ring}
As discussed on the MNP plane we have a collapsing ring which is mapped onto an extremal MP black hole \eqref{MPbh} with mass and spins (\ref{d2rmp}). In the $a_1=0$ this black hole becomes EVH \cite{Ghodsi:2013soa}. It has been shown in \cite{Lu:2008jk} that there is a chiral 2d CFT associated with the near horizon geometry of this extremal solution with the following central charge
\begin{equation} \label{ccmpc}
c_{CFT}=\frac{3\pi a_1^3}{2}=12\pi \frac{(1+c)^{3/2}}{\eta^{3/2}}\,.
\end{equation}
On the other hand the near horizon metric in the EVH limit is given in (\ref{colevh}). So the Brown-Hennueax central charge is equal to
\begin{equation} \label{bhcccol}
c_{BH}=\frac{3\ell}{2G_3}=12\pi \frac{(1+c)^{3/2}}{\eta^{3/2}}\,,
\end{equation}
which is equal to (\ref{ccmpc}), supporting the EVH/CFT proposal.
\subsubsection{ The extremal solution at corner P}
In this case it is possible to find the central charge of the dual 2d CFT as well. To this end, we note that the extremal solution (defined at $a,c\to0,\ b\to 1$) is parameterized by
$$
\alpha=\frac{c}{2a}\,,\qquad \beta=\frac{c}{1-b}.
$$
Sparing the straightforward but tedious algebra, the near horizon geometry is obtained to be
\begin{equation} \label{nhedrdr}
ds^2=A(x)(-r^2dt^2+\frac{dr^2}{r^2})+B(x)dx^2+C(x)d\psi^2+D(x)[(d\phi+rdt)+\rho \,d\psi]^2 \,,
\end{equation}
where
\begin{eqnarray}
A(x)&=&\,{\frac {2 ({x}^{2}+1)^{1/3} \left( 1-\alpha+\alpha{x}^{2} \right) ^{2/3}{k}^{2}{\alpha}^{4/3}{\beta}^{2}}{({\alpha}^{2}-{\beta}^{2})}} \,,\nonumber \\
B(x)&=&\,{\frac {k^2 \alpha^{4/3} \beta^2 (\alpha x^4-\alpha+1+x^2)}{(\alpha^2-\beta^2)(x^2-1)(x^2+1)^{2/3} (1-\alpha+\alpha x^2)^{1/3}}} \,, \nonumber \\
C(x)&=&\,{\frac { \left( 2\alpha+1 \right) {k}^{2} \left( \alpha+\beta \right) ({x}^{2}+1)^{1/3}}{{\alpha}^{2/3} (1-\alpha+\alpha{x}^{2})^{1/3} \left( \alpha-\beta \right) }}\,,\nonumber \\
D(x)&=&\,{\frac {4 \left( 1-{x}^{2} \right) {k}^{2}{\alpha}^{4/3}{\beta}^{2}}{ \left( {x}^{2}+1 \right) ^{2/3}(1-\alpha+
\alpha{x}^{2})^{1/3} \left( {\alpha}^{2}-{\beta}^{2} \right) }}\,,
\nonumber \\
\rho&=&\frac { \left( 2\,\alpha+1 \right) \beta+\alpha}{2\alpha \beta}\,.
\end{eqnarray}
The central charge can be read from the near horizon geometry (\ref{nhedrdr}) as
\begin{equation}\label{ccextd2r}
c_{\phi}=\frac{3}{2\pi}\int dx d\phi d\psi \sqrt{B(x) C(x)D(x)}=\frac {24 \sqrt {2}\pi \,\alpha{k}^{3}{\beta}^{2}\sqrt {1+2\,\alpha}}{ \left( \alpha-\beta \right) \sqrt{\alpha^2-\beta^2} }, \qquad c_{\psi}=0\,.
\end{equation}
The microscopic Cardy entropy of the dual CFT can be calculated using the fact that the Frolov-Thorne temperature is given by $T_{\phi}^{FT}=\frac{1}{2\pi}$ so the entropy will be
\begin{equation}
S=\frac{\pi^2}{3}c_{\phi}T_{\phi}=\frac {4 \sqrt {2}\pi^2 \,\alpha{k}^{3}{\beta}^{2}\sqrt {1+2\,\alpha}}{ \left( \alpha-\beta \right) \sqrt{\alpha^2-\beta^2} }\,.
\end{equation}
This is in complete agreement with the Bekenstein-Hawking entropy in (\ref{termdrd}) when it is written in terms of new parameters $\alpha$ and $\beta$
\begin{equation}
S_{BH}=\frac {4 \sqrt {2}\pi^2 \,\alpha{k}^{3}{\beta}^{2}\sqrt {1+2\,\alpha}}{ \left( \alpha-\beta \right) \sqrt{\alpha^2-\beta^2} }\,.
\end{equation}
\section{Discussion}
In this work we extended our analysis of \cite{Ghodsi:2013soa} to a larger class of black rings. We carefully analyzed parameter space of three type of rings, the balanced and unbalanced double rotating black rings and the double rotating dipole black ring, and explored where in their parameter space they become extremal and EVH.
We found that generically the ring size parameter (denoted by $k$ or $R$, respectively for unbalanced rings and dipole rings) goes to zero in the EVH case.
Nonetheless, one can scale the other parameters to keep the mass and one spin along the ring direction finite, while the other spin (on the topologically $S^2$ part of the horizon) vanishes. Vanishing of the horizon area then comes from the vanishing of a one-cycle along the $S^2$ part. This direction parameterized by $\phi$ joins time and radial direction to form a (pinching) AdS$_3$ factor in the near horizon limit. As we explicitly showed the near horizon geometry of all EVH rings, balanced, unbalanced or dipole-charged, becomes precisely the same geometry, the one which is also obtained as the near horizon limit of EVH MP black hole with the same mass as the EVH rings. The AdS$_3$ radius for all these cases becomes $\ell^2=\frac{8M}{3\pi}$, where $M$ is the mass of the EVH black ring/hole.\footnote{In the unbalanced case there remains a trace of the unbalance factor in the range of coordinate parameterizing the pinching direction $\phi$.} This result is of course understandable because all these near horizon geometries are 5d vacuum Einstein solutions. (Note that in the dipole ring case, the dipole charge goes to zero in the near horizon limit of EVH ring.) And there is a uniqueness theorem for such solutions with $SO(2,2)$ isometry \cite{SO22-uniqueness}.
For the near-EVH rings, in the near horizon limit the AdS$_3$ factor turns into a BTZ black hole. The mass and angular momentum of the BTZ exactly captures the deviations of the mass and angular momenta of the near-EVH black ring from the EVH point. In other words, these near-EVH excitations survive the near horizon limit. One may view this fact as the zeroth order evidence in support of the EVH/CFT proposal which states that all excitations or perturbations around an EVH black hole/ring is governed by a 2d CFT dual to the AdS$_3$ throat appearing in the near horizon geometry, or dual to the 3d gravity obtained from reducing the 5d theory over the $\theta\hat\psi$ part of the near horizon geometry.
As is discussed in the literature and we reviewed here, near the collapsing regions of the black ring parameter space one may always find a new coordinate system where the ring solution is mapped onto a MP black hole. Moreover, this collapsing region generically intersects the extremal surface in the parameter space
(for example see Fig.(\ref{fig1}.a) and Fig.(\ref{fig2})). The ring-hole map at these intersections, as expected, then relates an extremal ring to an extremal hole. On the other hand, we showed that the EVH rings appear around this collapsing regions. In general near-EVH ring we get a BTZ metric in the near horizon limit, while around these intersection points/lines we get an extremal BTZ in the near horizon.
Given this picture, EVH rings provide the window that ring-hole transition may occur. This transition may be traced from the 2d CFT which is proposed to capture the low energy dynamics of the EVH rings. We hope to study this point further in future works.
\section*{Acknowledgment}
We would like to thank Roberto Emparan and Hossein Yavartanoo for comments on the draft. A.G. and H.G. would like to thank the IPM for hospitality while this project was completed. H.G. would also like to thank Davood Mahdavian Yekta and Ghadir Jafari for useful discussions.
The work of A.G. and H.G. is supported by Ferdowsi University of Mashhad under the grant
2/31025 (1393/04/10).
|
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.